Apr 2nd 2012 4:50PM I, too, just can't bring myself to switch mains. It's funny, because when I started playing back in BC, I wanted to be a caster. I've always identified with the wizard-type characters in fantasy lit., and I was sure I would end up being a mage. But when I was trying out WoW for the first time, I started on a warrior, because (for whatever reason) I thought it might be easier to learn, and I figured I'd just play him for a few levels, while I figured out how the game worked. -- and Broose was born.
I have since tried every class, including mage, but nothing else has ever felt right. I have just grown to love being a fury warrior, especially as Broose. Everybody I know in game calls me Broose (even the few who know my real name -- including my 2 brothers!) and all my other characters are just "Broose's alts." It's become who I am in that world, and I can't imagine trying to change that.
I have 5 other 85s and several mid-levels, but Broose has all the titles, and mounts, and pets, and achievements, and he just feels like me in that world. It's almost like it's me having a fantasy when I play Broose, and it's Broose having a fantasy when I play an alt. Know what I mean?
Mar 31st 2012 12:55PM If we do this again (which we totally should) make a list of the insertion parameters in order before the break, then put the whole story after. That way, we can all come up with our answers without having to see the story.
Mar 31st 2012 12:23AM Wow! As an avid Lego collector, I've avoided Mega-blocks like the plague. But these...
B-but, I never buy Mega...
I can't believe it, but I'm actually going to have to buy these.
Mar 27th 2012 3:20PM It seems counter-intuitive, but being able to trade the items would adversely affect the system. For one, as Ghostcrawler mentions, one of the points is to alleviate any pressure from others in the raid to give your loot to someone (supposedly) more deserving. If you have no choice - no pressure.
Secondly, with this new system, everyone's roll is independent of everyone else's, so if I understand it correctly, in a 10 man raid, 10 people could, theoretically, win loot off of one boss. Some of that loot will not be usable (because it's a duplicate or not an upgrade, etc.). If trading was enabled, it would screw with the odds of loot distribution because something not useable to you might be useable to someone else, even though they technically did not win it, so they would have to lower the likelihood of loot dropping to keep it from giving out useable loot too quickly.
It's just like with any other soul-bound item that you get from quests or rep. Sure it would be nice, sometimes, to be able to give that to someone else, but that would screw with the distribution tables of the game, which is why you can't.
Mar 23rd 2012 1:44PM I think they meant that's how they were going to sort out the annual pass subscriptions sub-set, after they met the other criteria needed for the testing. This is not a game ready to play. The beta has a purpose. It would be counter-productive to let in all 1,000,000 annual pass subscribers before they even started looking at other factors that actually matter in the test process. If there are looking for certain system criteria, and there are annual pass-holders who meet that criteria, then they probably get dibs. Otherwise, they have to get the mix of systems they want first. Then they bring in, wave by wave, more and more people, giving preference to annual pass holders, sorted by time played and date purchased.
That is how they are sorting the annual pass entries, but that doesn't mean that all annual pass entries are going in first or that other criteria of your system can't trump those 2 factors. They are trying to do this in a reasonable way so they get the data they need from the beta test process. How can that not be the appropriate way to do this?
Mar 23rd 2012 1:31PM But I think that's because they didn't realize, until after the fact, that people were interpreting their words as meaning "immediately." When the said it, they probably meant that you would get access in with the normal waves of testers, but they they realized some people were thinking they would ALL get in at once at the beginning and they felt the need to clarify.
Mar 23rd 2012 1:26PM You know, I just got off the phone with a friend of mine who lives in Florida. My family and I are going down to visit them in May. I'm an avid mountain biker and I've decided to drive down and take my bike so I could ride a little while I'm there. I just said to him, "Hey, I'm bringing my bike, so when we get to Florida, let's go ride Alafia State Park."
I'm pretty sure he will be okay if I don't insist that we ride the second that I enter the state, or even the first or second day. "When I get to Florida" just means "during the time that I am in Florida." It's a common English phrase.
Mar 23rd 2012 12:19PM I don't see why it's so hard to believe that the story arc could go that way. The whole point of making Garrosh so against the use of demon power is probably to make the fact that he finally succumbed to what he hated most an intense plot twist.
It's such a common plot device: the hero fights almost cult-like against evil, and in his zeal, succumbs to evil himself. That is exactly why he was written to hate the demon taint so powerfully in the first place, so it would be painful and poignant when he fell to that very weakness, himself.
Mar 23rd 2012 12:12PM "I do see a little retconned being that in the low level of Cata, he kill one of his general for kill the inocents and by the end of MOP, he going to be cometing war crimes!?!"
Again, that is not retconning. Retconning does not mean making a character do something unexpected or even completely opposite of what he/she used to do. Retconning means going back in the past and saying something never happened or happened differently. He would be retconned if Blizzard said, "We've decided Garrosh always killed innocents. All that stuff about him being angry about it never really happened. Just forget about it."
Mar 21st 2012 7:52PM Although Matt was very gracious with his response, the truth is that this is a blog, not a news site. It's full of opinion, conjecture, and other devices meant to stimulate creative thought, express varied ideas and concepts, and encourage discussion and debate. Part of what the crew has decided to do is deliver as much news as possible, but that is certainly not the extent of the site's purpose.
I think they do a pretty good job of letting us, the readers, know what portions are fact and what portions are creative writing, and there is quite a bit of both. It's not just the tinfoil hat columns; there are also the Breakfast Topics, the Sunday Morning Funnies, the Moviewatch, the Daily Quest, and more that are purely creative writing. Then there are many columns that aren't really fiction, but aren't really news, either: World of Warcrafts, Goldcapped, Around Azeroth, Add-on Spotlight, Reader UI of the Week, etc. These are interest pieces that are meant to be fun, light reading.
I'm not sure why you think this site should just stick to the news and nothing but the news, but that has never been the case, and probably never will be (thank goodness).