Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by sanman7890

Originally posted by itgrowls

"catclysm made wow better" is just like saying "republicans made the senate better" sorry wrong. This game has been going downhill since they took out all the original devs and stuck them on Titan and when they stuck Mr. Marine Biologist in charge. The fact of the matter is this, they stopped doing meaningful fun developement and used minor very recent meaningful fun developement on this game only as a last resort when they lost 1 million customers in two months time all at once. The practices of the devs in this game are in question by myself and others not the game itself althought repeating the same content, styles, concepts every patch/expansion does make for a dull game as well.

 

Hmm..mayhap I'll write the next article on the topic of how gamers tend to assume advanced knowledge of game design and develpment while mixing in a healthy amount of condescension.

Thanks for the idea!

Condescension goes hand in hand with hyperbole don't you know?

 

Just like peanut butter and horseradish! :D

Originally posted by Kyleran

This article was unclear and bounced around several subjects, not really focusing on one single topic.

Is the author telling us people use Hyperbole when describing WOW sometimes? (but not all of the time?)

Is he upset with the drops and or artwork in WOW?

Or, is he just trying to receive attention like many of us here on MMORPG.com? 

I'll go with the last one.

 

I have to agree.  I think I know what the point of the article was, but it certainly wasn't very clear.  The narrative was all over the place and made it hard to follow.  I guess he was trying to act like one of the persons who is bored with the game? 

Not to be harsh or anything, but the article was a bit weak and I think the points could have been made better.   Instead of making fun of people who are criticizing the game, a more in depth analysis might a made a better article.  Just my 2 cents.

Yes they are =)

Darn it wtb an edit button: Anyhoo I was agreeing with RabbiFang =)

Originally posted by leojreimroc

Originally posted by Kyleran

This article was unclear and bounced around several subjects, not really focusing on one single topic.

Is the author telling us people use Hyperbole when describing WOW sometimes? (but not all of the time?)

Is he upset with the drops and or artwork in WOW?

Or, is he just trying to receive attention like many of us here on MMORPG.com? 

I'll go with the last one.

 

I have to agree.  I think I know what the point of the article was, but it certainly wasn't very clear.  The narrative was all over the place and made it hard to follow.  I guess he was trying to act like one of the persons who is bored with the game? 

 

Not to be harsh or anything, but the article was a bit weak and I think the points could have been made better.   Instead of making fun of people who are criticizing the game, a more in depth analysis might a made a better article.  Just my 2 cents.

I'm not sure how much more in-depth I could have gotten without busting out empirical data that doesn't exist and doing some repeatable laboratory testing that theoretically wouldn't prove a damn thing.

Sorry it wasn't clear to you though, but the point was to be incredibly over the top, perhaps even to the point of not being entirely understandable.  A goal of mine was to make sure it wasn't painfully obvious where I was going with the piece.  There was going to be a shift from evaluation to a percieved problem to an outrageous example of that problem, but I wanted the first part to make the reader think "Is this guy serious or just stupid?  Who is saying this, are these rash generalizations accurate or made up?  Who does he think he is to judge like this?  He's doing the exact same thing he is railing against!"  And if you reach that sort of conclusion, well, the satire was a success, thanks for reading!

Who knows?  Satire lends itself to such scenarios sometimes.  Take for example Colbert, he often engages in satire in his impersonations of the people he is discussing on his show.  One more than one occassion I've witness his ranting turn into entirely uninteligible nonsense, and it was funny and it proved a point.  Or his "Word" segments where he invents or stretches the meanings/spelling/usage of words to comedic ends.  

Also if I just wrote a SUPER SERIOUS SCIENTIFIC ACADEMIC ANALAYSIS article I'd hear something like "Not to be harsh or anything, but this article was a bit weak and I think it could have been much more entertaining.  Instead of just having an in-depth analysis of a problem in the game it could have been funny and entertaining instead and it would be a better article." This is an editorial not a straight up news column.  I'm also not a sociologist or psychologist so any serious attempts I would make, no matter how eloquent, would probably come off as armchair ramblings!  Suffice to say sticking to observations made about the community from a first-person perspective are my best and most reliable sources of input!

I appreciate the criticism though, and will strive to do better next time!

"Your Article Ruined WoW"

:(

Originally posted by SS2-Max

"Your Article Ruined WoW"

:(

LOL nice one.

What's the criteria for making and posting a column? Some one thought that this would be a good idea to make into a column, right?

I would also dub this as trolling ( this column ) versus whatever else you thought it would be? Satire/hyperbole/trolling = column  which then =supported by the website?

But it does give you the chance to check your email OMGALLTHETIME and wait for the next person to post so you can toss your wit back into the pile. 

I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the article. :(

I'm not real sure what is going on here(topic-wise), but that has never stopped me from voicing my opinion. I don't plan to change anytime soon.

You hit the nail on the head when you said bashing WoW is cool. You may also notice the most vocerfious post are from people who played WoW for YEARS. Not weeks or a month or two, like yours truly, but years. Then, they have such lack of common sense they come to forums to rant and rave how easy WoW is, or how dumbed down it is, or how the community is crap. My favorite being "Vanilla WoW was so much more difficult." LOL WHAT???? Clearly, a newbie to the MMO scene who failed to play such games as EQ, UO, DAoC and AC.

PS - If you takes another's opinions as stated fact that is clearly an error on your part. Opinions should not need to be stated, as such. We are intelligent beings that are able to discern someone opinions from fact. I can't stand it when one say "This game isn't fun." and someone says "This game isn't fun for you." Yea, nice going there Sherlock Holmes. You passed 2nd grade English where we all learned about opinions, arseholes and facts.

This was a lame read. Just saying......

Love the replies. I guess writer made his point because hyperbolas are still going on . lol

Joseph,

I had a bit of trouble following the article, but what I think you're saying is that a) one person's opinion is not necessarily fact, b) forums are, as a rule, not so hyperbolic as we make them out to be, and c) WoW doesn't necessarily suck?

I agree on all counts.

Still, for me personally, I found many things in WoW to be... less than desirable once Cataclysm got into its full stride. Does that mean "Cata ruined WoW?" Not at all. It means that I got bored and moved on. One day I might go back. But hey - we all get bored from time to time. It's why multiple games are out there.

I enjoyed the humor in the article though.

Originally posted by sanman7890

Originally posted by leojreimroc

Originally posted by Kyleran

This article was unclear and bounced around several subjects, not really focusing on one single topic.

Is the author telling us people use Hyperbole when describing WOW sometimes? (but not all of the time?)

Is he upset with the drops and or artwork in WOW?

Or, is he just trying to receive attention like many of us here on MMORPG.com? 

I'll go with the last one.

 

I have to agree.  I think I know what the point of the article was, but it certainly wasn't very clear.  The narrative was all over the place and made it hard to follow.  I guess he was trying to act like one of the persons who is bored with the game? 

 

Not to be harsh or anything, but the article was a bit weak and I think the points could have been made better.   Instead of making fun of people who are criticizing the game, a more in depth analysis might a made a better article.  Just my 2 cents.

I'm not sure how much more in-depth I could have gotten without busting out empirical data that doesn't exist and doing some repeatable laboratory testing that theoretically wouldn't prove a damn thing.

Sorry it wasn't clear to you though, but the point was to be incredibly over the top, perhaps even to the point of not being entirely understandable.  A goal of mine was to make sure it wasn't painfully obvious where I was going with the piece.  There was going to be a shift from evaluation to a percieved problem to an outrageous example of that problem, but I wanted the first part to make the reader think "Is this guy serious or just stupid?  Who is saying this, are these rash generalizations accurate or made up?  Who does he think he is to judge like this?  He's doing the exact same thing he is railing against!"  And if you reach that sort of conclusion, well, the satire was a success, thanks for reading!

Who knows?  Satire lends itself to such scenarios sometimes.  Take for example Colbert, he often engages in satire in his impersonations of the people he is discussing on his show.  One more than one occassion I've witness his ranting turn into entirely uninteligible nonsense, and it was funny and it proved a point.  Or his "Word" segments where he invents or stretches the meanings/spelling/usage of words to comedic ends.  

Also if I just wrote a SUPER SERIOUS SCIENTIFIC ACADEMIC ANALAYSIS article I'd hear something like "Not to be harsh or anything, but this article was a bit weak and I think it could have been much more entertaining.  Instead of just having an in-depth analysis of a problem in the game it could have been funny and entertaining instead and it would be a better article." This is an editorial not a straight up news column.  I'm also not a sociologist or psychologist so any serious attempts I would make, no matter how eloquent, would probably come off as armchair ramblings!  Suffice to say sticking to observations made about the community from a first-person perspective are my best and most reliable sources of input!

I appreciate the criticism though, and will strive to do better next time!

 

I don't think it's just about going more in-depth.  I think the whole point of the article (and of course, this is a huge paraphrase) was to say that a lot of people (and mostly former or non-WoW players) are saying: "I don't like WoW because x (where x is blame Blizzard or WoW's community)"  when the problem is really themselves.  I got that.  However, the article itself only touched briefly on to reasons why in 1 paragraph. 

The article doesn't need to be as you call it "super serious academic article" but I don't know, I would expect them to make me think about the issue at hand by presenting many well thought out arguments.  I think people who come and read these articles expect some sort of intelectual arguments, except where it's clearly not that kind of article.

I'm not saying the article completely failed at this.  I'm just saying it was a bit incohesive at times.  I got your points, but (in my opinion) a lot was left out that could have been said.  It's a great topic afterall, one that is really interesting.  And yes, I got that the last part was satire, although you may have a bit of work to reach Colbert status ;)

Unfortunately, it seems a number of people can't wrap their minds around the actual article as a whole.  Perhaps, they didn't read it in it's entirety.  Perhaps, they don't know the definition of hyperbole (and maybe they even pronounce it hyper-bowl).  The fact that it's included in the title and the use of "and...scene" at the end should have the effect of neon signage.  However, I think these individuals are too ready to defend their personal experiences, even when they aren't being attacked.

You are better at Dodging Reading Comprehension (100)!

Originally posted by Nifa

Joseph,

I had a bit of trouble following the article, but what I think you're saying is that a) one person's opinion is not necessarily fact, b) forums are, as a rule, not so hyperbolic as we make them out to be, and c) WoW doesn't necessarily suck?

I agree on all counts.

Still, for me personally, I found many things in WoW to be... less than desirable once Cataclysm got into its full stride. Does that mean "Cata ruined WoW?" Not at all. It means that I got bored and moved on. One day I might go back. But hey - we all get bored from time to time. It's why multiple games are out there.

I enjoyed the humor in the article though.

 

I appreciate your thoughts!  I'm also glad you got the main points and found it humorous.  I honestly can't state any opinion on the Cata content as I haven't experienced it yet, however once I do I plan on revisiting this idea/topic after I have a better grasp on the "state of WoW" in general.

Thanks for the comment.

Originally posted by leojreimroc 

I don't think it's just about going more in-depth.  I think the whole point of the article (and of course, this is a huge paraphrase) was to say that a lot of people (and mostly former or non-WoW players) are saying: "I don't like WoW because x (where x is blame Blizzard or WoW's community)"  when the problem is really themselves.  I got that.  However, the article itself only touched briefly on to reasons why in 1 paragraph. 

The article doesn't need to be as you call it "super serious academic article" but I don't know, I would expect them to make me think about the issue at hand by presenting many well thought out arguments.  I think people who come and read these articles expect some sort of intelectual arguments, except where it's clearly not that kind of article.

I'm not saying the article completely failed at this.  I'm just saying it was a bit incohesive at times.  I got your points, but (in my opinion) a lot was left out that could have been said.  It's a great topic afterall, one that is really interesting.  And yes, I got that the last part was satire, although you may have a bit of work to reach Colbert status ;)

 

Well for one I do have a word limit, so keep that in mind!  It is extremely easy to make an enormous essay of a column, it is more difficult to pick and choose points while dropping others for the sake of brevity and prioritization.  And I agree that the article was a bit schizophrenic direction wise, and that is my fault and I take full credit for that problem.  The idea this stemmed from was a rather large package for an article of this length and scope, however I was committed to making it work despite any shortcomings it might entail.

As for your comment about being more serious, I appreciate the sentiment.  Two points I want to make to you though are that a) this is an editorial column and b) this column in particular I was shooting for a more entertaining goal.  I can write with serious business in mind, and I think my other two articles (and my forthcoming review) show that when I need to be analytical and objective the capacity is there, however with the WoW Factor I like to be a little bit more open-ended and light-humored.  WoW as a topic has been done to death over the years and trying to balance being interesting, accurate, and entertaining about a subject matter that has permeated our gaming culture so much is daunting to me personally.

Either way I plan on the next piece to be more serious, perhaps a straight up news article is in order then?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Originally posted by Damon

Unfortunately, it seems a number of people can't wrap their minds around the actual article as a whole.  Perhaps, they didn't read it in it's entirety.  Perhaps, they don't know the definition of hyperbole (and maybe they even pronounce it hyper-bowl).  The fact that it's included in the title and the use of "and...scene" at the end should have the effect of neon signage.  However, I think these individuals are too ready to defend their personal experiences, even when they aren't being attacked.

You are better at Dodging Reading Comprehension (100)!

 

I'm glad you understood the post, and I hope you enjoyed it! :)  Also I'm glad someone noticed the "and scene" comment at the end, thank the editor for that!

I think people fail to realize that their "psychological needs" can't be met by a game all the time. If it is, then they have some serious problems they must sort out. WoW is a product for one's imagination and entertaining pleasure. They make a decision based on emotions, experiences, and reactions to the game and its content / community. What "ruins" a game for one, makes a game interesting for another. The point is, some people are not mentally strong enough to make reasonable decisions based on what they feel, think, want, and do. Rather, they tend to go like sheep, because the fear of standing out leads to rejection. notice that some of the most top successful people in the world were socially rejected, and now they are accepted (mostly). Haters gonna hate, lovers gonna love, but these WoW trolls want none of the above but to piss on WoW, and anyone who thinks different than them.

If I am successful, I can literally say that being a sheep in a herd is nice for you, but not me. I want to stand out, that way when I want lamb chops, i can take my pick of the sheep and *WHAM!* make my dinner.

Let me say it like Yoda: "Strong in mind, yes I am, but weak in mind, yes you are."

Originally posted by redpins

I think people fail to realize that their "psychological needs" can't be met by a game all the time. If it is, then they have some serious problems they must sort out. WoW is a product for one's imagination and entertaining pleasure. They make a decision based on emotions, experiences, and reactions to the game and its content / community. What "ruins" a game for one, makes a game interesting for another. The point is, some people are not mentally strong enough to make reasonable decisions based on what they feel, think, want, and do. Rather, they tend to go like sheep, because the fear of standing out leads to rejection. notice that some of the most top successful people in the world were socially rejected, and now they are accepted (mostly). Haters gonna hate, lovers gonna love, but these WoW trolls want none of the above but to piss on WoW, and anyone who thinks different than them.

If I am successful, I can literally say that being a sheep in a herd is nice for you, but not me. I want to stand out, that way when I want lamb chops, i can take my pick of the sheep and *WHAM!* make my dinner.

Let me say it like Yoda: "Strong in mind, yes I am, but weak in mind, yes you are."

I always find it hard to take anyone seriously once they start spouting all of the sheep talk.  Nice yoda though!