New interview with Steve Danuser about BfA

[Drusin]

Although really unsure why you think race has anything to do with this.

I didn't intend to read too much of this thread, but when I saw his comment about old white men I just knew someone was going to say something about it so I had to read the posts until I found it



I don't approve of the phrase but I understand its usage.

[Aucald]

the problem is what blizz want to do
Blizz went out of their way to confirm to us in Warcrimes book that Garrosh while started popular, lost his popularity pretty fast, and even Thrall's orcs hated him, he only had support of the old horde, a faction that was flat out hostile to Thrall's orc prior to his recruitment (and accepting him show he is exact opposite of our horde), and while Tides of War showed that even most peaceful horde races lose themselves in bloodlust in war during theramore war, most of them regret and flat out hated the cowardly bomb action of Garrosh, the start of his reputation hatred
Then BFA comes and sh8t on all of that for absolutely no reason, show us that ppl who would never start a war like Saurfang actually start it? Horde are happily supporting the most hated warchief!? And known heroes whom some of them were flat out neutral helping Sylvanas killing alliance!?
What the F*CK?
BFA sh8t on ~ everything established in lore, the conflict is extremely shoved in our throats that it chocked us alliance and horde, and while some ppl did follow sylvanas for many reasons (the most important is '2' reasons we all know) still most wow players hated MoP 2.0

Everyone who has a brain cell know that we can easily keep the 'war' in 'warcraft' without the need to be red vs blue, we have many established factions that we know will never accept peace, and - no surprise really - the 'pvp focus' of BFA ends shifting to old gods, and in worst way possible, in exp that its highlight is amazing cinematics, we end vs Nzoth - the most active important old god - in a very generic cinematic with dbz scene

Well, I'm not going to claim that BfA is written well or anything along those lines, as I found the rationale for the Blood War to be pretty spurious and thin on the ground even at the best of times. An attempt was made to justify it somewhat in "A Good War" and onward into BfA proper, but I think a pretty significant lack of exploration of the war's effect on the Horde and the Alliance made that justification be received as overwhelmingly flat, all in all. From a Doylist standpoint I think they just wanted to put the faction war to bed as a concept as this was the means to do it, and I treat it as something of a stumble as we move on to bigger and hopefully better developments within the story of the Warcraft universe.

As for the ending cutscene, I maintain that BfA ended in 8.2.5 with the Mak'gora cinematic with Saurfang and Sylvanas - 8.3 and the N'Zoth plotline are just a filler as we await the next movement into Shadowlands. I know much was said about how N'Zoth was an intrinsic aspect of BfA but I don't really believe that myself, or if it were the case I'd say the execution was woefully bungled by all hands. 8.3 is a stumble within the greater stumble that is BfA as a whole, not too dissimilar from how 6.2 closed out the weak expansion that was WoD and lead on to bigger and better things, IMO.

[Verdugo]

and I treat it as something of a stumble as we move on to bigger and hopefully better developments within the story of the Warcraft universe.

You are in for a surprise if you sheepishly believe this.

[Nerovar]

And yet both the Horde and Alliance have found common cause multiple times since the Horde became a force on Azeroth, joining forces to fend off said greater scope villains at multiple points in the timeframe. It's also worth noting that the Horde has worked in defense in Azeroth several times now, despite occasionally backsliding into warmongering or incitement. I continue to believe that with time, and without the constant work of outside forces trying to force both factions back into a war-footing, a more permanent if separate peace could be established and maintained. This isn't Pollyanna optimism, it's what is in the best interest of everyone, really. War should not be the go-to state of any social structure.

Again, I'm not disagreeing with you on this. I just think it's very unbelievable that the people on Azeroth would come to the same conclusion based on a few occasions in which the Horde and Alliance didn't kill each other in order to stop a third party.

[Kyphael]

Ive been spelling it Cocksucker this whole time, my bad too.

LOL knocked it out of the park.

[Aucald]

You are in for a surprise if you sheepishly believe this.

That Shadowlands will be an improvement relative to BfA? Maybe, though in that regard I am a bit optimistic - but then, almost anything would be an improvement on the faction conflict (a narrative arc I personally dislike) even if they leave the gameplay untouched. I've found 8.3 to be the high-point of BfA just because the faction conflict is over for the most part. So yeah, Shadowlands is apt to be a blast for me comparatively speaking, though YMMV of course.

[Verdugo]

That Shadowlands will be an improvement relative to BfA? Maybe, though in that regard I am a bit optimistic - but then, almost anything would be an improvement on the faction conflict (a narrative arc I personally dislike) even if they leave the gameplay untouched. I've found 8.3 to be the high-point of BfA just because the faction conflict is over for the most part. So yeah, Shadowlands is apt to be a blast for me comparatively speaking, though YMMV of course.

Its only weakest because that bunch of incompetent morons cant write for shit.

[Houle]

Ive been spelling it Cocksucker this whole time, my bad too.

ahahahahaha noiceeee
i like you

[allawyn]

Any one reading now has seen what both have posted...

You can keep deleting thing and trying to put words into my mouth, it won't work.

And yet, you keep pushing this idea that anyone saying Alliance has it bad is trying to tell Horde players how to feel, and wants Horde players to suffer. Or something. After all, it would be humiliating and unprecedented if the Horde had actual consequences! Never mind the near constant humiliation conga Alliance has had since Cata...

Instead of recognizing there's a group of Horde players that do want to be NuScourge and push for the characterization of the Horde that you don't like, you attack Alliance players as telling you how to feel. Maybe you should actually try having that sympathy you claim, and you might see why Alliance says Horde enjoyed the story. Heck, try looking around for all the jokes, memes, and mockery that surrounded Teldrassil and you might understand why that impression would be given.

Meanwhile, you refuse to consider the Alliance being given something beyond a grudging pseudo-victory so long as they forget anything ever happened. Do you realize how absurd and unrealistic it is to suggest "Oh, the bad leader is gone, guess you guys are innocent lambs, let's pretend nothing happened"? That's been what passes for our story every fucking time the idiot faction war rears its ugly head. Do you understand that our supposed leader didn't say two words for a near extinction of a core race of his own faction, but gave a speech eulogizing the orc that made that event possible? Hey looky there, a memorial service for the dead of Teldrassil! Wouldn't have cost the Horde a damn thing! Clearly impossible though, because you've insisted any Alliance content would somehow make Hordies suffer.

No, I dismissed those statements because I don't believe them. They do not fit with your insistence that this is a zero sum game and the only way for Alliance to have anything is for Horde to suffer, so therefore Alliance should continue to get nothing.

[Feanoro]

Any one reading now has seen what both have posted...

Yes, they certainly have. Especially since there's a search function.

You can keep deleting thing and trying to put words into my mouth, it won't work.

1) I'm not obligated to quote every word or reply to every word.

Besides, since everyone can see what you've posted, then it shouldn't matter if I only reply to specific quotes. Or are you now saying people can't see what you've posted? Since I don't have access to delete anything, and since quotes include a link back to the original post, that rather rules out me trying to misrepresent you, or whatever bizarre charges you're making. Really, this makes no sense whatsoever... unless of course you effectively have no argument, know full well your post history supports me on your "Horde player feelings", and are trying to drop it while getting the last word.

2) Words in your mouth, that's funny. You've previously spent an entire thread on that "telling Hordies how to feel" crap, and pretending that's not your argument again isn't going to work. Your first post in this was saying "I've said this before" for crying out loud.

[Syegfryed]

You presume that killing Garrosh would conclusively end the conflict as opposed to making him a martyr in the Horde, and consequently proving his own rhetoric more or less "correct" and galvanizing the Horde to continue to push back against the Alliance. That being said, the Legion was defeated in Legion because Horde and Alliance forces fought beside one another in the Order Halls alongside the Kirin Tor, but if the Alliance had "dismantled or enslaved the Horde" this wouldn't have been possible. More likely the Horde would've refused surrender on any terms and forced the Alliance to fight to the last to defeat it (if it could defeat it, which is an open question) - leaving the Alliance in this example depleted and weak, and likely poised to be overrun by the Legion forces at the Broken Shore (or those invading the world beforehand). Depending on when Garrosh was killed this might also nix the Blood Elven withdraw from the Horde as that was happening at the apex of Garrosh's warmongering, quite possibly leaving the Blood Elves both part of the Horde and more partisan than ever.
.

and there is nothing saying the alliance would just dismantle the horde back in mop, alliance was in a hostile city full of rebeles and Garrosh loyal people, it would be a hell of fight, and everyone would simple be uniting like Garrosh wanted all along. The fight would not end there, they would fight now to death and justified until the last man, even the ones who didn't partake with Garrosh war. Both factions would be fucked and the Legion would win.

[Varodoc]

That Shadowlands will be an improvement relative to BfA? Maybe, though in that regard I am a bit optimistic - but then, almost anything would be an improvement on the faction conflict (a narrative arc I personally dislike) even if they leave the gameplay untouched. I've found 8.3 to be the high-point of BfA just because the faction conflict is over for the most part. So yeah, Shadowlands is apt to be a blast for me comparatively speaking, though YMMV of course.

For me it depends. If they redeem Sylvanas, Shadowlands will become the worst expansion for me.

And it's not that I'm against redemption arcs, because I love several villains who died as tragic heroes, but they have not set up any redemption arc whatsoever for Sylvanas. Hopefully Blizzard understands that just because a villain is popular doesn't mean they have to die as heroes.

[sam86]

That Shadowlands will be an improvement relative to BfA?

of course i hope so, and so should most ppl
why would we follow wow if we aren't hoping it get better ? just to 'i told u so'?
do u really think i enjoy wow being bad? i don't, i hate it, wow for me is very important part of my life, i love wow, i want it better, i complain about it because i want it to improve, not to laugh while it is drowning

and there is nothing saying the alliance would just dismantle the horde back in mop, alliance was in a hostile city full of rebeles and Garrosh loyal people, it would be a hell of fight, and everyone would simple be uniting like Garrosh wanted all along. The fight would not end there, they would fight now to death and justified until the last man, even the ones who didn't partake with Garrosh war. Both factions would be fucked and the Legion would win.

blizz said so, Chris Metzen himself said so in the first blizzcon after SoO, i lost the bet and kept the video in my signature even if the video itself is removed from youtube
Alliance is the last superpower on Azeroth, they can f8ck the horde and no one can stop them after SoO

[Syegfryed]

blizz said so, Chris Metzen himself said so in the first blizzcon after SoO, i lost the bet and kept the video in my signature even if the video itself is removed from youtube
Alliance is the last superpower on Azeroth, they can f8ck the horde and no one can stop them after SoO

being a superpower don't mean you could just win easily.

Thats the point, alliance could not dismantle the horde in the Siege, later, they could/would, eventually win, but it would cost, and with then weak and without horde, Legion would win.

[Aucald]

For me it depends. If they redeem Sylvanas, Shadowlands will become the worst expansion for me.

And it's not that I'm against redemption arcs, because I love several villains who died as tragic heroes, but they have not set up any redemption arc whatsoever for Sylvanas. Hopefully Blizzard understands that just because a villain is popular doesn't mean they have to die as heroes.

I don't think a Sylvanas redemption is off the table, per se; but I do think there is an upper bound to the resolution I'd accept. The best Sylvanas can hope for as concerns redemption is a "redemption equals death" scenario, where she becomes cognizant of where she screwed up and sacrifices herself to put an end to it - I could accept such an ending for Sylvanas if it's told well, and as long as that occurs without anyone eulogizing Sylvanas as "a hero all along" or some crap like that.

My personal preference, however, is for Sylvanas to be killed as a villain with no redemption in sight. I personally think she's strayed too far into abject villainy at this point to be worth redemption - as for her popularity, let her die in a manner that befits it. My current most desirable end for Sylvanas is a rematch between her and an empowered Bolvar, and having his hammer crush her skull decisively somewhere around the apex of the Shadowlands story-arc.

[Varodoc]

I don't think a Sylvanas redemption is off the table, per se; but I do think there is an upper bound to the resolution I'd accept. The best Sylvanas can hope for as concerns redemption is a "redemption equals death" scenario, where she becomes cognizant of where she screwed up and sacrifices herself to put an end to it - I could accept such an ending for Sylvanas if it's told well, and as long as that occurs without anyone eulogizing Sylvanas as "a hero all along" or some crap like that.

My personal preference, however, is for Sylvanas to be killed as a villain with no redemption in sight. I personally think she's strayed too far into abject villainy at this point to be worth redemption - as for her popularity, let her die in a manner that befits it. My current most desirable end for Sylvanas is a rematch between her and an empowered Bolvar, and having his hammer crush her skull decisively somewhere around the apex of the Shadowlands story-arc.

Yes, exactly. I wouldn't mind if Sylvanas realized all the fucked up things she did and died remorseful (like Kil'jaeden). But I definitely don't want people to start praising her as a hero.

Though it'd be difficult to develop such an arc, because she's been shown to be so twisted and she believes she is doing nothing wrong. And I doubt she's going to be so important in Shadowlands, her story will probably be over by 9.2. The Jailer is the main villain, not Sylvanas. I'd be surprised if she doesn't end up like Garrosh, dead in the first part of the expansion.

[Aucald]

of course i hope so, and so should most ppl
why would we follow wow if we aren't hoping it get better ? just to 'i told u so'?
do u really think i enjoy wow being bad? i don't, i hate it, wow for me is very important part of my life, i love wow, i want it better, i complain about it because i want it to improve, not to laugh while it is drowning

I am optimistic that it will, and I've found that WoW tends to follow a general pattern of "hit, miss, hit, miss" as concerns expansions - Legion was a high note for me, as was MoP, and each of those were followed by lackluster expansions in their turn (BfA and WoD respectively). Nothing wrong with constructive criticism, either; I think it's always good to address where a game falls short and try to find ways to improve it even in the general sense (without directly addressing said concerns to the developers). Some people have come to a place where there can be no right by WoW, though; and they more or less revel in mining salt for its own sake, content for the entire game to burn. I am not nor do I want to be in that camp, myself, and like you I want WoW to improve and rise up from the low point it's found itself in BfA.

[Grazrug]

"One of the major themes in this expansion was expressed by Sylvanas in the opening words of the Battle for Azeroth trailer: "Ours is a cycle of hatred." To demonstrate that there is a cycle, we created a story structure for Sylvanas that, on the surface, echoed many broad strokes of the road Garrosh took. A warchief promoted under questionable circumstances. A brutal act of aggression that instigated conflict. Distrust among the inner circle that led to an uprising. These parallels were intentional. But it's within the nuance that we sought to show the story grow and change."

I mean yeah. Ultimately the story of BFA would not have been possible without MOP. We never experienced the burning legion orc stuff first hand. We weren't a part of that. Garrosh is essentially that, but for us, completing the parallel between us and Saurfang throughout the expansion, and utilized to give us sympathy to his position of frustration and defeat towards the Horde, who seem to repeatedly fall to darkness.

This expansion is a key example of what I've always said is Blizzard's greatest writing strength: Taking some writing they didn't like and expanding on it with new writing that makes it seem like it was all the grand plan all along. Jaina's arc is iconic in that regard. A perfect example of it, watching her change particularly from MOP to now. Thrall's arc is iconic in that regard, watching him through "Green Jesus" Cataclysm, through WOD, through Legion, through now.


What's different this time?
We are.

The expansion is over. Take a step back. Look at all of it, start to finish. I don't think it was perfect, but they accomplished a lot and I can see what they tried to do.

How much did blizzard pay you to write this?

Infracted.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, exactly. I wouldn't mind if Sylvanas realized all the fucked up things she did and died remorseful (like Kil'jaeden). But I definitely don't want people to start praising her as a hero.

Though it'd be difficult to develop such an arc, because she's been shown to be so twisted and she believes she is doing nothing wrong. And I doubt she's going to be so important in Shadowlands, her story will probably be over by 9.2. The Jailer is the main villain, not Sylvanas. I'd be surprised if she doesn't end up like Garrosh, dead in the first part of the expansion.

The only thing more spiteful than Sylvanas towards Arthas is her haters being obsessed over her, even tho they would never admit to it.

- - - Updated - - -.

[Tripzzz]

While the Light can only conceive of one true path, the Void sees endless possibilities. Strategically, the Old Gods always have plans within plans, waiting for one door to close so another can open. To believe there can only be a single outcome to the struggle against N'Zoth would be to ignore the lessons he was trying to teach us.

Yogg and C'thun could potentially come back it seems. Of course their demise wasn't met with extreme backlash, so obviously this is meant as damage control for N'zoth shitty plan, and not a sign that Yogg and C'thun will actually return. Danuser is fucking trash.

[Powerogue]

How much did blizzard pay you to write this?

Infracted.

Negative $50 plus whatever a year and a half's sub cost is. Mostly I just listen to Taliesin's story breakdowns and gain a much deeper appreciation for the story that way. Doesn't mean I have no criticisms, like the story being about 80% focused on the Horde all expansion. Lots of plot threads left dangling that I just have to shrug and hope they address in Shadowlands, particularly Tyrande and the night elves. The single dumbest story moment in Warcraft history with my horde pandaren handing Sylvanas an evil old god artifact.

You'll note none of that overlaps with my compliments towards the Jaina and Thrall arcs. A story can have good and bad parts. Another example of "writing new stuff to make it seem like this was the grand plan all along" was WOD's followup with the mag'har scenario, which managed to remove the time travel element, kill Grom, make Yrel interesting, and give us a playable race with great customization options in a matter of minutes. Pure brilliance. All of that was technically part of BFA.