Illidan was a god or something

[Kralljin]

He takes it and it is an obvious trap, juicing him up far more than he likely expected (or wanted, judging from his comment to Malfurion, "This is what I've become.")

Trap is the wrong word here.

Arthas basically told an alcoholic where to get free booze.

If you actually play RoC and don't just read about it on Gamepedia, there's no real reason to believe in any of this that he didn't have a real desire to fight the Legion

Never said that he had no desire to fight the legion, but when he did, it lined with some very selfish goals on his side, like becoming the savior of his people or simply more powerful.

Intentions matter.

[Enthralled]

Trap is the wrong word here.

Arthas basically told an alcoholic where to get free booze.

In other words, a trap.

Never said that he had no desire to fight the legion, but when he did, it lined with some very selfish goals on his side, like becoming the savior of his people or simply more powerful.

Intentions matter.

Some of you guys can't handle anything other than cartoon characters with only one dimension, like old-fashioned Batman comic books where Batman was the really primitive Good Guy with Robin at his side who fought Bad Guys like The Joker who was just Bad and that's it. The Bad Guy can never have any other internal or external motivation other than being a Bad Guy. I feel sorry for you, to be honest, but it doesn't lessen my enjoyment of this game.

And it's really funny because the Warcraft universe is really simple itself. It's not like there's a lot of symbolism or real depth here. Illidan is the most gray of the gray characters they have, and I can see why they feel that they have to keep it that way. So many people get so confused over so little.

[Kralljin]

The Bad Guy can never have any other internal or external motivation other than being a Bad Guy. I feel sorry for you, to be honest, but it doesn't lessen my enjoyment of this game.

It's pretty ironic, considering that you simply ignore main point of my argument.

Illidan has done good things, would the joker do good things? No, because he's evil for the sake of evil.
Had Illidan good intentions? Sometimes but very often also very selfish ones.

Does the Joker ever have good intentions? No, he doesn't, because as said above, he's evil for the sake of evil.

But i'll be honest, someone who seems adamant about defending Illidan, including some...discussable choices of him and basically riding the "All he wanted to do was to defeat the Legion" - Train and has an Illidan avatar on top of that, is a person i consider slightly biased.

If you then start go around and tell people who disagree with you that they only can think in

cartoon characters with only one dimension

you are not exactly helping your argument.

[Enthralled]

But i'll be honest, someone who seems adamant about defending Illidan, including some...discussable choices of him and basically riding the "All he wanted to do was to defeat the Legion" - Train

But I'm not doing that. I'm saying that this was always his constant goal, his main goal -- along with many other things. That a character can, in fact, be capable of the complexity of multiple intentions, some of them might even be distasteful. You're the one making hairsplitting distinctions.

and has an Illidan avatar on top of that, is a person i consider slightly biased.

OK, fair enough. It's not like my day is ruined if Random Guy on the Internet #6247 has decided that I am biased in a discussion about a videogame character.

[rhorle]

The problem is not that the others see him mystically as a good guy, it's Xe'ra is shoving this information down our throats. It's a little insulting, really. He should have to prove to us his intentions are for the greater good, not have some pretentious windchime being telling us we're idiots for not trusting in 'O holy is he, Chosen One Angeldan'.

Then don't believe it just because something tells you to? What you are saying isn't terrible writing because maybe that is just the character of Xe'ra. Someone that knows something and is flabergasted that someone doesn't as well. For example what if you met someone in real life that thought the world was flat? Do you think you would come across as pretentious when telling them that it really isn't? And that they are an idiot for believing the world is flat?

Some many things get called bad writing or ret cons when it simply is different perspectives or new lore putting a different perspective on existing lore that happened.