Gamers expect people to treat their games on ESPN and similar channels seriously, but then turn around and make comments like these on this article. Hehe. How can people who don’t play games care if gamers themselves make fun of professional gaming, too?

I guarantee the only reason YouTube responded so fast was because of the initial articles like the one here on Kotaku, and the buzz it generated on reddit.

You mean Warcraft 3? Yeah, that's pretty crazy.

Then don't read it, and wait. But people can discuss it. Not every article is made specifically for you to consume.

Because the theory isn't restricted to the game itself. Book readers and those who know of the universe are more than familiar enough to discuss the topic.

People familiar with both the universe and vague events of the game are able to discuss this point very easily. So them, like me.

They probably have more money than anyone in the gaming sphere right now, since Bizzard and Activision are partners. I bet even just Blizzard make as a shit ton with WoW.

I would say that there is always a level of corruption that comes with power, any small or large amount of power. So having people to look into it and loudly announce it to the world is a good thing because it might shed light on actual corruption or stem the growth of corruption that may have come if nothing had been…

By the same token, without that we also wouldn't have articles like this that shed light onto even a slight amount of corruption. Say what you want about the man wanting popularity, but that's not the sole reason he's doing this, even if it does play a big part.

The Internet *. Let’s not pretend reddit is worse or better than anywhere else. It’s just where a lot of people go, and wherever there are a lot of people, this happens.

It's a good game mechanically, and it's fun when things go well and your teammates aren't assholes. Those moments are what make it worth it for most players. I won't pretend that LoL or DotA have a majority of good moments to balance out the bad ones, and I may even be wrong on that, but the bad ones get far more…

I would say that's because despite how many people enjoy those two things, more people by magnitudes of hundreds of thousands enjoy games and gaming.

It is, but that's not a bad thing. It's a very well crafted game suited to a more casual crowd than League of Legends of DotA, and it's how Blizzard succeeds in every enterprise they've gone into. WoW, Diablo, Starcraft, Hearthstone, Heroes of the Storm, and soon, Overwatch. It's all geared toward a broader section of…

That must happen if you choose to go to the Darktown place instead of directly to the Atlus place with Rhys, because I don’t remember that.

Watching the second opening again, I’m reminded that the hat that fell off the truck at the end of the cutscene mysteriously reappeared on Fiona’s head in her next scene.

It won’t eat into their profit as it stands before Chroma Packs are implemented, because people who were going to buy skins would still be buying skins at the same rate. The chroma packs would be for those who don’t spend money on the game at all, but are unlocked via play, which is what Riot wants, because the longer…

I never said you couldn’t get a Chroma pack if you didn’t buy a skin. I just said that Chroma packs should be unlocked via IP and restricted to the champions and skins that you own.

You can also convince them by speaking out against the decision. There is more than one way to change policy.

Most of the skins in League are entirely different than the base, free image. The RP cost is mandatory because it actually takes effort to create them.

My point is not moot for the very reason that one of them was a skin itself. From the examples, it can be assumed that most, if not all, of the skins and basic images for the heroes in League of Legends will gain Chroma packs. Even if not, obviously some skins will be chosen to have Chroma packs.