Lore Interview with Dave Kosak

[Talen]

attacking the Horde Warchief and capital isnt beneficial?
Hell of lot benefits the Alliance more than the Horde, we lose our Warchief and all those warriors who could otherwise be on our side

We lose a Warchief we have rejected and don't follow or obey. We liberate a city he currently holds from warriors who have rejected us.
We are more united than ever as we share a common goal in doing this.

And the Alliance get to tag along and help us, and appear to be headed towards an ending where exactly NONE of their war aims are fulfilled. Indeed, Varian simply agreeing to walk out of Org would be a reasonable excuse for the Alliance to turn on him, given that in doing so he would have essentially backstabbed his own allies

So no - an assault that doesn't help the Alliance but helps its enemies isn't something I'd see as beneficial. But then again, I'm still waiting to see how a rebellion that has the Orcs, Trolls, BElfs, Forsaken, Taurne, Pandaren and Goblins on the same side, working towards the same goal is somehow indicative of the Horde being disunited. Or how an Alliance that was united in Vanilla, TBC, LK and Cata suddenly deserves to make a big deal out of an aspect that was always there.

EJL

[Dreknar20]

Pity we probably wouldn't even get that in-game. :/

eventually we will have another "Admiral Proudmoore' moment.
Somethin to remind the Horde/Alliance - 'wait a sec, we are supposed to hate each other arnt we? How could we forget..........'

- - - Updated - - -

We are more united than ever as we share a common goal in doing this.

Does not replace the thousands of lives lost by the Kor'kron and the rebels, and the destruction we are inflicting tou our own homeland and city.
No matter their affiliation, they are all Horde, rebels or loyalists. What both sides lose is what the Horde loses. Thats why its called a civil war.

[Sett]

Well this thread got derailed hard

o_o Indeed.


I'm hoping lore interviews happen more often though.

[Talen]

Does not replace the thousands of lives lost by the Kor'kron and the rebels, and the destruction we are inflicting tou our own homeland and city.
No matter their affiliation, they are all Horde, rebels or loyalists. What both sides lose is what the Horde loses. Thats why its called a civil war.

The trouble is...Blizzard hasn't gone to any great lengths to show that.

Its **SAYS** The Horde is crumbling...but its showing the internal factions of the Horde as bound more tightly and more united than ever.
Sure, the Horde will be weaker...but you an I both know thats going to have zero effect in game. The Horde will enter the next Xpac with just as many flightpoints and quests and bases as the Alliance, just as many NPCs. The best that might be hoped for is fewer Orcs....but not much more. Blizzards emphasis on balance, even when its unnecessary or even detrimental, will ensure that is the case.

Lorewise - the Horde SHOULD be shattered. It should be crumbling. It should already be broken. And noone should be trying to fix it.
Vol'jins notion of family is another plot device that is meaningless and baseless. The Orcs don't care about anyone else, the Goblins would sell the Horde down the river, LT doesn't care for anything outside his people and Sylvanas would toss the world to the first race to grant her guaranteed immortality. But there they are in Org...fighting together to hold and support a faction none of them really care for.

And all this is supposed to represent disunity.

EJL

[Scummer]

Hmm if the Alliance are actually there approving of a new Warchief I'll be very happy and agree with the rest of the leaders then I can see that being an ok portion of the Alliance story conclusion. By "there" I mean they are actually talking this through with the Horde rather than simply saying "you guys can pick a new leader, I'm out of here". That way we get to do something proactive that directly shapes the other faction in a way that is in the end unique to us as a conclusion.

That would really be the Alliance holding a blade to the Horde and saying "This guy knows his stuff, don't fuck up again or we'll be back".

Ofcourse acknowledging land disputes being over will be grand. That's what really escalated the skirmishes into the war and is what really got the Alliance up in arms. It's only natural for this to resolved in the near future.

I've frankly given up on the idea of a "fist pumping moment". It's been far more toxic than good to the story have this looming event that people will enjoy on the horizon. I don't really care for it, just give us a good ending and move onto a story arc that isn't completely limited by gameplay mechanics.

I've gotta say though that while I often don't agree with some of his views on the current story, he certainly seems like a fun guy.

[Verdugo]

The trouble is...Blizzard hasn't gone to any great lengths to show that.

When was any loss of life shown at all in lore. Alliance is still throwing endless legions at every part of the world even though they were in a state of population decay since First war.

[yetgdhfgh]

Great Interview btw Jesse enjoyed it alot

Please make more wow videos in the future i do miss them alot

[Deleted]

That "Alliance FIST-PUMP! moment" was an unnecessary trouble since its conception:

-General mistake:

>Playing along the immediate wants and lusts of playerbase, rather than getting concerned with long-term effects and/or devising an alternative option [i.e - immersion factor in scenarios that involve loss or failure, potential "fun" of such moments] that would be more viable than playing "Europa Universalis" with 'who gets to control more zones' as a reward in itself.

-a mistake that should have NEVER happened:

>Metzen openly and repeatedly announcing the 'Fist PUMP! Moment!' was one big-ass mistake in itself.

How would people react if Dalaran scenario ended up as an unexpected 'surprise' rather than something to fill the Fist-pump quota? We will never know, we can only speculate.

How people reacted to Dalaran scenario in the face of 'Fist pumping' being Blizz-confirmed? -An average of a few outraged threads every single day, with even more people disappointed yet not caring enough to voice their opinion on the internet. With the confirmation of eponymous 'fist pump moment', every single perceived inequality, every harm or loss experienced directly transformed into ever growing expectation that already couldn't have been sated.

Sure, no news from Metzen would have pissed off a good few folks back then on the grounds of inactivity, but how many more have been infuriated with the 'paradise' that their Metzen-prophecied 'religion' granted them for their cheaply bought patience?

[Icaras]

I knew we wouldn't get anything re: Turalyon, but I'm still massively disappointed every time blizz dodge the question

It also makes me really sad re: Rhonin in cataclysm (It really did bug me that he didn't interact with Deathwing AT ALL!) but it knowing that it was just a case of no dev time to fit him in takes (only a little!) a little of the sting out.

[Singularity]

Could the fact that the Aspects turned mortal make it possible for them to become playable races?

[Deleted]

That "Alliance FIST-PUMP! moment" was an unnecessary trouble since its conception:

-General mistake:

>Playing along the immediate wants and lusts of playerbase, rather than getting concerned with long-term effects and/or devising an alternative option [i.e - immersion factor in scenarios that involve loss or failure, potential "fun" of such moments] that would be more viable than playing "Europa Universalis" with 'who gets to control more zones' as a reward in itself.

-a mistake that should have NEVER happened:

>Metzen openly and repeatedly announcing the 'Fist PUMP! Moment!' was one big-ass mistake in itself.

How would people react if Dalaran scenario ended up as an unexpected 'surprise' rather than something to fill the Fist-pump quota? We will never know, we can only speculate.

How people reacted to Dalaran scenario in the face of 'Fist pumping' being Blizz-confirmed? -An average of a few outraged threads every single day, with even more people disappointed yet not caring enough to voice their opinion on the internet. With the confirmation of eponymous 'fist pump moment', every single perceived inequality, every harm or loss experienced directly transformed into ever growing expectation that already couldn't have been sated.

Sure, no news from Metzen would have pissed off a good few folks back then on the grounds of inactivity, but how many more have been infuriated with the 'paradise' that their Metzen-prophecied 'religion' granted them for their cheaply bought patience?

The situation in which Metzen had to give half of the player base some reassurance with that "promise", shouldn't have occured in the first place.
They should had taken their time in Cataclysm to flesh out the Alliance leveling experience, no matter what. Believe me, if the hadn't giving promises, the outrage about Theramore would have been a lot more.
The "Alliance FIST-PUMP moment" and all the "wait for it, Alliance's getting their time", were just PR-moves to control the damage that they themselves created with Cataclysm.

[Gamevizier]

To be honest, I don't even care we just killed a few blood elves in Dalaran, my problem with it is... that it doesn't matter, Dalaran won't be anywhere, ever. It's like that "victory" never even existed, Dalaran could have crashed in the sea and Jaina took the survivors from the amount of Kirin Tor we see after we capture Dalaran.

Blizz : Well in that case we're gonna show that in the game ASAP!! an Alliance floating city crashing down onto the ground!? it's gonna be awesome! we'll show a crate with a few crashed ruins and a few charred bodies!

but we're not gonna take our time showing an Alliance-controled Dalaran in game you know... "too much work".

[Talen]

Hmm if the Alliance are actually there approving of a new Warchief I'll be very happy and agree with the rest of the leaders then I can see that being an ok portion of the Alliance story conclusion. By "there" I mean they are actually talking this through with the Horde rather than simply saying "you guys can pick a new leader, I'm out of here".

I can't see the Alliance having a veto. As for "allow"...it's most probably they did nothing to stop it, rather than an explicit permission. It'll be more a case of the Horde electing someone they think the Alliance won't mind too much.

Unfortunately, that's Lorthemar. Who is a pretty poor choice. Or Baine...who is inexperienced. Between the two...Baine probably the better choice for a Horde leader. He actually believes in the faction.

Ofcourse acknowledging land disputes being over will be grand. That's what really escalated the skirmishes into the war and is what really got the Alliance up in arms. It's only natural for this to resolved in the near future.

I've frankly given up on the idea of a "fist pumping moment". It's been far more toxic than good to the story have this looming event that people will enjoy on the horizon. I don't really care for it, just give us a good ending and move onto a story arc that isn't completely limited by gameplay mechanics.

It is too late in the day for the Alliance to get the story they deserve, the story they need. So we can expect this griping to continue for the next year.

The best - the absolute best - that Alliance players can hope for at the minute is for an ending that makes sense, an ending that treats them with respect, and ending that doesn't treat them as losers, an ending that hopefully could engender some feeling of faction pride, a sense that they accomplished something even if its just in the lore. Right now, even that seems unlikely. What is perhaps "reasonable" is an ending to the Xpac that doesn't portray the Alliance quite so much as losers, wimps and suckers as the current set up promises to show.

The situation in which Metzen had to give half of the player base some reassurance with that "promise", shouldn't have occured in the first place.
They should had taken their time in Cataclysm to flesh out the Alliance leveling experience, no matter what. Believe me, if the hadn't giving promises, the outrage about Theramore would have been a lot more.
The "Alliance FIST-PUMP moment" and all the "wait for it, Alliance's getting their time", were just PR-moves to control the damage that they themselves created with Cataclysm.

True or not it does feel that way.

And unfortunately, that in turns means Alliance players are less likely to accept their reassurances now. Blizzards idea of faction development turned out to be making everyone look bad so Varian could look good and making Anduin a neutral character who praises the Hordes honor.

But yes - promising that "fist bump" moment was a mistake.

EJL

[Deleted]

So according to Blizzard patch 5.1 is the full scale war between the Horde and Alliance?
Yeah, they failed to deliver big time then. Go compare the action in patch 5.1 to any of the older Warcraft RTS games, then you'll understand it's not a full scale war.

He was right about the Alliance 'fist pump moment' though. If the Horde got to siege Stormwind people would've cried even more. How do you dare to complain when you're sieging the enemy capital city and defeating their leader? I wish I could do that as a Horde player.

Do you want all the zones the Alliance lost in Cataclysm to go back to the Alliance? Won't happen as the Horde had less zones since vanilla and Cataclysm only balanced it out.

Do you want to completely destroy Orgrimmar or enforce martial law? Yeah, that's a lot of fun for Horde players.

He is right, there is no way the Alliance can get more out of this without alienating the Horde players from the franchise.

- - - Updated - - -

True or not it does feel that way.

The reason the Horde leveling experience in Cataclysm was more fleshed out than the Alliance is because the Alliance side has been more fleshed out since vanilla. Cataclysm gave the Horde more attention because they were lacking compared to the Alliance. They had less leveling zones so Blizzard gave the Horde some victories to balance things out.

Please go compare Alliance and Horde controlled zones between vanilla and Cataclysm and you'll understand. What you see in Cataclysm is Blizzard favouring Horde, but you don't understand why they did it, they're completely fair in making that choice.

[Deleted]

Amazing how someone can talk for 30 minutes and still tell us jack shit about anything. He can´t even answer simple yes or no questions.

[Talen]

He was right about the Alliance 'fist pump moment' though. If the Horde got to siege Stormwind people would've cried even more.

Is there a big outcry from the Horde? No...there isn't. If developed properly, there wouldn't be one from the Alliance either.

How do you dare to complain when you're sieging the enemy capital city and defeating their leader? I wish I could do that as a Horde player.

We are. Garrosh isn't our Warchief anymore and Orgrimmar isn't really our city. It's HIS city.

Do you want all the zones the Alliance lost in Cataclysm to go back to the Alliance? Won't happen as the Horde had less zones since vanilla and Cataclysm only balanced it out.

Completely and utterly ridiculous for that to be so. Zone count has no impact on the game Its one thing Blizzard shouldn't balance around.

Do you want to completely destroy Orgrimmar or enforce martial law? Yeah, that's a lot of fun for Horde players.

Some Alliance players do...and it is the best response open to the Alliance. At the same time, most Alliance players simply want to have some impact and a decent story and development.

He is right, there is no way the Alliance can get more out of this without alienating the Horde players from the franchise.

But its fine the other way? The Alliance hasn't actually gotten much out of the franchise for the past 3 or 4 years.

The reason the Horde leveling experience in Cataclysm was more fleshed out than the Alliance is because the Alliance side has been more fleshed out since vanilla.

That the Horde experience needed to be improved is beyond question. Did it require the Alliance experience to be destroyed in the process? No. But that's effectively what happened.

Cataclysm gave the Horde more attention because they were lacking compared to the Alliance. They had less leveling zones so Blizzard gave the Horde some victories to balance things out.

Which was an incredibly dumb and stupid thing to do because it removed content and gameplay from the Alliance. And they can't even fall back on balance reasons....because little things like zone count doesn't affect balance or gameplay.

Please go compare Alliance and Horde controlled zones between vanilla and Cataclysm and you'll understand. What you see in Cataclysm is Blizzard favouring Horde, but you don't understand why they did it, they're completely fair in making that choice.

No, they aren't. They completely botched the Cataclysm upgrade. They should NEVER have removed content from the Alliance. They should NEVER balance around zone count. Blizzard favored the Horde for no reason save to favor the Horde. Did the Horde experience need to be improved? Yes. Did that require the Alliance experience to be destroyed? No...it most certainly did not.

EJL

[Deleted]

The Alliance is getting the biggest victory of all which you are apart of, the sieging the main enemy city and killing its leader. I think that kind makes up for that.

True, but it depends how it will be portrayed, we don't know all the lore tidbits yet. Look for example at the Horde rebellion thing, you'd think the Alliance would do something epic too, yet we got robo-cat. So, I shall wait before I pass my final judgement of the raid.

You weren't there to experience stopping Garrosh's plans in 5.1?
You weren't there to experience kicking the BElves out of Dalaran?
Maybe you didn't see the Horde completely dissolving, and only got a tease of the Alliance coming together.
You don't get to experience marching into Orgrimmar, taking an enemy capital, killing every orc in sight, killing the Warchief, then allowing the Horde to pick a successor that the Alliance can work with?

It's called the Sunreaver Onslaught, but if you payed attention, they got rolled into Rommath's Magister forces. The operation on IoT is personally led by Lor'themar. To pretend that it's only Sunreavers is disingenuous or misinformed.

So let me get this straight, all the things I should be proud of are in fact missions where we barely defended something (5.1, stopping Garrosh's plans), taking Dalaran (which was not reflected in-game anywhere, as I don't see it anywhere... unlike the Horde victories which I see everywhere) and my Alliance, which was founded as an alliance of nations, not a place where one nation holds the reigns of others... becoming a dictatorship of one nation? Yea, I sure am proud! *sarcasm*

Is it so hard to show the places where Alliance does something of their own, not as a response to something the Horde does, but of their own they attack something? It seems it is, since everything you pointed out is just because of an event the Horde did. We stopped Garrosh because Garrosh was doing some crazy shit, we took Dalaran because the blood elves passed through it to steal the Divine Bell, we united because... well I still am not sure about why we did this.
Also, I didn't get to experience the taking of Orgrimmar yet. And as I said, it all depends on how it is played. If we just go in the raid, kill Garrosh, come out yet nothing has changed ever... why would I be happy? In the end, wherever I go, I see phased Horde victories yet if Orgrimmar will be perfect and intact in the outer world... the whole attack will end up having no meaning. Plus, let's be honest... we don't know which version of SoO is cannon, do we? The Horde one, or the Alliance one? That's the whole issue.

- - - Updated - - -

Why does that matter?

When you're in the Deadmines and are killing Defias humans, do you feel as if you're actually killing Alliance or just some random "evil" faction?

[Enosh]

Canonically, the Alliance wins and puts pressure on the rebels to play ball after the dust settles.

nothing in the story supports this
the horde wins their own civil war, the alliance is there for the ride

Then when you call him out, he backpedals harder than a kid about to wipe out on his bike.

which was only put in after a massive outcry and the point still stand, he didn't contact the alliance and he doesn't need them if he is willing to threaten them the moment they offer help
so if he doesn't need the alliance to win it means the alliance has no effect whatsoever on the story, the story would play out exactly the same if blizzard tomorrow removed the alliance

Leaving a massive power vacuum, given the orcish power structure and that of the Horde as a whole.

a vauum that's filled 5 mins after it is over

Happy is an odd term for "having their peoples' continued lifespan essentially held hostage for fear of retaliation or needing the Horde to avoid getting a boot in the ass from the Alliance." Under Garrosh, the others went with his plan because the alternative was either get hit hard by the Alliance as a repercussion for his war efforts, or get hit hard by the Horde for being traitors.
oh the poor poor horde

I'm sure they cried out in pain about their suffering as they were murdering alliance children

edit: Just look at the events in the 5.1 Horde questlines. Early on, Garrosh attempts to have Vol'jin assassinated because Vol'jin refuses to go along with his plan. Then, in the short story The Blank Scroll, Lorewalker Shuchun details how things would have gone if the goblins got their hands on the scroll. Gallywix hides it deep in his vaults, and Garrosh sends the entire Horde after the Bilgewaters because he thinks the only reason Gallywix would hide a weapon from him is for treasonous purposes.

hence my point that no one in the horde at any point gave a fuck if garrosh was going to genocide the whole alliance but they only turned against him once he became incontinent for them

He was right about the Alliance 'fist pump moment' though. If the Horde got to siege Stormwind people would've cried even more. How do you dare to complain when you're sieging the enemy capital city and defeating their leader? I wish I could do that as a Horde player.

because we are doing jack shit except being along for the ride in a horde story
and I would gladly siege stormwind if it came along with all the context as the orgrimar siege does, aka 1 expansion of no meaningful horde story full of alliance wins, siege of stormwind revolving around the reason the alliance is there and their internal conflict story, something to do for all alliance races while horde plays around with robo wolf and does fuck all except run errands for one of the alliance leaders

context fucking matters

[Deleted]

What the Horde does: Redeems themselves, lead in a glorious charge by their greatest heroes of the modern era.
What the Alliance does: Helps the Horde redeem themselves, lead by the Horde's heroes while not making the Horde do anything to end the decades of genocidal war that the people they're helping participated in.

Exactly, and this is why the whole end of arc is bad storytelling for the Alliance. As it stands, we have it confirmed, there won't even be that new shiny Alliance base of Dalaran anywhere.
"but it would make problems for the land below" So put it over the sea, seeing it in the distance shooting fireballs. It's not rocket science.

[Verdugo]

When you're in the Deadmines and are killing Defias humans, do you feel as if you're actually killing Alliance or just some random "evil" faction?

In the end, they are humans, certain percentage of their genepool gets obliterated, making it harder for them to continue.