Page 25 of 28 FirstFirst ...
15
23
24
25
26
27
... LastLast
  1. #481
    High Overlord
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Jersey
    Posts
    197
    I hate them both as well as several others, but the answer why *others* don't hate her -- aside from the stupid male answer -- is right there in your OP. Sylvannas is subtle, crafty, willing to be a Chessmaster. She's much more terrifying and there *will* be a reckoning with her some day. But Garrosh? He's not a Chessmaster, he took one look at the board and swung his axe through it. Sylvannas in charge of the Horde could actually lead us to victory... a dark, unwanted victory, but victory nonetheless. Garrosh is a terrible Warchief on every level, unable to handle strategy or tactics. Personal combat is the only arena in which he excels, and frankly the Horde deserves better.

  2. #482
    Sylvanas gets extra points for being honest about her own douche-baggery.
    Last edited by Kasami; 2013-08-21 at 01:21 PM.
    WoW killers are like the end of the world, they come and go.
    Quote Originally Posted by Trassk View Post
    yeah, see the developers just flipped you the finger.

  3. #483
    Legendary! Pendra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Austria
    Posts
    6,378
    Quote Originally Posted by jealouspirate View Post
    The only difference I can really see is style. Garrosh is loud, stompy, and angry. Not very subtle. Sylvanas is cruel and cold, but more quiet, subtle and calm.
    This is exactly one of the primary reasons for me.

    I don't necessarily dislike Garrosh's course...but he evolved into a loud, annoying, simple-minded "ME SMASH!"-brute.
    Sylvanas' approach to reach her goals is just so much more elegant. I mean...she even uses Val'kyrs.
    Last edited by Pendra; 2013-08-21 at 11:14 AM.

  4. #484
    Sex sells you see it in advertising everywhere whether its pixels or not she is far more pleasing then him.

  5. #485

  6. #486
    I think the obvious answer is this: He has no nipples.

  7. #487
    Dunno I like both of them.
    Garrosh's horde is more like I wanted this expac to be. Not quite as brutal as id like the horde to be but closer.
    Being the "bad" guy, why not. It suits me fine.
    My view of how the horde should be fits more If the horde came to pandaria commited genocide on innocent pandarens, enslaved the survivors shipped them back to orgimmar and so on. Essentially making the entirety of the panda race the new peons.
    The whole pandaren joining the horde, I would solve like so; they could be the traitors of the slaves (slave overseers, perfectly normal to use the captives to control themselves they had them in Auschwitz).

    Then we could actually have an expansion focused on the war between the horde and alliance and not against some outside threat.

  8. #488
    It is kind of hilarious to see all these Blizzard apologists becoming all defensive about heavily implied Garrosh's role of a destructive, evil Fuhrer and denying EVEN THE EXPLAINATIONS FROM WOW DEVELOPERS THEMSELVES regarding this character developement. I never thought I would see Aquamonkey whine about decisions made by WoW team - but! Here it is!

    On the eve of 5.4 patch I will savour each and every single one of your delicious tears.

  9. #489
    Sylvanas has a lot more going for her than just boobs in fact. Like you know, living (possibly) forever thanks to being undead, planning and scheming for long term, always having a fresh deck of playing cards up her sleve. And probably the most notable, she's one of the few characters from WC3 that is still true to herself. And only herself. She is just one freaking crazy thing, I find it hard not to like her for that alone.

    Compared to that, Garrosh is just a brainless brute that allowed himself to become corrupted, bearing the family name of a war "hero" who... was essentially a brainless brute that became corrupted as well. He just has nothing likable about him. I mean, Thrall and some other higher-up orcs have shown that the race can be decent if they try, and god did Thrall try to batter some brain into Grom's son. I must say I lost all respect for Garrosh back at the Argent Tourney when he caused trouble in front of Tirion and his warchief.
    There are too many design flaws in your game. As a result, your customers' game experience may be degraded. Fire or replace the failing developers if you don't want to see this message again.

  10. #490
    The Lightbringer Simulacrum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    3,295
    Quote Originally Posted by Trassk View Post
    Well then I guess your books never going to be satisfied, since you can't tell who the bad guy is even when he's in front of you.

    All I read in these argument are 'I like him because he's a bad guy'.. which, okay, you like him because he's a bad guy.. he's still the bad guy though, and trying to convince yourselves he's not is where denial sets him.
    Don't you get it? He's a good guy because he's a "bad guy". I don't wanna play humans with a different hat (like 'humans with tusks', or 'humans with different skin colour', or 'humans but with pointy ears', or 'humans but with horns,' or...). I want orcs that act like orcs, not like humans. And what do orcs want? To kill and destroy! What do trolls want? I dunno, but probably much of the same. What do the undead want? To make everything else undead, obviously! Leaders who don't support these goals are not "good guys"; they are "bad guys". Of course, humans won't agree with that, but I'm not playing a human, I'm playing a walking corpse that eats people after raping their souls, and anyone who would resrict my ability to do that is a bad guy in my eyes (and I am naturally the ideal orc/troll/undead, and someone the other races of the horde should aspire to be like as well).

    I'm playing the faction with orcs, trolls, and the undead. I want my leaders to murder orphans and crush civilizations for no other reason than that they're there and they're not strong enough to resist. Such leaders would be good guys from the perspective of a rabid, genocidal, war-mongering lunatic like myself. I'm not here to sing cumbaja with gnomes and dwarves and those disgusting humans (humans who resist the undeath! could anything be more evil than that?), nevermind the pandaren. The very thought! Any who adopt any attitude other than rank xenophobia towards non-hordes are bad guys. They want our destruction! We must destroy them first! Even if they didn't, their existence offends nature itself. They must be destroyed, by any means necessary, any good and proper person would agree with me.

    (The same of course applies to the other factions of the horde as well - that should go without saying - but we wait with that war until we've destroyed the alliance. Gotta be smart about it!)

    Quote Originally Posted by Trassk View Post
    This whole 'its retarded because its not what i thought would happen' is just beyond ridiculous now. The sort of people that can't keep up with the story and yet claim they know it better then those that do always end up having the worst understanding of character development.
    It's not what I didn't think would happen. Obviously, I assumed the horde wouldn't be allowed to keep a leader that was actually a good leader in charge of the horde. It's just that the way they go about it is downright imbecilic. He went from the proper, enraged, crazy, warmongering lunatic that any good orc should strive to be, to a moron who actively engineers his own destruction by, among other things, antagonizing his own faction beyond all reason.

    And my player character is working against him from the start! Even though I wanted nothing more than to stab that worthless gimp vol'jin in the heart after our first fight with garrosh' soldiers; then to carry that heart to garrosh and be like "yeah your dudes totally attacked us, but we killed them, thus proving our strength, and now bring you his heart, thus proving our loyalty".

    I even have to suffer through countless encounters with that little shit anduin, every one during which I would've been able to kill him, as would naturally have been the only proper response for any situation where his capture wasn't possible, but nooo... it would've been so easy, for my character to stab its skeletal fingers into his chest and rip the heart out. The kid is crippled, too. He'd be no match at all. I even have to deal with that moronic tauren guy, who goes to battle wearing a baby arounc his neck, and who openly undermines garrosh from day one. Absurd.

    Ah well. Of course, what I want to be the case isn't the case, and hasn't been the case for quite some time. The orcs initiated their bitchification process somewhere prior to WC3. But I can still dream! Garrosh represented my dream... short-lived though it was.

  11. #491
    Sylvanas has style, she isn't evil, in D&D alignment system she would be "Chaotic Neutral" with some "naughty" flare. Everything she does is either to protect her people, ensure their survival or out of revenge (Arthas). She is also a great tactician and strategist.

    While Garrosh is nothing more than an ugly spoiled brat driven by impulses and lust for power.

    Sylvanas is much more in depth character. And I think the only person who allmost managed to take down Arthas 1vs1 during WC3 The Frozen Throne (Kel'Thuzad saved him).

  12. #492
    Quote Originally Posted by RadamentX View Post
    Sylvanas has style, she isn't evil, in D&D alignment system she would be "Chaotic Neutral" with some "naughty" flare..
    Thats nonsense, she is neutral evil. chaotic neutral are for the crazy characters. She has plans for her plague and still develops a new one. You must have missed to play through all the quests with her or watching her speeches in gilneas and silverpine. What you descripe is their propaganda. Watch her cutscenes when garrosh or an orc commander just left the screen.
    Last edited by Tyrannica; 2013-08-21 at 05:51 PM.

  13. #493
    Quote Originally Posted by Kangodo View Post
    Read up on the lore, they aren't hating it nor do they feel like they are suffering.

    That's why they have the option of going back to being death.

    Same as above.
    Well yes, that is quite clear.
    You are unable to set aside your bias that all zombies are evil, which makes Forsaken-discussions impossible.


    To use the famous words of Monty Python: "Well I didn't vote for you."
    In case you missed it: He is trying to execute all the people who disobey his orders, including Sylvanas.
    And again I would like to ask what exactly is evil about not following orders?
    Hey there! Don't know if you're still following this thread, but I figured I'd throw something out for you to chew on.

    First off, questing has to be viewed as a timeline. Events in Tirisfal happen before Silverpine, before WPL. We can work with Tirisfal > Silverpine > Hillsbrad > WPL pretty easily.

    In Tirisfal, new players are greeted, and informed they have a choice. Live or die. They pick to live, so they remain a member of the Forsaken and begin undertaking small missions.

    They get to Silverpine and witness many more resurrections. But something goes wrong. One of the newly resurrected Forsaken does what is in all honesty, the most likely thing for a newly raised Forsaken to do. Godfrey shoots Sylvanas right in the head, because she's still his enemy. He then breaks away and becomes a massive thorn in her side for a while.

    Surprisingly, from my memory, Hillsbrad doesn't have a -ton- of resurrecting going on in it. It's just plague this, plague that, traitor, traitor, abduct some Alliance forces, so on so forth.

    The next time you really see the Val'kyr in full on conversion mode is in WPL. And you yourself are given the task of taking her around to rez up dead Alliance to fight for Andorhal. But their reactions are... odd. Quotes like
    "I suppose I serve the Horde now."
    They stand up and, without much, or any communication from the Val'kyr or player, wage war against the Alliance. Just like that.

    Isn't it likely, that the timeline is thus?
    Tirisfal= No problems. Corpses allowed to retain free will upon return. High convergence rate.
    Silverpine= Slight snag. Godfrey killed Sylvanas. Clearly this freewill thing is a bit dangerous.
    Hillsbrad= Now we're abducting live SI:7 guys instead of killing them. Why?
    WPL= No more Mr. Nice undeath. They will be slaves and they will be used to kill their one time commander and friends, seconds after being reanimated.

    It's at least a little fishy, no?

  14. #494
    I like Sylvanas better because Garrosh is just a storytelling tool. Agressive counterpart to Varian in Wotlk, then suddenly the honorable klingon-like leader in Cata with Blizzard telling us that we have to like him and then (probably as a reaction to the alliance complaining) now now suddenly a stupid GARROSH SMASH ! villain to have him as a raidboss. Whats to like there ? He's just not believable as a character.
    Sylvanas on the other hand is. She is evil but not supid-evil and her character made a constant, believable development.

  15. #495
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivion View Post
    WPL= No more Mr. Nice undeath. They will be slaves and they will be used to kill their one time commander and friends, seconds after being reanimated.
    Weren't some of the newly reanimated Forsaken just overwhelmed by blind rage, and after that subsided, they either returned to grave or just continued to (un)live. And that forced obedience thing in WPL was removed in beta.

  16. #496
    Warchief Lime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Over There
    Posts
    2,017
    Here, I'll make this easy for you.

    Which makes for a more interesting character? An evil strategist (Sylvanas) or an arrogant brute that probably couldn't spell his name on a piece of paper (Garrosh).

    Big thanks to Yoni for making this Avatar and Signature!

  17. #497
    Quote Originally Posted by Mokaproductionist View Post
    Weren't some of the newly reanimated Forsaken just overwhelmed by blind rage, and after that subsided, they either returned to grave or just continued to (un)live. And that forced obedience thing in WPL was removed in beta.
    I could get blind rage, but their comments don't reflect that. They seem rather matter of fact instead, as if it's a foregone conclusion.

  18. #498
    Moderator MoanaLisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Posts
    11,964
    The whole 'she's hot, he's not' thing has its place but is a juvenile reason to prefer one over the other. Sylvanas has more interesting motives for what she does and seems to be a lot more complex. There's also a sense that you never really quite know what's going on with her. From a player perspective that's usually a bit more interesting. Garrosh at this point is a cartoon villain.
    If you have anything to contribute to a thread topic, please do so. Discussing moderation or calling out specific people is against the rules and makes a post liable for an infraction. Please report problem posts. If anyone is unclear about the rules please read our FAQ. Thanks.

    It's a magical world, Hobbes, ol' buddy...let's go exploring!

  19. #499
    Quote Originally Posted by Gelannerai View Post
    But it kind of does in the context of the story. She abandoned them to commit suicide. She went into the afterlife not knowing that the Valkyr could pull a magical res out of their backsides. Sylvanas completely washed her hands of the Forsaken in that moment, despite the fact that so many of them look upon her as some sort of divine savior. And again, I'm not saying she doesn't have feelings. What I'm saying is that she doesn't feel she has any obligation towards her people past using them as a safety-net to keep from going back to the void.
    "Your people will perish!" said the dark-haired Val'kyr. She had clearly been the youngest of the battlemaidens in life and was now the most impatient in her undeath.

    Sylvanas thought about her people. They had come far from their decimated origins, the yearning, confused mob of fresh corpses huddled about the ruins of Lordaeron's wrecked capital. The Forsaken were truly a nation now: a fetid, gore-caked, hideous mass of lifeless husks, skilled in combat, devastating with the arcane arts, and unhindered by fetters of morality. They had been honed into the perfect weapon. Her weapon. And they had struck the killing blow for which she had built them. She cared nothing for their fate.

    "Let them perish!" Sylvanas cried. "I am finished with them!"
    (Italics not added)

    I see Kangodo's point. It does show that she made them for that one purpose and it was done, but why is she getting all worked up over them dying? If she really didn't care, she would be indifferent and emotionless when shown that vision.



    EDIT: Sylvanas was pretty pissed and emotional when she thought the Alliance were burning the Forsaken and the thought that they were being destroyed:

    Within the city walls, bonfires raged. Sylvanas seethed; the Alliance was already burning the corpses. No. Wait. She tried to make sense out of the clouded vision. The few Forsaken who remain are throwing themselves into the bonfires, she realized, rather than facing their executioners.

    "This isn't real!" Sylvanas announced, her voice echoing in her head and sounding as it had when she had been alive. Were her people really so weak? No—no! Garrosh had all but murdered the best of her troops in his own wasteful campaigns. The Forsaken leadership had been gutted. That was what these visions showed.
    Last edited by Aquamonkey; 2013-08-21 at 07:31 PM.
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    I'm determined to someday make Med'an awesome. (MickyNeilson)

    ´So.. sorry to bring this up but..you know that .."thing" (Med'an).. is that "thing" cannon still?
    ...as much have some have wished otherwise, yes. (Loreology)

  20. #500
    Titan Kangodo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    13,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivion View Post
    The next time you really see the Val'kyr in full on conversion mode is in WPL. And you yourself are given the task of taking her around to rez up dead Alliance to fight for Andorhal. But their reactions are... odd. Quotes like
    "I suppose I serve the Horde now."
    They stand up and, without much, or any communication from the Val'kyr or player, wage war against the Alliance. Just like that.

    Isn't it likely, that the timeline is thus?
    Tirisfal= No problems. Corpses allowed to retain free will upon return. High convergence rate.
    Silverpine= Slight snag. Godfrey killed Sylvanas. Clearly this freewill thing is a bit dangerous.
    Hillsbrad= Now we're abducting live SI:7 guys instead of killing them. Why?
    WPL= No more Mr. Nice undeath. They will be slaves and they will be used to kill their one time commander and friends, seconds after being reanimated.

    It's at least a little fishy, no?
    Yes, seems like you can make anything look fishy if you are looking for random quotes.
    But do you have any proof that the undead have no free will?
    Or are you basing that entire theory on only one quote?

    Tirisfal: No problem, most people join the Forsaken.
    Silverpine: Godfrey kills Sylvanas.
    Hillsbrand: Interrogate Alliance-members.
    WPL: You ress an undead and he joins the Forsaken.
    Doesn't sound fishy anymore.

Posting Permissions

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