#1 - Jan. 26, 2012, 8:19 p.m.
I honestly thought it was a joke when I first heard it.
Let me rephrase.
WHY. DO. YOU. HAVE. TO. NAME. THE. XPAC. PANDARIA. THE. FACT. THAT. THEY. ARE. FROM. PANDARIA. IS. IRRELEVANT.
01/26/2012 12:52 PMPosted by TranhuntardThey didn't put Pandas in the game after WC3 because they knew that Pandas were too childish, silly and trivial. Why Pandas now? The obvious reason is Kung Fu Panda.
The expansion is not named "Pandaria". It is "Mists of Pandaria". Now to really nitpick.
If you're going to shorten the name down to one word, it should be "Mists". "of Pandaria" is an adjectival prepositional phrase describing the mists. The focus of the phrase is definitely "Mists".
I kinda feel like there's a disconnect between Expansion name hype and player excitement.
Burning Crusade, Wrath of the Lich King, Cataclysm and even just plain World of Warcraft pointed you towards the event that was going to be the overarching theme of the expansion.
Mists of Panderia feels like a door you go through, and you have no idea whats beyond it or whats going to happen, or even what you're going to do.
01/26/2012 01:36 PMPosted by CarchariasaWhen TBC was being considered, they were originally going to call it Mists of Silvermoonia, but it got changed at the last second for some odd reason.
I dunno, I would have preferred World of WARcraft: War Of the Blood War Anger Destruction Explode
I mean, that just sounds cooler. And things that sound cool validate me as a male. With testosterone.
01/26/2012 02:18 PMPosted by NecranMy favorite thing about this thread is how Zarhym never addressed the core issue presented and instead made strawman after strawman and mocked the opposition. Pretending the OP didn't have coherent point. I lurv ya Zarhym, but it pains me to see you resorting to Bill O'Reilley tactics.
01/26/2012 02:18 PMPosted by NecranIt is unimaginative to name a land full of Pandas Pandaria.