_Kewk_ posted:

---

I normally don't agree with a lot (most of) the team b threads but I was like REALLY? when I saw that update :\

---

Talehon69 posted:

---

To be fair, the Goblin mounts were pretty terrible too. They were different, sure. But they still look like crap.

---

_Kewk_ posted:

---

Talehon69 posted:

---

To be fair, the Goblin mounts were pretty terrible too. They were different, sure. But they still look like crap.

---

Nah, my gobby trike is rad.

---

Blizzard posted:

---

The intention with the new mounts was just to honor player concerns about achievements and even up the mount totals between the alliance and the horde. It’s something people had been requesting since the release of Cataclysm, so we’re evening up the numbers by giving the Alliance some additional mounts to add to their totals.

The Worgen racial mount is Running Wild. These are just some extra horses, for your horse needs. Perhaps the blog should have been titled 'New Gilnean Faction Mount'? Or maybe just 'Wyld Stallyns'? We may actually edit the blog to clarify why these mounts were added. To be clear, it’s not because we think worgen look their awesomest riding horses.

The intention wasn't really to hype this up, so much as to simply inform and reduce confusion. Our thought was, rather than let these be introduced without any context via data-mining, that it seemed like a better idea to introduce them ourselves with a bit of context.

[...] There was some miscommunication regarding the initial reason why these mounts were added. After talking with the devs again these mounts are actually being added because they already happened to be available and we thought it’d be nice to make them able to be purchased and ridden. Which is unfortunately quite a bit different than how we understood and framed the blog.

Their existence also allows us to give players that faction change to Worgen something in exchange for their old racial mount. Right now if you faction change to Worgen you lose your previous home-faction mounts, and so we’re also trying to correct that with this change.

---

Blizzard posted:

---

Wow are people pissed, so we're sending you a message to try to fix things. We released these new mounts to even the number of mounts on both sides. Unfortunately, our art team spent less time on the new models than the community team did drafting the announcement. Please don't be mad but praise us for balancing Alliance's number of mounts.

---

Errtuu posted:

---

Blizzard posted:

---

Wow are people pissed, so we're sending you a message to try to fix things. We released these new mounts to even the number of mounts on both sides. Unfortunately, our art team spent less time on the new models than the community team did drafting the announcement. Please don't be mad but praise us for balancing Alliance's number of mounts.

---

fixed.

---

Spookysheep posted:

---

Errtuu posted:

---

Blizzard posted:

---

Wow are people pissed, so we're sending you a message to try to fix things. We released these new mounts to even the number of mounts on both sides. Unfortunately, our art team spent less time on the new models than the community team did drafting the announcement. Please don't be mad but praise us for balancing Alliance's number of mounts.

---

fixed.

---

This, in spades.


Blizzard got busted once again, being completely lazy and retarded, and now they are backpedaling, as usual.

Pathetic really.

---

The-Sofa-King posted:

---

Pathetic really.
At this point, I don't think it matters what they say anymore, as you plan on finding a way to negatively interpret it anyway. I'm just wondering, why even bother? I assume it's just because you get to see your post count go up, but I could be wrong. I do find it slightly entertaining to be honest.

---

Acao posted:

---

A much better Worgen mount would have been an infected horse but that would have required a new model.

---

Spookysheep posted:

---

The-Sofa-King posted:

---

Pathetic really.
At this point, I don't think it matters what they say anymore, as you plan on finding a way to negatively interpret it anyway. I'm just wondering, why even bother? I assume it's just because you get to see your post count go up, but I could be wrong. I do find it slightly entertaining to be honest.

---

I equally wonder why you get so butthurt about what I post on VN

---

The-Sofa-King posted:

---

[

Of course, because my post sounded very, as you put it, "butthurt". It was merely an observation, and a curiousity. Thanks, however, I'm now convinced you actually don't read anything before posting.

---

Spookysheep posted:

---

The-Sofa-King posted:

---

[

Of course, because my post sounded very, as you put it, "butthurt". It was merely an observation, and a curiousity. Thanks, however, I'm now convinced you actually don't read anything before posting.

---

For someone who seems to desperately want everyone to believe you are not butthurt, you sure are defensive about being called out on it

---

Trigeminal posted:

---

Blizzard is due for some humility. Here's hoping they make appropriate changes when it comes.

---

The-Sofa-King posted:

---

damn, why must you always see through my thinly veiled lies. You caught me. I was totally being defensive there.

---

Spookysheep posted:

---

The-Sofa-King posted:

---

damn, why must you always see through my thinly veiled lies. You caught me. I was totally being defensive there.

---

So this is the part where you try to pretend that you are just trolling and not really butthurt.


Gotcha

---

The-Sofa-King posted:

---

That fact that you think I'm trying to troll you laughable. I was asking you an honest question based on my observation of your recent posting habits, and you took it in a negative sense, which reinforced my initial thoughts. Thanks!

---

Spookysheep posted:

---

Re-read my post bro, I never said you were trolling.

Certainly not successfully

---