WOW 1 reply?

I guess the 41% of people that voted for it aren't that bothered after all?

deucedouglas wrote:

 

when the game ends, it shows the game winning "mini-tage" of all the top players kills with dubstep playing in the background.

Brilliant.

Datura wrote:

 

Presumably they look at where a bulk (not most) of the votes lie and make the decision based on what gametype offered will take the least time/resources to set up and be inclusive of most players.

Out of 14K votes 10K went to 2 of the options and neither have been put in so I don't know about that?

What's the point of asking what we want and then ignoring us?

trialstardragon wrote:

 

That was only a poll and just because a poll has a certain outcome does not mean that it has to be acted upon. Many more people  would prefer a playlist that allowed more then one weapon or playstyle to be used. And with playlist slots a premium to give one up for snipers/no snipers since most likely most game modes would be in the same playlist is not really feasible, since the numbers in that list would probably be lower then the FO playlists.

 

S&D in GW was probably a test to see how well S&D would work with more players. There is a lot of players that would like to see some of the other game playlists have more players added to them. 6v6 may be fun for some but after a while it gets boring. where as 9v9 adds a whole new level of chaos because of the extra people.

Bit off topic there? Wrong thread?

wmpratt wrote:

 

Yea a no-sniper game, Snipers are the worse scum. Worse than campers, yea I said it!

Do you mean Snipers or Quickscopers?