I think Blizzard has been indicating that they might do SOMETHING between SoO and next expansion, just don't think this is it. Dunno if Blizzard has even decided on what to do yet.
Last edited by Gehco; 2013-10-24 at 07:31 AM.
i don't think we will find out if its real until blizzcon, if they reveal skysunder is real before blizzcon is basically confirms burning legion expansion. so 5.5 probably on PTR after blizzcon?
Too cool for a signature
Please giff me Skysunderz
This is my signature. It states my prediction of the next expansion. Not only is it correct in my eyes, but should also be in yours too.
Anyone who doesn't agree with me is an idiot, a bad, and a pleb.
- A Quote from every narcissistic, defiant, self-absorbed theorist on these forums. True story.
it's a fake
look at picture
it uses 4,1 trailer ending stuff
look it's shown on youtube and it hasnot been confirmed by any source that was uploaded there
look at timer 0:06 of 0:21? wtf?
wher ehave u seen 21 sec lengs oth logo onyl or trailer size? mostly when patch name is shown at START and not at end of line
look at any pervious patch trailers almsot all need 5-8 secs to show fully patch logo
and after that, 2-3 secs and it disappears
its a fake
loook carefully they come from below, like in 4,1
Fake or not, we've already gotten 25 pages of discussion out of the topic and no new developments. Probably best to let the thread stay dead.
Blizzard do not destroy Jaina Proudmoore's character. Make her who she once was, not full of rage and vengeance.,If you are curious about me or about my writing aspirations, feel free to pst me. Paladin-Sorcerer at your service! My Youtube Channel https://www.youtube.com/user/Aeluron
fact its fake!
Quite a few misconceptions being thrown around in this thread!
First of all, here is a different image showing a little more detail:
As you can see from the title -- it's just the "title frame fx test" -- and not the full trailer; so people who are dismissing its validity on that point alone are doing so on a false assumption.
Other posters have pointed this out too, but I think it merits repetition: asking for a source is pointless, because any source would serve their interests best by remaining anonymous. If the source identified themselves, not only would they possibly put their career at risk, but they would most certainly ruin any chance at leaking anything else.
I am not for a moment suggesting that this is the genuine article. In fact, I've got a strong feeling that it isn't.
But let's not try to support our beliefs with flimsy logic and outright wrong conclusions.