Dragonflight Alpha/Beta General Discussion

[huth]

People said the same for the Shadowlands logo, and that one turned out correct.
It's not unthinkable that the logo is legitimate, and that the mistakes are either from honest mistakes from the designer, or because it's still nto completely polished.

If 10.0 is announced within the next 4-5 weeks then a logo leak is pretty fitting right about now. Especially when you consider that the press kits have likely been ready for ages now.

The rational approach here would be to assume it is fake until proven otherwise. We had far more fakes than real leaks.

Could it be real? Maybe, but highly unlikely, and if it is it's a very poor quality copy of the real thing, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There's also the problem that the logo has no discernible connection to the title, which we've never really had.

[Jokubas]

Secondly, and more importantly:
What kind of fake leaker would make a custom logo of this quality and then intentionally choose something that wouldn't fit?

That's a key thing for me. I'm reminded of the leak of the Shadowlands cinematic. Many people immediately dismissed it as fake because the helmet had the normal Lich King blue while Bolvar's helmet had fiery eyes. My brother had the opposite opinion. Why would someone skilled enough to fake a Blizzard cinematic make such an obvious mistake? The answer was, of course, it wasn't a mistake. It wasn't a fake. It was just a new transition effect for the sake of a cool visual that we were seeing a still image of.

Now, I still don't feel strongly about this logo. I will admit I don't want to make a big deal about saying something is real and end up being wrong, but I really have seen so many fake logos at this point that this one doesn't stand out to me. It could also be a coincidence, or maybe a faker picked up on the Bolvar thing from last time and wanted to exploit that logic now that it's so publicly been a thing. If this does turn out to be real, I guarantee you that future leak seasons are going to have fakers slipping in obvious mistakes to seem more plausible. For now, though, having a design theme that seemingly contradicts the name's theme is conspicuous.

The thing to keep in mind is, a Light+Void+Dragon expansion doesn't have to literally be an expansion with all three of those elements or locations. Whatever new lore is written for the expansion could create a more succinct version in a way that we completely take for granted after its announced.

[Archmage Xaxxas]

Not really. There's errors in this that simply wouldn't make sense for somebody with access to the source materials.

Not that I think the Empire of Dragons one is real, I don't: But it's always fun to look at BfA's official Logo and realize the one they put on the box art was a 'concept' piece (I have to imagine) for the later 3D rendered one that wasn't used anywhere except the Cinematic.

Let's take a look!
BFA Box Art Logo:


https://wow.zamimg.com/uploads/blog/...ular-items.png

You can examine the HD Box Art Logo here https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/wo...20171104032906
And it becomes very obvious once pointed out, that nearly every asset is a Photomanipulated object. Pretty neat!

If THAT leaked on the forums before BfA'S announcement, we probably have debunked it.

And the BFA Cinematic Logo, beautifully rendered. Never used on the Boxes strangely.


This is why it baffled me that people thought the Shadowlands logo that was real, when it leaked, was fake. It had more Blizz polish than BfA's official logo, which is very clearly a Photoshopped, cobbled together concept (A good job done of course.)

It's also why I think EoD here is fake, because it's lacking the polish of the SL logo for it being such the overhaul to the main frame as a painted piece, rather than a render or in BfA's case, a collage. But I'll eat my words if I'm mistaken this time.

[Khaza-R]

Most convincing thing to me about EoD is the name.

I would assume if you were going to go through all the trouble to make a fairly convincing fake, you would at least want to use a name that was a popular fan theory or sounded plausible. The other factor is the lack of any type of leaked details surrounding it. So I think its at least plausible it could of been a boardroom type draft that got leaked.

[Sondrelk]

The rational approach here would be to assume it is fake until proven otherwise. We had far more fakes than real leaks.

Could it be real? Maybe, but highly unlikely, and if it is it's a very poor quality copy of the real thing, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There's also the problem that the logo has no discernible connection to the title, which we've never really had.

Obviously the baseline assumption should be fake. But I always figured the point of leak season was to ahve fun discussing concepts until you found one idea that you really enjoyed.
Same as two years back before the Shadowlands release. I found a leak I really, really enjoyed and championed it.

Not to say that I am completely behind this one, but I think it's worht mentioning that there isnt really anything about it thats a dealbreaker compared to the Shadowlands leaked logo.

[Edward Wu]

Anyone have a quick link to the EoD leak then? If this is being taken semi-seriously then I'd like to see the actual leak please.

[Sondrelk]

Most convincing thing to me about EoD is the name.

I would assume if you were going to go through all the trouble to make a fairly convincing fake, you would at least want to use a name that was a popular fan theory or sounded plausible. The other factor is the lack of any type of leaked details surrounding it. So I think its at least plausible it could of been a boardroom type draft that got leaked.

The name is pretty good, yeah. It fits the "X of Y" pattern with many expansions, it's easy to understand what it's about, and it sounds snappy.
The empire part isnt exactly the most obvious thing, but the Mists part of MoP wasnt exactly crucial to the overall plot either, and the Lich King was many things, but not really filled with Wrath in WotLK.

- - - Updated - - -

Anyone have a quick link to the EoD leak then? If this is being taken semi-seriously then I'd like to see the actual leak please.

I think it's just the logo.

[Jokubas]

Surprised this one wasn't posted yet. They say it's from some discord group.

This was the original post on the forum, not sure if anyone has a link.

[Edward Wu]

Ah okay I thought it was the one accompanied by a 4chan post.

[Jokubas]

Ah okay I thought it was the one accompanied by a 4chan post.

There might have been another 4chan thing, but that was a different logo:

This just caught my eye on 4chan, appears to be a slightly redisigned warcraft logo with the next expansion title. No features or details just a photo

[Syegfryed]

This reminds me of the time the bfa and shadowlands logo were leaked out, and there was a lot of photoshop masters claiming it was all fake, because clearly big mistakes, and end up turning true.

Same thing for Blue bolvar, people who i see here now and then saying it was an amateur or beginers work in photoshop, good times.

Anyway, i don't disqualify the logo yet, color scheme fits the twilight and infinite dragonflight, that are the possible villains we would get in a dragon expansion, and tie the end with the void/light thematic.

"Empire of Dragons" fits the rule of "one expansion have a standalone name the other is multiple" (Like Legion->battle for azeroth, Cataclysm->mists of Pandaria, Shadowlands -> ?)

[Makabreska]

"Empire of Dragons" fits the rule of "one expansion have a standalone name the other is multiple" (Like Legion->battle for azeroth, Cataclysm->mists of Pandaria, Shadowlands -> ?)

The thing is, these type of rules are made up. People constantly search for patterns where may be none.

[Syegfryed]

The thing is, these type of rules are made up. People constantly search for patterns where may be none.

the patterns exist since the Lich king, sooooo

[Hitei]

This is why it baffled me that people thought the Shadowlands logo that was real, when it leaked, was fake. It had more Blizz polish than BfA's official logo, which is very clearly a Photoshopped, cobbled together concept (A good job done of course.)

It's also why I think EoD here is fake, because it's lacking the polish of the SL logo for it being such the overhaul to the main frame as a painted piece, rather than a render or in BfA's case, a collage. But I'll eat my words if I'm mistaken this time.

The Shadowlands leaked logo was clearly handpainted (edit: I mean digitally hand-crafted, not painted in traditional media) rather quickly instead of rendered (in the painting sense, not 3D rendered) it also had bits that were highly incomplete (the top was almost completely blank) and lots of little problems (the stroke around the maintext was sloppily painted in). So the whole thing read as just being not official, particularly when it fairly close to announcement.

It was just very basic and unpolished compared to all the previous logos we could use as a control.

[Makabreska]

the patterns exist since the Lich king, sooooo

Mists of Pandaria -> Warlords of Draenor, sooooooooo nope.

[Hitei]

the patterns exist since the Lich king, sooooo

?????

WotLK (multi) > Cataclysm (single) > MoP (Multi) > WoD (Multi) > Legion (single) > BfA (multi) > Shadowlands
What pattern? Also that is insane reasoning. Like 9 out of every 10 fake leaks have multiple words in the title. Any fake leak has a 50/50 chance of getting this supposed aspect correct.

[Shadochi]

the patterns exist since the Lich king, sooooo

but the lich king didn't come after a one word expansion. So it started with Cata and MoP
But even then it's not really a rule since we went from multiple words to multiple words in MoP -> WoD, what is saying then that part of the greater pattern isn't that now another single word comes out?

[Jokubas]

The thing about a dragon expansion is that it can basically be anything. Out of all precedents for retcons and new expansions inventing new ideas or shaking up past lore, the dragons have been doing it longer and more consistently than almost anything else.

Even in Classic we had Nefarian creating the Chromatic dragonflight, and experimental or mutated flights would be introduced almost once an expansion since then. On top of those, Wrath of the Lich King introduced the proto-dragons as their original forms. Legion introduced Storm Dragons. Shadowlands gave us feathered Veilwing Dragons.

While the easy guess for the Dragon Isles is something like a zone for each of the original flights and fleshing out the dragons we know, the sky's the limit. Awhile back someone speculated on the possibility that Elune may not just have a fondness for Ysera specifically, but be the origin of the dragons as a whole. I feel like some sort of newly revealed history of the dragons like that is basically guaranteed in any dragon-themed expansion.

Something like "Empire of Dragons" could reveal that Galakrond was one of many colossal proto-proto-dragons before he came to Azeroth and sired dragonkind as we know it. This Empire could exist to this day on the Dragon Isles, or the other side of Azeroth, or some mythical place on the border between the cosmic realms of Light and Void. If Elune really does have something to do with the dragons, her established creation of the Prime Naaru could easily connect the dragons to the Light, and even Void.

[huth]

Obviously the baseline assumption should be fake. But I always figured the point of leak season was to ahve fun discussing concepts until you found one idea that you really enjoyed.
Same as two years back before the Shadowlands release. I found a leak I really, really enjoyed and championed it.

Not to say that I am completely behind this one, but I think it's worht mentioning that there isnt really anything about it thats a dealbreaker compared to the Shadowlands leaked logo.

You still shouldn't keep insisting that it could be real because people will misread that as a confirmation that it is.

And for me, that the title is completely unrelated to the design is a fairly sizeable dealbreaker.

[Syegfryed]

?????

WotLK (multi) > Cataclysm (single) > MoP (Multi) > WoD (Multi) > Legion (single) > BfA (multi) > Shadowlands
What pattern? Also that is insane reasoning

Mists of Pandaria -> Warlords of Draenor, sooooooooo nope.

hey, i didn't say it was perfect.

Like 9 out of every 10 fake leaks have multiple words in the title. Any fake leak has a 50/50 chance of getting this supposed aspect correct.

And, it could be a real leak, im just not scrapping any possibilities.