Players Must Reject Blizzard Divisiveness

[Kyphael]

It's just a video game story. I discuss and debate it as such. No one should be taking this so seriously where they feel the "community is divided" and Blizzard is actively trying to do just this.

[Aucald]

It's just a video game story. I discuss and debate it as such. No one should be taking this so seriously where they feel the "community is divided" and Blizzard is actively trying to do just this.

I don't think it's generally a matter of people "taking it too seriously" as opposed to one where people tend to forget that the people on the other side of the screen are real people with real emotions, and may be understandably invested in their own opinions. It's a matter of respect, and the understandable annoyances when that respect isn't observed or respected. I don't know how many times I've heard variations on the whole "online interactions aren't real" sentiment - it's one I feel has no truth to it, and that the people who employ often do so solely to justify their own crassness.

[Jastall]

My post wasn't clear enough maybe - I agree with what you've written here, it's what I was getting at - that even while Thrall was personally still extremely popular, probably the height of his popularity since the game had the widest audience at that stage, there was still an overall interest in more inter-faction conflict independent of that. Wrathgate was the original Burning in terms of the sheer amount of text written about it and the aftermath regarding factions. Garrosh himself was almost universally disliked in Wrath, and was a crapshoot in Cataclysm at best. I think nothing did more to rehabilitate him than the first rebellion story and everything that came after, followed by a reappraisal of what was earlier. As it regards Cataclysm, I maintain that the faction focused stories were decent to excellent (if you were Horde), whereas the main story was abysmal. I wouldn't say the worst since we still have TBC, but truly dire.



As a self-contained story WC3 is the best product Blizzard has produced in the franchise. It doesn't have the best writing or lay the only groundwork or whatever, the writing is hokey, even more so than some of what we have now, but it knew what it wanted to be and did an excellent job of it. I can't think of a single story in it that didn't land exactly as intended - except Medivh. Anyone going back to that game will find him a total loon with severe social anxiety who badly should've just spoken straight instead of doom-mongering and who had endless opportunities to prevent many of the events that ended up going down. WC2, soft spot though I have for it and functional in its own right was much more basic, but it laid a lot of groundwork that still gets mileage to this day. It's not an either/or - elements of them are complementary to one another. The WC3 orcish backstory was an objective improvement to the WC2 one and the flaws it did in what the orcs were in the present were corrected in the MMO right before it decided to ditch all the good effort it'd done in aligning these two angles.


Long-form narratives like this need to be aware of their limitations and play to them. My main frustration is that WoW, less so before, but especially now struggles against these basic points - super hero stories with a universal cast of heroes, all of them with generally the same positions vs an overarching big bad can't do it on their own. Lessons that the gameplay mechanically can't carry and if it could would cripple the game likewise.

I dunno about the faction war stories in Cataclysm. First the game itself has close to no explanation for the war or how it came to pass- the pre-patch event was about elementals going nuts and then Deathwing comes and there's Twilight's Hammer cultists literally everywhere... oh and teams blue and red hate each other in some zones but in others (80-85 ones especially) factions might as well not exist. Everything to set up and explain the war happened in a book, including the death of a major Horde character, which might as well be offscreen to 95% of the playerbase. Garrosh veers between honorable leader and total idiot who loses an entire fleet to his murderboner. Baine is made into the simpering fool we know today. Vol'jin is angry at Garrosh and you again have no idea why unless you read external material.

No, I don't think it was good for the Horde, except maybe for the Forsaken and even then you have the dodgy writing over them raising their dead enemies en masse (but it's not mind control because we handwaved something about newly raised dead being angry in a Q&A, that's what good writing looks like folks!) and Sylvanas not knowing if she likes the Forsaken or sees them as cannon fodder. Obviously for the Alliance it was atrocious for all the reasons we know, and that alone would make it poor storytelling.

The issue IMO is that long-term narratives can't really be done right- repetition and bogging down themes and characters is inevitable. For example, most of the best comic book stories I know spanned relatively short issues or even single books, such as The Killing Joke. Most series that remained good from the beginning to the end (like The Wire or Breaking Bad) had 5 seasons or less. The first three books of A Song of Ice and Fire are masterpieces, then the next two are bogged down in silly plots and the last two aren't even out because of it. In WoW, most good writing is contained to a single zone or even a single questline. A focused narrative will almost always fare better than an expansive one even in the hands of a good writer- and Blizzard aren't good writers.

[Varodoc]

You're allowed to like bad writing - but that's not what you said. You said you don't think the writing is bad.

Since the writing it objectively bad, the correct response is to expose yourself to better writing so you can make an educated comparison. Maybe drop the hyper defensive inferiority complex you have about learning to be better rounded in your intellectual pursuits.

There's no such thing as "objectively bad" writing. A lot of people hate Blizzard for turning Sylvanas into an antagonist (NOT villain, she was already that way before BfA). Instead, I like her character arc and appreciate it for what it is; the negative arc of a nihilist so consumed by fear that she has become the very thing she hated.

[Utrrabbit]

I am of the opinion that the reason Blizzard has been able to skate by with their atrocious writing is that so many players buy into the "Who has it worse" feud with regards to the bad writing or favoritism.

Despite the faction wars usually having some of the worst writing I've also felt that they could be some of the best if Blizzard BOTHERED to have consistency and attention to detail.

Rather than arguing about how the In-Universe characters are dumb, or who has suffered more (Alliance for being passive and losing things to neutrality, Horde for getting villain-batted and losing characters to being raid bosses and such) we should push together for Blizz to get more in touch with its playerbase and their concerns with the lore. It's been YEARS we shouldn't still be seeing them making the same mistakes and reading people being angry about it as "Engagement".


#LoreUnion

Speak for yourself.

I enjoy the writing.

And i know a lot of people who do too. The storytelling and quests going through the zones are wonderful.

[Super Dickmann]

I dunno about the faction war stories in Cataclysm. First the game itself has close to no explanation for the war or how it came to pass- the pre-patch event was about elementals going nuts and then Deathwing comes and there's Twilight's Hammer cultists literally everywhere... oh and teams blue and red hate each other in some zones but in others (80-85 ones especially) factions might as well not exist. Everything to set up and explain the war happened in a book, including the death of a major Horde character, which might as well be offscreen to 95% of the playerbase. Garrosh veers between honorable leader and total idiot who loses an entire fleet to his murderboner. Baine is made into the simpering fool we know today. Vol'jin is angry at Garrosh and you again have no idea why unless you read external material.

Yeah, no arguments where it regards the tie-ins being especially aggravating. In principle, the war was already explained to you in Wrath - Varian declares it, then it's on from level 73 all the way going forward. There's no peace summit or anything, that also happens off-screen and the race intros give you the basic gist of things. The actual stories - Ashenvale, Stonetalon, S. Barrens and basically everything Forsaken related are consistently good to great. The one to suffer heavily if one doesn't read the tie-in materials both during Wrath and in Cataclysm is Garrosh himself and Cairne's death, since without the tie-ins the impression that sticks is the Wrath one where he's just a really angry dude. I entirely disagree on the other leaders though - Baine and Vol'jin were complete non-characters before their appearances in Cataclysm with Garrosh, and so were their according races. Trolls and tauren were essentially orc mini-mes until enough elements of their pre-WC3 characterization were brought back and expanded. I defy anyone to tell me one character trait Vol'jin had before Cataclysm.

No, I don't think it was good for the Horde, except maybe for the Forsaken and even then you have the dodgy writing over them raising their dead enemies en masse (but it's not mind control because we handwaved something about newly raised dead being angry in a Q&A, that's what good writing looks like folks!) and Sylvanas not knowing if she likes the Forsaken or sees them as cannon fodder. Obviously for the Alliance it was atrocious for all the reasons we know, and that alone would make it poor storytelling.

We'll no doubt go on about this in another topic, but while the raising thing is a handful, the only insight we're given into Sylvanas's mindset is in Edge of Night and revisionism aside, the conclusion fo it is fairly clear - she goes from utilizing the Forsaken wastefully to making a point of keeping them around and investing long-term into them since her life is connected to hers. Hence things like the dog tags, her letting Crowley go and so forth. Cataclysm moved the Forsaken away from self-flagellation to exploring some of the other aspects of undeath and whenever it focused on it - such as every named person you raise, it did it competently.

Terrible for the Alliance though, no doubt about that. It's not even the actual content within the story, memequests aside, but the way it is told inconclusively with bad presentation. Stonetalon for example ends up being a huge win for the Alliance, but no one remembers it at all because it's carried by complete non-characters to an anticlimactic finish that tells you these things but doesn't show them. And where it is shown - like the victory in Stonard, the game immediately undercut the Alliance's win by having them back off for no reason. Compare and contrast nuking the Stormpike outposts after an ally's sacrifice in Hillsbrad or even something as simple as seizing night elf positions in Ashenvale, which is visually depicted and ends with a clear victory.

The issue IMO is that long-term narratives can't really be done right- repetition and bogging down themes and characters is inevitable. For example, most of the best comic book stories I know spanned relatively short issues or even single books, such as The Killing Joke. Most series that remained good from the beginning to the end (like The Wire or Breaking Bad) had 5 seasons or less. The first three books of A Song of Ice and Fire are masterpieces, then the next two are bogged down in silly plots and the last two aren't even out because of it. In WoW, most good writing is contained to a single zone or even a single questline. A focused narrative will almost always fare better than an expansive one even in the hands of a good writer- and Blizzard aren't good writers.

A focused, conclusive narrative is alien to an MMO but Blizzard don't take it into account and don't write with according stakes. Stories in that situation are best treated as pulp narratives, where you have your pieces and setups and the stories you do are spins on seeing how these pieces lock together and what thing you haven't done with them yet. Blizzard don't let the pieces settle or use them to the fullest before they throw them out of the pram and grab new ones and they also don't focus on the other big element of pulp which is spectacle - consider how much of BFA was taken up by watching sad people chat in murky rooms discussing shit that's happened like three times now and was already tiresome the first time against how much time we used the planet's lifeblood and fifteen years worth of toys on both factions to kill each other. And consider which makes for better cinematics and lends itself more to a game like this. Or whether a roleplaying game exclusively about violence lends itself better when it's colorful, varied cartoon characters clashing melodramatically vs the Burger King kids' club agreeing on all orders of the day.

[Aucald]

There's no such thing as "objectively bad" writing. A lot of people hate Blizzard for turning Sylvanas into an antagonist (NOT villain, she was already that way before BfA). Instead, I like her character arc and appreciate it for what it is; the negative arc of a nihilist so consumed by fear that she has become the very thing she hated.

Well, I don't know if I'd go *that* far - there's some atrocious writing out there, as any quick review on Wattpad or Fanfiction.net can confirm. I wouldn't say the writing for WoW descends anywhere near that level, though.

[Saltysquidoon]

The issue IMO is that long-term narratives can't really be done right- repetition and bogging down themes and characters is inevitable. For example, most of the best comic book stories I know spanned relatively short issues or even single books, such as The Killing Joke. Most series that remained good from the beginning to the end (like The Wire or Breaking Bad) had 5 seasons or less. The first three books of A Song of Ice and Fire are masterpieces, then the next two are bogged down in silly plots and the last two aren't even out because of it.

I mean I think that turns on what your level of 'right' is. I think WoW suffers from the issue with cape comics in that it's not just long-form but there are too many cooks which leads to conflicting visions and story retreds (and resultantly the numerous silly retcons). Long-form stories with a single artistic vision and drive can work. Basically every fantasy novel series ever has multiple entries or Berserk (boat memes aside) has maintained a pretty high standard of quality for decades.

For me, I feel that unified drive is what really puts FFXIV leagues ahead of WoW (narratively). That shows it can be done, alteast to an extent beyond what WoW has slopped out recently.

In WoW, most good writing is contained to a single zone or even a single questline. A focused narrative will almost always fare better than an expansive one even in the hands of a good writer- and Blizzard aren't good writers.

Hard agree here. WoW has always been at its best when it does simple well. I the DK order hall, for example, was very good.

[Jastall]

A focused, conclusive narrative is alien to an MMO but Blizzard don't take it into account and don't write with according stakes. Stories in that situation are best treated as pulp narratives, where you have your pieces and setups and the stories you do are spins on seeing how these pieces lock together and what thing you haven't done with them yet. Blizzard don't let the pieces settle or use them to the fullest before they throw them out of the pram and grab new ones and they also don't focus on the other big element of pulp which is spectacle - consider how much of BFA was taken up by watching sad people chat in murky rooms discussing shit that's happened like three times now and was already tiresome the first time against how much time we used the planet's lifeblood and fifteen years worth of toys on both factions to kill each other. And consider which makes for better cinematics and lends itself more to a game like this. Or whether a roleplaying game exclusively about violence lends itself better when it's colorful, varied cartoon characters clashing melodramatically vs the Burger King kids' club agreeing on all orders of the day.

Well, there's only so much spectacle to go around, I don't think WoW's weakness is that it lacks this aspect. Even gameplay wise, Warfronts for example can look pretty good for being in a 15 years old game. Whenever they play well is another topic entirely of course, but WoW usually does spectacle convincingly enough, the issue is that there's almost always some level of bad writing around it that makes you scratch your head. For example, Lordaeron; it is cool that Jaina arrives on a fucking boat The Lonely Island style and freezes an entire battlefield's worth of undead/plague before blasting the walls with arcane cannons? Definitely. But then you think about the fact that this moment requires the Alliance to be complete morons and the Horde to just stand by as their boss callously sacrifices their own and raises their corpses and the effect is lost. Or the Broken Shore; is Varian's last stand cool? You betcha. Is Vol'jin getting dunked by a mook and the Alliance somehow not noticing what's happening when they have a gunship in the sky cool? Not really. I wrote a couple more examples but I'm sure you get the point.

No arguments as to Blizzard not using their pieces right. The sole fact that a Troll warchief was killed right before an expansion where the Zandalari allied with the Horde is just criminal. Or Nathanos being overused in the stead of other Horde characters. Or Forsaken characters that actually look like Forsaken being ignored in favor of elves and humans with skin conditions. Or the total absence of the Dwarves apart from Mr. Woons. Again, could go on forever.

[Tharivor]

I'm automatically dismissed as an Alliance zealot, but I've been saying for a long time:

- WC3 Horde players are pissed at their faction being dragged through the mud
- WC2 Horde players are pissed at their faction being forced to be peaceful
- Alliance players are pissed for their faction being treated as passive, irrelevant, and a plot device for the Horde

The core problem is Metzen set up an impossible division in the Horde and then refused to pull the trigger. Thus, we keep swinging back and forth between the two Horde factions, with Blizz trying to cater to each. So much time is spent on the Horde that there's nothing left for the Alliance (aside from the writers openly stating they have no interest in the Alliance). Result, everyone is pissed, everyone feels they were done dirty and the other guy has it better.

Its entirely possible to have groups with differing political views in the same faction- its called good storytelling and realistic worldbuilding. Vanilla actually incorporated this somewhat: in the Horde you had the EK/Kalmidor Rep difference and the differing outook groups like the Frostwolves and Warsong; while on the Alliance you had divisions with races (like Tyrande vs. Fandral, or the Scarlet recruiter in Stormwind) which catered both for fanatics and pacifists.
Its turning both factions into monolithic blobs that has led to the problems we have today, because only one "version" of each faction is allowed to exist and that version was be bland enough for everyone to be (un)happy.

As usual its Blizzard causing their own problems. There is no logical reason for example why Sylvanas would ever have become Warchief- the Forsaken could have stayed lurking in the shadows and catered to that particular fantasy without forcing the rest of the Horde to go along with it. Or Tyrande- we all know she's going to mellow in Shadowlands, but why? Why can't the Alliance be a loose confederation of states where its not Anduin's business to pacify the Night Elves?

Its all eminently doable, but it requires Blizzard to write stories that involve more than 5 characters and more importantly it requires the two factions to be one of many identities that exist on Azeroth rather than the be all and end all of every storyline.

[Kyphael]

I don't think it's generally a matter of people "taking it too seriously" as opposed to one where people tend to forget that the people on the other side of the screen are real people with real emotions, and may be understandably invested in their own opinions. It's a matter of respect, and the understandable annoyances when that respect isn't observed or respected. I don't know how many times I've heard variations on the whole "online interactions aren't real" sentiment - it's one I feel has no truth to it, and that the people who employ often do so solely to justify their own crassness.

I'm absolutely an advocate of treating people with respect and respecting opinions opposite of my own in an open forum, but this is the internet, and more times than not, thanks to the veil of anonymity of the internet, people will not always adhere to that philosophy. At the end of the day, it's a video game, and while we're in the middle of a pandemic, no amount of grief is worth the stress if you have thin skin or is easily rattled. Sometimes, people can't always distinguish between sarcasm, joking, or simply a passionate rebuttal. When it gets to that point, the best course of action in my opinion is turning off the monitor, or just leaving the discussion. It's no different than being somewhere you don't feel comfortable outside the internet in the real world.

This doesn't mean I think just because it's the internet I'm going to disrespect people and insult them for their opinion. I just don't think it's worth the grief if someone can't handle it. No amount of moderation in the world will spare someone's feelings if they're not thick skinned, and at the end of the day, feeling insulted by the internet is a first world problem. Life's a lot tougher than online forums, disagreements and faction loyalties in a video game.

[LemonDemonGirl]

I am of the opinion that the reason Blizzard has been able to skate by with their atrocious writing is that so many players buy into the "Who has it worse" feud with regards to the bad writing or favoritism.

Despite the faction wars usually having some of the worst writing I've also felt that they could be some of the best if Blizzard BOTHERED to have consistency and attention to detail.

Rather than arguing about how the In-Universe characters are dumb, or who has suffered more (Alliance for being passive and losing things to neutrality, Horde for getting villain-batted and losing characters to being raid bosses and such) we should push together for Blizz to get more in touch with its playerbase and their concerns with the lore. It's been YEARS we shouldn't still be seeing them making the same mistakes and reading people being angry about it as "Engagement".


#LoreUnion

Oh yes, this is one thing that I absolutely hate. Almost every Warchief we had went crazy and had to be killed or just died. Can we have a new leader who will stay alive for a little while? And can we have troll characters not get killed off too?

I really with that would all change

[Skytotem]

Wouldn't Baine just allow proxies to plunder his territories?

Baine would have to be fixed

[plz delete account]

OP is right. we must reject blizzard divisiveness by giving Sylv and the entire horde a giant f you in the form of using out spaceship to level their cities. And Torghast.

[Syegfryed]

- WC3 Horde players are pissed at their faction being dragged through the mud
- WC2 Horde players are pissed at their faction being forced to be peaceful

Wc2 horde fans liked Wc3 horde , and Wc3 horde fans liked Wc2 horde, but now neither of those groups liked the horde since mop

what is the real problem here?

the real problem is how Blizzard is floating to bad extremes, instead of putting something in the middle, like we had in the past, they either put the horde as a obnoxious pacifist faction or a retarded villain troop

Same extremist problems with the alliance, they should be way more pro-active, attacking way more, like they did until mop, but once again, extremism of the alliance being the good faction of justice who can only react to the "wrongs" done to then, now they think night elves and tyrande should go full murder hobo, because they think is that what the alliance playerbase want.

Blizzard team is completely disconnected with the playerbase, they don't know what the factions truly are/mean, and their vision is flawed, they often think some shit is so cool, but the rest of us think is shit, they are stubborn and don't want back down, they keep doing lore and a story to amuse then alone, and if some people like it its a win for then.

[Feanoro]

Wc2 horde fans liked Wc3 horde , and Wc3 horde fans liked Wc2 horde, but now neither of those groups liked the horde since mop

what is the real problem here?

the real problem is how Blizzard is floating to bad extremes, instead of putting something in the middle, like we had in the past, they either put the horde as a obnoxious pacifist faction or a retarded villain troop

Same extremist problems with the alliance, they should be way more pro-active, attacking way more, like they did until mop, but once again, extremism of the alliance being the good faction of justice who can only react to the "wrongs" done to then, now they think night elves and tyrande should go full murder hobo, because they think is that what the alliance playerbase want.

Blizzard team is completely disconnected with the playerbase, they don't know what the factions truly are/mean, and their vision is flawed, they often think some shit is so cool, but the rest of us think is shit, they are stubborn and don't want back down, they keep doing lore and a story to amuse then alone, and if some people like it its a win for then.

You won't hear me arguing with this.

[Melusine]

I am of the opinion that the reason Blizzard has been able to skate by with their atrocious writing is that so many players buy into the "Who has it worse" feud with regards to the bad writing or favoritism.

Despite the faction wars usually having some of the worst writing I've also felt that they could be some of the best if Blizzard BOTHERED to have consistency and attention to detail.

Rather than arguing about how the In-Universe characters are dumb, or who has suffered more (Alliance for being passive and losing things to neutrality, Horde for getting villain-batted and losing characters to being raid bosses and such) we should push together for Blizz to get more in touch with its playerbase and their concerns with the lore. It's been YEARS we shouldn't still be seeing them making the same mistakes and reading people being angry about it as "Engagement".


#LoreUnion

I think it is not the players' call as to what direction the writing goes. Blizzard needs good writers to succeed or fail here. What Blizzard absolutely SHOULD listen to from the players would be ideas to make their characters something that appeals to the players while not trying to turn those players into things they ought not be. AS few good examples would be, say... a way to change their dance to something else, or make human females able to have bigger or smaller tits, or wider hips, or male taurens to have more head dresses and horn decoration. Addition of jewelry, tattoos, hair colors, new emotes, all good ideas. What would be a bad idea would be making orcs beautiful, undead to appear completely fine, Pandarens to look like any other type of bear, or Draenei to be 4 feet tall.

The favoritism argument has a few flaws to it. While I admit being alliance, there are times when, especially as I am also a mount collector, that there are a number of times Horde gotten favoritism with their mounts, and I'll include two glaring examples, among one that involves Azeroth Choppers, where Horde got a mount that in order for Alliance to get the mount would need to pay 100,000 gold, and I'm not going to bitch that they got one and we didn't unless we pay for it. That should have been a promotional where both sides get the mount, because let's be honest. That was a popularity contest. The American Choppers team could have put a tricycle with some spikes on it and it would have won. It was never about which was the better made. The other, Goblins and Worgen were put in the game in Cataclysm. The Goblins got two new mounts that were trikes. Some amount of time was put into their construction, and it was at the time a unique frame. Worgens got nothing because they could run wild and serve as their own ground mount. And their solution wasn't any better, because it was a couple barebacked horses. I remember the comments section on the revealed 60 pages before I heard a neutral comment, and almost 70 before someone mentioned he/she loves horses, and we needed a bareback model in game for Alliance. Alliance was pissed off, and Horde was like, well, you lost this round, or laughing at us for our shitty horse mount, taunting, all sorts of predictable shit.

[Skytotem]

I sincerely hope that no writer ever uses polls to determine a story. One of the worst ideas I have ever heard. A story should be made from passion by the writer. I think the problem with wow is that there are so many cooks in the kitchen with the manager pulling them in different ways based on marketing.

For example: sylvanas in BFA and legion cinematic versus Sylvanas in game.

Not polls to determine story, polls to see what the player's FEEDBACK on the story is.

[Hubbl3]

Posts like this, I swear. Stop projecting how you feel onto others - you do not speak for everyone that plays this game. It might seem that way to you on forums like this one, where most topics are of the 'REEEEEE WOW SUX' variety - but the amount of players posting here compared to the amount of people actually playing the game is like a drop of water in a hot tub.

You are right.

[Skytotem]

What if you don't think the writing is bad

Then contribute thoughts on how to make it 'even better' if you think it's already okay/good/great or w/e.