[Spoilers] Shattered legacies (new cinematic)

[pahbi]

This is a pre-render or something right?

I mean, its not really going to look this bad in game is it?

[Aucald]

This is a pre-render or something right?

I mean, its not really going to look this bad in game is it?

It's PTR, so all of the datamined cutscenes and cinematics are still technically in the WIP (work in progress) state. But I wouldn't expect much in terms of the rendering if you don't currently like it - they're at diminished capacity with everything going on at current, so corners are definitely going to be cut.

[sighy]

I wouldn't say the Forsaken were manipulated victims, per see; but I do think they were a vulnerable group (by dint of their circumstances following being freed from the Scourge) that Sylvanas exploited, but also provided a great deal of material help to. The point is that Sylvanas' rule over the Forsaken wasn't a matter of any kind of altruism on her part, nor was it born out of a desire to help what she saw as her peers or even her new countrymen. She built them up, built out a place for them to call their own, all with an eye to what the Forsaken could for her. And any time the Forsaken stepped out of the line, such as the Desolate Council eventually did, they were ruthlessly stepped on by way of extermination. Suffice it to say, Sylvanas was neither a noble nor a caring ruler, even if she tried to sell this image of herself to the Forsaken via her cult of personality. She laid out her feelings on the matter beyond question in the post-BfA material.

She was in a similar place to them, in regards of emotional vulnerability and her being the first known to break free from Lich King's Domination magic is going to play a role soon enough. That said her relationship with the Forsaken has always been that of mutual benefit, which is something recent authors have omitted or even sought to undermine. (whether that was dictated by Danuser&co doesn't really matter toward criticism of the creative choice) As for her own views of them she has always showcased a sort of ownership kind of caring, where in the edge of night it's one of the heart strings being pulled on to convince her that she should accept the Val'kyr's bargain, because otherwise Garrosh is gonna grind her Forsaken down as canon fodder, in the conquest of Gilneas. Even portraying remorse for leaving them, in aftermath of 8.2.5's conclusion to the War Campaign, with the note that she has some sort of secret urgent duty, which eclipses all the Azeroth based stuff. A more fitting description would be that sort of toxic abusive kind of caring, which gets rarely explored in standard Fantasy media.

The whole Arathi fiasco was talked over to death on these forums, but from a political standpoint she had every right to shoot the likes of Parqual, which is something even Anduin had to admit when heat of the moment passed. The ones who left before Calia and the runners showed their true collors are still alive and well presumably given that they got the seal of approval and were never mentioned again.

As I related previously, the manner in which Ranger-General Sylvanas used the phrase, and the manner in which Dark Ranger Sylvanas did are circumscribed and rendered quite different by the context. Ranger-General Sylvanas was beloved by her people, and she seemed to love them in turn. Her use of the phrase is tinged with fatalism and resignation - this isn't how she wants it to be, but she knows some must be sacrificed if all are to be saved (in the midst of a pitched battle for the Quel'dorei's very land). For the Banshee Queen, with her personal agenda of vengeance, this takes on a new meaning with a new resonance - cold and brutal, impersonal and intensely practical. An example of how the same words can depending on the circumstance, mean something entirely different. As for the Desolate Council, well, they run the gamut of ideologies as concerns of the future of the Forsaken. From members who simply miss Sylvanas' attentions, to those who see the shortsightedness of continued general hostility like Vellcinda/Elsie Benton, and those like Parqual who oppose Sylvanas so intensely they could easily be thought of as traitors to the Forsaken. A lot of their personal feelings are explored in Before the Storm.

The arrow analogy is one she has used in a variety of contexts, from her own Rangers to Garithos's company, even to chide Garrosh about carelessly wasting her forces. Gonna take your word for it about the specific BtS parts given it's been years since i read the book and I'm not particularly inclined to do it just for the sake of this discussion. For Sylvanas's part i recall distinctly that while she had a negative first reaction to it she came around to the idea of the Desolate Council and even suggested them for the meeting hoping they would be spurned just like she was during War Crimes to a mixed result.

I think the focus on Teldrassil is mostly for the viewer - it's the freshest of Sylvanas' atrocities, therefore the easiest to serve as the encapsulation of everything Banshee Sylvanas is that Ranger-General Sylvanas is not. You're also judging the whole of a narrative on a single moment, which is itself torn from its surrounding context. I'm sure there's going to be more to this story arc going forward, and we've already seen some aspects of the unified Sylvanas discussing her past and legacy. Needless to say, this isn't the end of this specific story or the only beat in which it will be touched on.

Barring major changes what we see is likely what we are going to get, in terms of her actually coming to terms with all the stuff given that after the cinematic we're already dealing with the composite version. That said having her share the reasoning/motive for joining him, after Zovaal kicks the bucket would unfortunately fit the recent trend of Blizzard storytelling, where they set things up, after the payoff.

Right now we're sifting through unrelated and disconnected story beats datamined from the PTR, without a bridging narrative or a full picture of 9.2's story going forward. So yeah, you're not going to get a complete picture here - it'd be more akin to reading a few pages of LotR and then skipping 100+ pages ahead and reading another set, then trying to forge that into a cohesive narrative.

My criticism for lack of information is pretty much aimed at the whole era from BtS/War of Thorns until now. We still don't know the what, how or why of her story over 3 years down the line, after she managed to flip flop to the enemy side and then back to our own achieving basically nothing besides kicking Bolvar's ass, in the interim save the Jailer letting her talk to Anduin until his real plan with the Kingsmourne was ready like a kid in your workshop that needs to be entertained so it doesn't get in your way.

- - - Updated - - -

It's PTR, so all of the datamined cutscenes and cinematics are still technically in the WIP (work in progress) state. But I wouldn't expect much in terms of the rendering if you don't currently like it - they're at diminished capacity with everything going on at current, so corners are definitely going to be cut.

The Shattered LEgacy or whatever it'S called has been officially launched on Blizzard's youtube channel "To give context to playtesters"

[bloodkin]

Ugh, gross. Major cop out.

The concept of coming to grips with what she's done (kind of) is honestly not a bad thing to explore. It's a relatable story beat that can really show growth and go any number of ways. The voice acting and the dialogue was great. But the fact is, that this has never been hinted at through out the like 20 years since WC3:TFT.

They have always maintained that Sylvanas has free will and her story was clearly a twisted reflection of Arthas' own story for revenge. I would argue that the fact that she occasionally seemed forlorn about her past and dwelt on things like her sisters or the fall of Silvermoon confirmed the notion that she was supposed to be the whole package rather than one piece of two.

Suddenly introducing this "split soul" stuff and then applying it directly to her forehead cheapens the whole "revenge arc" of her story and considering that it looks like they're teeing up some sort of soft redemption, it cheapens all of the horrible things that she has done because even if she's trying to shoulder responsibility for it, you can always say "well it wasn't really her."

I'd so far as to say that blizz made the whole soul split thing of Frostmourne solely to save sylvanes, with Uther being used as an a near unimportant example for the phenomenon.

Instead of making a self actualized person of Uther with the capability of rationalizing his decisions to go against the status quo of the kyrian (with good reason), blizz decided to duck out of having to actually write something meaningful. The cop-out here is just being recycled for sylvanes. Instead of having true character development, blizz went "nah, frostmourne did it!"

aside from the fact that the quality of the cinematics have gotten worse over time, I think that the redemption arc for sylvanes is cringe at best, this wasn't done for the fans but for the dev(s) themselves. Redeeming sylvanes spits in the face of everthing that happened in BfA, not to mention the weird behavior in legion, and just stacks up on yet another horde warchief that got an unfitting treatment and ending. Vol'jin should at least have had a decent role to play in Shadowlands, Garrosh should've jsut not been in the picture beyone a mentioning in the maw and gone for good by the time we get there, and Thrall should've found his balls by now and actually doing something constructive by now instead of being yet another anduin yes-man. I believe that there was once a time blizz did have some horde favoritism, but with the way anduin is being used and handled, in contrast to the past 3 warchiefs, I'd argue that time is long gone. I truly hope the horde council can be something interesting and positive for the horde.

[Aucald]

She was in a similar place to them, in regards of emotional vulnerability and her being the first known to break free from Lich King's Domination magic is going to play a role soon enough. That said her relationship with the Forsaken has always been that of mutual benefit, which is something recent authors have omitted or even sought to undermine. (whether that was dictated by Danuser&co doesn't really matter toward criticism of the creative choice) As for her own views of them she has always showcased a sort of ownership kind of caring, where in the edge of night it's one of the heart strings being pulled on to convince her that she should accept the Val'kyr's bargain, because otherwise Garrosh is gonna grind her Forsaken down as canon fodder, in the conquest of Gilneas. Even portraying remorse for leaving them, in aftermath of 8.2.5's conclusion to the War Campaign, with the note that she has some sort of secret urgent duty, which eclipses all the Azeroth based stuff. A more fitting description would be that sort of toxic abusive kind of caring, which gets rarely explored in standard Fantasy media.

I would say you've got it a bit backward, myself. Sylvanas' views on the Forsaken pre-Cata were a bit more equitable, even with her obviously using them to her advantage. It wasn't until Cata and Edge of Night that we really see the extent to which she presupposes them as tools, first as arrows in her quiver and then as her bulwark against fate (in this case being tormented in the Maw). Like I said previously, she did have some regard for them beyond simple utility - but even still, she left them easily enough, and right when they arguably needed her most what with having lost their own homeland. It was definitely a largely one-sided and toxic, almost parasitic relationship, but I do think she had some minor pangs about ultimately leaving them to their own devices.

The whole Arathi fiasco was talked over to death on these forums, but from a political standpoint she had every right to shoot the likes of Parqual, which is something even Anduin had to admit when heat of the moment passed. The ones who left before Calia and the runners showed their true collors are still alive and well presumably given that they got the seal of approval and were never mentioned again.

If she only killed Parqual this might stand, but she butchered the majority of them, including their leader who had emphatically declared her loyalties only moments ago. It was the cold action of a tyrant, delivering swift death without trial, question, or appeal. You might say she has the right, and as an autocratic tyrant I guess that's true - but that's pretty damned far from a good thing, and anyone who believes in the essential rights of personhood or individual freedoms is going to have a dim view of her actions. It's in that capacity that I'm sitting in judgment of her.

The arrow analogy is one she has used in a variety of contexts, from her own Rangers to Garithos's company, even to chide Garrosh about carelessly wasting her forces. Gonna take your word for it about the specific BtS parts given it's been years since i read the book and I'm not particularly inclined to do it just for the sake of this discussion. For Sylvanas's part i recall distinctly that while she had a negative first reaction to it she came around to the idea of the Desolate Council and even suggested them for the meeting hoping they would be spurned just like she was during War Crimes to a mixed result.

That's not really what I'd call "coming around to the Desolate Council," either. She was hoping they'd be spiritually and philosophically crushed, making them far more pliable and less of a thorn in her side, more or less. She got her wish, too - some of them demoralized by their living relatives' inability to accept them, becoming more loyal to Sylvanas as a result, and the rest conveniently butchered on the fields of Arathi.

My criticism for lack of information is pretty much aimed at the whole era from BtS/War of Thorns until now. We still don't know the what, how or why of her story over 3 years down the line, after she managed to flip flop to the enemy side and then back to our own achieving basically nothing besides kicking Bolvar's ass, in the interim save the Jailer letting her talk to Anduin until his real plan with the Kingsmourne was ready like a kid in your workshop that needs to be entertained so it doesn't get in your way.

Which portions of the story are you still unclear on, specifically? There's a lot of information present - and while some specifics are unclear (and some retcons further muddy the waters) the general movements of the story from Before the Storm to BfA to Shadowlands are more or less known.

The Shattered LEgacy or whatever it'S called has been officially launched on Blizzard's youtube channel "To give context to playtesters"

And that context probably won't change, either. But anything on the PTR can and is often iterated on and updated, including cutscenes and cinematics. No idea if this cinematic specifically is a done deal or not, but while it's still PTR material the potential for refinement remains.

[Darththeo]

I am not going through 15 pages of comments ... but I realized that this is like Shadow of Revan in SWTOR;

I know that likely isn't the first. But, I mean, the more I see this the more I am like ... wait, are they just whole sale ripping off ideas from other places and putting no spin on it?

[sighy]

I would say you've got it a bit backward, myself. Sylvanas' views on the Forsaken pre-Cata were a bit more equitable, even with her obviously using them to her advantage. It wasn't until Cata and Edge of Night that we really see the extent to which she presupposes them as tools, first as arrows in her quiver and then as her bulwark against fate (in this case being tormented in the Maw). Like I said previously, she did have some regard for them beyond simple utility - but even still, she left them easily enough, and right when they arguably needed her most what with having lost their own homeland. It was definitely a largely one-sided and toxic, almost parasitic relationship, but I do think she had some minor pangs about ultimately leaving them to their own devices.

Which is consistant with the bulk of undead characterisation, up to BtS. Where it was largely considered near impossible for them to posess genuinely good feelings outside of something that they felt very strongly about in life and even then it was very easy for them to slip into bitter resentment over it. So them (including Sylvanas) seeing the faction as a means to an end hasn't been an issue until cca BfA, where we suddenly out of the blue start getting the likes of Zelling, Calia, Derek, etc. Who basically act as if they were still alive.

Regarding her leaving of the Horde/Forsaken... there is a reason it's been one of the most criticised moments of the expansion. (Besides Blizzcon lies) In that it's hard out of character for her just like mindcontrolling Derek. (latter of which is even pointed out through Voss) And no we still don't have the reason she was so desperate that she would cross the lines she herself established, as one of the few moral boundaries the Forsaken abide by.

If she only killed Parqual this might stand, but she butchered the majority of them, including their leader who had emphatically declared her loyalties only moments ago. It was the cold action of a tyrant, delivering swift death without trial, question, or appeal. You might say she has the right, and as an autocratic tyrant I guess that's true - but that's pretty damned far from a good thing, and anyone who believes in the essential rights of personhood or individual freedoms is going to have a dim view of her actions. It's in that capacity that I'm sitting in judgment of her.

Her reasoning for taking the actions she did was that she couldn't trust them. If asked they'd obviously say they're loyal and if they were interrogated they'd obviously say the opposite. So who is to tell that they didn't just get cold feet at the last moment? I've never taken an issue with it from a storytelling standpoint, because it portrays a character acting on information they have, in a lose-lose situation. Feel free to judge it from a meta perspective, with information the characters can't possibly have, but that's your fight.

That's not really what I'd call "coming around to the Desolate Council," either. She was hoping they'd be spiritually and philosophically crushed, making them far more pliable and less of a thorn in her side, more or less. She got her wish, too - some of them demoralized by their living relatives' inability to accept them, becoming more loyal to Sylvanas as a result, and the rest conveniently butchered on the fields of Arathi.

"Hardened, bitter, truly desolate" i believe is her description of how she hoped they would end up. You can speculate what she'd have done, if it wasn't for Calia, with the rest. The book doesn't give you enough to work with to form a conclusive case either way past Sylvanas's initial reaction to finding out about the council being a negative one, until she recognised their necessity for running the city, in her absence.

Which portions of the story are you still unclear on, specifically? There's a lot of information present - and while some specifics are unclear (and some retcons further muddy the waters) the general movements of the story from Before the Storm to BfA to Shadowlands are more or less known.

Oh, you know just the basic pillars of building an actual character.
-What did she hope to achieve/attain?
-Why did she hope to attain it?
-What are the consequences of her success and/or failiure to her?
-What was the thing she sought to be free of? How did it oppress her?
-What would make it all worth it?


And no, vague gobbledygook about freedom doesn't cut it and neither does the devs saying in Interviews retrospectively that she was actually like that all along. These last two expansions so far have done about as much good for the franchise as the Last Jedi and Rise of the Skywalker did for Star Wars, with about as much reverence for the legacy characters and overall pacing/plot coherency. (Not counting PTR/Datamined spoilers)

And that context probably won't change, either. But anything on the PTR can and is often iterated on and updated, including cutscenes and cinematics. No idea if this cinematic specifically is a done deal or not, but while it's still PTR material the potential for refinement remains.

Remains to be seen, but given the timeframe of March, at latest they don't really have time to do massive changes. Let alone the cinematics, which can easily take up to a year to produce. If they had an actual QA department they could test this stuff internally without spoiling the heck out of it to the playerbase, but what do i know?

[TrueHorde]

Sylvanas is so hot.

[Aucald]

Which is consistant with the bulk of undead characterisation, up to BtS. Where it was largely considered near impossible for them to posess genuinely good feelings outside of something that they felt very strongly about in life and even then it was very easy for them to slip into bitter resentment over it. So them (including Sylvanas) seeing the faction as a means to an end hasn't been an issue until cca BfA, where we suddenly out of the blue start getting the likes of Zelling, Calia, Derek, etc. Who basically act as if they were still alive.

I don't think that's really in evidence, though. Not when you have Forsaken characters like Leonid Bartholemew, Kegan Darkmar, Barnabas Grell, and alchemist Finklestein all the way back from Classic, TBC, and WotLK that prove otherwise. The Forsaken trended to self-serving evil due to their circumstances and the many traumas that gave rise to them - but there were always significant non-evil Forsaken. I think a lot of people got the idea that the Forsaken were monolithically evil because the majority of leveling quests you do are at the direct or indirect behest of the Royal Apothecary Society, which at the time was headed by a demon and his brainwashed lackey (Varimathras and Putress). So yeah, *they* are going to be pretty damned evil all in all, but they're also not the whole of the Forsaken or the non-Scourge undead.

Regarding her leaving of the Horde/Forsaken... there is a reason it's been one of the most criticised moments of the expansion. (Besides Blizzcon lies) In that it's hard out of character for her just like mindcontrolling Derek. (latter of which is even pointed out through Voss) And no we still don't have the reason she was so desperate that she would cross the lines she herself established, as one of the few moral boundaries the Forsaken abide by.

Admittedly, her rage-quitting the Horde and her own people due to Saurfang wounding her was both out-of-character and very surprising (not in the good way), but contextually it does make sense given that with her more direct service to the Jailer her need to placate either group was significantly diminished. Her mind-controlling Derek, though; that's in keeping with Sylvanas' attitudes having been previously established. Sylvanas is a pretty rank hypocrite, after all, and she's more than willing to violate her own credos if it proves to her advantage.

Her reasoning for taking the actions she did was that she couldn't trust them. If asked they'd obviously say they're loyal and if they were interrogated they'd obviously say the opposite. So who is to tell that they didn't just get cold feet at the last moment? I've never taken an issue with it from a storytelling standpoint, because it portrays a character acting on information they have, in a lose-lose situation. Feel free to judge it from a meta perspective, with information the characters can't possibly have, but that's your fight.

We know Sylvanas' own thoughts on the matter, so there's no real way to disentangle that from what occurred unless you willfully ignore it.

"Hardened, bitter, truly desolate" i believe is her description of how she hoped they would end up. You can speculate what she'd have done, if it wasn't for Calia, with the rest. The book doesn't give you enough to work with to form a conclusive case either way past Sylvanas's initial reaction to finding out about the council being a negative one, until she recognised their necessity for running the city, in her absence.

And the immediate question one should ask is why any monarch would want their people to feel "hardened, bitter, and truly desperate." To more easily manipulate them.

Oh, you know just the basic pillars of building an actual character.
-What did she hope to achieve/attain?
-Why did she hope to attain it?
-What are the consequences of her success and/or failiure to her?
-What was the thing she sought to be free of? How did it oppress her?
-What would make it all worth it?

- She hopes to fix what she views as a hopelessly broken system that damned her for acts she feels were out of her control.
- She was able to commune with a god-like power who offered her power and promises of resolution in exchange for her service.
- Said god-like power successfully restructures the cosmos and frees her from her eventual fate, and maybe even restores her to herself.
- Damnation, and it oppressed her in the same way any deeply feared future fate would oppress someone as they drew inexorably closer to it.
- Not being damned, escape from eternal and endless torture in the Maw.

Remains to be seen, but given the timeframe of March, at latest they don't really have time to do massive changes. Let alone the cinematics, which can easily take up to a year to produce. If they had an actual QA department they could test this stuff internally without spoiling the heck out of it to the playerbase, but what do i know?

Like I said originally, it's unlikely to change much if at all - but basically PTR = WIP in terms of nigh everything. They could do some additional passes and refine textures easily enough if they feel a need to do so.

[Gref]

I love how people who have zero knowledge of (computer) graphics & animations claim that this clip is garbage. I believe that story is utterly stupid but let's give them justice for a well made in-game animation.

yes good job on them turning wow into fortnite and fall guys level of graphics which is indie or low-budget companies. It is a disgrace. I don't need to know jack shit about graphics, the results are in front of me.

[Zodiark]

I am not going through 15 pages of comments ... but I realized that this is like Shadow of Revan in SWTOR;

I know that likely isn't the first. But, I mean, the more I see this the more I am like ... wait, are they just whole sale ripping off ideas from other places and putting no spin on it?

I play SWTOR as well so I kind of know where your going with this. However Most gaming companies borrow ideas from each other. That's the way things have always been. I mean look at Final Fantasy, a game I also play. They have almost each and every major summons / Ikon, esper, etc, is ripped from other games, most notably Dungeons and Dragons. Bahamut and Tiamat were literally the main antagonists of the Original DnD campaign and the 80's Saturday morning cartoon.

That said, I've noticed that one of the problems with games and their characters be they protagonists or antagonists is that when it comes to games you often don't own your creations anymore so writers may paint the characters in a certain light then become cornered. So then other writers come along and the company doesn't want to let go of said character so then they start to retcon and change things to suit the current narrative. I always felt the whole revan thing in Star Wars games was just that. They made a decent character in KoTor and didn't want to let him go.

Organic original ideas that are also good are hard to come by these days, so when any company comes across one they are unlikely to let it go. From an artistic standpoint many of those chars should have remained where the original author left them. However, art alone doesn't always pay the bills.

[Izalla]

Attonement in character, but out of character we know she shouldn't be blamed for everything that "she" did because it wasn't her. It's an indirect out of character redemption, regardless if this development takes the form of attonement in character.

My interpretation of all of this is that the whole point is of the cinematic that yes, it is her. The half that the jailer had frozen this whole time is just Sylvanas as she was when she died, and the only thing that makes them different is that the "good" Sylvanas (really just pre-death Sylvanas) was the lucky half that didn't experience undeath and everything that came after it. That half has to accept that the "evil" half is honestly just "the other half", and that it didn't matter which one ended up walking that path, the result would have been the same. They are one being, just at different points in time, and the only thing that makes the other half the "good" version is that she hasn't had any path to go down since she died to be able to make any bad decisions or be tainted by undeath. In order to merge and wake up, the "good" Sylvanas has to accept that they are really just one person, and all "bad" Sylvanas' crimes are exactly what she would have done if she'd been the half raised as a banshee instead.

[Darththeo]

I play SWTOR as well so I kind of know where your going with this. However Most gaming companies borrow ideas from each other. That's the way things have always been. I mean look at Final Fantasy, a game I also play. They have almost each and every major summons / Ikon, esper, etc, is ripped from other games, most notably Dungeons and Dragons. Bahamut and Tiamat were literally the main antagonists of the Original DnD campaign and the 80's Saturday morning cartoon.

That said, I've noticed that one of the problems with games and their characters be they protagonists or antagonists is that when it comes to games you often don't own your creations anymore so writers may paint the characters in a certain light then become cornered. So then other writers come along and the company doesn't want to let go of said character so then they start to retcon and change things to suit the current narrative. I always felt the whole revan thing in Star Wars games was just that. They made a decent character in KoTor and didn't want to let him go.

Organic original ideas that are also good are hard to come by these days, so when any company comes across one they are unlikely to let it go. From an artistic standpoint many of those chars should have remained where the original author left them. However, art alone doesn't always pay the bills.

Well, I don't believe any idea is original (certainly not completely original).

Like I know Bahamut is a god in DnD .. but it comes from mythology (it is akin to Marvel's Loki.) If you look into a source, you will see influences in it. It is just I am like this is feeling almost like a rip off. But, I am also judging the cinematic out of context.

[Khaza-R]

My interpretation of all of this is that the whole point is of the cinematic that yes, it is her. The half that the jailer had frozen this whole time is just Sylvanas as she was when she died, and the only thing that makes them different is that the "good" Sylvanas (really just pre-death Sylvanas) was the lucky half that didn't experience undeath and everything that came after it. That half has to accept that the "evil" half is honestly just "the other half", and that it didn't matter which one ended up walking that path, the result would have been the same. They are one being, just at different points in time, and the only thing that makes the other half the "good" version is that she hasn't had any path to go down since she died to be able to make any bad decisions or be tainted by undeath. In order to merge and wake up, the "good" Sylvanas has to accept that they are really just one person, and all "bad" Sylvanas' crimes are exactly what she would have done if she'd been the half raised as a banshee instead.

Your interpretation is probably right. Considering that's also how Uther seems to function with his soul being split. There's no good Uther and bad Uther.

However its still highly problematic. Because the overall implication is simply that Sylvanas really is just evil. Sure you can try to say she suffered through undeath and that caused her morality to decay. However there are plenty of Forsaken who don't go full genocidal despite suffering from undeath.

Which will likely make the conclusion of the Shadowlands even more unsatisfactory if Sylvanas survives in any fashion.

[Izalla]

Your interpretation is probably right. Considering that's also how Uther seems to function with his soul being split. There's no good Uther and bad Uther.

However its still highly problematic. Because the overall implication is simply that Sylvanas really is just evil. Sure you can try to say she suffered through undeath and that caused her morality to decay. However there are plenty of Forsaken who don't go full genocidal despite suffering from undeath.

Which will likely make the conclusion of the Shadowlands even more unsatisfactory if Sylvanas survives in any fashion.

Oh yeah I'm not arguing against that. I'm just saying that this cinematic in no way says "Sylvanas was only evil because she had all her good parts taken out and she had no choice but to do bad things!" Though I am still waiting for them to reveal that the Jailer sent the val'kyr to Sylvanas atop Icecrown to show her the Maw and make her think she was unfairly doomed to that torturous hell so he could get her to team up with him and act as his agent on the other side of the veil. She still made the choice to do horrific and unforgivable things to preserve herself above all else, but it would show that she wasn't destined for evil because her good half was taken. She just chose evil because she has always been a selfish person and everyone else be damned if it benefits her. It is interesting for the Sylvanas of the past to see where that thinking and those priorities took her though. Which is probably why after waking up Sylvanas reflects on her personal motivations for chasing down Arthas for revenge, since that personal vengeance is what took her to Icecrown and then led her to jumping off it, which I'm pretty sure is when they said she met the Jailer.

[masterjc]

Still it looks terribly cartoony and goofy. Looks more like hots than wow.

same for me

i even thought it was made in HotS not in WoW

[Feanoro]

@Super Dickmann As someone whose preferred playable race was stomped in the ground, set on fire, and the embers pissed on, you have my full sincere sympathies for how thoroughly Sylvie's development has finished off Forsaken lore.

- - - Updated - - -

I still maintain that the majority of your ire i.e. the Forsaken basically stems from not getting what you seem to have wanted

"U mad bro?", swallowed dictionary edition. Also, that's not how you use "i.e.". Presumably you wanted "re" or "regarding".

[Jackstraw]

Please, don't attempt to patronize me - I've completed all of WoW's quests and story elements on both Horde and Alliance characters, including both pre and post-Cata revamp, for every expansion, including every Legion Class campaign and Shadowlands Covenant campaign. So yes, I've played all Forsaken zones in all their various incarnations. Hell, my main back in Classic up until WotLK was a Forsaken Warlock.

You forgot to read them then.
Or rather, this is the zinger I'd use, but you have proven you know your lore. I do wonder on what the bias is standing though: slandering an entire fanbase, reducing their disagreement with the plot to just wanting some evil is egregious.

As for the substantive portion of your reply, how exactly would Koltira Deathweaver ever have stood in for the Desolate Council? He's not even a Forsaken himself, just an Ebon Blade mercenary contracted by Sylvanas to lead the campaign in the Western Plaguelands and subsequently jailed in the Undercity for what Sylvanas viewed as being too chummy with the enemy leader (his friend Thassarian). The Desolate Council's formation and existence make fine sense in the context of the power vacuum Sylvanas left behind when she became Warchief, no longer able to focus her attentions on the Forsaken due to leading the entirety of the Horde from Orgrimmar. Sure, it's definitely a plot device, but what isn't when you get down to it?

Yeah, he is an Ebon Blade knight who was under Sylvanas' order and got punished for insubordination, possibly brainwashed even, although that part was never really claimed as Koltira enjoyed ample margins of freedom, last being seen strolling around Oribos alongside Thassarian. But we all know the obvious.

A distaste with Koltira as device would do wonders to ground it in past events, giving at least a semblance of long term storytelling. If a plot device is made out of thin air such as this Desolate Council, then it basically has no credibility at all. And the Council has none.
This actively damages the story as a whole because the approach then gets replicated.

We could argue of course that whatever is canon is canon, and I can't really go against this point. But reducing it all to a bland "it is what it is and yall mad" is highly disingenuous.

[Vasilisa]

yes good job on them turning wow into fortnite and fall guys level of graphics which is indie or low-budget companies. It is a disgrace. I don't need to know jack shit about graphics, the results are in front of me.

Graphics hasn't changed for a while now, so saying it has turned into Fortnite it quite an overstatement. I dare you: take Maya or Blender and try animate a face so it shows emotions. I'll repeat what I said: art team did a good job. Wow style is cartoonish and outdated imo but it doesn't have to fit everybody's taste (I don't like it as well but it doesn't prevent me to see a job well done), just don't bash them for things they didn't do wrong.

[Super Dickmann]

As someone whose preferred playable race was stomped in the ground, set on fire, and the embers pissed on, you have my full sincere sympathies for how thoroughly Sylvie's development has finished off Forsaken lore.

It was a stroke of genius on the writers' part to tie the final destruction of both Forsaken and night elves to each other, condemning their stories to rotate around characters that had fuck all to do with them until Teldrassil and continue to have no thematic connection since. It was a masterstroke of terrible writing as well as of ensuring there'd be no common fan response.