Is Faction Lore Bias Simply Just a Perception of Players

[Nadev]

I don't think there can't be lore bias if you leveled 1-60 since Cataclysm as Alliance.

[Scummer]

Worgen V goblin story telling.... Goblins had the better integration and conclusion to their starting zones. Worgens did not even get to participate in half of their own lore.

I actually vastly preferred the Worgen 1-10 experience. The story seemed better and the quests themselves seemed better with neither story nor actual content being mostly gags likes the Goblins.
However everything post level 10 was better done on the Goblin side. The Worgen at that point just didn't exist as far as the rest of the Alliance were concerned.

[Deleted]

Blizzard admitted themselves that the Worgen story was an aftertought and that they actually didn't finish it cause they were to busy with the horde.

- - - Updated - - -

I actually vastly preferred the Worgen 1-10 experience. The story seemed better and the quests themselves seemed better with neither story nor actual content being mostly gags likes the Goblins.
However everything post level 10 was better done on the Goblin side. The Worgen at that point just didn't exist as far as the rest of the Alliance were concerned.

Goblins: They get a zone of their own and reshape it into a Horde symbol, with a Goblin town in the center of it and huge cannon on top of it.
Worgen: They get a tree.

Teehee!

[Aquamonkey]

Blizzard admitted themselves that the Worgen story was an aftertought and that they actually didn't finish it cause they were to busy with the horde.

Source?

Worgen not getting Gilneas back sounds more like they did it on purpose:

We didn't want to tempt you with other cities you'd never want to visit.

BURN! (on us maybe)

Losing your starting city, homes, etc. just fit with the Cataclysm vibe. It's one of the few places where I think that ultimate devastation really played out. Obviously more literally for the Goblins, but similarly for Worgen. But even with that similar thread of 'loss, they're different stories, and the battle rages on to this day to control Gilneas.

Much like the other battlegrounds, it's lost to no one, and sought by all. (Source)

[Sniperpally]

You are on one hand contradicting yourself, by first saying Alliance attracted kiddies because of the white knight/good guy, then you say people shifted because gameplay elements as they don't really care about the lore or feel of a faction.

Please make your mind up.

On the other hand you are making swapping generalizations with typical internet statistics NINTY-NINE PERCENT without really having much to back that up with. (That I said that 90% of people in Vanilla never seen Epix is backed up by Blizzard statistics whom they themselves stated that only 3% of the player base got to do endgame raiding.)

Undoubtedly racials and game play elements contributed and as faction farming (although again early battlegrounds once introduced happened to be dominated by the Alliance), but that was only at best a part of the population shift. Also as it happens most of the more known early pvp pioneers and streamers happened to play Alliance. One of the major gameplay population shift elements causes where actually related to raiding (see Cleansing totems) and on the PvP side the Undead racial.

In general people that cared enough about gameplay to change factions went alliance -> horde. alliance always had kiddies, they just stayed cause they didn't care enough to move, with the overall effect being that demographics shifted towards horde, on the basis of gameplay type decisions.

lore bias isn't something your typical horde player even thinks about, not because horde has better lore, but in general because the horde player cares less about lore than alliance players, which is the whole reason they're horde in the first place

[Talen]

The entire WoW storyline/lore is silly.

People still care about it and Blizzard has successfully created a degree of rivalry. Silly or not, it exists.

It all goes back to the silly white knight/pretty princess alliance mentality, horde doesn't care about the storyline cause they know its contrived anyway.

Balderdash. Horde doesn't care about the storyline...because they have one. When the Horde storyline was poor in Vanilla the Horde cried plenty. But even then, the Horde DID have a storyline, even if it wasn't as well put together or as good as the Alliance version.

The fact that the Horde did complain about the story and quests and experience an other issues in Vanilla and beyond neatly, I think, destroys the argument that this is something to do with Alliance mentality or a spin off of Blizzard catering to "casuals".

EJL

[Sniperpally]

People still care about it and Blizzard has successfully created a degree of rivalry. Silly or not, it exists.



Balderdash. Horde doesn't care about the storyline...because they have one. When the Horde storyline was poor in Vanilla the Horde cried plenty. But even then, the Horde DID have a storyline, even if it wasn't as well put together or as good as the Alliance version.

The fact that the Horde did complain about the story and quests and experience an other issues in Vanilla and beyond neatly, I think, destroys the argument that this is something to do with Alliance mentality or a spin off of Blizzard catering to "casuals".

EJL

I don't remember the horde complaining about the story in vanilla and I played horde in vanilla

in fact, what I always liked about the horde story was that it was more sandboxy and less grand-narrative driven than alliance. Which is probably why it paid off so well in the long run, its hard to have a cohesive narrative for what are essentially business decisions in an MMO

I think what people liked about the horde was the fact that it was like finding a neat little corner of the game world and exploring it. you weren't Arthas or Illidan like in the RTS games, rather just some filthy troll, that would have been canon fodder in the previous games. your relatively smaller role made the world seem bigger in comparison. I think this attracted a certain type of player from the get go, meanwhile alliance has people trying to be uther the 2nd or illidan jr. Of course they're gonna geek out over the lore and any sort of percieved imbalance, but their relationship to the MMO story is sort of at odds with the spirit of an MMO itself-- in other words not everyone can be those characters, and in fact its more rewarding to not be one, because smaller events have more meaning. I really miss the days of quests like of love and family, now everything is one long quest chain where you're saving a zone from anihilation, but it runs into a huge problem which is things have become so inflated that its impossible to please anyone anymore.

Its the same reason LFR is bad, when everyone has something it means less. in regards to lore, everyone is a badass, now they're not satisfied with the story because it can't possibly take it to 11. people that were always more concerned about gameplay elements over being goku are therefore much happier with the game as time goes on in regards to lore, mainly because they don't care. People playing it like their own single player game though are a little left out. those people should probably just play a single player game, though, where a cohesive narrative can actually be developed. MMO stories are absurd by their very nature.

[Talen]

Now...Is there an INTENTIONAL faction bias? No.

Yes.

Blizzard continually chooses to use and develop Horde characters unless given no choice. Malfurion was a near non-entity in Cataclysm for example. Thrall was given the task of revealing an ALLIANCE traitor. Alliance characters report to Vol'jin in 5.3 rather than an Alliance commander. Its not that Blizzard can't develop or use Alliance characters. Blizzard CHOOSES not to. Even when the use of Alliance characters or Alliance story development would make sense, Blizzard chooses not to do so in favor of Horde characters and story.

And that indicates a bias.

EJL

[Deleted]

no, its not. i'm not one to bitch on forums about faction bias because in the end theres nothing i can do about it and blizz are gonna write how they wanna write, and thats up to them, but its clear that horde get more attention and better storylines than alliance.

[Lynneiah]

I actually vastly preferred the Worgen 1-10 experience. The story seemed better and the quests themselves seemed better with neither story nor actual content being mostly gags likes the Goblins.
However everything post level 10 was better done on the Goblin side. The Worgen at that point just didn't exist as far as the rest of the Alliance were concerned.

The Worgen starting area was probably the best of all starting areas in the game, including the Pandaren one. After that, you get an 'oh, nice' moment when you learn that Worgen are being trained as Sentinel officers in Feralas, but beyond that, you don't really get anything.
It wasn't until I made a Forsaken alt that I learned the story of my favourite race actually continued, and I kept wondering why my Worgen wasn't there, fighting alongside the GLF...

[Talen]

I don't remember the horde complaining about the story in vanilla and I played horde in vanilla

One example - the Alliance got the Onyxia questline. The Horde got Nefarion. There was plenty of jealous over that.

Not to mention there was a difference in quest and story quality; that was after all given as a reason why the quest revamp in Cataclysm happened.

The big difference between the Horde then and the Alliance now?

WoW was newer then
The Horde actually did have a story - it was just poorer
The Horde didn't have to suffer that lack for two full XPacs.

EJL

[nyc81991]

Blizzard has failed at showing Alliance victories in game, so in that sense there is a faction bias.

[Lynneiah]

Yes.

Blizzard continually chooses to use and develop Horde characters unless given no choice. Malfurion was a near non-entity in Cataclysm for example. Thrall was given the task of revealing an ALLIANCE traitor. Alliance characters report to Vol'jin in 5.3 rather than an Alliance commander. Its not that Blizzard can't develop or use Alliance characters. Blizzard CHOOSES not to.

And that indicates a bias.

EJL

They actually pulled the whole 'Alliance takes orders from Vol'jin' thing back in the troll patch during Cataclysm. Granted, it made some sense there, but in 5.3? Really very much not.

[Hughes]

I remember when I started WoW in Vanilla the running joke for Alliance was 'kids go there because the races are pretty.' I kinda fit into that category back then too (cept...I wasn't a kid then either). Went Horde to join a guild I saw on Facebook, and because I want Alliance to see 'kek' when i LOL dammit!

[Sniperpally]

One example - the Alliance got the Onyxia questline. The Horde got Nefarion. There was plenty of jealous over that.

Not to mention there was a difference in quest and story quality; that was after all given as a reason why the quest revamp in Cataclysm happened.

The big difference between the Horde then and the Alliance now?

WoW was newer then
The Horde actually did have a story - it was just poorer
The Horde didn't have to suffer that lack for two full XPacs.

EJL

This is just an example of people getting what they want and it making them less happy than with what they had. The older quests had charm because they weren't part of any bigger scheme but rather just little slices of life from the World of warcraft. People may have poo-poo'd that at the time and asked for a more streamlined questing experience, but now we get the extremely generic on rails experience that we currently have.

really though, I don't think people were even complaining about the classic quest experience from a lore perspective but rather from a gameplay one. newer expansions streamlined the leveling experience by bringing a more sensible approach to quest and zone layout. it made it more efficient with quest givers grouped and quests given in an easy to follow order with objectives in the same area. In the classic experience you got that sometimes but sometimes you wasted a lot of time travelling back and forth. I think that's where most the complaints were, and that's what they sought to remedy. In changing the quest feel story wise to the newer version they just made the game feel more like a single player game and less like a MMO. its like in SWTOR, which I really enjoy, but I play exclusively as a single player game. It just doesn't make sense as an MMO. Every inquisitor is a dark council member, every sith warrior is the wrath of the emperor-- what? But that's what people want, a cinematic engaging single player experience in an MMO. The thing is the whole project breaks down upon scrutiny, so what can blizzard do?

this is all a consequence of the player's mentality so in regards to the subject of this thread, I say yes. I also think this mentality has been cultivated by the accessibility changes and therefore with those increases lore complaints also went up.

[Talen]

This is just an example of people getting what they want

Alliance players were fairly happy with the Vanilla experience, storywise. The Horde wasn't. Therefore, to gove the Horde a good experience levelling, thjey destroyed the Alliance experience.

Players didn't get what they wanted.

The Horde wanted a better levelling experience. Both sides wanted the system streamlined.

The older quests had charm because they weren't part of any bigger scheme but rather just little slices of life from the World of warcraft. People may have poo-poo'd that at the time and asked for a more streamlined questing experience, but now we get the extremely generic on rails experience that we currently have.

Players denigrated the Horde experience and with cause. But the Alliance liked questlines such as the Missing Diplomat and the Onyxia questchain...precisely because they weren't little slices of life. Who remembers the pig you had to kill in Elwynn for example? No - they remember ending the Masquerade.

EJL

[Deleted]

Source?

Worgen not getting Gilneas back sounds more like they did it on purpose:

We didn't want to tempt you with other cities you'd never want to visit.

BURN! (on us maybe)

Losing your starting city, homes, etc. just fit with the Cataclysm vibe. It's one of the few places where I think that ultimate devastation really played out. Obviously more literally for the Goblins, but similarly for Worgen. But even with that similar thread of 'loss, they're different stories, and the battle rages on to this day to control Gilneas.

Much like the other battlegrounds, it's lost to no one, and sought by all. (Source)

Not talking about Gilneas.
Im talking about how the Goblins (after they finished the lost isles an Kezan) got a whole zone terraformed as a horde symbol and slapped a huge city with a huge cannon on top of it, and had that whole zone filled with goblin-related quests, while the Worgen got a tree in darnassus an got to do the night elves' quests.

[Sniperpally]

Alliance players were fairly happy with the Vanilla experience, storywise. The Horde wasn't. Therefore, to gove the Horde a good experience levelling, thjey destroyed the Alliance experience.

Players didn't get what they wanted.

The Horde wanted a better levelling experience. Both sides wanted the system streamlined.




Players denigrated the Horde experience and with cause. But the Alliance liked questlines such as the Missing Diplomat and the Onyxia questchain...precisely because they weren't little slices of life. Who remembers the pig you had to kill in Elwynn for example? No - they remember ending the Masquerade.

EJL

Actually, I'm pretty sure anyone that actually played in vanilla remembers princess. But with the new generation of players, yeah, I'm sure they gloss over it on their quest to raise their power level in order to beat vegeta. Which is exactly my point, with the way the game has been going its attracted players who have certain expectations, its those expectations that can't possibly be satisfied that cause them to dislike the alliance lately. Unfortunately, the alliance attracts these people from the get go, so they're sort of set up for failure. my suggestion to them is to play a console RPG where they can get that experience they're looking for

[Aquamonkey]

Not talking about Gilneas.
Im talking about how the Goblins got a whole zone terraformed as a horde symbol and slapped a huge city with a huge cannon on top of it, and had that whole zone filled with goblin-related quests, while the Worgen got a tree in darnassus an got to do the night elves' quests.

They had to balance out the leveling zones.

[Elegiac]

No, the faction bias isn't simply player perception. It's pretty well established by this point that the Alliance are the 'other' faction - they exist solely as a foil to the Horde's storyline and lack any meaningful development of its lore, races, and characters. As others have mentioned, of the four non-neutral races introduced into the game - Blood Elves, Draenei, Goblins, and Worgen - the Alliance races have received poor world representation and very little plot development. The Draenei stopped having a story after their start zone, and acted more as a foil to the Blood Elves during BC than an actual entity. This was repeated with the Worgen; after their start zone, not only did their storyline cease but it was turned into a Horde storyline in Silverpine. The introduction of the Pandaren was only faction neutral because the Tushui and Huojin were given the same amount of post starting-zone representation; none. Blizzard's idea of "faction storyline balance" became making the questlines a glorified excuse for players to role Pandaren rather than integrating either into their respective factions.

As regard expansion bias, people like to point out that "Wrath was an Alliance expac because Arthas". If this makes Wrath an Alliance expansion, by extension it makes BC a Horde expansion due to the fact that the general storyline revolved around the Blood Elves. I happen to think neither of the case; BC and Wrath were neutral expansions where neutral factions like the Scryers, the Argent Crusade, etc. ate up faction lore which saved Blizzard the excuse of having to balance it.

Since the resurrection of the whole Red vs. Blue shtick in Cataclysm, however, the storyline has become increasingly Horde centric. The Stonetalon questline, for instance, the Alliance are simply there as victims to foreshadow the Horde's decline into tyranny. The Western Plaguelands, the Alliance exists as an excuse to show off Forsaken plot development in Andorhal. The zones which are balanced are either neutral like EPL, or exist as gimmick homages to previous games like Swamp of Sorrows. Fortunately, endgame content was not as unbalanced - again, due to the Wrath model of the abundance of neutral factions.

Things have reached their nadir in Pandaria. People like to say that the Alliance is better off because the Horde is in the midst of a civil war; but they're confusing content with development. The fact is that the Horde's development has taken a front role, with Horde characters driving the story. The Alliance exist solely as "the other guys" who, rather than impacting the story in any meaningful way, are simply along for the ride.

What makes this worse is the fact that Blizzard actually promised that this wouldn't be the case. The "fist pump moment" line was touted as an example that the developers were going to give the Alliance their moment to shine as a proud faction. Then where is it? The only thing we've seen coming out of SoO is that we "assist" the Horde in bringing down their tyrant, our two major leaders Jaina and Varian have an argument, and then we leave the Horde alone rather than demanding any compensation. Our "fist pump moment" seems to be acting as the moral foil for the Horde; we take the "high ground" and we are supposed to be pleased with that.

To further underscore Blizzard's bias, we look at the fact that while the Alliance is a foil, it's not a very well written one. As my example, I use the Trials of the High King. This could have been an excellent opportunity for some hardcore Alliance lore and character development; in contrast to the Horde's divisiveness, we would get a line of scenarios or quests that shows the Alliance strengthening their bonds. The first Trial, however, was a disaster. A Little Patience made absolutely no sense from a lore standpoint, served only to underscore Tyrande's new status as a foil to whatever male character she happens to be standing next to, and didn't show much in the way of actual development. The second trial of Blood in the Snow is arguably better in that it helps resolve some of the Varian/Moira tension. Now that we're nearing the end of this expansion, it's become abundantly clear that Blizzard is giving up on the "trials of the High King" - only two out of the six races were represented.

It's gotten to the point at which I wish Blizzard would give up on the Horde versus Alliance storyline. They clearly lack either the impartiality or skill to write it well, and as a result are alienating a good half of the playerbase.