Page 12 of 17 FirstFirst ...
2
10
11
12
13
14
... LastLast
  1. #221
    Quote Originally Posted by Tychus View Post
    Wat. So, this is how things basically went, super abridged version:

    You: Wow sux, pandas be goofy
    Him: Wow's been goofy
    You: BLIZZARD ISN'T PERFECT, WOW ISN'T PERFECT, STUPID FANBOY
    I never said Pandas sucked becuase they were goofy.

    The first step to fanboyism is completely ignoring somebody else's criticism and just copying somebody elses argument.

    I said Pandaria sucked because they managed to take the depth and diversity of ancient Chinese mythology and boil it down to terracotta roofs, and Shaolin monks in panda suits, and oh look, here's an ox, and a dragon. And the characters that were introduced were all martial arts movie clichés. Pandaria ended up being the most intellectually shallow continent in the game.

    And I'll admit, as far as game play goes, other than the complete failure of 5 mans, and the fact that initially the execution of scenarios sucked, MoP probably had the best game play so far. But the story line was just crap. They took a very promising artistic theme, and boiled it down to the most shallow elements possible.

  2. #222
    Quote Originally Posted by Dwarfare View Post
    Vanilla, TBC and WotLK were all about immersion, tough and exciting adventure. MoP will be associated with farms and pandas.
    Did you actually make an account just to post this?

    Also does anyone else notice OP abandoned his own thread?

  3. #223
    Quote Originally Posted by The Mister Madgod View Post
    Dunno about you but by and large... he's not that comical. He's rather gentle, but I wouldn't say that being lighthearted is the same as being comedic.

    Plus, he's in... two raids. And only a part of the second one. He also has a good reason to be in both, if you paid attention to what he is.
    I did lorewalkers. He's about as comical as valley of four winds. Ruined any real immersion with getting the legendary too.

    He's in 2 tiers out of 3, that's pretty bad. They should be better at showing bosses through content than having an npc tacked on as a story-teller, fumbling his way through some of the most dangerous parts of pandaria.

    Note: Just because blizzard tell you X doesn't make it a good reason, they need to prove - like any developer - that it is reasonable. A panda suddenly wandering around places you need groups of experienced adventurers to take down (who displays no combat capability that I recall), is just too much. Maybe if we didn't have pandas everywhere else it would've been more enjoyable (a "break" from the tension, like sandal in DA), but because for 4/6's of the levelling experience you were largely working with lazy, beerdrinking, xenophobic pandas, then met doing HUNDREDS of dailies for them, then even seeing one in the raid content after you'd expect it all to be over, too much.

    Just as a note, it's not that they are pandas - it's their characterization. Same with the hozen. Horde should have had yaungol instead and hozen could've been a silly faction that just fights the grummles.
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    which is kind of like saying "of COURSE you can't see the unicorns, unicorns are invisible, silly."

  4. #224
    Quote Originally Posted by Gheld View Post
    I said Pandaria sucked because they managed to take the depth and diversity of ancient Chinese mythology and boil it down to terracotta roofs, and Shaolin monks in panda suits, and oh look, here's an ox, and a dragon. And the characters that were introduced were all martial arts movie clichés. Pandaria ended up being the most intellectually shallow continent in the game.
    Again, how does using something as a base inherently mean you have to use the same complexity of that base for your derivative work?

    Why is it not okay to look at a source material and take the bits and pieces you like and think would work for YOUR piece?

  5. #225
    Quote Originally Posted by Raiju View Post
    I did lorewalkers. He's about as comical as valley of four winds. Ruined any real immersion with getting the legendary too.

    He's in 2 tiers out of 3, that's pretty bad. They should be better at showing bosses through content than having an npc tacked on as a story-teller, fumbling his way through some of the most dangerous parts of pandaria.
    Can you go more in depth to explain how Lorewalker Cho was a terrible character? You haven't given any real reason to explain how he's comical.

    Furthermore, this is one of the first negative comments I've seen about his character. I have a few friends who thoroughly dislike the Pandaren but loved Lorewalker Cho and even Taran Zhu. Interesting.

  6. #226
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Verdugo View Post
    Figures, they dont appear in places where I would be justified in slaughtering them.
    Yeh that's a dungeon I would have run continuously like

  7. #227
    Quote Originally Posted by Raiju View Post
    I did lorewalkers. He's about as comical as valley of four winds. Ruined any real immersion with getting the legendary too.
    Again, light-heartedness isn't inherently comedic.

    He's hardly as silly as the Valley.

    He's in 2 tiers out of 3, that's pretty bad. They should be better at showing bosses through content than having an npc tacked on as a story-teller, fumbling his way through some of the most dangerous parts of pandaria.
    For a couple minutes of screentime. Nor is it really bad. It's his job. His being there is explainable.

    All in all, he was unnecessary for the stories, technically. However his being there added a touch of adventure to it. A connection to other events in the world, making that raid not just another random place we go to.

    Note: Just because blizzard tell you X doesn't make it a good reason, they need to prove - like any developer - that it is reasonable. A panda suddenly wandering around places you need groups of experienced adventurers to take down (who displays no combat capability that I recall), is just too much. Maybe if we didn't have pandas everywhere else it would've been more enjoyable (a "break" from the tension, like sandal in DA), but because for 4/6's of the levelling experience you were largely working with lazy, beerdrinking, xenophobic pandas, then met doing HUNDREDS of dailies for them, then even seeing one in the raid content after you'd expect it all to be over, too much.
    He does have experienced adventurers to help him out, so I don't see the problem.

    I have already shown how the pandaren aren't everywhere, and even if they are there, they aren't so overwhelming as you claim.

    You focus on them, and that's why you believe what you do but the truth of the matter is that your focus on them blinds you from the big picture.

    Just as a note, it's not that they are pandas - it's their characterization. Same with the hozen. Horde should have had yaungol instead and hozen could've been a silly faction that just fights the grummles.
    Their characterization of being light-hearted in general makes them terrible?

    I'd argue otherwise. They're a breath of fresh air in an otherwise cripplingly depressing world. They add contrast and in Mists of Pandaria, add a means of judging what we've done and how bad it is.

  8. #228
    Quote Originally Posted by The Mister Madgod View Post
    Again, how does using something as a base inherently mean you have to use the same complexity of that base for your derivative work?
    They don't have to. They don't have to make a game that compels me to give them my money; and they didn't. It's as simple as that.

    The OP argued that MoP is a great big satire, and while there was plenty of silliness in WoW before MoP there was indeed a larger degree of silliness in MoP than in Wrath or Cataclysm. Vanilla and TBC I'm not so sure. But because they presented the Chinese artistic theme so shallowly you could even call the whole thing a spoof of Chinese mythology.

    So while as a grandiose generalization the OP might not be right there are elements of truth to what he is saying. But if somebody started playing in WoTLK, I could see how they would get the impression that the OP did because WoTLK had a lot of dark themes going on.

  9. #229

  10. #230
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by The Mister Madgod View Post
    No, you don't. Not at all.

    You don't have to embrace their culture, you don't have to like it. You simply have to acknowledge that they exist and that their culture exists. Whether you like them or not isn't up to the game. It simply portrays them as a likeable race... because that's what they are. They're a friendly, kind race, who by and large doesn't need to face much adversity due to the fact that they have the Shado-Pan, who make up the grittier portion of their race.

    If you're feeling forced to love and embrace everything pandaren because they were featured in an expansion that uses their homeland as a backdrop, you might need to reevaluate something. If anything, what you are saying is telling me that you are uncomfortable with them being perceived as a positive thing because it conflicts with your world view. You dislike them, you outright hate them. You want that validated, but the game isn't doing that.



    Except you have to help and befriend other races too.

    I believe you think it's forced... but I think it's simply your bias against the pandaren. Truly. You're forced to help them the same way you were forced to help the taunka, the wolvar, the oracles, the dragons, the broken, the sporregar, the draenei, the naaru, the blood elves, and every other race you help and befriend in every version of the game.

    What we do with the pandaren isn't exclusive to them. It's simply the latest iteration of a nine year long pattern.
    No sorry mate but he's right. You're simply forced this message "war is bad we should cooperate" down your throat constantly.
    I have anduin next to me, and I can't skin him alive and have varian wath me wearin his skin. Why? Because garrosh baaaaad war baaaad.
    This is the kind of "pandaren approach" you're forced to accept.
    Absolutely foreign to the game. I kill allys because that's what I do. I made sure I slaughtered every human in hillsbrad with my lock pre cata.
    That's what the game is about.
    Horde vs alliance + some shit on the side
    Not his absolutely uncomfortable, unnecessary and foreign concept of "war is bad mmmkay?"
    Because is war is bad, Warcraft is bad.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Hellhammered View Post
    No please no more... Please no more...

  11. #231
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Tychus View Post
    I guess it's good that Pandaren aren't real, because that almost sounded racist.
    Yes I don't have problems admitting my chars are racist bastards.
    Fuck those pandaren stealing our jobs. Humans smell, dwarf are only good as slaves, gnomes all look the same and night elves are inferior.
    Any problems with that? That's what this game is based on. Hating the other faction.

  12. #232
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by The Mister Madgod View Post
    Again, how does using something as a base inherently mean you have to use the same complexity of that base for your derivative work?

    Why is it not okay to look at a source material and take the bits and pieces you like and think would work for YOUR piece?
    His point was that he does not approve of that they took pieces of something with a lot of depth/potentional - and essentialy turned it into something more lighthearted or less displayed with actual depth.

    And beyond this, taking something that has a lot of depth to only pluck out certain pieces to create something with less depth - is generally not considered well thought-out work. More so then being inspired and "dumbing down". It's more akin to rip-off, copycat - the emphasis here being that there should be more evolution and additon or re-iteration, enough so to justify it's results.. And in this case, they clearly did not score that sum according to said user.

    And i can agree with him. But on the basis of i personally found it not in good taste to take a cultures concepts like that and display them so poorly.

  13. #233
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    Again, people trying to attribute things to MoP that have been in Warcraft since the RTS games.

    Trying to avoid conflict for the sake of conflict has been a recurring theme in Warcraft for some time. The storyline has never just been, "durr kill the other side cuz that's the story".
    Sorry what?
    Warcraft IS "kill the other side".
    Even when facing a boss. Lootship for example in icc.

  14. #234
    Quote Originally Posted by Pebrocks The Warlock View Post
    I disagree with basically everything you just said of MoP, but I see this thread as a flamebait simply because of your last sentence.
    And what was the purpose of this rant other than to just put your opinion out there while you could have in any established threads, which you have.
    Yeah agree completely with you about the flamebait, so obvious from the last sentence. Pretty ridiculous...

  15. #235
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    No sorry mate but he's right. You're simply forced this message "war is bad we should cooperate" down your throat constantly.
    I have anduin next to me, and I can't skin him alive and have varian wath me wearin his skin. Why? Because garrosh baaaaad war baaaad.
    This is the kind of "pandaren approach" you're forced to accept.
    Absolutely foreign to the game. I kill allys because that's what I do. I made sure I slaughtered every human in hillsbrad with my lock pre cata.
    That's what the game is about.
    Horde vs alliance + some shit on the side
    Not his absolutely uncomfortable, unnecessary and foreign concept of "war is bad mmmkay?"
    Because is war is bad, Warcraft is bad.
    You're rather blind then because up until Wrath of the Lich King there was never any real Alliance vs Horde conflict within the story. It was all player-driven.

    World of Warcraft in general has basically always been centered around the player races of Azeroth facing some big baddy or a group of big baddies. Hell, the game didn't even have game-organized PvP for about 8 months.

    Mists of Pandaria is the expansion that actually brought faction conflict to THE center of the story.

    Both of you are about as right as Kael'thas is a dwarf. The idea that war is bad and we should cooperate hasn't been shoved down our throats at all, it's simply the end lesson of the expansion and an idea perpetuated by a couple individuals. The pandaren don't reference it all that much. Taran Zhu is the biggest mouthpiece for that and in an entire year he mentions it enough that I can count it on one hand. Most of the time when we see pandaren, they're simply trying to live life. Deal with problems that are relevant to them.

  16. #236
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    Yeah, this is right up there with "Warcraft never had humor!" in terms of ignorance.

    If you don't like MoP, that's fine. Don't try to pretend that the Warcraft setting was always something it wasn't, though.
    Sorry but what exactly do you mean?
    What exactly would the settings of Warcraft be?

  17. #237
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by The Mister Madgod View Post
    Again, light-heartedness isn't inherently comedic.
    Their characterization of being light-hearted in general makes them terrible?

    I'd argue otherwise. They're a breath of fresh air in an otherwise cripplingly depressing world. They add contrast and in Mists of Pandaria, add a means of judging what we've done and how bad it is.
    Warcraft has never been about being lighthearted. The very name implies war. And the craft of said war.

    The big reason, big lore characters were big to begin with wasn't because they were lighthearted nor because they were comical or Silly. They were individuals who made tough choises, went through tragedies and turned from having a very good outlook, to the complete opposite (i.e Arthas)

    Now, you could try to argue that it's "fresh" - But if you don't like what is in essence YEARS of doing and YEARS of Thematic.. When A LOT of people follow that theme that has been around for YEARS... Yeah. You're probably not a majority then. WoD supports this idea. Because the developers themselves said they want to go back to what feels as "Warcraft".

    Pandas being portrayed as light hearted, silly alcoholics - at least as far as i am concerned.. Does NOT fit the earlier theme that has been Warcraft in any aspect whatsoever. It would be a pretty hard argument to make as well that it would not break off TOO hard from that running theme of you know, people you come to love and apprechiate who then turn to destroy everything they ever had.

    TL;DR - Silly Alcoholic Pandas does not match up to lengthy lore-heavy and lore-enriched characters who meet their fate.

  18. #238
    Quote Originally Posted by Zyranthian View Post
    Since when was wow ever serious? Its always been tongue in cheek and full of pop culture references. I was actually just lamenting the other day that there isn't ENOUGH tongue in cheek stuff in MoP. I was hoping for a lot more Monkey Magic references
    And poop jokes, there are lots of those. How many quests are given to you from someone in an outhouse or requires you to interact with poop in someway?

  19. #239
    Quote Originally Posted by Raiju View Post
    Just as a note, it's not that they are pandas - it's their characterization. Same with the hozen. Horde should have had yaungol instead and hozen could've been a silly faction that just fights the grummles.
    The Horde has already gone through the sort of scenario Yaungols would have played out. They did it in WotLK, with the Taunka. The Hozen were something new, and dare I say interesting. The game has several races that live thousands of years. It's only got one that dies of old age at 20. The Hozen were an exploration of that concept, of what sort of society would emerge in a race that was so short-lived. A society reminiscent of the one from Lord of the Flies. Playful and lazy in one moment and insane, vicious bastards the next, not because they're stupid but because they never get a chance to learn any better. They're the only non-insectoid race that swarms like locusts. And the Horde militarizes them. Think about how old they are for a second. They are all child soldiers at that point. It was a fairly poignant scene when Cho showed up and found them marching in formation. That story could not have been told with the Yaungol.

    The point is, every scene where they were depicted being silly had a serious purpose. Except possibly the feces catapult. But we got that instead of yet another quest to dig through X animal's leavings, so it balances out.

  20. #240
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by The Mister Madgod View Post
    You're rather blind then because up until Wrath of the Lich King there was never any real Alliance vs Horde conflict within the story. It was all player-driven.

    World of Warcraft in general has basically always been centered around the player races of Azeroth facing some big baddy or a group of big baddies.

    Mists of Pandaria is the expansion that actually brought faction conflict to THE center of the story.

    Both of you are about as right as Kael'thas is a dwarf. The idea that war is bad and we should cooperate hasn't been shoved down our throats at all, it's simply the end lesson of the expansion and an idea perpetuated by a couple individuals. The pandaren don't reference it all that much. Taran Zhu is the biggest mouthpiece for that and in an entire year he mentions it enough that I can count it on one hand. Most of the time when we see pandaren, they're simply trying to live life. Deal with problems that are relevant to them.
    When I hear things like this I actually wonder if people played this game in vanilla (drums of war thunder once again, it's in the cinematics for fucks sake), tbc (every zone had pvp areas), and wotlk (we kill each other in front of arthas in icc).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •