Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the EU

Anything, including off-topic posts

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, PsiVen, Sabindeus, Aergis

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Fivelives » Mon Jul 16, 2012 7:54 am

Wasn't aware of that. I haven't particularly cared about achievements since, well, achievements Became A Thing. I also haven't cared about mounts, either.
- I'm not Jesus, but I can turn water into Kool-Aid.
- A Sergeant in motion outranks an officer who doesn't know what the hell is going on.
- A demolitions specialist at a flat run outranks everybody.
User avatar
Fivelives
 
Posts: 2797
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:55 pm

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby halabar » Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:02 am

Darielle wrote:You're aware that Mimiron's Head was a guaranteed drop for Alone in the Darkness before Cataclysm hit, right? And Invincible was a guaranteed drop for Light of Dawn. Crusader's pony thing was also a guaranteed for Tribute to Immortality.

The fact that people now either can't possibly or can't realistically obtain them is what makes the ones that people DO have valuable - and 98% of the ones that do have them obtained them as a reward for skill in facing those fights and winning.


OF course, they might show up in the BMAH now.. :D
Amirya wrote:... because everyone needs a Catagonskin rug.

twinkfist wrote:i feel bad for the Mogu...having to deal with alcoholic bears.
User avatar
halabar
 
Posts: 6557
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:21 am
Location: <in the guild that shall not be named>

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Shoju » Mon Jul 16, 2012 10:28 am

halabar wrote:
Darielle wrote:You're aware that Mimiron's Head was a guaranteed drop for Alone in the Darkness before Cataclysm hit, right? And Invincible was a guaranteed drop for Light of Dawn. Crusader's pony thing was also a guaranteed for Tribute to Immortality.

The fact that people now either can't possibly or can't realistically obtain them is what makes the ones that people DO have valuable - and 98% of the ones that do have them obtained them as a reward for skill in facing those fights and winning.


OF course, they might show up in the BMAH now.. :D


/vomits

Please god no.
User avatar
Shoju
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:15 am

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Lieris » Mon Jul 16, 2012 2:20 pm

With this huge lull in content there are so many groups selling mounts every week (and lots of people with several hundred thousand gold with nothing to spend it on) that the Cata mounts are fairly meaningless now. I am due another 35K~ gold tomorrow. I don't think there was anything that came even close to the prestige of the realm first titles in WotLK, the TOGC mounts and the old Amani bear in Cata. The only person that looks at your FOS achievements is yourself so the Sinestra achievement (and the 0% achievements in MOP if they don't award a mount or title) have much less value.
Lieris
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1521
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 7:49 am

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby halabar » Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:04 pm

Shoju wrote:
halabar wrote:
Darielle wrote:You're aware that Mimiron's Head was a guaranteed drop for Alone in the Darkness before Cataclysm hit, right? And Invincible was a guaranteed drop for Light of Dawn. Crusader's pony thing was also a guaranteed for Tribute to Immortality.

The fact that people now either can't possibly or can't realistically obtain them is what makes the ones that people DO have valuable - and 98% of the ones that do have them obtained them as a reward for skill in facing those fights and winning.


OF course, they might show up in the BMAH now.. :D


/vomits

Please god no.


While I don't give a rip about Invincible, I'd buy Mimron's Head in a flash. And since both are still percentage drops from those bosses, I have no qualms about it as well. So some pug gets lucky in an Uld25 tribute run, and you don't want it sellable in the BMAH?

What I really want from the BMAH along with that is the BRK-1000, which I hope shows up, and is currently unobtainable.
Amirya wrote:... because everyone needs a Catagonskin rug.

twinkfist wrote:i feel bad for the Mogu...having to deal with alcoholic bears.
User avatar
halabar
 
Posts: 6557
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:21 am
Location: <in the guild that shall not be named>

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Skye1013 » Mon Jul 16, 2012 4:33 pm

Shoju wrote:
halabar wrote:
Darielle wrote:You're aware that Mimiron's Head was a guaranteed drop for Alone in the Darkness before Cataclysm hit, right? And Invincible was a guaranteed drop for Light of Dawn. Crusader's pony thing was also a guaranteed for Tribute to Immortality.

The fact that people now either can't possibly or can't realistically obtain them is what makes the ones that people DO have valuable - and 98% of the ones that do have them obtained them as a reward for skill in facing those fights and winning.


OF course, they might show up in the BMAH now.. :D


/vomits

Please god no.

Not really sure why you care anymore. I'll probably never be able to afford one from the BMAH, but I haven't been farming it forever either. If I ever end up with any, then I'll be happy to have gotten them. Also, aren't all those mounts potentially obtainable through the incentive bags from RDF? This would just be one more RNG way to get one (since I doubt they'd show up with any sort of regularity.)
"me no gay, me friends gay, me no like you call me gay, you dumb dumb" -bldavis
"Here are the values that I stand for: I stand for honesty, equality, kindness, compassion, treating people the way you wanna be treated, and helping those in need. To me, those are traditional values. That’s what I stand for." -Ellen Degeneres
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance." -Jon Stewart
Horde: Clopin Dylon Sharkbait Xiaman Metria Metapriest
Alliance: Schatze Aleks Deegee Baileyi Sotanaht Danfer Shazta Rawrsalot Roobyroo
User avatar
Skye1013
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 3514
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:47 am
Location: JBPH-Hickam, Hawaii

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Darielle » Mon Jul 16, 2012 5:35 pm

The raid mounts can't be gotten from RDF. The only way to get them right now is killing Alone in the Darkness or Light of Dawn. The ToGC one isn't obtainable at all since Tributes got removed.
I highly doubt they'll be put into BMAH. Blizzard has a thing with wanting to make new mounts, not find new ways to repackage old ones. With account-wide, the people that do have them will be more visible anyway. And since almost all of them are already technically obtainable and rare, I doubt they'll fold the OLD raid mounts into the BMAH - any more than they'd put Ashes or A'lar in there.

It's funny though; even with just how available the Cataclysm mounts are, and post-Geyser nerf, I believe there are less Pureblood Firehawks than there are Handmaidens.
Darielle
 
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:41 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Skye1013 » Mon Jul 16, 2012 6:18 pm

Didn't the screenshot of the BMAH actually have Ashes of A'lar on it? Or am I misremembering...
"me no gay, me friends gay, me no like you call me gay, you dumb dumb" -bldavis
"Here are the values that I stand for: I stand for honesty, equality, kindness, compassion, treating people the way you wanna be treated, and helping those in need. To me, those are traditional values. That’s what I stand for." -Ellen Degeneres
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance." -Jon Stewart
Horde: Clopin Dylon Sharkbait Xiaman Metria Metapriest
Alliance: Schatze Aleks Deegee Baileyi Sotanaht Danfer Shazta Rawrsalot Roobyroo
User avatar
Skye1013
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 3514
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:47 am
Location: JBPH-Hickam, Hawaii

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Darielle » Mon Jul 16, 2012 6:45 pm

Yeah Ashes is there.

What I was trying to say was "I don't know if they'll put in mounts that were guaranteed and then made exclusive, as opposed to mounts that were always RNG", and I didn't wake up fully before I typed that.
Darielle
 
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:41 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Skye1013 » Mon Jul 16, 2012 6:48 pm

Half-asleep ramblings... almost as bad as drunken ones :lol:
"me no gay, me friends gay, me no like you call me gay, you dumb dumb" -bldavis
"Here are the values that I stand for: I stand for honesty, equality, kindness, compassion, treating people the way you wanna be treated, and helping those in need. To me, those are traditional values. That’s what I stand for." -Ellen Degeneres
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance." -Jon Stewart
Horde: Clopin Dylon Sharkbait Xiaman Metria Metapriest
Alliance: Schatze Aleks Deegee Baileyi Sotanaht Danfer Shazta Rawrsalot Roobyroo
User avatar
Skye1013
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 3514
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:47 am
Location: JBPH-Hickam, Hawaii

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Shoju » Tue Jul 17, 2012 4:30 am

I don't mind ashes being on there, because it was always a percentage drop.

Putting something on there that at one time was a guaranteed drop for doing something REALLY hard, that they made a random drop from doing it on the "REALLY HARD" setting, to preserve the integrity of it to an extent, would really just be counterintuitive.

I would have preferred them make invincible and mim's head go away just like the original war bear.

I care, because while I don't play the game anymore, I know many people still do, and I am a human, and I have an opinion.
User avatar
Shoju
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:15 am

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby halabar » Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:51 am

Shoju wrote:I don't mind ashes being on there, because it was always a percentage drop.

Putting something on there that at one time was a guaranteed drop for doing something REALLY hard, that they made a random drop from doing it on the "REALLY HARD" setting, to preserve the integrity of it to an extent, would really just be counterintuitive.

I would have preferred them make invincible and mim's head go away just like the original war bear.

I care, because while I don't play the game anymore, I know many people still do, and I am a human, and I have an opinion.


The hardest thing about Yogg now is getting enough bodies to do it... Same is going to be true for LK once the xpac hits. It's simply a rare drop now, on the order of how rare Ashes are.

And considering how many people bought the war bear, I don't know if that's a great comparison.

The best comparison might actually be the gun I want, the BRK-1000, which was harder to get than Mim's Head, and is no longer available. Not as sexy, but much harder to get.
Amirya wrote:... because everyone needs a Catagonskin rug.

twinkfist wrote:i feel bad for the Mogu...having to deal with alcoholic bears.
User avatar
halabar
 
Posts: 6557
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:21 am
Location: <in the guild that shall not be named>

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Shoju » Tue Jul 17, 2012 9:42 am

halabar wrote:
Shoju wrote:I don't mind ashes being on there, because it was always a percentage drop.

Putting something on there that at one time was a guaranteed drop for doing something REALLY hard, that they made a random drop from doing it on the "REALLY HARD" setting, to preserve the integrity of it to an extent, would really just be counterintuitive.

I would have preferred them make invincible and mim's head go away just like the original war bear.

I care, because while I don't play the game anymore, I know many people still do, and I am a human, and I have an opinion.


The hardest thing about Yogg now is getting enough bodies to do it... Same is going to be true for LK once the xpac hits. It's simply a rare drop now, on the order of how rare Ashes are.

And considering how many people bought the war bear, I don't know if that's a great comparison.

The best comparison might actually be the gun I want, the BRK-1000, which was harder to get than Mim's Head, and is no longer available. Not as sexy, but much harder to get.


I would assume with MoP coming out, the guaranteed drop from DW:H, and Rag:H will also be taken down to a random drop.

Tales of purchased bear mounts are greatly over exaggerated.

And "You only need enough people for Yogg 25" is also certainly flawed. I most assuredly wiped out on Yogg No Lights 25, at 85, with 25 people, while tanking on Onisu.

Yes. People bought them, but it still isn't some super common mount. It is a perfectly logical comparison. Ashes of Alar was NEVER a reward for skill. It was simply always a Rare drop Mount, similar to the reins from Alysrazor, or the drake from Ultraxion. I don't mind, nor do I think that most of the community minds, if those mounts end up on the BMAH. Not a big deal. Grats for having the gold.

But I feel that Mim's head, and Invincible should stay off the BMAH just as strongly that I feel that the Gladiator drakes need to be account bound if we are going to make the glory of the... mounts account bound, or even the ashes, mim's head, or invincible. While those can now be had with less skill and more RNG involved, it doesn't mean that at one time, it wasn't a show of skill to have those. Gladiator Mounts have always been skill. The list of people who actually "bought" their way to Gladiator Status would be incredibly finite, certainly smaller than the number of people who have gone back and gotten the Glory of the... Mounts afterwards.
User avatar
Shoju
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:15 am

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby halabar » Tue Jul 17, 2012 12:07 pm

Shoju wrote:But I feel that Mim's head, and Invincible should stay off the BMAH just as strongly that I feel that the Gladiator drakes need to be account bound if we are going to make the glory of the... mounts account bound, or even the ashes, mim's head, or invincible. While those can now be had with less skill and more RNG involved, it doesn't mean that at one time, it wasn't a show of skill to have those. Gladiator Mounts have always been skill. The list of people who actually "bought" their way to Gladiator Status would be incredibly finite, certainly smaller than the number of people who have gone back and gotten the Glory of the... Mounts afterwards.


/handsShojumorerocksalt

Key words - "at one time". If it is available as an RNG drop now, I see it as fair game for the BMAH. (And I'm pretty sure that I did Yogg-0 in a pug not that long ago, without vent, so it's not THAT hard.)

Gladiator mounts are different.
Amirya wrote:... because everyone needs a Catagonskin rug.

twinkfist wrote:i feel bad for the Mogu...having to deal with alcoholic bears.
User avatar
halabar
 
Posts: 6557
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:21 am
Location: <in the guild that shall not be named>

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby halabar » Tue Jul 17, 2012 12:15 pm

And back to the whole point of this thread...

The key issue that really needs to be resolved by various governing bodies is: What defines "ownership" in a virtual world, if anything can be owned at all, and what are the requirements to maintain ownership, and how does that occur when a vendor controls the virtual world.

Shoju's clearly in the camp of there is no ownership at all, and that the developer of the world owns everything (and if I was a software developer I'd probably agree). But I think we are going to get to the point in virtual places (and in social media) that the issue needs to be addressed, and the rights or lack thereof can't simply be buried in a TOS/EULA.

We won't be able to address account selling under that underlying issue is resolved.
Amirya wrote:... because everyone needs a Catagonskin rug.

twinkfist wrote:i feel bad for the Mogu...having to deal with alcoholic bears.
User avatar
halabar
 
Posts: 6557
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:21 am
Location: <in the guild that shall not be named>

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Shoju » Tue Jul 17, 2012 12:25 pm

On Mounts: And Like I said, I'm in the camp that feels that they should have been simply removed. I was originally unhappy, but have since changed stances on the lost T7 Glory Mounts, and the original Bear Mount. It should have been removed, continuously, and held as a reward for those who were able to achieve it when it was relevant.

This means, that I wouldn't have my Uld drake or my Sarth drake (on Onisu), but I'm ok with that. I think that those who were able to clear the content when it was the most difficult should have those.

On owning virtual goods in a video game.
That's probably what it boils down to. As I start working on game development on my own, I'm realizing that I don't particularly care for the idea of someone using the code, and collecting the widgets, and then making a profit from it. This, coupled with my.... "moral code" as some have called it, just leaves me with the sense that you purchased the game, you purchased the subscription, not the right to sell the digital stuff you gained access to while owning it.

There are some virtual goods that I am 100% on board with ownership of. But they are "complete" virtual goods, as opposed to components of something else.

(purchasing music from itunes or similar, as compared to characters in a video game)
User avatar
Shoju
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:15 am

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby halabar » Tue Jul 17, 2012 12:36 pm

Shoju wrote:On Mounts: And Like I said, I'm in the camp that feels that they should have been simply removed. I was originally unhappy, but have since changed stances on the lost T7 Glory Mounts, and the original Bear Mount. It should have been removed, continuously, and held as a reward for those who were able to achieve it when it was relevant.

This means, that I wouldn't have my Uld drake or my Sarth drake (on Onisu), but I'm ok with that. I think that those who were able to clear the content when it was the most difficult should have those.

On owning virtual goods in a video game.
That's probably what it boils down to. As I start working on game development on my own, I'm realizing that I don't particularly care for the idea of someone using the code, and collecting the widgets, and then making a profit from it. This, coupled with my.... "moral code" as some have called it, just leaves me with the sense that you purchased the game, you purchased the subscription, not the right to sell the digital stuff you gained access to while owning it.

There are some virtual goods that I am 100% on board with ownership of. But they are "complete" virtual goods, as opposed to components of something else.

(purchasing music from itunes or similar, as compared to characters in a video game)


IF the mounts had been removed (like the gun that I want) then I would agree with you. But, since they are RNG drops, all's fair.

Regarding the goods, what I'm really saying is that we need to look at EULA/TOS's overall, and address the issue of virtual ownership. At some point, avatars, goods, and time-based rewards begin to have value. How does that translate to ownership?.. it's a big question.

What happens when users bring content into the games (maps, designs, etc)? Look at the current mess with the community-driven stuff that Blizz and I-forget-the-other-company were fighting over.
Amirya wrote:... because everyone needs a Catagonskin rug.

twinkfist wrote:i feel bad for the Mogu...having to deal with alcoholic bears.
User avatar
halabar
 
Posts: 6557
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:21 am
Location: <in the guild that shall not be named>

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Shoju » Tue Jul 17, 2012 1:06 pm

I disagree. There is a valid way to get them now, I don't think that they need to be even further devalued throught he BMAH.

To me, I just can't see how there is value associated with a character / account in WoW or other video games, unless you are going to start pricing it like a job. Paying someone for the time not the product, since the "product" is a collection of components from a larger construct, in this case, the video game. The EULA spells out that you don't own the characters, the items, the goods, and that you are not allowed to sell them.

In a game like second life, where the user can bring about their own "goods", it's indeed more difficult. From what I understand, the artist maintains the original copyright. Meaning that you could run in to problems attempting to sell a second life account because of copyright law, and the form of copyright law that their production is protected by.
User avatar
Shoju
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:15 am

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby halabar » Tue Jul 17, 2012 1:36 pm

Shoju wrote:I disagree. There is a valid way to get them now, I don't think that they need to be even further devalued throught he BMAH.

To me, I just can't see how there is value associated with a character / account in WoW or other video games, unless you are going to start pricing it like a job. Paying someone for the time not the product, since the "product" is a collection of components from a larger construct, in this case, the video game. The EULA spells out that you don't own the characters, the items, the goods, and that you are not allowed to sell them.

In a game like second life, where the user can bring about their own "goods", it's indeed more difficult. From what I understand, the artist maintains the original copyright. Meaning that you could run in to problems attempting to sell a second life account because of copyright law, and the form of copyright law that their production is protected by.


And we can agree to disagree on the mounts.

And the bolded statement is correct. But what I am saying is that the broad context of that needs to be reviewed, and possibly changed. Right now that are no laws governing it, so we are starting at ground zero. Blizz has opened this can of worms by selling mounts and pets. Since the items aren't earned in-game, and in most cases the purchase involves just that virtual item, that's where a good lawyer might be able to start a challenge. (The way around this would be to sell a pass, that happens to include mounts and pets, but Blizz is going the exact opposite way, making the purchased pets untradeable in Pokewow.)
Amirya wrote:... because everyone needs a Catagonskin rug.

twinkfist wrote:i feel bad for the Mogu...having to deal with alcoholic bears.
User avatar
halabar
 
Posts: 6557
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:21 am
Location: <in the guild that shall not be named>

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Darielle » Tue Jul 17, 2012 8:05 pm

The mounts being available now doesn't make them "fair game" - the point of making them available but not guaranteed was to preserve their "exclusiveness". That is the thing that makes those mounts different from a mount awarded at sheer randomness - like Midnight, which was definitely not hard to obtain, but still feels special to have.

It's entirely possible they'd change their minds on the issue; but there's be 20 other steps like reintroducing mounts people can't obtain anymore first.
Darielle
 
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:41 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Skye1013 » Tue Jul 17, 2012 11:15 pm

Darielle wrote:The mounts being available now doesn't make them "fair game" - the point of making them available but not guaranteed was to preserve their "exclusiveness".

I'm still not seeing how this makes them any less exclusive... it's not like you can go to the BMAH and always see one up for purchase. It will still be RNG. At this point we don't know how much RNG, but they could easily keep the exclusiveness by making it only show up 1% of the time (or less, depending what all will be purchaseable through it.)

All the BMAH would do is remove the need to go to the raid with X number of other people (which X decreases for each xpac) to see it have a chance to drop.
"me no gay, me friends gay, me no like you call me gay, you dumb dumb" -bldavis
"Here are the values that I stand for: I stand for honesty, equality, kindness, compassion, treating people the way you wanna be treated, and helping those in need. To me, those are traditional values. That’s what I stand for." -Ellen Degeneres
"I'm not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance." -Jon Stewart
Horde: Clopin Dylon Sharkbait Xiaman Metria Metapriest
Alliance: Schatze Aleks Deegee Baileyi Sotanaht Danfer Shazta Rawrsalot Roobyroo
User avatar
Skye1013
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 3514
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 5:47 am
Location: JBPH-Hickam, Hawaii

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Darielle » Wed Jul 18, 2012 12:31 am

I'm still not seeing how this makes them any less exclusive... it's not like you can go to the BMAH and always see one up for purchase. It will still be RNG. At this point we don't know how much RNG, but they could easily keep the exclusiveness by making it only show up 1% of the time (or less, depending what all will be purchaseable through it.)

All the BMAH would do is remove the need to go to the raid with X number of other people (which X decreases for each xpac) to see it have a chance to drop.


It makes it less exclusive by every definition. It's another source to obtain it on top of the sources that already exist(ed). It's not like they're swapping one source of obtaining for another in the case of % chance - they're just adding more mounts into the pool, and making the ones that people did earn less rare. In the case of mounts that are just sheer rng as opposed to mounts awarded for hard boss kills, it just has no achievement/accomplishment to work against.

The mounts aren't even the thing they're making annoying less exclusive. T3 being reintroduced is worse.

Yogg-0 is something where taking less and less people gets limited by Sanity anyway.
Darielle
 
Posts: 853
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 2:41 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby halabar » Wed Jul 18, 2012 7:38 am

Darielle wrote:T3 being reintroduced is worse..


Isn't that available from DMF anyway? It's all tmog gear now anyway.
Amirya wrote:... because everyone needs a Catagonskin rug.

twinkfist wrote:i feel bad for the Mogu...having to deal with alcoholic bears.
User avatar
halabar
 
Posts: 6557
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:21 am
Location: <in the guild that shall not be named>

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby Shoju » Wed Jul 18, 2012 7:46 am

halabar wrote:
Darielle wrote:T3 being reintroduced is worse..


Isn't that available from DMF anyway? It's all tmog gear now anyway.


and to me that is a shame. I really would have liked to see that reserved for those who had it, and I never had a piece of it. In the guild bank I gave to BLDavis, there is a wartorn plate scrap that I won during late BC on a run, but I never got more than that.
User avatar
Shoju
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:15 am

Re: Selling accounts may soon be legal - already is in the E

Postby halabar » Wed Jul 18, 2012 8:11 am

Shoju wrote:
halabar wrote:
Darielle wrote:T3 being reintroduced is worse..


Isn't that available from DMF anyway? It's all tmog gear now anyway.


and to me that is a shame. I really would have liked to see that reserved for those who had it, and I never had a piece of it. In the guild bank I gave to BLDavis, there is a wartorn plate scrap that I won during late BC on a run, but I never got more than that.


Come on.. do you actually really even like T3? at least for me, the hunter T3 is Meh at best, and the recolors are actually better looking. I think T3 is romaticized since the original raid is no longer around. If T2 wasn't available, people would be just as up in arms about that, and most of T2 was butt-ugly.

This argument is trending towards the lawnchairs, and I can do that as well.. I'm not thrilled that Blizz is introducing non-rare non-exotic versions of some of the pet skins that were previously only exotic rares. I put in the time and effort to get those rares, and now everyone can have them. Woe is me.
Amirya wrote:... because everyone needs a Catagonskin rug.

twinkfist wrote:i feel bad for the Mogu...having to deal with alcoholic bears.
User avatar
halabar
 
Posts: 6557
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:21 am
Location: <in the guild that shall not be named>

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Sagara and 1 guest

Who is online

In total there are 3 users online :: 2 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 380 on Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:28 pm

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Sagara and 1 guest