Oct 27th 2011 9:10AM Thrall let Sylvanas stay in power and put Garrosh in power. Don't you even TRY to tell me they have not portrayed him making major mistakes.
Oct 26th 2011 10:22AM @Spellotape
It all depends at how you look at it. You may see the Alliance doing nothing but losing lands (because you obviously do not play in the Barrens and see Taurejo burnt to the ground), but what about something so much more important? The Horde is losing its soul. Now this actually does feed into the Horde getting more story time, but it is like watching a show where your favorite character becomes less and less likable, and more and more of a jerk you hate. I watch one of my favorite faction leaders die, the Forsaken becoming more and more overtly evil, and the Orcs being led by a raging maniac. The Goblins and Trolls are the only ones that have ANYTHING good going on, and both of them take huge backseats to the Orcs and Forsaken. No appreciable lore for Blood Elves.
So then the question becomes; Would you rather be told a story about somebody you really like becoming somebody you hate, or just not get any story?
Full disclosure, the only Alliance I have played since Cata is the Worgen starting zone so I lack a full appreciation of all the story (or lack thereof) out there.
Oct 18th 2011 12:26PM You had me at "Dance Studio."
Oct 18th 2011 12:22PM Batman being able to take out the Avengers is as ridiculous as saying he could kill some huge cosmic villain like Darkseid.
Oct 14th 2011 12:26PM Okay, are you playing it hard and loose with the term "spaghetti code", or did Blizz really fly in the face of convention and structure and write sloppy code with complete disregard for the fact that an MMO more than any other type of game, is going to need its code to be maintainable?
The fact that the code is 10 years old is one thing. I can look at programs I wrote a month ago and even if I documented them well it will still take me at least a few minutes to figure out what is going on. It is the nature of the beast. But "spaghetti code" is almost synonymous with "legacy code" these days, in that any programmer with any education or who has worked in an effective company should know better than to write sloppy control structure. Hell, I know of schools where professors threaten to outright fail students for ever using GOTO. Just seems weird to me that a professional organization like Blizz would make such a bizarre decision as to be okay with that. But maybe it is just because I have only coded in an academic environment where such lofty ideals are still maintained.
Oct 11th 2011 12:00PM The only reason I can think of for it not being that interesting would be that a lot of the story was wrapped up in Stormrage. There is nothing inherently wrong with having an expansion focus on one or two classes. Just look at what we have had:
BC - arguably could have been about Warlocks, but the ultimate story was about the Belfs and more to the point, Belf Paladins. Probably the least class centered expansion.
Wrath - okay, this was ALL about DK's and Pallies. Bar none. Mages should have gotten more love than they did story-wise considering Dalaran and Malygos being front and center, but c'est la vie.
Cata - Shammies, shammies, druids, and shammies.
And as with every expansion, just because there is a focus (Arthas, Deathwing), there are still other story lines that focus on other bosses.
I guess what I am saying is that even though I raided on a lock, priest, and druid in Wrath, I was never pissed that is was not any of those classes stories. But considering all the bread crumbs in the game about how the Emerald Dream needs to be fixed (world bosses, sunken temple, Anzu, that chain quest in Wrath, Nelf starting zone, etc), I actually would be pissed if there were not a full expansion dedicated to it.
And quite frankly they're not exactly blooming with more places to go to. They could introduce an entire new alien world again (Xoroth, etc), but why do that when you already have the general maps that you need to create the Emerald Dream?
Oct 4th 2011 3:08PM Downrated into oblivion. I obviously do not have a grasp on the popular opinion :P
I did get a shammy to 80 in Wrath, but it was never more than a fun alt and I haven't played her since.
And nobody else has said anything but I really do want to know if locks are considered the worst dps and whining jerks to boot?
Oct 4th 2011 12:25PM I feel like it is one of his weaker efforts. There are some that I feel like he nailed, and others where it just seemed to be a REALLY personal experience. Especially with shamans. Even if it is true, I don't consider it a stereotype about shamans that Blizzard nerfs them all the time. That's more of a stereotype about Blizz. Not sure where the entire bit about locks being the worst DPS came from either. They seemed to have been the straw-man for jerk DPS like priest did for oppressed healers.
Pallys, rogues, priests, hunters, druids, and DK's seemed pretty on the money. I just did not feel Shamans, warriors, warlocks, and mages.
Oct 4th 2011 9:07AM I really have to agree with what the majority seem to be saying: it breaks so much of the game. I mean, this is a game designed to be leveled through.
Quick question: how many people kept doing quests in a zone after they stopped getting xp for it? Outside of achievements, most people I know would move on. I am one of the most lore centric players in my guild, and I think there were still only 2 times in the revamped Cata content that I was willing to take the hit on xp just to see how the story ended.
Does leveling teach us anything about PvE? Look at the bosses faced as you proceed. Targaman the Hungerer vs. Ozruk. There is a MASSIVE difference between these two. One is a tank n spank centered around getting you to just play your role of tank/healer/dps. The other is a very involved fight that requires you to know your rotations, understand that you need to run, and have pretty quick reflexes. That seems like a lot to ask a new player. And imagine if the tank or healer in ZG/ZA were somebody who had just rolled that day. Think that would go long before they were kicked? They would probably feel angry and discouraged and flat out not want to play. My first heroic in Cata I got kicked without explanation, and despite having played for a while I was still discouraged. If you tier it off by gear and just require a specific ilvl to get into that instance, it breaks all the benefits of removing the barrier to playing with friends.
On a personal note, I have never leveled a DK and had trouble with my leveling toons after major content patches both for the same reason; I have a whole book full of skills and in no way understand how they go together. Blizz designed the skills you get as you level in an AMAZINGLY intelligent way. They are frequent enough that you are constantly saying "oooh! I want to try that out", but infrequent enough that you have a chance to actually try every new one. I have a hunter languishing in the 60's because I did not want to have to relearn to play a class with an entire skillset on the fly after the change to focus. You can think of me as a noob if you want, it was my 5th or 6th alt, I played him for fun and it had stopped being fun and started being homework to get to play him anymore. Same with DK's, I just always feel like I'm missing something because there are all these abilities and I only vaguely understand how they work with each other. I could spend the time reading through all the descriptions figuring it out, or go online and read about it, or I could play a class from level one where learning to use the new skills is fun and built into the game. Decisions, decisions...
Talent trees would also lose a lot of meaning. I guess you could just start everyone off with the max number of talent points, but then those abilities seem kind of meaningless as you were given them rather than "earning" them. But this would also compound new player confusion, as they need to not only get down their rotations very quickly, but get what speccing is and do it properly. Again, say a completely improperly specced person joins your random. They might be new and not understand which skills are good and which are not because they have no sense of how everything works. A lot of people would be nice and offer to help. A lot would just vote to kick with the reason being "noob."
DK's are almost evidence against these arguments, except that DK's have a previous character level requirement, meaning Blizz expects you to have played enough to understand roles in group play, the concept of rotations, and talent trees before you are even allowed to roll one.
I think removing level requirements would be just as bad as the current flawed system, possibly worse. The game is largely based around progressing through levels. It gives the story a chance to be told in a relatively linear fashion (ignore Outland and Northrend), and gives people a chance to grow into their character. Barriers would still exist to playing with friends in having proper gear, so it does not even help with that. I honestly cannot think of a single way in which the game would benefit from removing leveling. Even if you are a "it's all about the endgame" person, then leveling is just a giant tutorial. Yeah, a lot of people go online for specs/strats, but I think there is still a lot of learning that goes on during leveling.