Oct 31st 2011 9:09PM Sometimes I long for the days of classic EQ where you choose a class and that was that. No specialization nonsense. Even the original Alternative Advancement system in EQ was a different beast than what Blizzard did with specs.
In any case, I agree with some of comments here. I'd be for this same limited talent tree, but per spec. In other words, a separate tree for each spec, where the player is allowed "trivial" choices within that spec.
Aug 30th 2011 10:13PM For me, the most enjoyable aspect of WoW is the leveling process and small-group content; I stopped playing because I have no interest in raiding or crafting. After hitting 85 and gearing up three different characters, it slowly dawned on me that there was nothing else for me to do except roll a new toon and start the process all over again. That's not my idea of fun, it's not something I have any desire to do (again), and so Blizzard no longer gets my money. That's not a slight against Blizzard or the people who still find enjoyment in the game. It's simply a fact. My time with the game is at an end, until the next expansion (presuming the level cap will be raised.)
Mar 3rd 2011 6:16PM Great post. I just recently started to play my hunter again and was surprised to find how competitive BM is.
What's the recommendations for PvP? RIght now I'm in BM for PvE, but I switch to MM whenever I hit the BGs. However, the SV tree has some really intriguing talents. Does the single-target damage vs. AoE damage still apply?
Jun 9th 2010 4:26PM Oh, absolutely. It was an impressive show. I liked all the "extras" they trotted out because they were filming, like Ralph Baer playing the prototype Odyssey.
Lament of the Highborne, the Civ music, Chrono Trigger/Cross, the Mega Man medley... epic win.
May 29th 2010 12:25PM Back in the BC alpha, they hadn't finished the Fel Reaver behavior; they didn't make any noise or cause the earth to shake. So, you'd be soloing some boar or buzzard or other thing and WHAM!....dead. But, occasionally, I'd catch a glimpse of a leg before I got splattered. Always an OMG-What-Is-That moment.
Other than that, I was fairly creeped out the first time I went to SM and saw the folks hanging - literally - from the trees out in the courtyard.
Jan 22nd 2010 8:39PM I've always considered connotation, as opposed to denotation, to be the order of the day when I'm putzing around Azeroth. When someone mentions they're going to "go to Wintergrasp to rape some Horde" I assume - because I understand context - they are going to take their virtual swords and virtual spells and go virtually kill, with intensity, those virtual characters in a virtual place called Wintergrasp. I obviously do not assume they are going to sexually assault real people - especially not in Wintergrasp, which would be impossible.
As far as language is concerned, I've long understood that words are neutral. It's quite ridiculous to assume there's any such beasts as good or bad words. However, there are bad thoughts and bad intentions (and good thoughts and good intentions), and we have words to describe said intentions and thoughts, including connotation. And that's the requirement: Context and intent. Those two delicious morsels determine whether a word is "good" or "bad."
Where the word "rape" is concerned: If spoken in RL, I consider the user to mean the sexual act. I can't imagine someone would ever say, "I was so hungry I raped that burrito." But, when playing WoW, I'm going to assume the person who uses the word "rape" is describing a particularly intense assault, e.g. "we raped Anubarak," "we raped those Horde," etc. They obviously don't mean "we sexually assaulted Anubarak," for more than one reason.
If someone says they are going to rape you - you, the person sitting at the computer - that's a problem and should be dealt with accordingly. If they say they're going to rape Hogger? Not so much. Again, context and intent.
The word "rape" disturbs people because the very act it describes in RL disturbs people. But for some reason -and some of the comments here are evidence- within the game some people dismiss context and intent, although context and intent are apropos to understanding meaning.
By the way, the word "kill" gets a free pass. Afterall, that's what you do in the game (although certainly not the only thing): kill mobs. Is "rape" more offensive than "kill?" If so, is there a logical reason why? What about "murder?" Even if one of your friends or a family member was murdered in RL, should someone be reprimanded for saying, "Oh my god, I'm being camped. I'm logging on my main and murdering this guy." There's even talents and items in the game that reference murder.
Of course, if the guy said he was coming to your house to murder you - again, you, the person at the computer - then, by all means, GM report and /ignore.
Context. Intent. These are our friends, and they make the world (of Warcraft) a lot easier to sort out.
Jan 19th 2010 8:30PM I imagine a cross-realm raid interface would alleviate some of the (perceived) problem. Blizzard suggested that idea was problematic because of raid IDs and whatnot; cross-realm communication may fix that. (e.g. Just like with the Dungeon Finder tool, a pop-up appears on the screen that notifies the player that the raid instance is continuing, initiated by the raid officers or what have you.) Whatever the answer, I think Blizzard can overcome the technical issues and get a Raid Finder implemented.
Also, I never considered casuals to be raid-hungry. If someone takes time out of their life to attend a scheduled raid, I don't think I'd call them casual. Maybe not hardcore - I hate that word - but certainly not casual either.
Dec 11th 2009 2:49PM The differences in server etiquette are an interesting revelation from using the Dungeon Finder tool.
I was bitched out last night because I rolled Need on a Frozen Orb, but I didn't mean to ninja. On Sargeras, my home server, everyone rolls Need on BoE items, including Frozen Orbs. It's been that way since at least BC, if not before. (Keep in mind this is the general rule at 80, but not before then. So if you're leveling up and you see a green drop that's an upgrade, you'll still get it by rolling Need. But at 80 if it's BoE - regardless of green, blue, purple, item classification- it's all Need, all the time. If you really need something, you have to work out with the person who won the item.)
It'll be interesting to see how different server eccentricities pan out in the next few months.
Dec 2nd 2009 9:07PM I'm actually leveling a Rogue (rouge!) right now through PvP until I get to lvl 58, where I'll head to Outland and level via a mixture of PvP and PvE. But really, yet *another* toon taken through the old treadmill of vanilla WoW? No, thanks. PvP is so much the way to go.
Or maybe it's just the "rogue-must-kill-clothies-haha-one-shot" mindset...
May 14th 2009 2:27PM There is no such thing as a "priority list." Only one thing can be a priority; everything else is just stuff you haven't done yet.
Food for thought: