Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ...
9
10
11
12
LastLast
  1. #201
    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    But the war in "low level Azeroth" is Garrosh's war. A lot of stuff in the Horde questing is around Garrosh. You can't just call it "the new warchief's war" when you still have Garrosh showing up everywhere in Silverpine, Stonetalon etc.

    The thing with Garrosh is not even a timeline problem. The problem is having a warchief standing in Orgrimmar that has nothing to do with the story in the zones, and having a story in the zones that talks about a warchief that isn't there anymore.
    Orgrimmar is in the present, the other zones are in the past. Simple as that. No paradoxes, no weirdness, simple cool logic.

  2. #202
    Over 9000! Nindoriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    9,837
    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    So what makes cata the present and not mists? We have access to mists content starting at level 1 in the form of the pandaren.
    You're right that is weird. It doesn't make sense for these old races to do stuff that already happened. But that doesn't make my level 1 character someone who is in the past. He didn't travel back in time. He wasn't created in Pandaria and then went back to Durotar. He starts in Cataclysm, then goes back to TBC, then forward to WotLK, forward to Cataclysm and forward to MoP. If anything it's the Pandaren who are going back in time. Just like Blood Elves and Draenei were.

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-04 at 01:49 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    Orgrimmar is in the present, the other zones are in the past. Simple as that. No paradoxes, no weirdness, simple cool logic.
    That's what you call logic.

  3. #203
    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    So what makes cata the present and not mists? We have access to mists content starting at level 1 in the form of the pandaren.



    They never did.

    Leveling content, when it is no longer the primary expansion, is simply catch-up work.

    As far as the overarching lore is concerned, if your character is not at endgame with the most recent parts of the most recent story arc, you are experiencing the past, but not being truly part of the past.
    Catch-up work or not; there's pandarens and monks fighting in Outland. These characters, even when they are level 90, have fought in Outland and Northrend and everywhere. Saying that it's catch-up work doesn't somehow make that untrue. How does this 'experiencing the past' thing work then? Does the Dark Portal now transport people back in time?

  4. #204
    Over 9000! Nindoriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    9,837
    Quote Originally Posted by The Madgod View Post
    They never did.

    Leveling content, when it is no longer the primary expansion, is simply catch-up work.

    As far as the overarching lore is concerned, if your character is not at endgame with the most recent parts of the most recent story arc, you are experiencing the past, but not being truly part of the past.
    You know he means when a Pandaren character is doing TBC content. Of course there were no Pandaren there lorewise, that's the point. But a Pandaren character can still participate in the war aganst the Legion.

    Now I know things like that will never make any sense, it's near impossible in an MMO.

    But the thing I'm talking about with Garrosh has nothing to do with these timeline issues. Just forget TBC, forget WotLK, forget the rest of Cata and forget MoP. Only take the 1-60 stuff. Isolate it from everything else. Do not pay attention to any transition between expansions. If you take only that content of Level 1-60, and you play through the zones, having a different warchief in Orgrimmar and a different warchief being talked about, or appearing in the zones creates a weird questing experience for new players.

  5. #205
    The Patient gorocz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Pilsen, Czech Republic
    Posts
    249
    Anyone remembers the Missing Diplomat alliance questline? That was about searching for Varian and it was not removed when Varian was added to SW (3.0), only the final 2 quests which involved Bolvar and Katrana were removed back then... The quest chain was only removed in Cataclysm with the rest of the quests...

  6. #206
    I've always viewed it like this: whenever I create a new character, that character exists in the present. Which, at this moment is patch 5.2 content. That is the present for my character. They are effectively a level 90 character fighting the thunder kings forces in Pandaria.

    Now for gameplay reasons I can't jump right into that content and must make my way from level 1 up to 90. The way I see it is that that journey is more like my character telling the story of how they got to where they currently are.

    To put this in a real world perspective, if I were telling my life story and met the president when I was 12 years old, if say I met president reagan or bush or clinton or whoever was the president at that time despite the fact that in the present, obama is president. My story takes place in the past, so I reference the way things were.

    This admittedly does get a little messy when I hit 60 and go to Outland and then Northrend at 70, because those events are further in the past than the beginning of my story, but I, as the player, understand that this is only because renaming the 60-70 and 70-80 experience would be extremely time and resource consuming for blizz, and so they choose not to do it.

    I simply acknowledge the paradox and don't try to logic it. Though I have heard others suggest that when they hit 60, a bronze dragonflight representative approaches them and sends them into the past to preserve the timeline. It's awobbly explanation, but not entirely unfeasible in the scope of the game.

  7. #207
    The Patient Sir Nikotin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Internetz
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    But the war in "low level Azeroth" is Garrosh's war. A lot of stuff in the Horde questing is around Garrosh. You can't just call it "the new warchief's war" when you still have Garrosh showing up everywhere in Silverpine, Stonetalon etc.

    The thing with Garrosh is not even a timeline problem. The problem is having a warchief standing in Orgrimmar that has nothing to do with the story in the zones, and having a story in the zones that talks about a warchief that isn't there anymore.
    And now we have a warchief that is standing in Orgrimmar that has nothing to do as a warchief with BC and WotLK content. Again, what's the difference?
    Also, I can remember Garrosh's appearing only in two quests in 1-60 content. And, well, only Stonetalon and maybe Ashenvale and Barrens are somehow Garrosh-related among all 1-60 zones. Not a big deal, and not that hard to manage with.
    What I'm worrying about a bit more is Twilight Highlands starting chain. It's so epic, I'll be sad to see it removed. Hope they'll do something about it with some solo scenario tech or something.
    LF something funny to place here.

    English isn't my native, sorry for possible mistakes

  8. #208
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragon2K View Post
    Catch-up work or not; there's pandarens and monks fighting in Outland. These characters, even when they are level 90, have fought in Outland and Northrend and everywhere. Saying that it's catch-up work doesn't somehow make that untrue. How does this 'experiencing the past' thing work then? Does the Dark Portal now transport people back in time?
    Gameplay and the leveling process that Blizzard created necessitates this, but as far as lore is concerned, there were no pandaren or monks fighting in outland, or at least, not enough to be of note. Think of it like watching a movie. You're seeing the story, but as far as the story goes, you're not really officially (read: canonically) a part of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    But the thing I'm talking about with Garrosh has nothing to do with these timeline issues. Just forget TBC, forget WotLK, forget the rest of Cata and forget MoP. Only take the 1-60 stuff. Isolate it from everything else. Do not pay attention to any transition between expansions. If you take only that content of Level 1-60, and you play through the zones, having a different warchief in Orgrimmar and a different warchief being talked about, or appearing in the zones creates a weird questing experience for new players.
    So you think that these players would have trouble distinguishing between the two and would not be able to ask for clarification on what is past and what is present? You think that players wouldn't understand the innate timeline present in games with expansions? If that is ultimately what this is about, I don't think there's much to worry about. They understand it better than you think. Again, really, it's not a hard concept to understand that certain parts of the game are behind in terms of story, while others are not.
    Last edited by The Madgod; 2013-04-04 at 02:58 PM.

  9. #209
    High Overlord
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    174
    I tried to make sense of the space time continuum in this thread, and I now look like Chromie.

    Seriously though, I'm not sure we will actually kill Garrosh. We will remove him, I'm sure. It would be silly to have all this build up, all this tension if he could just stick around. Then again, they may just pull a "Hey hey hey, I was just corrupted by the Sha of Douche Nozzles, yo" thing and everything goes back to normal.

  10. #210
    Brewmaster Breccia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    1,429
    Quote Originally Posted by Frozenbeef View Post
    Saurfang is too old,
    Vol'jin doesn't fit the role
    Lor'themar doesn't want it,
    Sylvanus wants to become warchief
    It's a matter of opinion, but I disagree with these.
    -- I admit, I have no idea exactly how old Saurfang is, but Dranosh didn't seem that old to me. That would put Saurfang the Elder at the low-end-grandpa stage or so, older middle aged, but not old. Compare to, say, Varian Wrynn, who can't be that far off in terms of relative age. He's running the Alliance just fine. Magni, Cairne, Genn Greymane...there are/were leaders on both sides of roughly that age span. U.S. Presidents are that age span. If the role of Warchief is to be more about leadership and tactics than pure physical strength and combat skill, he should be ok.
    -- Vol'jin fits the role fine to me, not necessarily my top choice, but he fits the role. This upcoming patch will be the second time he's reached out to the Alliance for a large growing threat. The first was the Zandalari, who incidentally, are still kind of a big deal. This will also be the second time he's personally involved with the action as well. Dealing with big threats with a combination of diplomacy and action seem like leadership traits to me. Also, what he did with the Echo Isles. Again, he might not be my top choice, but I wouldn't rule him out as "not cut out for it".
    -- Lor'themar has directly said he would take the role of Warchief. See this link for details.
    -- I'm not sure Sylvanas wants to be Warchief. I cannot think of a single action she's taken that wasn't directly related to her people first and foremeost. She's a capable leader, on and off the battlefield, but remember that time she sent a bunch of Forsaken soldiers to defend the Barrens? Or capture Ashenvale? Or siege Theramore? I'm pretty sure she did none of these, because it served no value to her.

  11. #211
    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    Like I explained, that was done in Cataclysm. The fact that they changed 3 leaders in an expansion where the world was completely redone, to me that says, that they wanted to use the opportunity, because it's hard to do that in some cases without changing certain things.

    There's a lot of stuff tied to Garrosh. Appearances in certain zones, the war machine etc.
    It can be done. Thrall appears as Warchief in many places (ToC for example), and it will be done. Garrosh cant stay as Warchief without the Horde breaking into pieces. The guy attempted to kill one of the Horde race's leader, and destroyed a sacred place of another race's leader.

    Most of the leaders of the horde have already threaten to kill him.

    I dont know if he will die (99% sure he will) but i can tell you this, he will NOT keep being Warchief.

    Also, many devs already stated Thrall will be Warchief again.

  12. #212
    Quote Originally Posted by Chaozu View Post
    Didn't Blizzard say that Garrosh wouldn't be influenced by the Sha? That what he did and will do, is because he actually, in his mind, believes he is in the right? I could swear I remember a blue post on this but I can't claim it to be true unless I find a link... Either way, in my opinion Garrosh needs to go. I don't care if he's killed, exiled or whatever, just get him out of my sight. I've hated him ever since I met him in Nagrand during BC.

    ---------- Post added 2013-04-04 at 02:05 PM ----------


    Nope not that i have ever seen, although many people have been spewing it needs to be like this allover the forum, but if you think about it... he really wasn't acting that way before he stepped on Pandaria. He was more aggresive (like he has always been) about getting to this new continent before the Alliance but never did any crazy actions like he is now.
    "I hated hating Garrosh before it was cool."
    FOR THE HORDE!!!

  13. #213
    Quote Originally Posted by kingriku View Post
    Nope not that i have ever seen, although many people have been spewing it needs to be like this allover the forum, but if you think about it... he really wasn't acting that way before he stepped on Pandaria. He was more aggresive (like he has always been) about getting to this new continent before the Alliance but never did any crazy actions like he is now.
    I think Tides of War is a suitable transition, have you read it?

  14. #214
    I hope Garrosh kills Thrall (he was way too overexposed over the last life of Warcraft and WoW) and then we kill Garrosh. Vol'jin, Baine or Lorethremor.

  15. #215
    The Insane Trassk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Having beers with Dorothy
    Posts
    17,814
    Quote Originally Posted by luccadeo View Post
    I hope Garrosh kills Thrall (he was way too overexposed over the last life of Warcraft and WoW) and then we kill Garrosh. Vol'jin, Baine or Lorethremor.
    Thrall has been no more exposed then Varian, and both characters are the representation of there faction.

  16. #216
    Quote Originally Posted by Trassk View Post
    Thrall has been no more exposed then Varian, and both characters are the representation of there faction.
    Not sure that's technically true. Alliance players see plenty of Varian, but when do the Horde see him in the same way Alliance saw Thrall in Cata? Has he made any appearances in MoP during Horde quests? I legitimately don't know as I don't play horde. Thrall on the other hand made several key appearances, including being in the final raid and dungeon of the last expansion which people ran over and over and over again.


    I'm not saying that Thrall should be killed, I'm not supporting the post you quoted. But if anything I'd say Anduin is the one matching Thrall in overall exposure, as both factions deal with him in jade forest, Krasarang wilds, 5.1 storyline, and 5.2's Wrathion story.
    Last edited by Malzra; 2013-04-04 at 05:49 PM.

  17. #217
    The Insane Trassk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Having beers with Dorothy
    Posts
    17,814
    Quote Originally Posted by Florena View Post
    Not sure that's technically true. Alliance players see plenty of Varian, but when do the Horde see him in the same way Alliance saw him in Cata? Has he made any appearances in MoP during Horde quests? I legitimately don't know as I don't play horde. Thrall on the other hand made several key appearances, including being in the final raid and dungeon of the last expansion which people ran over and over and over again.


    I'm not saying that Thrall should be killed, I'm not supporting the post you quoted. But if anything I'd say Anduin is the one matching Thrall in overall exposure, as both factions deal with him in jade forest, Krasarang wilds, 5.1 storyline, and 5.2's Wrathion story.
    so really what it boils down to is how alliance felt jaded because a horde hero has such a central role in cataclysms story and that can't handle that.

    Yeah, I can see that. But given how so much of the story in warcraft comes from a throwback to alliance stories and how the horde has had to tag along and sort that out (yes, kel'thzard, Arthas, Kael'thas, even Illidan were stories knocked from the alliance, and tirion who was a member once a member of the alliance as the main hero in wrath, the horde really has had nothing focused on there story and characters until Thrall did something and became a central role).

  18. #218
    Quote Originally Posted by Trassk View Post
    so really what it boils down to is how alliance felt jaded because a horde hero has such a central role in cataclysms story and that can't handle that.

    Yeah, I can see that. But given how so much of the story in warcraft comes from a throwback to alliance stories and how the horde has had to tag along and sort that out (yes, kel'thzard, Arthas, Kael'thas, even Illidan were stories knocked from the alliance, and tirion who was a member once a member of the alliance as the main hero in wrath, the horde really has had nothing focused on there story and characters until Thrall did something and became a central role).
    The difference between Tirion and Thrall is that Tirion was established as neutral all the way back in Vanilla, while Thrall was the Horde Warchief all the way up until Wrath and then thrust into a new role in Cata.

    As for Arthas/Kel'thuzad, yes they are tied into human lore. But also Forsaken lore. The orcs might not have had much to do with the scourge, but it did tie into the blood elf and forsaken story lines a lot.

    Part of it isn't just that a horde character played a big role either. Thrall isn't just any horde character. He was the Warchif. It's most iconic character, it's central leader, up until he suddenly left that role in the cata prelude event. I think though that a lot of the alliance hate on Thrall from Cata has to do with them dropping the ball with Malfurion. Him never acknowledging that the Horde is invading and desecrating his forests. Having him literally stand there when horde raids attack Tyrande. (I know, story/gameplay segregation but COME ON.) Having a horde character in Hamuul always around to share the screen time and glory with him. Not getting to see his appearance in the firelands unless you're a heroic raider. I think alliance could have handled Thrall's role better if Malfurion's hadn't been botched.

  19. #219
    Quote Originally Posted by Nindoriel View Post
    If you take only that content of Level 1-60, and you play through the zones, having a different warchief in Orgrimmar and a different warchief being talked about, or appearing in the zones creates a weird questing experience for new players.
    I agree, it would be such nonsense to have a new warchief in orgrimmar and then all the stuff about Garrosh in EK and kalimdor, I just don't think Blizzard will care to be honest, not after revamping those zones for cataclysm, they should have found a different final boss for MoP.

  20. #220
    The Insane Trassk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Having beers with Dorothy
    Posts
    17,814
    Quote Originally Posted by Florena View Post
    The difference between Tirion and Thrall is that Tirion was established as neutral all the way back in Vanilla, while Thrall was the Horde Warchief all the way up until Wrath and then thrust into a new role in Cata.

    As for Arthas/Kel'thuzad, yes they are tied into human lore. But also Forsaken lore. The orcs might not have had much to do with the scourge, but it did tie into the blood elf and forsaken story lines a lot.

    Part of it isn't just that a horde character played a big role either. Thrall isn't just any horde character. He was the Warchif. It's most iconic character, it's central leader, up until he suddenly left that role in the cata prelude event. I think though that a lot of the alliance hate on Thrall from Cata has to do with them dropping the ball with Malfurion. Him never acknowledging that the Horde is invading and desecrating his forests. Having him literally stand there when horde raids attack Tyrande. (I know, story/gameplay segregation but COME ON.) Having a horde character in Hamuul always around to share the screen time and glory with him. Not getting to see his appearance in the firelands unless you're a heroic raider. I think alliance could have handled Thrall's role better if Malfurion's hadn't been botched.
    I'll give you it on the malfurion bit. But still, its a poor reason to dislike a character, when given now much of the lore has come off of the alliances side of things for years, and yet the moment a central horde character does something, theres this cry for reprisal. Its ridiculous.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •