Vote: The Redepemtion Arc!

[Sondrelk]

She may need to stay in character if she is pretending to serve the Jailer.

This all forgets one simple fact though. That the Sylvanas loyalist storyline was never meant to happen.

Beyond that though I guess the main problem that rises going forward is whether Sylvanas is playing 4D chess or not.
You argue the side that every action Sylvanas has taken is part of some massive grand plan, in which even the meta is a part of the grand delusion. Whereas I argue that WoW is not the kind of game that does that kind of extremely deep storytelling.

As much as I agree it would be plausible that Sylvanas is actually just that good and calculated her every move to both ingratiate herself to the Jailer by killing as many people as possible while also not so many the Jailers plan couldnt be stopped I think it is far more likely that she is simply a villain, and her missteps is because like most villain in WoW, she is overconfident and unprepared for the scourge that is the player characters.

And again, if the argument for her acting like such an over the top cartoon villain is because the writers wants to trick us, then I would argue that this makes the story so much worse, not better.
A good writer, (or team) should know how to effectively straddle the line between good and evil in such a way that when you look back you can see the conflict in their eyes. Especially if you consider these the kinds of writers who are willing to make such a grand twist.

[Raisei]

Think about it:

- Saurfang stays in front of the Undercity to fight alone because Sylvanas taunts him. Anduin is way too noble to kill a lone and grieving orc, but not too noble to use him politically, so Saurfang gets taken away.
- When Saurfang is finally released, Sylvanas sends Dark Rangers to arrest him, knowing that in Saurfang's mind this would echo Vol'jin's attempted assassination by Garrosh. This spurns him into action more than anything else.
- When you return to Sylvanas as a loyalist to tell her about Saurfang and Zekhan, she tells you she has plans for Zekhan... but nothing bad happens to him. He simply continues to gather allies for Saurfang.
- When Saurfang goes to Thrall, there's no guarantee that he's gonna join his rebellion. He left the Horde behind and has a family there. Luckily, Sylvanas sent two incompetent "assassins" to motivate him. Now the main advocate for Horde & Alliance diplomacy is back on Azeroth and part of the rebellion.
- The plan to raise Derek and use him to kill Jaina? She says it right to Baine's face, and makes sure to leave him someplace accessible. Derek is being "processed" throughout most pf the Nazjatar campaign, but the promised mind control never materializes. Derek recovers fully once freed, and lo an behold Jaina (the former poster girl for Horde & Alliance cooperation) and Baine have mended fences. Once again, as a loyalist you inform on Baine right away, but you are told to help him through the entire process regardless.
- Baine is publicly arrested in front of all the Horde leaders, and even though they don't like it, they are reluctant to di anything about it. Sylvanas could have killed Baine right then and there and gotten away with it, but she didn't. The whole "using him as a trap" part is circular, since, I repeat, she had an opportunity to stop him from the get go. Then Jaina would have been killed by Derek, Baine himself would have been caught red handed anyway, or killed in the attempted treason, and the rebels would have had no connection to the Alliance, making both groups weaker and easier to pick off.
- Sylvanas was supposedly waiting for Baine's rescuers, but they get away anyhow. As a loyalist, again, you give her the exact time and composition of the group, and you're there with them, but you don't get any orders to turn on them. The reason can't be that Sylvanas doesn't have enough forces (including herself, beefed up with Jailer magic) to stop 4 heroes in her own city, because then the entire war is bogus. Jaina, Thrall, Saurfang, Shaw and a random DPS from group finder can just Mythic+ the whole of Orgrimmar. The end result of this whole thing is that Thrall and Jaina rekindled their friendship and the Horde and Alliance are ready to work together again, to defend Thunder Bluff, which is never actually attacked.
- When their armies come to Orgrimmar, Saurfang challenges her to Mak'gora, and she oopsies herself out of command with a single casualty (the one guy who actually wanted a glorious death), leaving the Horde and Alliance to make peace, so that they are at least somewhat prepared for what is inevitably coming: N'zoth, the Scourge invasion, the impending threat from beyond the Veil, and who knows what else.

If Sylvanas really wanted to maximize deaths and pave the way for the Jailer as effectively as possible, then she is an utter idiot, and the plot is feeble. If she was only playing at it as much as she needed to, while making sure that the Horde and Alliance would have a reason to mend faces and put the cork back on senseless deaths once she was "in" with the enemy, the BFA story retroactively becomes more complex, intricate and interesting. Some of her lines in the Reckoning cinematic even get a double meaning:

- "I trusted you, and so did they" - meaning she knew he would play the part he set him up for, and rally a rebellion behind him just like Vol'jin.
- "The Horde is nothing. You are all nothing!"; 1 minute later: "[You are] standing as one. Savor it. Nothing lasts." - meaning that the Horde and Alliance will endure after that moment.

Urgh... please stop. Nothing is worse then a villain that is so smart she has calculated in every reaction of her enemies and everything falls into place just as she wants it. It makes the villain infalliable and requires the heroes to do ridiculous acts to beat them and/or hope for a deus ex machina.

Sylvanas is not mentally sane. She hasn't been for a long time and in her insanity she is cannot accept loosing and she does not allow herself to believe that she makes mistakes. Hence why she either has a scapegoat to blame for her mistakes and crimes or she twists things in such a way that it was all part of her plan to begin with.
She most certainly did not want the rebellion to exist and tried hard to have key members or even potential members eliminated, which then backfired.

[Goradan]

Good observation, to me she looked almost optimistic, hopeful. But I guess it could also be her being awestruck while talking about the Jailer. I guess we'll have a better idea when the video drops.


She's perfect btw...

Seeing Sylvanas WITHOUT a bitchface is scary shit indeed.

[Coconut]

This all forgets one simple fact though. That the Sylvanas loyalist storyline was never meant to happen.

I mean, if you're already willing to selectively discount lore, then you shouldn't have any problem adjusting to however they decide to frame past events in the future. It makes more sense to accept that the tone of certain quests and cinematic is misleading (on purpose or by mistake) than to ignore an entire narrative branch.

Even so, the loyalist arc simply strengthens the theory, and makes it more visible to people who play through it. The way she handles Derek, Baine and the mak'gora still works better that way, even from outside.

Beyond that though I guess the main problem that rises going forward is whether Sylvanas is playing 4D chess or not.
You argue the side that every action Sylvanas has taken is part of some massive grand plan, in which even the meta is a part of the grand delusion. Whereas I argue that WoW is not the kind of game that does that kind of extremely deep storytelling.

As much as I agree it would be plausible that Sylvanas is actually just that good and calculated her every move to both ingratiate herself to the Jailer by killing as many people as possible while also not so many the Jailers plan couldnt be stopped I think it is far more likely that she is simply a villain, and her missteps is because like most villain in WoW, she is overconfident and unprepared for the scourge that is the player characters.

And again, if the argument for her acting like such an over the top cartoon villain is because the writers wants to trick us, then I would argue that this makes the story so much worse, not better.
A good writer, (or team) should know how to effectively straddle the line between good and evil in such a way that when you look back you can see the conflict in their eyes. Especially if you consider these the kinds of writers who are willing to make such a grand twist.

I think that 4D chess is simply the only way to give the story some depth.

Sylvanas's arc from Legion throughout BFA is filled with question marks and inconsistencies - both relative to older lore and within the arc itself. 4D chess would be an opportunity to reframe them in a coherent, maybe even interesting fashion. What's more, the existence of a complex, subversive plan would add stakes and twists to these reveals, instead of simply lampshading the inconsistencies. For example, the Mueh'zala reveal lampshades the fact that Vol'jin's dying claims were apparently wrong, but doesn't explain why Vol'jin's spirit conveniently forgot the details of his vision, or why he was saved from Mueh'zala, and by who, or why the multiple whispers turned into a single one, or why exactly Sylvanas was surprised to have been named Warchief in BtS, or even why Mueh'zala is working with the Jailer. Helya's presence is still only lampshading so far, without actually fleshing out her role in the Jailer-Sylvanas alliance.

You bring up good storytelling, but how was BFA good if taken at face value? Horde players have been complaining for ages about the rampant villain batting of their racial heroes, as well as Warchiefs changing 4 times in 4 expansions, and I'm not sure how many Horde players were keen on getting the bargain bin remake of MoP - "The Evil Horde - Now Even More Vile and Quicker to Fall Apart". Anything that can help give this some depth, some Watsonian logic or some meta twist pay off would only improve the overall lore, IMO.

And how is the story good if Sylvanas is just a straight-forward cartoon villain? Step back from the Teldrassil payback angle and keep in mind the metanarrative problems I brought up above. What does the story gain, in a narrative sense, from villain-batting Sylvanas, versus having a true morally grey war in BFA and segueing into Shadowlands with her in a position similar to the one Velen played in Legion? Never in the history of WoW has a Horde-themed faction spearheaded the defense of Azeroth in an expansion, and rarely even in patches. The only sort of exception was Thrall in Cataclysm (with the Earthen Ring having no overt Horde theme to it, even though it started that way in lore), and that utterly ruined the character. How is it good storytelling to villain bat Sylvanas just for the sake of killing her, when villain batting Horde heroes is already an overused, frustrating trope? It's not like introducing the Jailer couldn't have been done some other way (through Bolvar for example); hell, her exact connection to him hasn't even been explained yet. And if the Jailer is a Snoke 2.0 and Sylvanas is the actual big bad, why even have him in the story at all?

In my opinion, the story will already be bad if they play it straight. It's only the twist reveal, the details we don't yet know, that has a chance to make it better. Achieving that while also giving Alliance satisfaction for Teldrassil might be a challenge, but there are ways to provide catharsis for that without offering revenge, I think (i.e. reviving the elves through Ardenweald or linking their presence in Shadowlands with something that helps Elune). As to the story being simple, here's what Danuser had to say in a recent interview about the cinematics:

We know that no detail, no matter how small or seemingly incidental, escapes the watchful eye of our players. From concept, to script, to storyboards, to animatics, all the way to final sound and images, every word and every frame is lovingly crafted in painstaking detail. Nothing is there by accident.

Players have already picked up on a number of elements that hint at larger storylines or concepts. When we depicted Uther's soul being shattered by Frostmourne, we wondered if the detail might be too subtle. But in fact, the community spotted that immediately and began speculating what that might mean for Uther and other characters. When we showed Draka infiltrating a Burning Legion stronghold, viewers quickly picked up on a reference to an earlier cinematic and realized the implication that the Necrolords not only defend against invasions, but travel beyond the Shadowlands to neutralize potential threats.

There are other details in the Afterlives series that will take on greater meaning once players can play through the full Shadowlands story and see how these elements tie together.

He clearly makes it sound like they are erring on the side of subtlety and complexity. Whether or not he is bullshitting remains to be seen, but I don't think we are wrong to expect something subversive.

Would a 4D chess twist make the character too smart? Maybe, but to me that is vastly preferable to a character being too stupid, which is bad writing by default. Heroes and villains alike are better when they're smart. They can still make mistakes based on emotion, so even if they're clever they need not be Mary Sues. I feel that only haters revel in characters' stupidity - and this applies to more than just Sylvanas; Anduin, Malfurion, Vol'jin, Thrall and others are frequent targets of this attitude as well - because then they get to piss on the character and get to point out how pathetic and retarded they are. I think this attitude is toxic, but if their bullying remains contained to fictional characters, I guess I'll say to each their own...

[Sondrelk]

I mean, if you're already willing to selectively discount lore, then you shouldn't have any problem adjusting to however they decide to frame past events in the future. It makes more sense to accept that the tone of certain quests and cinematic is misleading (on purpose or by mistake) than to ignore an entire narrative branch.

Even so, the loyalist arc simply strengthens the theory, and makes it more visible to people who play through it. The way she handles Derek, Baine and the mak'gora still works better that way, even from outside.

I am not disagreeing that the story might do with some extra depth, I am simply arguing that Sylvanas is not the way to go about it.
Reading too deeply into motivations is a definite thing, and where do you draw the line where Sylvanas' evil gloating is just playing a layed game of chess against the world, compared to simply being insane and evil.

As I said, some stories can really delve deep into motivations and create layered and deep motivations that allows a character to play both the hero and villain, I just don't think WoW is that kind of story.
Is that a sign that WoW is objectively a worse written story than something like Code Geass that has the essential twist you are arguing? Possibly, but there is still a niche for simple good vs. evil stories, and WoW is I would argue one of them.


What the story gains from villain batting Sylvanas is making allusions to Arthas to compare and contrast with the character who is definitely returning soon. It gives BfA an explosive opening. And it gives the surrounding characters the opportunity to react to someone they thought they knew being so evil.
Would the story have been better without making Sylvanas evil? Given how poor the storytelling in BfA was I am leaning towards yes, but that doesnt change the fact that they have now shown Sylvanas as clear evil, pretty much the entire faction wr plot in BfA revolved around it, and all signs currently point to defeating Sylvanas as the endgame of that story.

What is the alternative final boss to avenge Teldrassil, Undercity and the countless others lost in BfA? The Jailer is not particularly interesting at the moment, and even then making him the villain would not feel particularly earned when we knew nothing of him in BfA, where indeed Sylvanas was the big bad.

You say villain batting Sylvanas just to kill her is bad, but surely it iss even worse to villain bat her just to redeem her.
She was never a pure good character, and there were several points in the story that have shown that she is evil even before BfA. Things like kidnapping innocent farmers to make the blight, torturing Koltira for intending to pursue a peaceful resolution in Andorhal, and of course the weird cult of personality in Undercity that one might argue is warranted, but also could be better gotten rid of.

You mention ressurecting Nelves, but what is earned by having Sylvanas kill them just to revive them later? Again, it comes off as needless busywork just to have Sylvanas appear irredeemable at one point, then good at another. Will she also regrow Teldrassil? Or un-undead the ones she raised? And again, what of the damage to civilizations and the massive blow to the Horde reputation?
The argument is there of course that this is what makes it a morally questionable choice, but I would argue that if Blizzard really just wanted her to do something morally dubious and then be shown to have good intentions then they didnt need to make her so cartoonishly evil.


As for the dev post, I honestly think you are reading WAY too deep into it. Nothing is there by accident was referring to things people took as obvious such as Uther's soul being split into two, explaining how we could interract with him despite him also being sent to Bastion.

[Orby]

I would like to believe that you cannot redeem genocide of an entire race but hey they did it with Kerrigan in Starcraft 2. Maybe they'll make her a massive void light god too xD

[bagina]

Seeing Sylvanas WITHOUT a bitchface is scary shit indeed.

I want to protect this smile

[Sondrelk]

I would like to believe that you cannot redeem genocide of an entire race but hey they did it with Kerrigan in Starcraft 2. Maybe they'll make her a massive void light god too xD

Even with Kerrigan they went for the slight copout of saying she was mind-controlled in the original Starcraft trilogy, then having 2 games where she did good things to try and redeem herself, and even with all that players still considered it a copout.
I sincerely doubt Blizzard would try the same with a character more hated, and whose actions would need to be retconeed almost immediately after they were commited.

[Super Kami Dende]

She doesn't deserve a redemption arc, and just needs to be fucking removed from the story already.

She's a shit-tier character written by a shit-tier writer.

[Coconut]

I am not disagreeing that the story might do with some extra depth, I am simply arguing that Sylvanas is not the way to go about it.
Reading too deeply into motivations is a definite thing, and where do you draw the line where Sylvanas' evil gloating is just playing a layed game of chess against the world, compared to simply being insane and evil.

Sylvanas is the only way to go about it, seeing how she is the one who was hijacked to lead us into this, and the most familiar face connected to the whole thing.

As I said, some stories can really delve deep into motivations and create layered and deep motivations that allows a character to play both the hero and villain, I just don't think WoW is that kind of story.

Come on! Have you played Warcraft III? There's almost nothing BUT antiheroes and compelling villains in there, as Chris Metzen at that time had a massive hard-on for the morally grey A Song of Ice and Fire series. This entire franchise is built on layered characters with over the top actions of both good and evil.

What the story gains from villain batting Sylvanas is making allusions to Arthas to compare and contrast with the character who is definitely returning soon. It gives BfA an explosive opening. And it gives the surrounding characters the opportunity to react to someone they thought they knew being so evil.
Would the story have been better without making Sylvanas evil? Given how poor the storytelling in BfA was I am leaning towards yes, but that doesnt change the fact that they have now shown Sylvanas as clear evil, pretty much the entire faction wr plot in BfA revolved around it, and all signs currently point to defeating Sylvanas as the endgame of that story.

Given the rather extreme abuser-victim dynamic they had in Warcraft III, and the fact that he is directly and solely responsible for setting her on the path to undeath, villain batting Sylvanas just so she can serve as a ramp for redeeming Arthas would pretty much be the most disgusting, sickening, fucked up, perversely psychopathic direction the story could take.

What is the alternative final boss to avenge Teldrassil, Undercity and the countless others lost in BfA? The Jailer is not particularly interesting at the moment, and even then making him the villain would not feel particularly earned when we knew nothing of him in BfA, where indeed Sylvanas was the big bad.

You say villain batting Sylvanas just to kill her is bad, but surely it iss even worse to villain bat her just to redeem her.
She was never a pure good character, and there were several points in the story that have shown that she is evil even before BfA. Things like kidnapping innocent farmers to make the blight, torturing Koltira for intending to pursue a peaceful resolution in Andorhal, and of course the weird cult of personality in Undercity that one might argue is warranted, but also could be better gotten rid of.

You mention ressurecting Nelves, but what is earned by having Sylvanas kill them just to revive them later? Again, it comes off as needless busywork just to have Sylvanas appear irredeemable at one point, then good at another. Will she also regrow Teldrassil? Or un-undead the ones she raised? And again, what of the damage to civilizations and the massive blow to the Horde reputation?
The argument is there of course that this is what makes it a morally questionable choice, but I would argue that if Blizzard really just wanted her to do something morally dubious and then be shown to have good intentions then they didnt need to make her so cartoonishly evil.

Who says Shadowlands' resolution should be about revenge for BFA? Surely the story should be allowed to grow beyond that; we are entering the Afterlife and learning that it's broken, we learn about a grand conspiracy to consume all planes of existence. While Teldrassil needs a resolution, the expansion has a much grander scope than simply a setting to solve our gripes over two cities.

What Sylvanas needs is not so much redemption, but a compelling reason for what she did - either something that motivated her, or some grander scheme that required her to take those steps. And yes, we should be able to empathize with her position, or at least say "Holy shit, this is a much bigger deal than we thought", otherwise the reveal would be entirely pointless.

And no, Sylvanas shouldn't have anything to do with rescuing the Teldrassil victims, that should be Tyrande's arc. Having to choose between getting the vengeance she sets out to pursue and taking an opportunity to rescue her people would be a compelling character moment for her, and the catharsis Night Elf fans truly need. You might think resurrection is tacky, but even if Sylvanas is killed, the Night Elves are still threatened with extinction, or at least politically powerless for the foreseeable future, they are still a sad, broken, traumatized and displaced race. They deserve to return to what they truly were, and luckily revival is very much a Nature/Life theme, and the Night Elf souls end up in Ardenweald, which is the one place which can provide exactly that, given that the flow of anima is restored to it.

[Sondrelk]

Sylvanas is the only way to go about it, seeing how she is the one who was hijacked to lead us into this, and the most familiar face connected to the whole thing.



Come on! Have you played Warcraft III? There's almost nothing BUT antiheroes and compelling villains in there, as Chris Metzen at that time had a massive hard-on for the morally grey A Song of Ice and Fire series. This entire franchise is built on layered characters with over the top actions of both good and evil.



Given the rather extreme abuser-victim dynamic they had in Warcraft III, and the fact that he is directly and solely responsible for setting her on the path to undeath, villain batting Sylvanas just so she can serve as a ramp for redeeming Arthas would pretty much be the most disgusting, sickening, fucked up, perversely psychopathic direction the story could take.



Who says Shadowlands' resolution should be about revenge for BFA? Surely the story should be allowed to grow beyond that; we are entering the Afterlife and learning that it's broken, we learn about a grand conspiracy to consume all planes of existence. While Teldrassil needs a resolution, the expansion has a much grander scope than simply a setting to solve our gripes over two cities.

What Sylvanas needs is not so much redemption, but a compelling reason for what she did - either something that motivated her, or some grander scheme that required her to take those steps. And yes, we should be able to empathize with her position, or at least say "Holy shit, this is a much bigger deal than we thought", otherwise the reveal would be entirely pointless.

And no, Sylvanas shouldn't have anything to do with rescuing the Teldrassil victims, that should be Tyrande's arc. Having to choose between getting the vengeance she sets out to pursue and taking an opportunity to rescue her people would be a compelling character moment for her, and the catharsis Night Elf fans truly need. You might think resurrection is tacky, but even if Sylvanas is killed, the Night Elves are still threatened with extinction, or at least politically powerless for the foreseeable future, they are still a sad, broken, traumatized and displaced race. They deserve to return to what they truly were, and luckily revival is very much a Nature/Life theme, and the Night Elf souls end up in Ardenweald, which is the one place which can provide exactly that, given that the flow of anima is restored to it.

WoW is not Warcraft 3. And while WoW has some high points of writing on ocassion it doesnt really strike as as aspiring to the same heights as what The Frozen Throne did with Arthas' slow descent into the Lich King.


You could argue that making Sylvanas evil when Arthas is likely redeemed is a bad choice, or you could argue that this is also a layer of depth added to the story. Sylvanas' misguided attempts at righting the wrongs done to her has damned her far more than Arthas ever did, the true tragedy that she has become far, far worse than the person she once hated.

If you want to discuss the question of twists and deeper metanarrative then you could also argue that Arthas was not the person that is solely responsible for killing Sylvanas because of Frostmourne, and that the big twist will be that in comparision Sylvanas IS in control and responsible for her actions. Further adding to the tragedy that is Sylvanas descent into villainy.


Shadowlands shouldnt be all about BfA, no. But we are lacking a resolution ot BfA in the form of some kind of revenge, that is just how the medium of game works. The Shadowlands has its own problems thatt desperately need to be fixed, but that doesnt mean that we should just forget about parts of the reasons we went in to begin with, the faction leaders knows Sylvanas is evil and intend ot follow her to ensure she stays dead to no longer haunt them.

We do already emphatize with Sylvanas' actions because we recognize that it is her overreaction to what she thinks is an unfair world.
She was killed by Arthas and ressurected to kill her own people, the tragedy being that in trying to correct that wrong she has in fact become the very thing she once despised. Despite her presumably starting her descent because of a desire to prevent things like elven soldiers being killed defending their homes only to be ressurected to kill their own family, she herself is now the incarnate of evil that taunts her enemies as they lie down dying.

Tyrande rescuing her people from the Maw is also a moment that is pretty much antithetical to Sylvanas getting a redemption. Rescuing them would in every way be seen as a victory against Sylvanas. Something which would be massively undercut by having her be redeemed. Same with the Undead finally starting a new life away from the shadow of the tyrant that killed her own people.


There is no way ot write Sylvanas as being anything more than a universally vilified character, for whom the death was nothing but a net positive for the universe.

Or perhaps rather, there is no way to write it that way without giving the impression that the writers are retconning themselves almost immediately. The best they might manage is something where the characters accept that Sylvanas finally did something good by uniting the world against her evil ways.

[Coconut]

WoW is not Warcraft 3. And while WoW has some high points of writing on ocassion it doesnt really strike as as aspiring to the same heights as what The Frozen Throne did with Arthas' slow descent into the Lich King.

You're kind of using selective reasoning here. Either it's worth having an argument about good writing vs bad, or it's not, and then your original point that validating Sylvanas without payback for Teldrassil is bad writing doesn't matter.

You could argue that making Sylvanas evil when Arthas is likely redeemed is a bad choice, or you could argue that this is also a layer of depth added to the story. Sylvanas' misguided attempts at righting the wrongs done to her has damned her far more than Arthas ever did, the true tragedy that she has become far, far worse than the person she once hated.

If you want to discuss the question of twists and deeper metanarrative then you could also argue that Arthas was not the person that is solely responsible for killing Sylvanas because of Frostmourne, and that the big twist will be that in comparision Sylvanas IS in control and responsible for her actions. Further adding to the tragedy that is Sylvanas descent into villainy.

There is nothing to be gained by redeeming Arthas. He had a successful, complex arc as a villain which would be ruined if it gets retconned into some tragic puppeteering, and there's nowhere for him to go after Shadowlands. The Forsaken taking him would be a bad joke, he has no claim to Stormwind, and there probably won't be any focus on undeath for a while. He could be the rightful king of the Scarlet Crusade, but then he'd be a villain all over again. Unlike Illidan or Kael (or Sylvanas), he is not a popular antihero hijacked into villainy for the sake of a random raid. There is absolutely no reason to bring him back other to satisfy the sickening fantasies of some very fucked up individuals who get off on maximizing Sylvanas's degradation. IMO, anyone who champions this particular dumpster fire of a narrative is disqualified from calling anything bad writing, even Med'an and Season 8 of Game of Thrones, and should really look in the mirror and question themselves.

Edit: Besides, if you can say Arthas wasn't in control, you can just as easily say Sylvanas was under the effect of some magic of hopelesness cast on her in the Maw.

Shadowlands shouldnt be all about BfA, no. But we are lacking a resolution ot BfA in the form of some kind of revenge, that is just how the medium of game works. The Shadowlands has its own problems thatt desperately need to be fixed, but that doesnt mean that we should just forget about parts of the reasons we went in to begin with, the faction leaders knows Sylvanas is evil and intend ot follow her to ensure she stays dead to no longer haunt them.

The medium of the game works on stopping world-ending threats, not on "getting revenge", particularly since former Sylvanas fans have little reason to get on board with this fairly recent (3 years at most, out of 18 the character has been around) hijack into extreme villainy (yes, Sylvanas was always a ruthless bitch, but she had a sympathetic emotionally wounded side too, and never went as far as in BtS/BFA prepatch) perpetrated by a couple of writers who are relatively new to the franchise. Not everyone is a Worgen player.

We do already emphatize with Sylvanas' actions because we recognize that it is her overreaction to what she thinks is an unfair world.
She was killed by Arthas and ressurected to kill her own people, the tragedy being that in trying to correct that wrong she has in fact become the very thing she once despised. Despite her presumably starting her descent because of a desire to prevent things like elven soldiers being killed defending their homes only to be ressurected to kill their own family, she herself is now the incarnate of evil that taunts her enemies as they lie down dying.

Yet we were never shown this transition explicitly, and the story played itself like it had depth and missing information. The "unfair world angle" is incomplete, since we don't know what supposedly makes it "unfair", so it sounds like a mopey emo teen's whines when they have to do their homework. If the true reason fails to engage players in any way, playing it as a secret drawn out over 5 years would be just awful.

The fact that Sylvanas appears as an absolute villain can be a matter of perspective. People keep projecting what her ultimate goal is based on appearances, but we don't truly know. It would be a rather narrow minded approach to criticize the story if it turns out that the scope of what's going on with the Shadowlands is so vast that the fate of a city pales in comparison to it.

[bagina]

There is nothing to be gained by redeeming Arthas. He had a successful, complex arc as a villain which would be ruined if it gets retconned into some tragic puppeteering, and there's nowhere for him to go after Shadowlands. The Forsaken taking him would be a bad joke, he has no claim to Stormwind, and there probably won't be any focus on undeath for a while. He could be the rightful king of the Scarlet Crusade, but then he'd be a villain all over again. Unlike Illidan or Kael (or Sylvanas), he is not a popular antihero hijacked into villainy for the sake of a random raid. There is absolutely no reason to bring him back other to satisfy the sickening fantasies of some very fucked up individuals who get off on maximizing Sylvanas's degradation. IMO, anyone who champions this particular dumpster fire of a narrative is disqualified from calling anything bad writing, even Med'an and Season 8 of Game of Thrones, and should really look in the mirror and question themselves.

*slow clap*

I've been really enjoying your posts. Please keep on keeping on

[ZazuuPriest]

i highly doubt we will be killing off another major horde leader.

[Powerogue]

i highly doubt we will be killing off another major horde leader.

Good news, she's not a Horde leader anymore.

People keep talking about her "pulling a Kerrigan" but Blizzard made it clear where they stand on that.



Though that does make me wonder of pulling a twisted Kerrigan as an ironic ultimate punishment. Doing the mindwipe process from the Kyrians on her by force and having her shell tasked with rescuing the innocent damned from the Maw.

[Varodoc]

Good news, she's not a Horde leader anymore.

People keep talking about her "pulling a Kerrigan" but Blizzard made it clear where they stand on that.

Though that does make me wonder of pulling a twisted Kerrigan as an ironic ultimate punishment. Doing the mindwipe process from the Kyrians on her by force and having her shell tasked with rescuing the innocent damned from the Maw.

People who claim that Sylvanas is Kerrigan 2.0 NEVER played Starcraft 2. It's obvious. They try to act like they are sooo smart ("Hehe look I'm so bright, I found a connection between two women from these two completely different Blizzard games developed by two completely different teams hehe"), when they got it all wrong.

Kerrigan committed atrocities under the negative influence of Amon. The "Good" Kerrigan literally whispers to Jim Raynor in the final mission. Sylvanas committed atrocities of her own free will.

Say it with me

BEING MANIPULATED BY THE JAILER.
DOES NOT MEAN.
BEING MIND-CONTROLLED.

Also, people don't seem to understand how exactly Kerrigan redeemed herself. Becoming a xel'naga was a burden, not a reward. All Kerrigan wanted was to live a normal life like every other human, becoming literal God is the OPPOSITE of that. She did not want to become xel'naga, she did not see it as a reward, that's why she said "It is my DUTY to become xel'naga, I need to wash off all this blood I have on my hands". And it's not like people just forgave her. In fact, no one forgave her lol. She's still seen as a monster by terran and protoss alike. She saved the cosmos, but left behind a hated legacy, as very few knew what happened in the Void, and they kept quiet.

[Sondrelk]

You're kind of using selective reasoning here. Either it's worth having an argument about good writing vs bad, or it's not, and then your original point that validating Sylvanas without payback for Teldrassil is bad writing doesn't matter.



There is nothing to be gained by redeeming Arthas. He had a successful, complex arc as a villain which would be ruined if it gets retconned into some tragic puppeteering, and there's nowhere for him to go after Shadowlands. The Forsaken taking him would be a bad joke, he has no claim to Stormwind, and there probably won't be any focus on undeath for a while. He could be the rightful king of the Scarlet Crusade, but then he'd be a villain all over again. Unlike Illidan or Kael (or Sylvanas), he is not a popular antihero hijacked into villainy for the sake of a random raid. There is absolutely no reason to bring him back other to satisfy the sickening fantasies of some very fucked up individuals who get off on maximizing Sylvanas's degradation. IMO, anyone who champions this particular dumpster fire of a narrative is disqualified from calling anything bad writing, even Med'an and Season 8 of Game of Thrones, and should really look in the mirror and question themselves.

Edit: Besides, if you can say Arthas wasn't in control, you can just as easily say Sylvanas was under the effect of some magic of hopelesness cast on her in the Maw.



The medium of the game works on stopping world-ending threats, not on "getting revenge", particularly since former Sylvanas fans have little reason to get on board with this fairly recent (3 years at most, out of 18 the character has been around) hijack into extreme villainy (yes, Sylvanas was always a ruthless bitch, but she had a sympathetic emotionally wounded side too, and never went as far as in BtS/BFA prepatch) perpetrated by a couple of writers who are relatively new to the franchise. Not everyone is a Worgen player.



Yet we were never shown this transition explicitly, and the story played itself like it had depth and missing information. The "unfair world angle" is incomplete, since we don't know what supposedly makes it "unfair", so it sounds like a mopey emo teen's whines when they have to do their homework. If the true reason fails to engage players in any way, playing it as a secret drawn out ov.er 5 years would be just awful.

The fact that Sylvanas appears as an absolute villain can be a matter of perspective. People keep projecting what her ultimate goal is based on appearances, but we don't truly know. It would be a rather narrow minded approach to criticize the story if it turns out that the scope of what's going on with the Shadowlands is so vast that the fate of a city pales in comparison to it

And you don't see the irony of you arguing that reddeeming Arthas is silly when he has done so much evil, and then immediately transitioning to stating that Sylvnaas is just misunderstood?

What is there to say Arthas didnt do everytning out of hte kindness of his heart, which indeed the material actually supports, or that he was unjustly controlled, which again the material supports.

Your argument here is basically to assume Arthas is evil because his evil deeds speak for themselves, and even if they didnt a redemption would just cheapen the character and writing as a whole. And then at the same time argue that the similar overt villainy of Sylvanas is just the writers projecting a front so conceal her true motives.

Sometimes the writers are just out ot make a character a villain, and in the case of Sylvanas the fall was not that far, and indeed one could argue makes the character better as it in a way finishes her twisted arc as the dark mirror of Arthas.


Just to put it concisely, why should Arthas be assumed ot be completely evil and beyond redemption for destroying cities, when Sylvanas is not for similarly destroying cities, torturing people and indeed conspiring to release an Old God.
It just seems like blatant hypocrisy to me.

[Coconut]

*slow clap*

I've been really enjoying your posts. Please keep on keeping on

I can say the same. The resistance must continue.

[Rustedsaint]

I’m suspecting we gonna a twist ending to her story.
After watching the bastion trailer I’m suspecting that the sylvanas we all know and “love” will just turn out to be a shard separated from the rest of her true self. The rest did reach her true afterlive similar to what happened to Uther.
We will get a boss fight with both of them waging war against each other.

[Sondrelk]

I’m suspecting we gonna a twist ending to her story.
After watching the bastion trailer I’m suspecting that the sylvanas we all know and “love” will just turn out to be a shard separated from the rest of her true self. The rest did reach her true afterlive similar to what happened to Uther.
We will get a boss fight with both of them waging war against each other.

It would be interesting in concept, but in practice I think we would quickly hit a wall when we realize that the Sylvanas we are then interracting with is not the same one that we used to interract with and might as well be a completely different character.

Let's for the sake of argument say that the good Sylvanas ended up in Maldraxxus or something. What would the character be like? She wouldnt have interracted with any of hte faction leaders, she wouldnt have led the freed Scourge to become the Forsaken, she wouldnt have become the twisted and bitter version of herself that was willing to kill innocent farmers to perfect a weapon of mass destruction.

It might be neat to see a good Sylvanas, but the only reason it kinda works for Uther is because all the relevant parts about his story were from before he was dead, with only a tiny bit after with pretty much no personality, leaving the Bastion Uther to essentially just be the Uther we know except with amnesia.