Fate of Sylvanas Loyalist Players

[Kumorii]

Inwould rather help Saurfang then Sylvanas. Sorry, i just grew up with an upbringing that teaches to value moral integrity over a short term gains especially under circumstances like in BfA (aka World literally dying from a stab wound).

Find it a bit odd to equate real life morals with in game ones...especially when we go a round and kill things for very ambiguous moral reasons... like meeting some new group of people and they just ask us to murder a bunch of others they don't like and we just go "sweet, kill those fuckers I don't know because it gives me a reward". *shrug*

usually my take on in game morals and ethics is just "lets see what happens" and rarely "this is right" or "this is wrong". Currently I find the saurfang and baine path to be a boring so I would not take part in it. Granted, the reason why I went with sylvanas is due to them not releasing any information on wtf she is doing so it's more about choosing a hidden dumpster fire over the obvious dumpster fire.

Different strokes for different folks I guess.

[VladlTutushkin]

Find it a bit odd to equate real life morals with in game ones...especially when we go a round and kill things for very ambiguous moral reasons... like meeting some new group of people and they just ask us to murder a bunch of others they don't like and we just go "sweet, kill those fuckers I don't know because it gives me a reward". *shrug*

usually my take on in game morals and ethics is just "lets see what happens" and rarely "this is right" or "this is wrong". Currently I find the saurfang and baine path to be a boring so I would not take part in it. Granted, the reason why I went with sylvanas is due to them not releasing any information on wtf she is doing so it's more about choosing a hidden dumpster fire over the obvious dumpster fire.

Different strokes for different folks I guess.

There is a lot of difference between usual quests and something like we dealing with now. Plus whole “lets wipe all Alliance/potentially all living” is so wrong that i would rather not. Say she “wins” and wipes out Alliance. Like she planned - with mass slaughter of Stormwind and then maybe going for some extras in Redridge and other human controlled areas. Finishing off night elfs entirely, hunting down whatever stragglers left and so and such... and then Horde weakened by the war faces Old Gods on the rise with possibility of even a Void Lord showing up and problem of a Sword is STILL unresolved. Plus all Alliance remnants will be so desperate at that point that they might as well start joining Old Gods in hopes of revenge. Thats not a winning scenario, not at all.

[Super Dickmann]

Illidan's motivation was never revealed to be selfless. Rather he was an extreme version of "The end justifies the means" were his means were EVIL in all caps but the end was defending against the universe-spanning armies of Satan. And that was never really in question; we knew Illidan was willing to fight the Legion back in WotA, he fought the undead for his people in WC3, he was forced to serve because KJ was much stronger than him and could squash him like a bug but then he did his best to rebel against him. In TBC the Legion is fighting against Illidan's forces in Outland and Kael betrays Illidan for the Legion. The book simply made it more clear and removed that silly "Illidan is just insane" storyline that was just moronic in the first place and was never more than an opinion from Malfurion anyway. Illidan was and still is a dick. He is just a dick who is on our side.

With Sylvanas we still have no idea what she is planning. Is she doing something for the Horde that she needs to keep secret? Is her plan for the good of everyone? Does she believe it is for the good of everyone but it is super twisted? Is it just a way to keep herself safe? Is it a way for her to gain ultimate power MUAHAHAHA? Who the fuck knows.

Illidan in Legion is leagues better than Illidan in TBC, but they still changed his motive. While Illidan did oppose the Legion, he was ultimately a self-serving character. He wanted to protect his home, sure, but he was also scared of KJ and his wrath (see his reaction when KJ pops up) and he was easily baited in by promises of power, like the Skull of Gul'dan. Before the Illidan book there was no indication that Illidan ever had larger schemes in mind to devastate the Legion, so much as he was cutting his own fiefdom into being to oppose the Legion and escape KJ's retribution.

As said, I don't mind the character change, it's better than TBC, but it also is a bit different from his WC3 self, at least until he does things like pop open a portal to Argus to chance everything on it, blasting Xe'ra or staying behind vs Sarg. All good moments for him as far as I'm concerned.

Sylvanas is a mess. Again, the only thing i'm hoping for is that she isn't just a patsy of N'zoth. The character is already wrecked but she doesn't need that particular stake through the heart.

[Kumorii]

There is a lot of difference between usual quests and something like we dealing with now. Plus whole “lets wipe all Alliance/potentially all living” is so wrong that i would rather not. Say she “wins” and wipes out Alliance. Like she planned - with mass slaughter of Stormwind and then maybe going for some extras in Redridge and other human controlled areas. Finishing off night elfs entirely, hunting down whatever stragglers left and so and such... and then Horde weakened by the war faces Old Gods on the rise with possibility of even a Void Lord showing up and problem of a Sword is STILL unresolved. Plus all Alliance remnants will be so desperate at that point that they might as well start joining Old Gods in hopes of revenge. Thats not a winning scenario, not at all.

Well, as I said... I don't really care for winning or losing when it comes to games on a moral leve or just outcome. I usually go with what I find is more interesting. What you describe is more interesting than peace between the two factions.

[VladlTutushkin]

Well, as I said... I don't really care for winning or losing when it comes to games on a moral leve or just outcome. I usually go with what I find is more interesting. What you describe is more interesting than peace between the two factions.

Well, i dont find mass murdering civvies interesting. It is no fun to go around beating unarmed and eating babies. I mean... even from gameplay perspective. All she has to offer is that. Plus gas warfare which is despite being effective (if your enemy is a moron who forgets that they have gasmasks) is not interesting.

[Kumorii]

Well, i dont find mass murdering civvies interesting. It is no fun to go around beating unarmed and eating babies. I mean... even from gameplay perspective. All she has to offer is that. Plus gas warfare which is despite being effective (if your enemy is a moron who forgets that they have gasmasks) is not interesting.

You wrote a lot more in your previous quote which is what I said was more interesting than peace. But even then what you now wrote is also more interesting, since peace just brings nothing. Anything is better and more interesting than doing nothing.

Another example is bioshock. I went through it twice, once for saving the girls and one for extracting them. Because I wanted to see what happened and not because of a moral choice.

[VladlTutushkin]

You wrote a lot more in your previous quote which is what I said was more interesting than peace. But even then what you now wrote is also more interesting, since peace just brings nothing. Anything is better and more interesting than doing nothing.

Another example is bioshock. I went through it twice, once for saving the girls and one for extracting them. Because I wanted to see what happened and not because of a moral choice.

Not committing atrocities dosent mean doing nothing.

[Kumorii]

Not committing atrocities dosent mean doing nothing.

Peace means nothing when it comes to gameplay. Almost all gameplay is based on some sort of conflict. Even if we have peace we will have conflicts... But that is not peace bringing gameplay. Which is why I don't care for Baine or saurfang since it's boring.

[VladlTutushkin]

Peace means nothing when it comes to gameplay. Almost all gameplay is based on some sort of conflict. Even if we have peace we will have conflicts... But that is not peace bringing gameplay. Which is why I don't care for Baine or saurfang since it's boring.

You are... not to say shallow, but i think you just not into games with lore , but more about action.

[Kumorii]

You are... not to say shallow, but i think you just not into games with lore , but more about action.

On the contrary. Nier automata is great story writing and tackles the concept of purpose and what it means to be conscious and human. However the gameplay is tied to conflict.

If nier automata was just peace there wouldn't be anything to play. It's due to that conflict you get immersed in that story telling. If they tried to tell the story and meaning in a peaceful way there joust wouldn't be any gameplay and then I would prefer watching a movie.

Same goes for metal gear, especially phantom pain. That story tackles questions about morality and ends justify the means, but once again. The gameplay is tied to conflicts.

Let me ask you, what sort of gameplay would be tied to peace? Only thing we would do gameplay related is gather resources and transport resources from outpost to outpost or city to city.

Wows gameplay is definitely tied to conflicts without conflicts the gameplay wouldn't exist since it's all about casting spells and dispatching enemies.

Your assumptions are your projections at best. Ignorant at worst. Even then I don't particularly find peace to be thrilling when it comes to story either... Not sure why peace would be equated to good story while conflicts or "action" as you call it would equate to bad story. Both of them can be written both good or bad... But only conflicts translate to gameplay, thus I prefer it in games since it can give two things instead of just one.

[VladlTutushkin]

On the contrary. Nier automata is great story writing and tackles the concept of purpose and what it means to be conscious and human. However the gameplay is tied to conflict.

If nier automata was just peace there wouldn't be anything to play. It's due to that conflict you get immersed in that story telling. If they tried to tell the story and meaning in a peaceful way there joust wouldn't be any gameplay and then I would prefer watching a movie.

Same goes for metal gear, especially phantom pain. That story tackles questions about morality and ends justify the means, but once again. The gameplay is tied to conflicts.

Let me ask you, what sort of gameplay would be tied to peace? Only thing we would do gameplay related is gather resources and transport resources from outpost to outpost or city to city.

Wows gameplay is definitely tied to conflicts without conflicts the gameplay wouldn't exist since it's all about casting spells and dispatching enemies.

Your assumptions are your projections at best. Ignorant at worst. Even then I don't particularly find peace to be thrilling when it comes to story either... Not sure why peace would be equated to good story while conflicts or "action" as you call it would equate to bad story. Both of them can be written both good or bad... But only conflicts translate to gameplay, thus I prefer it in games since it can give two things instead of just one.

You also severely missed the point of well... everything i said. And also dramatized to the extreme. Usual pro-sylvanas poster sadly, when out of arguments - mock your opponent. I said that i dont like the methods, not the lack of conflicts. And even if Horde/Alliance are at peace there will be other factions to be at conflict with. Non playable factions for example like Scourge, Old Gods and such.

[Kumorii]

You also severely missed the point of well... everything i said. And also dramatized to the extreme. Usual pro-sylvanas poster sadly, when out of arguments - mock your opponent. I said that i dont like the methods, not the lack of conflicts. And even if Horde/Alliance are at peace there will be other factions to be at conflict with. Non playable factions for example like Scourge, Old Gods and such.

Sure you can not like the methods. As I said in the beginning different strokes for different folks... You are the one question me of what I enjoy and prefer and you just recently called me shallow because I don't agree with you on what's enjoyable or what I look for in a game and or story.

Not sure what was mocking except the comment on projection and ignorance but that's because you displayed those traits when saying I'm shallow because I don't want peace or follow Baine and saurfang in wow. Pot kettle black.

Lets not forget how you started the discussion:

Inwould rather help Saurfang then Sylvanas. Sorry, i just grew up with an upbringing that teaches to value moral integrity over a short term gains especially under circumstances like in BfA (aka World literally dying from a stab wound).

Where you attacked my real life morals instantly... yet you say "pro-sylvanas" mock their opponent while I've yet attacked or questioned your taste as being wrong or how it reflects you on as a person... I guess you don't see the hypocrisy in your statement tho.

Not sure why you have such issues with accepting that Im most likely not looking for what you look for. It's ok to have different opinions and desires.

Also what is extreme about my examples? You said I don't like story and I show some great examples of stories I enjoy that tackles subjects that impact me and interests me.

Also, your notion of pro sylvanas is a bit of a stretch since I earlier called it a hidden dumpster fire, I don't find the story to be well executed and reason why I chose sylvanas is not because of sylvanas but because it's the most interesting choice currently in game... for me. Bain and Saurfang is clearly the choice for you... different folks, different strokes.

[Mehrunes]

I'm never going to accept her actions as right and Blizz can't tell me to.

Sure they can. Just like they will tell you Alliance is a poor innocent flower oppressed by the evil Horde even though they repeatedly are the instigators of conflict. Or how honorable Saurfang is even though he's inconsistent as fuck about it to say the least. Or that Anduin is all about peace even though when push came to shove he did nothing about Genn and Rogers acting against it. Because the things Blizzard wants players to believe and tells them to believe are separated by a chasm larger than Valles Marineris on Mars from what they actually wrote in the story.

It reminds of when some people believed that the Legion made Vol'jin choose Sylvanas because of a "master plan" taking place...after they were literally defeated at the end of the previous expansion. Master planning indeed.

Well, it's about as masterful as it gets when it comes to an organization whose main planning guy advertises to the universe how deceitful he is in his very title.

They can always say that she did the wrong things for the right reasons and turn her into some cringy female Illidan.

So Kerrigan?

[Wilfire]

I'm loyal to N'zoth tbh. Haven't removed that eyeball since I first got it.

They should totally make a special scenario for players who kept the gift in which they fight Khadgar 1v1. Like Anakin vs Obi-Wan.

"You were Azeroth's champion! You were supposed to destroy N'Zoth, not join him! You were supposed to heal Azeroth, not doom her!"

[Mehrunes]

We will be hailed as heroes when traitors realise they have worked against the horde by helping saurfang and baine help the alliance war campaign under false premises.

Why are you expecting logical outcomes? The traitors will be the ones hailed as heroes because they are on team kumbaya. As such they get all the applause and none of the repercussions. The exact same shit has been happening the previous time around we had this horseshit rebellion plot. Garrosh had grounds to outright execute Vol'jin for his treason before Cata proper even began. But since Vol'jin was on the first incarnation of team kumbaya, he was immune to the logical repercussions of his treason, no matter how nonsensical it was for him to go unpunished.

[justandulas]

TBF, given who those racial leaders are and what's happening in the Horde in general, I wouldn't mind seeing my chars kicked out as well. Being the Red Alliance isn't appealing to me at all T_T

Same. What crappy writing to force all players to one morality choice that is written for 12 year olds. Every other mmo offers morality choices in game

It’s about time wow caught up to 2002 in that regard

[Mehrunes]

Illidan's motivation was never revealed to be selfless. Rather he was an extreme version of "The end justifies the means" were his means were EVIL in all caps but the end was defending against the universe-spanning armies of Satan. And that was never really in question; we knew Illidan was willing to fight the Legion back in WotA, he fought the undead for his people in WC3, he was forced to serve because KJ was much stronger than him and could squash him like a bug but then he did his best to rebel against him. In TBC the Legion is fighting against Illidan's forces in Outland and Kael betrays Illidan for the Legion. The book simply made it more clear and removed that silly "Illidan is just insane" storyline that was just moronic in the first place and was never more than an opinion from Malfurion anyway. Illidan was and still is a dick. He is just a dick who is on our side.

With Sylvanas we still have no idea what she is planning. Is she doing something for the Horde that she needs to keep secret? Is her plan for the good of everyone? Does she believe it is for the good of everyone but it is super twisted? Is it just a way to keep herself safe? Is it a way for her to gain ultimate power MUAHAHAHA? Who the fuck knows.

Her plans harms the Alliance, so of course it's for the good of everyone and "the end justifies the means" type of deal. Alliance is a malignant tumor upon Azeroth that's willing to doom the world just to stick it to the Horde. What if Sargeras breaks out of his prison and attacks Azeroth again, only to be helped out by yet another moronic and utterly unhinged Alliance attack on the Horde again? Why should Azeroth's fate be risked that way? Sylvanas can have any additional personal motivation she wants, just like Illidan had the motivation of getting into Tyrande's pants, but as long as the end result of crushing the Alliance remains a logical outcome of her war, she's free to have it.

[Athredas]

I just like how nobody even thinks about the possibility of Sylvannas winning this war (which is exactly what is going to happen)

[Mehrunes]

Sylvanas is a mess. Again, the only thing i'm hoping for is that she isn't just a patsy of N'zoth. The character is already wrecked but she doesn't need that particular stake through the heart.

What if she was a patsy of AU Sylvanas?

There is a lot of difference between usual quests and something like we dealing with now. Plus whole “lets wipe all Alliance/potentially all living” is so wrong that i would rather not. Say she “wins” and wipes out Alliance. Like she planned - with mass slaughter of Stormwind and then maybe going for some extras in Redridge and other human controlled areas. Finishing off night elfs entirely, hunting down whatever stragglers left and so and such... and then Horde weakened by the war faces Old Gods on the rise with possibility of even a Void Lord showing up and problem of a Sword is STILL unresolved. Plus all Alliance remnants will be so desperate at that point that they might as well start joining Old Gods in hopes of revenge. Thats not a winning scenario, not at all.

Uh-huh. Because a scenario in which Alliance is not destroyed and Void Lords pop up only for the Alliance to pull their usual stunt and attack the Horde during the Apocalypse for the tenth time while screaming "hurr durr, revenge for the muh betrayal at the Broken Shore" that does nothing but help the apocalyptic threat is a much better outcome.

[baskev]

simple no bad fate at all.
couple of reasons:
- They would not dare to do a other garrosh
- horde already cried about it so she will be good somehow
- alliance always get the short end of the stick in recent years. So somehow her mass murder spree will have no repercussions.
- and if you look at all the leaks ( who i think are fake). In most cases she did it for the greater good. and that ties in to the previous point.