Official High Elf Discussion Megathread

[Garfurion]

Thank you.

As for what pertains to me specifically:

Indeed, I do perceive a fundamental disagreement on what dismissal entails, and that is basically just a matter of perspective.

A simple "We heard you, we are aware of the ideas and points you that what High Elves have brought and we appreciate your passion, but..." That would have been a world of difference for many people, whether you believe it or not. Of course some people would still just not accept it either way, but I am only speaking for me and the people that think alike.

But to give basically the same arguments he did months ago, the same arguments that were seen as flawed and that sparked the whole conversation, feels dismissive. Regardless if is answer was the same, regardless if he considers that maintaining faction identity is the priority, is the lack of acknowledgement of the poits brought up in the months of discussion that irks me and other. What was it worth then, all the discussions, all the feedback if we didn't get even a "We are aware of the points you made"?

That is what feels dismissive, regardless of his answer being No



Even you in this throw away line at least pay some lip service to the Pro High Elf side, and is the lack of anything like this what feels disheartening.

Ion is just not the right person to address these kinds of questions. I think he focuses more on game mechanics than game lore which is understandable given his background. I agree that he should have worded his answer better. He also should just have stuck to gameplay reasons. I can imagine Ornyx wasn't happy yesterday since he said to the community that feedback was passed on to the devs and they would track the debate. Nothing in Ion's answer last night indicated he was really aware of the pro/anti- High Elf feedback in anyway. He could have given the same answer 4-8 weeks ago. On the topic of the GCD he was clearly much more aware of specific community complaints.

[Goldielocks]

Again, that wasn't the contention. The situations back then are the same as the ones now, that was the disagreement. Now you agree with the devs, okay, I don't care about that. The argument that they aren't the same because now you agree with them is a bad argument.

No, they aren't the same because the devs don't believe that those features will damage the game. They believe this one will. I agree with them. As for why it took them so long to implement it, I already gave a reason. Their pride was hurt, but eventually they got over it. Perhaps Activision forced them to. Who knows.

They aren't necessarily right. Nobody is objectively right, but it's their game. In that sense, their opinion is law.

I can imagine Ornyx wasn't happy yesterday since he said to the community that feedback was passed on to the devs and they would track the debate. Nothing in Ion's answer last night indicated he was really aware of the pro/anti- High Elf feedback in anyway. He could have given the same answer 4-8 weeks ago.

I entirely disagree with this notion. What Ornyx did was placation and nothing more. There's a reason why even after telling them no, Ion still said "anything is possible in the future."

These people are being tricked by having a carrot being dangled in front of them.

[elbleuet]

Point is that it's still possible to implement it. I didn't follow the thread much since I actually don't care if they implement High Elves or not (I would play a High Elf Hunter if they implement it at some point, but if not, don't really care).

Also Blizzard has proven many times they do stuff which they opposed heavily from the beginning (classic server for example). So I don't understand where the agressive attitude comes from some people bashin on high elf fans. I don't get following scenario by the way in which I see many people here hating the idea of an high elve allied race:

I mean you got a thread about High Elves and people fanboying about them -> you don't like it and you think they are delusional for thinking they would implement it and yet you still stay in that thread and bash on those people.

Where is the logic? If you don't like it at all then just leave it be. Especially after Blizzard confirmed they won't get it in the near future and still people here bash on high elf fans. Is that fun? Seriously? Making signatures to bash those people and remind them in completly irrelevant threads that they most likely would not get high elves is a sign of a really weak character in my opinion and makes you look like the salty one actually. Just my two cents about this topic.

Sorry for all the people who actually loved to play a High Elf, maybe in future expansions they will implement it. Play the game and give BFA a try regardless and just ignore people here bashing you.

Thank you.

[Enkrypt]

Thanks for further proving my point, not that it was needed, it was obvious from the very start.

What point are you making, edgelord? You've made no point. I asked you what I'm sad about or denying, and you refuse to answer. It looks like you're just trying to insult someone without actually serving the meat and potatoes. Looks like you don't have the spine to say what you mean.

Alliance didn't get High Elves. Horde kept its identity with the Blood Elves. So I'll ask you one more time before I put you on ignore, what would I possibly be in denial about?

[Shinkishi]

No, they aren't the same because the devs don't believe that those features will damage the game. They believe this one will. I agree with them. As for why it took them so long to implement it, I already gave a reason. Their pride was hurt, but eventually they got over it. Perhaps Activision forced them to. Who knows.

They aren't necessarily right. Nobody is objectively right, but it's their game. In that sense, their opinion is law.

The point is that they did believe those features would damage the game just as they do now with this one, which is why the arguments are similar. You seem to think I'm trying to argue over their decisions - I'm not. The idea that this argument isn't framed the same way as those is what is wrong. You agree with them this time so the other times were just them being prideful, whatever. That's a weird opinion but I don't really care. The original point was that the discussions over those issues were framed the same way about being harmful to the game and faction identity.

[Goldielocks]

Point is that it's still possible to implement it.

HE zealots have been told no for what...13 years now?

It's time to come to reality.

The point is that they did believe those features would damage the game just as they do now with this one, which is why the arguments are similar. You seem to think I'm trying to argue over their decisions - I'm not. The idea that this argument isn't framed the same way as those is what is wrong. You agree with them this time so the other times were just them being prideful, whatever. That's a weird opinion but I don't really care. The original point was that the discussions over those issues were framed the same way about being harmful to the game and faction identity.

I'm not sure what the point is, to be honest. You keep saying that the arguments are the same, and while they are, it's a meaningless prospect. One is the right use of the argument (blurring faction lines damages the game) and the other is the wrong use of it (classic servers will damage the game).

People use sensible arguments the wrong way all the time. It doesn't mean you have a case here.

[united]

What point are you making, edgelord? You've made no point. I asked you what I'm sad about or denying, and you refuse to answer. It looks like you're just trying to insult someone without actually serving the meat and potatoes. Looks like you don't have the spine to say what you mean.

Alliance didn't get High Elves. Horde kept its identity with the Blood Elves. So I'll ask you one more time before I put you on ignore, what would I possibly be in denial about?

You’re not in denial about anything. They’re the ones grieving, and denial is one of the steps.

[MyWholeLifeIsThunder]

Ion is just not the right person to address these kinds of questions. I think he focuses more on game mechanics than game lore which is understandable given his background. I agree that he should have worded his answer better. He also should just have stuck to gameplay reasons. I can imagine Ornyx wasn't happy yesterday since he said to the community that feedback was passed on to the devs and they would track the debate. Nothing in Ion's answer last night indicated he was really aware of the pro/anti- High Elf feedback in anyway. He could have given the same answer 4-8 weeks ago. On the topic of the GCD he was clearly much more aware of specific community complaints.

I mean if they felt that Ion himself wasn't the best suited to answer this off the cuff, they could have prewritten him something. So this is not solely on Ion, but an overall callousness of Blizz as an entity to address the community.

And it's dangerous to simply accept this type of callousness because it was against something you didn't want, because some day it might be about an issue you do care about. It's just bad PR, and who would want that?

[Enkrypt]

You’re not in denial about anything. They’re the ones grieving, and denial is one of the steps.

Exactly. He's suggesting he's making some deep, ambiguous point but in reality he's got two pair up against a royal flush.

I love these guys, I really do. Favorite thread ever.

- - - Updated - - -

HE zealots have been told no for what...13 years now?

It's time to come to reality.

They want Johnny Depp to speak on their behalf.

I think reality is beyond their grasp. Instead, they must live within the Void. *ba dum tis*

[Shinkishi]

I'm not sure what the point is, to be honest. You keep saying that the arguments are the same, and while they are, it's a meaningless prospect. One is the right use of the argument (blurring faction lines) and the other is the wrong use of it (classic servers).

People use sensible arguments the wrong way all the time. It doesn't mean you have a case here.

So you agree that the arguments are the same and you were wrong to pretend that they weren't. That's fine.

[Garfurion]

I can... sympathize with this. And not saying you're wrong, but I ask you to leave your personal scope for a moment and try to put yourself in someone of this position's shoes: you have a group of people to address where their voices do not speak in unison (in the sense this sort of request had different suggestions) and react differently. You need a direct message with little fluff so to speak, otherwise might lead to misinterpretations (there were already some). The kind of references you speak of, could very well make people feel it's personal that their feedback was not good enough, know what I mean? I'm not saying his statement was perfect, but I understand why it was the way it was: short and addressing the points they feel problematic.

Nevertheless, you might feel this way now because this is a sore subject at the moment. But in my personal opinion, very much doubt so. This is not a single man's decision, I'm sure the team behind it looked through these regardless of the outcome. It might be even somewhat useful to try to figure out what people think it's amiss the Void Elves (with limitations)

I think in this situation a blog post would have been better. They also could have reached out much earlier to the community regarding Void Elves ( e.g. explain their BE background and their design intend). There have been requests for more tentacle-free hair styles which could easily have been addressed or other tweaks to their appearance.

In the past it was also easier to communicate with devs directly on Twitter but since Ghostcrawler left Blizzard has been distancing itself more and more from the playerbase.

[Goldielocks]

So you agree that the arguments are the same and you were wrong to pretend that they weren't. That's fine.

No, I'm saying that you're grasping at straws by stating that there is a gap of logic in what Blizzard believes damages the game. Saying "they're not the same" is the exact same thing as saying "no you're not using the right logic here."

Regardless of what foot ahead you think you have in this, it doesn't really matter lmao

[Hitei]

I mean if they felt that Ion himself wasn't the best suited to answer this off the cuff, they could have prewritten him something. So this is not solely on Ion, but an overall callousness of Blizz as an entity to address the community.

And it's dangerous to simply accept this type of callousness because it was against something you didn't want, because some day it might be about an issue you do care about. It's just bad PR, and who would want that?

No, it's great to accept this type of callousness because it means the devs are resistant to doing dumb shit just to cater to a screeching minority.

[Deleted]

You’re not in denial about anything. They’re the ones grieving, and denial is one of the steps.

He really needed that pat on the back, without you, he would PM me by now on why is he in denial about his happiness.

[Deleted]

I entirely disagree with this notion. What Ornyx did was placation and nothing more. There's a reason why even after telling them no, Ion still said "anything is possible in the future."

The point is that that Ion was unaware about anything going on in the High Elf arguments, only that they existed. There is a big difference between telling 'no' while reacting to people's feedback and telling 'no' while showing that you don't know what that feedback contains. And that's the issue. You may be fine with it because Ion's response is what you wanted it to hear, but you should still be concerned about how he did it. Because it shows how he ignores feedback completely if it's not what he is interested about and invested in, no matter how big that issue is. Which is a very bad sign if we are talking about a game director.

[Shinkishi]

No, I'm saying that you're grasping at straws by stating that there is a gap of logic in what Blizzard believes damages the game. Saying "they're not the same" is the exact same thing as saying "no you're not using the right logic here."

Regardless of what foot ahead you think you have in this, it doesn't really matter lmao

I don't think you understand (or don't remember) why I even replied to you in the first place. I'm not "grasping at straws" when nothing has even changed about my statement. I don't think there's a gap in logic anywhere except maybe with you personally, now. I'm not a high elf guy. I pointed out the similarity between the arguments that happened before and this one which you were trying to deny because you agree this time. I can see you're getting very defensive, but that's all it was.

[Goldielocks]

The point is that that Ion was unaware about anything going on in the High Elf arguments, only that they existed. There is a big difference between telling 'no' while reacting to people's feedback and telling 'no' while showing that you don't know what that feedback contains. And that's the issue. You may be fine with it because Ion's response is what you wanted it to hear, but you should still be concerned about how he did it. Because it shows how he ignores feedback completely if it's not what he is interested about and invested in, no matter how big that issue is. Which is a very bad sign if we are talking about a game director.

Not really. Game devs shouldn't have to heel to their fanbase. Just because the fans want it, doesn't mean it needs to happen. If it did, then Holinka would have been gone a long time ago.

I don't think you understand (or don't remember) why I even replied to you in the first place. I'm not "grasping at straws" when nothing has even changed about my statement. I don't think there's a gap in logic anywhere except maybe with you personally, now. I'm not a high elf guy. I pointed out the similarity between the arguments that happened before and this one which you were trying to deny because you agree this time. I can see you're getting very defensive, but that's all it was.

And I pointed out that the similarity you replied with is nothing more than a coincidence. The same argument used in two different situations, one correctly and one incorrectly.

There's a gap in logic, all right.

[Evilfish]

The point is that that Ion was unaware about anything going on in the High Elf arguments, only that they existed. There is a big difference between telling 'no' while reacting to people's feedback and telling 'no' while showing that you don't know what that feedback contains. And that's the issue. You may be fine with it because Ion's response is what you wanted it to hear, but you should still be concerned about how he did it. Because it shows how he ignores feedback completely if it's not what he is interested about and invested in, no matter how big that issue is. Which is a very bad sign if we are talking about a game director.

You honestly think Ion would go on a live stream without being briefed. And even if by some impossible chance he wasn't, you'd think he'd be unaware about a annoyingly loud issue that has gone on for a decade across ALL fucking forums concerning WoW. Come on...

[Deleted]

I think in this situation a blog post would have been better.

I disagree. You might feel this is a jab comment or anything of the sort, but the truth is.... This High Elves request is not as massive as it's being branded.

There were very few topics that justified an open conversation throughout the years, where the community overall was displeased. This is not the case.

[Deleted]

Would be cool if they made WoW a democracy.. :P

Let us vote for the things..! What do you want people!