Mar 20th 2012 7:20PM My first reaction when reading this one is, "He's such a jerk!" Perhaps his feelings may be natural, but he's doing just about everything he can to make both women in this situation miserable. Stringing along the writer with promises that, let's face it, if he were really serious about he'd have done something already if everything he said is true. And stringing along the fiance by staying in an engagement he says he's no longer interested in. He needs to man up like yesterday and deal with his problems, and I think the letter writer needs to seriously consider these things if she intends to stay with him.
Jan 23rd 2012 7:44PM They need to fix how the female tauren model is rigged at the least. There's all sorts of problems around the legs. Don't look at them too closely when running wearing pants and sitting down while wearing a skirt. You'll be sad.
Dec 14th 2011 3:40PM More specifically, it's a baby dik-dik.
Dec 6th 2011 10:03PM While most of the time I wouldn't condone throwing out an ultimatum, if you accuse someone of cybering and refuse to listen to their side of the story, that's personal. Of course she got angry and said things that under normal circumstances shouldn't be said! At the very least the GM and officers are absolutely terrible with dealing with people. But more than that, it's a terrible guild because if you think about it, either:
1. They believed the officer when he denied that he was cybering. If this is the case, then why on earth did they press the issue that far? The OP stated that only after she tried to explain that they were mistaken and was disbelieved did she make that statement. And if they did ultimately believe him, as decent human beings, they should have apologized to both of them for making such an inflammatory and personal accusation.
2. They did not believe the officer when he denied that he was cybering. Then they kept on a officer that was as they said themselves smearing their guild's reputation. And how awesome does it look for your guild when you gkicked one person that was theoretically involved and not the other?
Jun 6th 2011 3:19PM I think the advice given in the column was good considering the circumstances, but I think it's better to not let it get to this point in the first place. In other words, if you notice something that's obviously wrong, speak up as soon as you notice; don't wait until you and all your friends are all officers and everyone's expecting for you to pick up the slack, and you have a laundry list of complaints. A lot of people have a tendency to keep quiet because they're afraid it'll cause drama, but keeping quiet all too often leads to situations like this. And of course, it then also wouldn't be a giant shock to them either if you complain, they don't fix it, and you end up /gquitting later.
May 17th 2011 5:33PM I wonder if people will start making cross-realm guilds or at least guild partnerships using this... that could be kind of neat.
Apr 20th 2011 1:01PM I was actually kind of sad when the dungeon finder came out because I knew the days when I could meet cool people through pugs were gone. WoW is supposed to be social, making a mechanic that encourages people to be unsocial because they know with certainty they'll never see those people again... even in Wrath I thought it was a bad idea.
Apr 18th 2011 6:03PM My guild once experienced some bad-mouthing due to some drama I won't really go into. We pretty much followed your first suggestion: when they started drama and bad-mouthing in our recruitment posts, we responding logically and reasonably, and they ended up looking like drama queens. Probably no one from that group or people close-knit with that group would ever like our guild, but uninvolved people seemed to discount them. The trouble makers saw we weren't engaging on their terms and gave up after not too long.
Dec 13th 2010 7:48PM Maybe someone's mentioned this already, but there's potentially another reason for extreme sexual dimorphism in wow characters. Namely, if you're playing a game zoomed out so everything's kind of small, it might be difficult to distinguish the girls from the boys. I like the looks of the old alpha models, but I admit they'd be harder to identify, especially from farther away, and I think alot of people like to be able to easily distinguish between the two under all circumstances. Of course, these are just screenshots. In game, if their animations were still gender-specific, the way they moved would probably give them away.
Jul 10th 2010 11:01AM I for one really happy for the fans speaking their minds, and for Blizzard reversing their opinion; I would have piled on too, except I couldn't post on the official forums because I'm taking a WoW-break at the moment (no non-active accounts allowed.) =(
To those people who think the fan-response was overblown because the forums are an "optional feature", my response is this: WoW is optional. So why should we just sit back, continue to give them money, and let them make a change that we so vehemently dislike that people are telling us, "well, if you don't like it, it's optional"? Yes, most of the time, no one uses all of a program's features, but that's normally because for whatever reason they don't care to use that particular feature, rather than "there is something about this feature I find so vile that even though I'd like to use it, I won't." Usually when it gets to that level of badness, I don't pay for that program. =b
Furthermore, for me, it isn't even about the fear-mongering, for surely a relatively small percentage of people have their privacy invaded in a dangerous way (although this is still a concern), but rather, it's because I *like* my privacy. I'm mostly a private person, and I don't like having to constantly worry if people can and will be motivated to look me up, and I don't like companies that think it's okay to invade my privacy like that. (For this reason I refuse to get a facebook account.)
Therefore, my response before their relenting was, "Well fine, then. Blizzard is optional too." =b But now I'm happy because I can play WoW and Diablo 3 (when it comes out) again.