Skip to Content

WoW Insider has the latest on the Mists of Pandaria!
  • mancko
  • Member Since Dec 11th, 2005

Are you mancko? If So, Login Here.

BlogComments
WoW10 Comments

Recent Comments:

Hunters & Mounts {WoW}

Mar 11th 2006 12:38PM Blink shmink.

But we do have port, which, lemme tell you, saves a lot of time and irritation in getting to the major cities. I forget when we get it, but it was definitely before the mount thing was even an option.

WoW Invades Real Life (RL) {WoW}

Feb 1st 2006 12:48AM A short film I directed got into a film festival recently, and I sent out an e-mail to most of the people I know about it. All the responses were pretty normal ("I'm so proud of my little boy," from my mom, etc) except for the one from a buddy of mine I don't talk to that often, who plays WOW. His e-mail said only:

congratz
/clap
/cheer

Very succinctly put, I thought.

Duel rules {WoW}

Jan 27th 2006 5:24PM Yeah, I got the "nice pot" once, early on. Now, I won't use em, but I'm not sure if that makes sense. I think the rules are often made up by the loser.

I was fighting a priest, I'm a warrior, and he used healing, so I figured, whatever, and I used a pot. I'm an alchemist for crying out loud. What else am I gonna do?

Here's my thought: You click "duel", you deal with the consequences. The number of levels is only part of the equation. The level 10 might be the alt of a multiple level 60, who's dueled 1,000 times already today. He or she may have pots, scrolls, healing spells, whatever. If you challenge. You deal. If you accept, you deal as well. There's rules only if they're put down first, and Jennie Lee points out the problem with that.

In fact, I'm gonna go out on a limb here: YOU CHALLENGE, YOU DON'T CHALLENGE THE RESULTS. YOU ACCEPT, YOU ACCEPT THE RESULTS. If you don't want to lose sometimes, don't play. Don't whine about it, because the fact is, you signed up for it.

And for the record. I'm on a PVE server for my main and a PVP on my alt. My main decides whether he feels like dueling and goes from there. My Alt ALWAYS accepts a duel, and win or lose, says, "thank you. nice duel" no matter the consequences.

You're not dueling the toon. You're dueling the player. And who fraggin knows who that is...

Are the Horde evil? {WoW}

Dec 31st 2005 2:22PM It's funny--my previous comment was merely as a result of responding to the other WOW insider readers' views, but now that I've read the actual article involved... well, I have problems with it, and for want of a better way of putting it, the author comes across as being either morally grandstanding, naive, or both. His arguments, as laid out in the article are thus:

1) The word "orc" has been connotated as evil, and therefore the race is evil whether blizzard chooses to characterize them as such or not.

This is clearly ridiculous. Any author of a fantasy text, and for the purposes of this argument, Blizzard is the "author" of a "text" called World of Warcraft. The fact that the characters in that world are creating the story as they go along is irrelevant. The universe, and therefore the rules, are made by them. This is the overriding answer to the argument, but let's go further.

He says that "orc" and "troll" mean evil things, that they have meant evil things in the past, and therefore they are evil. Poppycock. Ask any reader or scholar who is well versed in Tolkiens works and history what an "elf" is. In Tolkien's world (and indeed, in WOW) elves are tall, noble folk. But what about Santa's elves? What about the rather morally ambiguous elves of Grimm's fairy tales? Tolkien decided that "Elves" were what he wanted them to be, and we can't change that because we can point out that in the past, elves have most often been characterized as something more akin to fairies or gnomes. Dwarves hold as well. A Nordic dwarf was an evil thing. Red Caps were dwarves, and they dipped their hats in the blood of their enemies to give them a rusty hue. Authors create worlds, and are not bound by precedence. Especially in a fantasy world, where the rules are bound only by the laws laid forth by the authors.

2) He is a father, and his son was scared by the undead character and the undercity. When I was five, I was terrified of the cover of a picture book I was given. The creature on the front was obviously evil, with big eyes, a bulbous nose, and hair on his feet and wrists. I wouldn't dare open the book for a year after I got it. When I finally plucked up the nerve, I found out the name of this terrible beast: A hobbit.

Kids are afraid of the unknown, and it's hardly fair for an adult to categorize a thing based on the imagination of a three year old. It's unfair mostly to the child, who might not understand and who might have the kind of imagination that turns things boogiemen no matter their real connotations.

3) Playing evil makes you evil. The author leaves out one thing that makes computer games popular and is the reason why games like "Grand Theft Auto" and "TIE fighter" are wildly popular. In fact, lets go back even further: Why is Richard III one of Shakespeare's most popular plays and characters? Because evil is fun to contemplate.

Most of us don't really want to be evil in real life, and besides, the rules set forth in modern society make it impossible to be evil without completely losing every advantage society gives us. But in a game, there are no strictures like that, and if there are, the consequences are much less dire. So kill, maim, and steal, folks. Just be prepared for some consequences, and for the sake of gamers everywhere: not in real life. Or, if you must, don't blame games. :)

4) There are no children in Horde society. Well, you never see baby pigeons either, unless you invade a pigeon nest. Most creatures choose to protect their young from the dangers of the outside world. Particularly a world as unwelcoming as exists in the Horde areas. I would actually see the callous way humans let their children run around in areas teeming with vicious wolves and murlocs as evil, but who am I to judge?

And their's the rub. Obviously, the person who wrote the article is entitled to his opinion. But again, it comes up to personal choice. Some horde are evil. Some humans are evil. Some gank, some don't, some just do quests and help their guilds.

Far be it from this one person to decide what is evil and what isn't.

Anyway, far too much rambling. I have to get back to work now.

Are the Horde evil? {WoW}

Dec 31st 2005 1:06PM It's all relative, though, isn't it? It's not like this isn't a debate that hasn't raged in the real world since...well, since forever. The man who steals from a vendor to feed his family, is he evil? To the vendor, yes, because the thief is taking what he has worked hard to attain. To the family, no. The thief is offering them a better alternative to starvation.

The undead are trying to do what they can to survive. In their sunken, worm-eaten eyes, they're not evil, they're just making the most of the situation they're in. They believe that what they are doing is the best way to achieve their ends, so is therefor not evil, just necessary. The same holds true for the orcs, trolls, and Tauren.

But then again, fantasy works very often create this issue. What if you were an Orc who didn't want to kill elves? What if you were a goblin who wanted to paint pictures instead of murder an pillage? What if you were (and this is outlandish, I know) a drow elf who doesn't want to slink around in the Underdark and be all murderous?

Evil, whatever that is, is created by personal choice, not by right of birth. And even those who choose to claim to be truly evil will attempt to explain it or justify it (see comment #13). So evil is as evil does, but even that depends on the point of view. Moral relativism strikes again, I suppose.

In the game: solo vs. groups {WoW}

Dec 11th 2005 5:21PM I'm really of two minds about this one. There are times when grouping is the best thing about WoW, and ultimately, the reason we're all playing this game rather than something similar like Knights of the Old Republic. I have had some great times with groups, when it works right. This means that I've found a group of characters who may or may not be the absolute pinnacle of efficiency (my current group, e.g., is 3 mages, a rogue and a druid... no tanks, no healers or rezzers), but everybody has the same goal: to have fun and help everybody move forward. So sometimes I spend a few hours helping the group get a quest I don't need, but thats okay, because I'm having fun and some of the pressure of high-yield questing is off. But sometimes I just want to solo, and take on challenges on my own, concentrating on my own strategies for questing rather than trying to make complex plans via the chat interface. Ultimately, I think it's a case-by-case basis, and obviously there are quests where you can't avoid grouping, but the WoW interface seems to work really well, so oftentimes it's not the pain that I've experienced in other games.

How much time do you spend designing your characters? {WoW}

Dec 11th 2005 5:21PM There is definitely a lack of options in the character creation screen. This surprises me, because it seems like that is more or less the point: to make a unique character that is all your own that you can hone to your liking and make a name for yourself in Azeroth. While I admit I've never seen another gnome with ALL my attributes, I have seen some pretty close ones.

What's in a Name? {WoW}

Dec 11th 2005 5:16PM My gnome mage is a engineer/miner, so I wanted to give him a name that reflected that, so I went with "Widdershins". It's a somewhat antiquated term for anti-clockwise, which I felt went well with the idea of the gears and springs in a clock, and then the backwards running worked with the personality I wanted to project. Now everyone calls me "Widder" which I like, except for my main questing partner, who very often refers to me as "WidderIDIOT" which I don't like as much. But oh well...

How much time do you spend designing your characters? {WoW}

Dec 11th 2005 5:07PM There is definitely a lack of options in the character creation screen. This surprises me, because it seems like that is more or less the point: to make a unique character that is all your own that you can hone to your liking and make a name for yourself in Azeroth. While I admit I've never seen another gnome with ALL my attributes, I have seen some pretty close ones.

In the game: solo vs. groups {WoW}

Dec 11th 2005 4:37PM I'm really of two minds about this one. There are times when grouping is the best thing about WoW, and ultimately, the reason we're all playing this game rather than something similar like Knights of the Old Republic. I have had some great times with groups, when it works right. This means that I've found a group of characters who may or may not be the absolute pinnacle of efficiency (my current group, e.g., is 3 mages, a rogue and a druid... no tanks, no healers or rezzers), but everybody has the same goal: to have fun and help everybody move forward. So sometimes I spend a few hours helping the group get a quest I don't need, but thats okay, because I'm having fun and some of the pressure of high-yield questing is off. But sometimes I just want to solo, and take on challenges on my own, concentrating on my own strategies for questing rather than trying to make complex plans via the chat interface. Ultimately, I think it's a case-by-case basis, and obviously there are quests where you can't avoid grouping, but the WoW interface seems to work really well, so oftentimes it's not the pain that I've experienced in other games.