What's Happening

Troperville

Tools

collapse/expand topics back to Videogame/WorldOfWarcraft

HiddenFacedMatt
topic
12:13:57 PM Sep 17th 2011
The following entry relating to this game is on Prison Episode:
  • World of Warcraft has the Stockades, an instanced prison dungeon in the centre of Stormwind serving prior to the Cataclysm as a continuation of the Defias questline and now updated to fit current miscreants.

Now, bear in mind that Prison Episode is defined as a prison-centered installment of a series not otherwise about prison; many examples are more along the lines of a level, and I was wondering if this was too.

Not that this would disqualify it; in that trope's discussion page, battosaijoe claimed that a level should count if it makes up a significant enough portion of the gameplay, and kjnoren claimed to have looked through the video game section, removing the more obvious non-examples.

In any case, would you say it qualifies?
MrWednesday
topic
10:10:20 AM Jul 2nd 2011
Would there be any support for adding another character page for the races of the world rather than just characters? There would be plenty of material for it and it might take some of the load off the main page.
OldManHoOh
topic
02:14:14 PM May 24th 2011
Moved this to here, as it MAY fit, but it's too natteriffic for me to make sense of it.

  • Butt Monkey: In Orgrimmar, there is a level 12 tauren that rogues must pickpocket for a quest. However, in order for a rogue to be able to pickpocket a target, the target must be attackable. The result is that many high-level Horde players get serious kicks out of assassinating him over and over again whenever he appears at the inn. Said level 12 tauren will also try to be a Big Damn Hero if a Death Knight (who, at this point, is typically level 57 or 58) rides through Orgrimmar who hasn't yet delivered his letter to Thrall. Guess how that works out for him.
    "SCOURGE! Stand back! Gamon will save us all!"
    • He's taken 73 levels in badass, now that his services as a pickpocket target are no longer required as of Cataclysm.
      • He's also still attackable, and hits like a truck. Hilarity Ensues when players decide to mess with him out of curiosity or just for the lulz. Now, at any given time, dozens of dead bodies and skeletons litter the floor of the inn where Gamon hangs out. Took a Level in Badass indeed!
      • Hilariously, when he first took a level in badass players ocmplained it was still possible to kite him, so Blizzard buffed him again, several times in fact. He is no longer able to slowed, rooted, snared, stunned, feared, can charge anybody who does this (and he does it so fast he basically teleports) as well as one shotting anybody short of a fully geared raid tank. A common practice amongst Horde now is to draw him into any Alliance raid that attacks Orgrimmar.
CelticKnot
10:00:09 PM Dec 13th 2011
Fixed. I'd say that Gamon is an example considering what he went through, so I put him back in and cut out the fluff. In particular I've kept the details of his badass upgrade to a minimum, as that's another trope, but I mentioned it; if I didn't, somebody would probably swoop in and "don't forget" the entry into Nattersville.

OldManHoOh
topic
11:14:04 AM May 24th 2011
The YMMV tag has both More Popular Spin-off AND Sequel Displacement. Does WoW fall under both or should one of them be cut?
sxizzor
topic
04:16:42 PM Mar 8th 2011
So can we go ahead and take the spoiler tags off of all the stuff about Bolvar? It's been what, three years?
ledge
topic
09:06:14 AM Jan 20th 2011
This Is Wrong on So Many Levels ?

The new Archaology profession lets you dig up artifacts from various digsites around the world. Most of them are abandoned ruins or fossil beds, but one is the Ancestral Burial Grounds in Nagrand. You know, the place where Saurfang the elder promised to bury Saurfang the younger in his mother's memory. So if you play an Orc, you're essentially digging up your own ancestors' artifacts for cheap vendor trash and to level up your archaeology skill.

Looking for better writeup and somewhere to put that. I think it's worth mentioning since the Ancestral Grounds is sort of a glaring exception to the rule of the rest of the dig sites being abandoned ruins.

TotemicHero
09:26:13 AM Jan 20th 2011
That's a stock phrase, so if it isn't actually being said (or something similar to it), then it's not an example.

Probably for this, you'd stick it on the YMMV page under Unfortunate Implications.
Nithael
09:40:02 AM Jan 20th 2011
GamerAmI
01:47:01 PM Jan 20th 2011
I'd say it's more Fridge Horror than Unfortunate Implications; the former is frequently confused for the latter.
Klaudandus
02:17:25 PM Jan 20th 2011
Fridge Horror and Unfortunate Implications are not mutually exclusive, are they?
GamerAmI
05:39:28 PM Jan 20th 2011
No, they aren't mutually exclusive, but Unfortunate Implications' name makes it frequently confused with Fridge Horror, and I think this is a case of the latter. Unfortunate Implications are when a work says something demeaning about something in the real world, whereas Fridge Horror is when you realize that something is really horrifying after you think about it for a while. The only way I could see this example as being an example of Unfortunate Implications is if you are implying that being able to dig in the Ancestral Burial Grounds implies that it's ok to dig up your own ancestor's grave sites for personal gain, whereas it fits into Fridge Horror much more easily, since you realize what you are doing after giving it some thought and realize how horrifying it is.
Klaudandus
05:48:04 PM Jan 20th 2011
Well, considering you're digging graves in order to increase your skill so you can get purples (epics), you are actually digging for personal gain.

And in back in the day, it was common to rob graves for teeth and stuff, or mummy treasures — so it's not like it hasn't happened in the past
Fighteer
moderator
08:00:59 PM Jan 20th 2011
I think you guys are taking this way too seriously.
ledge
11:08:19 AM Jan 21st 2011
I think you could say that just about any entry on the site is from someone taking something way too seriously.

For players who enjoy the lore (lots of) of the Warcraft Universe, play orcs (lots of) and do think about it for a moment (probably not as many), you realize you are digging up artifacts from one of your most revered sites, including where Saurfang the younger and possibly even Thrall's own ancestors, as well as your own, are buried. For skillups.

I will put on YMMV under fridge horror. "This is wrong on so many levels" was the original choice because it was my reaction when I realized what I was doing...

Fighteer
moderator
11:40:58 AM Jan 21st 2011
That seems best.
Fighteer
moderator
topic
07:05:16 AM Oct 22nd 2010
Chopped the below bit from Demoted to Extra. As these are both playable races, the claim of them being extras is kind of silly. And what about Gnomes? Tauren? Anyway, Vol'jin is getting a bit of a comeback in Cataclysm and apparently Velen's working off of a brand new prophecy about the coming darkness, so they aren't completely forgotten about.

  • Trolls' heroes have all been killed or sidelined, their city was taken over by a level 10 enemy, the game designers forgot that the Darkspear trolls come from the Echo Isles, they're the most killed playable race in the game with troll deaths very rarely being portrayed with sympathy, and their Regeneration was so severely nerfed that they eventually had to give them an extra racial. They do get the Echo Isles back—and the druid and warlock classes—in Cataclysm...but that's after getting pushed out of the center of Orgrimmar. And rumor has it that that's about all they get.
  • Coming right after trolls are draenei. They did, admittedly, get quite a bit of focus in the beginning of the Burning Crusade, but were overshadowed by the blood elves after the Black Temple. Like trolls, they didn't do much of anything in WotLK. And finally, in Cataclysm, Draenei are the only race to not get a new class.

TotemicHero
topic
06:45:32 PM Aug 30th 2010
Shouldn't the first and second paragraphs of the description be reversed? The current description reads...weirdly.
Valantis
topic
09:55:14 PM Aug 7th 2010
Something that could cause natter =/= Actual natter

I was trying to sum up in two sentences the general point made in the discussion pages on the quest, and acknowledge that it's not the only possible bit of unfortunate implications in the entire game. Could it have been better written? Heck yeah. But deleted outright instead of improved? Not really necessary. I'm going to put it here, so that someone else can give it a rewrite and put it back, instead of inviting a edit war by simply putting it back myself.

  • Unfortunate Implications: A number of quests are somewhat iffy in this regard, but this one in particular stands out. Not only are you asked to go and steal a dozen Wolvar pups from the protective den mothers, but once you hand them over, you never see them again.
Fighteer
moderator
06:52:14 PM Aug 31st 2010
Why do we need to put this trope on works pages? What does it gain us, other than Complaining About Plot Elements You Don't Like?
Fighteer
moderator
topic
10:57:58 AM Aug 6th 2010
Monsund, the main article is not a platform for you to complain about things. We have JustBugsMe.World Of Warcraft for that - take it there. I already mentioned this on the forum thread and you ignored me. This game is enough of a natter-bait without encouraging it like that.
OldManHoOh
11:12:17 AM May 24th 2011
Note: since Headscratchers has been renamed to Headscratchers, this no longer applies. Nothing to see here folks.
Fighteer
moderator
topic
08:24:55 AM Jul 7th 2010
edited by Fighteer
I'm starting a new discussion thread to get the Wangsting over the RealID forum announcement out of the main page, where it does not belong. First, let me state that, however OMG TERRIBLE you may think it is, it's not Big Brother Is Watching (Blizzard already knows your account info, dumbasses), and Real Life people cannot have a Moral Event Horizon. Let me also add that the game has been Ruined FOREVER more times than I can count, and still somehow manages to exist. Further, Blizzard is not a governmental agency or a social networking site and you have no Right to Privacy on their fora, especially since posting there is an opt-in deal; nobody's holding a gun to your head and making you do it.

So however outraged you are about it, think twice before filling the page with bile, k? Rant at me in this thread for being a fanboy, if it makes you feel better. Personally I don't agree with the decision either; I think they'd be better off letting people choose a forum handle for their account.
GamerAmI
08:59:42 AM Jul 7th 2010
edited by GamerAmI
While I do agree that we should wait to see how this plays out before posting anything to the main page regarding this change, I disagree with your several of your arguments.

For one, yes, plenty of things have "ruined" the game before, but these were all in-game changes. This is different, in that it has real life consequences for those who post on the forums. Already, people's personal information has been posted in-game and people have been harassed in real life thanks to us being able to see the full names of friends of friends with the in-game RealID feature, and when community manager Bashiok posted his full name as a show of good faith to the community, people quickly found his address, phone number, as well as his age and the names of and ages of people living with him, and started harassing him. No other change that has "ruined" the game has had real-life consequences like this, and this time, people have actually started canceling their accounts in reaction.

And while we may not be "forced" to go on the forums, what if we want to go on our realm forum to look for a guild or post an advertisement for our own guild? What if we want to let people on our realm forum know about a ninja-looter? Or what if we are having technical issues, can't get through to Blizzard on the phone, and want to post in the technical support forum so we can, you know, start playing again? We may not be forced to use the fora, but there are plenty of legitimate situations where it would be a good idea to do so, and now many people won't feel comfortable doing so because of this change.
Fighteer
moderator
09:06:02 AM Jul 7th 2010
I said I don't agree with the decision. As a notional method to cut down on trolling, it seems like massive overkill. I just want ranting about it to be kept out of the article.
GamerAmI
12:37:07 PM Jul 7th 2010
I would like to retract my previous statement about how this should not be on the main page; I think the current Internet Backdraft entry on the main page explains it quite well and objectively.
Fighteer
moderator
12:54:52 PM Jul 7th 2010
edited by Fighteer
The main entry, sure, but the extra bullet point was pure natter. Referencing Palehoof's summary is more than sufficient; if people really want to know, they can go there. This wiki is not the proper place to vent your Nerd Rage Righteous Internet Anger — the Gods know there are plenty of others.
Comartemis
01:13:23 PM Jul 7th 2010
edited by Comartemis
*shrug*

The entry asked for a starting point, and I provided one... Though in all seriousness, I felt the topic was a great deal more significant than the oodles and oodles of "Feature X has been implemented/changed/removed! This game is Ruined FOREVER!!!" stuff that continuously populates the fanbase, partially because it's gotten such a widespread and nearly universal negative reaction and because it has actual real-world consequences. If there's any one example to be added to the Internet Backdraft example (or the Internet Backdraft trope page, for that matter), this is definitely the one.
GamerAmI
01:31:43 PM Jul 7th 2010
I'd hardly say it's natter. The fact that the backdraft has actually gotten media attention makes it pretty significant, I would think, and the entry wasn't just a way for the editor to vent his anger; it was an objective account of the community's response, which is probably the most universally negative response any change to anything regarding World of Warcraft has ever gotten (about 5/6 of the playerbase opposes it).
Fighteer
moderator
01:37:55 PM Jul 7th 2010
edited by Fighteer
Still doesn't justify a Flame Bait entry on the main page. Nothing ever justifies that. We've been on a push lately to remove highly subjective topics from primary articles on the basis that they detract from the purpose of the wiki, which is to catalogue tropes.

Internet Backdraft is a fan reaction trope, but it is not worth taking over the page for a paragraphs-long discussion of why EVERYONE HATES BLIZZARD GRR. Leave that for the forums and the media.

Oh, and you can certainly add it to the trope page; knock yourself out. Incidentally, I wonder why nobody's commenting on the fact that it's going to be implemented first for Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3.
GamerAmI
01:27:50 PM Jul 9th 2010
Now that the Real ID fiasco is over (source), I think we should add something to the main page about the Internet Backdraft and how it was actually successful.
Fighteer
moderator
02:07:26 PM Jul 9th 2010
Good now?
GamerAmI
03:13:03 PM Jul 9th 2010
Definitely (in my humble opinion, at least).
Foryn
topic
09:05:49 PM Apr 15th 2010
About the Bribing Your Way to Victory conflict, I bought the Celestial Steed today and unless we want to count 50 pms of "LOLDUDE WHERE DID U GET THAT MOUNT!11!!!" as "victory" I think it needs a different heading. I think the example belongs, sure as sure, I just think it needs a different trope to belong to.
Fighteer
moderator
06:29:06 AM Apr 16th 2010
edited by Fighteer
It's not Bribing because the mount has no in-game effect other than cosmetic. People need to get this through their heads. Tropes Are Not Bad, but if people want to pay money for a shiny horse to ride around on, it's their business and Blizzard is simply offering a product that people will buy.
132.170.38.121
12:59:04 AM Apr 18th 2010
edited by 132.170.38.121
I think the resolution of where it should be placed on the tropes page was a fair one. Overall, the problem isn't the selling of mounts. I support that 100%. It's the similarity to the other mount in the game that is intended for the cream of the crop.

The concern is more that it's an easy way to get an almost equivalent reward to a cosmetic bragging right intended for a boss only four guilds in the world have killed. I would be happier if they put mounts on the store that were unique and cooler, even, then rehashing a unique reward off something difficult.

It was never about "WAAAAAH, DON'T LET MICROTRANSACTIONS HAPPEN," at least not for me.

Just explaining my rationale for that mini-editing war. I'm sure more people will start to agree if they ever, I dunno, made a green fire Ashes of Al'ar for 30 bucks. You'll start seeing the complaints growing a bit more.
OJtheLION
02:17:07 PM Apr 18th 2010
Yeah, You'd think with all the money that World of Warcraft makes they could assign one or two guys just for designing completely unique mounts to be sold and have his pay covered by the sales(25-30 bucks is enough to make me cry, but maybe 5-10 for a cyborg lion with octopus tentacles?). Like you said, though, it's just bragging rights in the end, and from what I can see from that trope and related tropes And Your Reward Is Clothes, Cosmetic Award and Allegedly Free Game, this is already something that's been discussed to death, so I just want to fit it into the already established categories. I think it's really something in between one of those others and Revenue Enhancing Devices, but it's definitely not anything that provides a tangible ingame benefit—and despite what people on the forums might say, epeen is not an ingame benefit as such:P.
132.170.37.226
02:18:01 PM Apr 21st 2010
edited by 132.170.37.226
Eh...it technically does give an in-game benefit, since you save an absurd amount of gold if you have multiple alts as you won't need to buy a mount for each of them. But it's not enough of an in-game benefit to be "bribery," I suppose. It's still almost the same thing as selling gold. Blizzard is essentially giving you a couple hundred gold per character created for 25 dollars from the amount you save from not buying a mount for each.

The fact that is so hotly debated, however, I think speaks more about how important the game is to everyone that plays it more than it speaks about how the fanbase is lolstupid or anything. No one is going to be passionate about this if they didn't genuinely love the game.
Fighteer
moderator
02:33:15 PM Apr 21st 2010
Well... a "couple hundred gold" is hardly what I'd call absurd by WoW standards. It's certainly nice, but hardly game breaking.
132.170.37.226
05:17:00 PM Apr 21st 2010
Gold selling is gold selling. As I said, though, I'm not fully discouraged from the game yet. It's a definite concern.
serialkillerwhale
02:03:02 PM Feb 17th 2014
And now though, it doesn't matter because mounts are (Le gasp) shared!
Fighteer
moderator
topic
08:23:51 AM Mar 4th 2010
edited by Fighteer
Look, lay off of Harrison Jones. Yes he's an idiot in Zul'Aman, but in Grizzly Hills, he's an elite mob who's more than capable of beating down the snake boss, the adds, and all the mobs on the way out of the temple. Have you guys actually tried letting him fight through or are you just making stuff up because you don't like him?
back to Videogame/WorldOfWarcraft

TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy