1. #8361
    I am Murloc! FlubberPuddy's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    On the frontline
    Posts
    5,384
    Some people are still trying to make the race argument: There's already High Elves on Horde, go play them if you want.

    If this was a substantial argument we wouldn't even have Void Elves existing on the Alliance. The Allied Race system as a whole right now wouldn't be a thing if this about giving specific races to play.

    The system is made for specific race variants judging by the examples of what we have so far. Kul'Tirans are another type of Human, Zandalari are another type of Troll, Dark Iron another type of Dwarf, Mag'har another Orc, LF another Draenei, HM another Tauren, Void Elf another Elf, Nightborne another Elf.

    If this argument that "you already have a High Elf type to play on the Horde" was actually true then the creation of Void Elves wouldn't have happened. Neither would practically all other Allied Races (Mag'har are Orcs, Orcs are already playable - "what? there is no point in another Orc race since one is already playable!?").

    That argument isn't an argument against High Elves, it's an argument that flies in the face of the entire Allied Race system itself.

    Are new race types barred from Allied Races? Nope, but we haven't had an example of a new race type released yet under the system.

    Fact: There's been no say that a "3rd variant" can't be on one faction.

    In fact, a 3rd Dwarf variant was hinted at.

    Fact: Blood Elf Golden Eyes and Night Elven eyes were treated as a feature under an Allied Race system question.

    If Blizzard developer sees Eye color choice as part of "taking the system in a bunch of different directions" then what else could be considered under the Allied Race system?

  2. #8362
    The Unstoppable Force Syegfryed's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    21,776
    Quote Originally Posted by FlubberPuddy View Post
    Some people are still trying to make the race argument: There's already High Elves on Horde, go play them if you want.

    If this was a substantial argument we wouldn't even have Void Elves existing on the Alliance. The Allied Race system as a whole right now wouldn't be a thing if this about giving specific races to play.
    if this was not a substantial argument they would not even had to do void elves in the first place, they would do high elves instead

    The system is made for specific race variants judging by the examples of what we have so far.
    yes, and high elves are not race variants, they are the exactly same race.

    Every other allied race so far are still different subraces, aka, true variants.

    by your example, wildhammer dwarf are not exactly the same as the normal dwarf, they are taller and leaner (those are lore things, not some made-up characteristics you guys invented) so the system support their addition.

  3. #8363
    I am Murloc! FlubberPuddy's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    On the frontline
    Posts
    5,384
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    if this was not a substantial argument they would not even had to do void elves in the first place, they would do high elves instead
    Think why they went with Dark Iron over Wildhammer for the time being, it'll be the same reasoning for Void Elves over High Elves.


    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    yes, and high elves are not race variants, they are the exactly same race.

    Every other allied race so far are still different subraces, aka, true variants.

    by your example, wildhammer dwarf are not exactly the same as the normal dwarf, they are taller and leaner (those are lore things, not some made-up characteristics you guys invented) so the system support their addition.
    So a Mag'har isn't an Orc to you? Or is a Lightforged Draenei not a Draenei anymore? If you want to move away from magic-affected races, then how about the Zandalari - are they not a Troll anymore?

    Also Wildhammer are in a way being considered for addition so they actually strengthen the High Elf request, not diminish it.

    Especially considering that in the end, the Void Elf model is exactly the same silhouette as a Blood Elf model but painted blue/purple. So if you're trying to bring in the height / body proportions as if that is a requirement then you've failed in that sense. Same goes for all other AR that have the same body/silhouette of the other races.

    Again, if this system was specifically for creating new races and Blizzard had a "1 and done" policy then we wouldn't have anything like a Void Elf or the other ARs.

    This is the main faultiness of the "High Elves are the same race as Blood Elves so they're playable" because we're getting multiples of other races too, with a possible 3rd dwarf type later on.

    Another thing is we wouldn't have 3 blue/purple elves if Blizzard's aim once again was a "1 and done" policy nor 2 types of "arcane/magic focused elves" (NB and BE).

    You and others are acting like a race, as a race (as in there can only ever be a singular type of this one race), must be unique but we already have various examples of how that isn't true.

    The only thing keeping Blood Elves unique relates back to skin/eye color, because aside from skin/eye color what makes the Blood Elves unique visually?

    Remember to keep in mind that there's already 3 purple/blue elf types, is there something special about fair elves that they must remain unique in that regard?

    If the Answer is just "Because Blizzard did it this way" then that answer can also be used to introduce High Elves. "If Blizzard wants to, they can do it."

  4. #8364
    Quote Originally Posted by Varx View Post
    Um no, Dark Irons already took the Dwarf Spot and Velves the Belf spot.
    Think about what you wrote there. Now think back to a time prior to BfA's announcement. Would you ever consider Blizzard would actually release a race that has the exact same model and animations as an existing race, changing just textures and voice emotes? I imagine most, if not the vast majority of people would say something like that would never happen.

    The point I'm making with Mag'har is that they basically made the possibility of a Blackrock AR or Dragonmaw AR or Bleeding Hallow AR impossible with their inclusion.
    Each of those orc clans could have perfect viability if blizzard wanted to have multiple AR's for one core race. Since that isn't the case, I see 0 reason why Helves, wildhammers or any other repeat should make it in.

    Wildhammers could easily just have tattoos unlockable for regular dwarfs similar to the night warrior for nelves.
    Yes, Wildhammers could "easily" just have tattoos unlocked for the regular dwarves... but so could the Dark Iron. The Dark Iron could easily be just a new set of skin/hair combos for the dwarves, yet they're their own "race" in the character selection screen. The exact same thing could be said about the Highmountain tauren, where their only difference from regular tauren are the horns.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Obelisk Kai View Post
    And again, Pandaren neutrality was a mistake Blizzard regretted. I have offered enough ample evidence to show that they regret it. Persisting in pointing out they exist is besides the point, just because a mistake was made does not mean you are obligated to repeat it. Furthermore, Pandaren were conceived of as neutral, implemented as neutral with a theme and storyline all reflective of their neutrality and the balance they represented. And despite having all that going for them, neutrality STILL didn't work.
    You said they're a mistake. But at no point you ever showed exactly what about the race's neutrality was a mistake. Is it because the factions now had each a race that looked exactly like the one in the opposing faction? It can't be that, considering we have nightborne and void elves. If that was the 'mistake', then they wouldn't have given void elves to the Alliance and nightborne to the Horde.

    Void Elves are a compromise. They are simply one you don't like.
    It's not exactly a "compromise" if it doesn't please the group they're trying to reach a compromise with. People asking for high elves don't want blood elves, which is what the void elves are. If they wanted blood elves, they would be asking for void elves.

    Oh and as Blood Elves are High Elves
    But not all high elves are blood elves.

    Pandaren did damage faction diversity. That was the mistake. But given they were introduced as neutral and no neutral race has been introduced since, the damage was contained. With Alliance High Elves, making a race that has been Horde for twelve years de facto neutral
    Um... no. It wouldn't make the elves "neutral". "Alignment" isn't a quantifiable number, where if a race is "50% one faction, 50% another faction" means the race is "neutral".

    Ah the perennial retreat of the pro High Elfer when confronted by a developer saying things they don't like.
    Are you somehow claiming that a lead developer's personal opinion somehow reflects the entire company's opinion?

    You can of course see the team doesn't agree given that they haven't introduced another neutral race in the six years since MOP came out
    Or perhaps they just thought they could tell a better story otherwise. By the way, Blizzard hasn't created a class that has been so race-restricted for twelve years since the game's inception until Legion came along.

    Or maybe, just maybe, his 'personal' opinion was shared by other developers and that it's not really a 'personal' opinion at all but a more widely held belief in the development team?
    Maybe. Maybe not. Why don't you go ask every single WoW developer, current and former, if they agree with Ghostcrawler's opinion regarding the pandaren to make sure?

    But for the sake of simplicity...

    The races of the Alliance are the Humans, Dwarves, Gnomes, Night Elves, Draenei and Worgen and the Tushui. And the void elves, the Dark Iron dwarves, the lightforged draenei and the Kul'Tirans.

    The races of the Horde are the Orcs, Trolls, Tauren, Undead, Blood Elves and Goblins and the Huojin. And the nighborne, the Highmountain tauren, the zandalari and the Mag'har.
    Fixed that for you. Saying "core" in the way you're using is nonsensical and meaningless, because it's simply a gameplay term to differentiate from the "allied races". I'll repeat the question I asked you earlier: can you give a lore difference between "core races" and "allied races"? If you can't, then your term as you define it is useless.

    A few High Elves are a part of the Alliance. A few Hozen are a part of the Horde too and we see them wandering around our camps occasionally.
    I asked about pre-Cata goblins. Can you answer that?

    You have argued that a difference of political opinion is enough to base an Allied race on. The Defias have a different political opinion to other Humans. Under your own rules, they are allied race material. But those are your rules and a Defias allied race is self-evidently ridiculous as Humans are already playable, just as High Elves are already playable as Blood Elves.
    So are the tauren playable. But we still got Highmountain tauren.

    And no, High Elves do not qualify as allied race material under 'wow's own rules'.
    They do, thanks to the pandaren.

  5. #8365
    The Unstoppable Force Syegfryed's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    21,776
    Quote Originally Posted by FlubberPuddy View Post
    Think why they went with Dark Iron over Wildhammer for the time being, it'll be the same reasoning for Void Elves over High Elves.
    nonsense, Dark iron and wildhammer are both options who already existed, they didn't have to create another one from the scratch. they just had to chose what would be first. they didnt "hey we can't do wildhammer, we have to create another kind of dwarf, lets create the dark iron dwarf!!!11"
    and it was exactly what happened with void elves, you again with the false equivalence thing.

    So a Mag'har isn't an Orc to you? Or is a Lightforged Draenei not a Draenei anymore? If you want to move away from magic-affected races, then how about the Zandalari - are they not a Troll anymore?
    exactly, they are sub-race, race variations, UNLIKE, high elves, who are the exactly same race.

    this is so over explained that hurt my pancreas

    Maghar are orcs from another dimension, with no corruption. They have differences from normal orcs, skin color is the main and visually one

    Lighforged Draenei undergo to a ritual to change their bodies, they ar eno longer normal draeneis, they skin is different, their power and racials are different.

    Zandalari are prime trolls, totally different from the already playable ones, years of mutation shows they are a variation of the race, not the exactly same race

    All of those, and the others, have canon differences, not made up differences that your trupe invented trying desperate to prove the high elves are somehow a different race.

    Also Wildhammer are in a way being considered for addition so they actually strengthen the High Elf request, not diminish it.
    ah, once again the "anything who happen is a hit of high elf, and strenght the high elf request" nothing new, but no they don't, they have nothing to do with the high elf

    Especially considering that in the end, the Void Elf model is exactly the same silhouette as a Blood Elf model but painted blue/purple. So if you're trying to bring in the height / body proportions as if that is a requirement then you've failed in that sense. Same goes for all other AR that have the same body/silhouette of the other races.
    What, considering the void elf model exist, there is no need for the high elf playable. cause they already occupy their niche

    Again, if this system was specifically for creating new races and Blizzard had a "1 and done" policy then we wouldn't have anything like a Void Elf or the other ARs.
    the system is for creating SUB-RACES, variations of already playable races, and new ones, not add the same race again for the other faction.
    This is the main faultiness of the "High Elves are the same race as Blood Elves so they're playable" because we're getting multiples of other races too, with a possible 3rd dwarf type later on.
    no isn't, cause blood elves are the same race, and we would not get the same race again, just a variation of it, thats why void elves fit the thing

    You and others are acting like a race, as a race (as in there can only ever be a singular type of this one race), must be unique but we already have various examples of how that isn't true.
    except we don't have, every other allied race is unique and different enough, and are in the same faction


    The only thing keeping Blood Elves unique relates back to skin/eye color, because aside from skin/eye color what makes the Blood Elves unique visually?
    duh, so? saying the obvious?

    Remember to keep in mind that there's already 3 purple/blue elf types, is there something special about fair elves that they must remain unique in that regard?
    you are just oversimplifying the characteristics as just blue, what is wrong


    If the Answer is just "Because Blizzard did it this way" then that answer can also be used to introduce High Elves. "If Blizzard wants to, they can do it."
    if they want it, they would do from the start already, and didn't have to create void elves from thin air, this is the truth yet.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    They do, thanks to the pandaren.
    they do not, cause pandarens are not an allied race, and are just exceptions of the rule, they were introduced neutral, unlike the elves
    So are the tauren playable. But we still got Highmountain tauren.
    this is not ridiculous because they are in the same faction, and are not the same race, but a sub-race, nice try though

  6. #8366
    Legendary! Obelisk Kai's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    The north of Ireland
    Posts
    6,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    You said they're a mistake. But at no point you ever showed exactly what about the race's neutrality was a mistake. Is it because the factions now had each a race that looked exactly like the one in the opposing faction? It can't be that, considering we have nightborne and void elves. If that was the 'mistake', then they wouldn't have given void elves to the Alliance and nightborne to the Horde.
    I thought the mistake was self-evident in the context of the topic we are discussing. Pandaren neutrality was a mistake because they are identical to each other, leading to a feeling of detachment and rootlessness regarding them and diminishing the distinctiveness between the two factions. You also seem to have great difficulty with the concept of neutrality. Void Elves and Nightborne are not equivalent to Pandaren, they are clearly established variants on existing races that follow the criteria for allied races. Nightborne are not Night Elves. Void Elves are no longer Blood/High Elves. But a Horde Pandaren and an Alliance Pandaren are culturally and thematically identical. And as established, in hindsight that was an error. Blizzard did learn from the Pandaren mistake, which is why the Void Elves and Nightborne are clear variants rather than duplicates.

    To dive a bit deeper here Pandaren on the Horde are exactly the same as Pandaren on the Alliance. Attempting to force an equivalence between them and the Void Elves and the Blood Elves is an attempt to say Void Elves and Blood Elves are the same thing (and Nightborne and Night Elves). If you truly believed that, then Void Elves would be your High Elves and you would be happy. Yet you have expressed unhappiness at Void Elves precisely because they are not Blood/High Elves. Given this is your primary motivation, your attempt to conflate the identical Pandaren with the Void Elf variant of the Blood/High Elf race is nothing short of a disingenuous response.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    It's not exactly a "compromise" if it doesn't please the group they're trying to reach a compromise with. People asking for high elves don't want blood elves, which is what the void elves are. If they wanted blood elves, they would be asking for void elves.
    To google the definition of compromise

    com·pro·mise
    /ˈkämprəˌmīz/Submit
    noun
    1.
    an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.
    "an ability to listen to two sides in a dispute, and devise a compromise acceptable to both"
    synonyms: agreement, understanding, settlement, terms, accommodation; More
    verb
    1.
    settle a dispute by mutual concession.
    "in the end we compromised and deferred the issue"
    synonyms: meet each other halfway, find the middle ground, come to terms, come to an understanding, make a deal, make concessions, find a happy medium, strike a balance; More
    2.
    accept standards that are lower than is desirable.
    "we were not prepared to compromise on safety"


    This definition of compromise makes clear it a settlement of a dispute with each side making concessions. This particular dispute is that the pro High Elf side wants a carbon copy of a Horde race to be available to their faction. The compromise was a group of that race become available to the Alliance, shorn of the visuals, theme and aesthetic that define the majority of the race. Believe me, if it were up to me the Alliance wouldn't even have gotten Void Elves and that model would have remained Horde unique (and the Horde wouldn't have gotten Nightborne either, I am consistent). So the model going neutral was the concession from the Horde side, and losing the theme and aesthetic was the concession from the Alliance side.

    Now, you say Void Elves aren't a compromise. And why? Because you are unhappy with the result. Why are you unhappy with the result? Because you wanted High Elves.

    The problem of course is that High Elves, visually, thematically and culturally are playable as the Horde Blood Elf race so to give you what you want wouldn't be a compromise, it would be a complete victory. So, in terms of this debate, you are what is described as a hardliner, to whom any compromise on the end result is unacceptable.

    Now that's unfortunate, but you make a critical mistake in your response. 'It's not exactly a "compromise" if it doesn't please the group they're trying to reach a compromise with'. What makes you and the pro High Elf community so special that it all has to be about you? The wider Alliance is out there you know, a whole player base of hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of people. Are you so arrogant to believe that because the Void Elves didn't fit the criteria of the few hundred people on the High Elf discord or who signed the pro High Elf petition (currently at 640 people which has barely increased since the last time I check it to make this point half a year ago) that it isn't a compromise?

    Void Elves are a compromise between our two positions. I don't like them or Nightborne but I find them tolerable. They are not what you wanted, but there is no compromise that gives you what you want while respecting the narrative and thematic integrity of the Horde and the Blood Elves. Void Elves manage this. That is why they are a compromise.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    But not all high elves are blood elves.
    Not all Humans are loyal to Stormwind but people aren't going around claiming Humans aren't playable. Blood Elves are High Elves, High Elves are playable.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Um... no. It wouldn't make the elves "neutral". "Alignment" isn't a quantifiable number, where if a race is "50% one faction, 50% another faction" means the race is "neutral".
    This is a strange position to take. Neutrality refers to the Alliance players being able to play a duplicate of a core Horde race. If Alliance High Elves happen, that is exactly what they would be, de facto neutral. That the vast majority of thalassian elves are Horde aligned Blood Elves is a lore based argument against playable Alliance High Elves happening, not justification that they aren't really making Elves a neutral race after the fact if they do add them.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Are you somehow claiming that a lead developer's personal opinion somehow reflects the entire company's opinion?
    Well it's certainly more representative of imagining that if they say something we dislike we can ignore them. But you keep using that word, personal, trying to box what they say in so as to render it of little value. Here's the thing, while you might like to pretend what Ghostcrawler said was just his personal opinion, everything done by Blizzard since aligns with the concerns raised. Even the Allied race system can be seen as a new way of introducing races cheaply without the consequences of the Pandaren mistake. It's funny that you can be so dismissive of these individuals when their commentary goes against what you want despite the fact the company then behaves in line with that commentary.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Or perhaps they just thought they could tell a better story otherwise. By the way, Blizzard hasn't created a class that has been so race-restricted for twelve years since the game's inception until Legion came along.
    What does Demon Hunter race restriction have to do with this debate?


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Maybe. Maybe not. Why don't you go ask every single WoW developer, current and former, if they agree with Ghostcrawler's opinion regarding the pandaren to make sure?
    Sadly not possible. All we have is the Allied race system they constructed which obviates the few advantages neutral races had (i.e. cheaper to develop and implement), the fact they introduced racial variants which respect faction diversity and the continual restatements by Ion Hazzikostas that faction diversity is important.

    Ever heard of Cato the Elder? He was a Roman Senator back over two thousand years ago, and he had this thing where after every speech in the Roman senate, no matter what it was, he would end it with the famous phrase 'Carthago delenda est'...Carthage must be destroyed. Rome had fought two wars against Carthage and in the third war that happened later they would totally destroy them, but in this period Cato ended every speech with this line. Could have been about something as mundane as grain taxes and he would still end it with 'Carthage must be destroyed'. He clearly felt it was an important point to continually drive home.

    With the pro High Elf community, if something isn't said on this topic regularly flights of fancy take over. Even if every single developer came out and agreed with the importance of facton diversity the pro High Elf side wouldn't care and would, after six months, say that 'that was all said AGES ago, they have likely changed their mind and Alliance High Elves are definitely coming soon.' To keep your community 'satisified', if not happy, they would have to make like Cato the Elder and after every communication, end with something like 'Quia non erit diversitas partium princeps Dryades' which is the google translation from English to Latin of High Elves will not happen because of faction diversity.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Fixed that for you. Saying "core" in the way you're using is nonsensical and meaningless, because it's simply a gameplay term to differentiate from the "allied races". I'll repeat the question I asked you earlier: can you give a lore difference between "core races" and "allied races"? If you can't, then your term as you define it is useless.
    Given your own definition of a core race was so laughable I see you've given up trying to defend it, attempting to poke holes in my own seems almost presumptuous. Like Tommy Wiseau attempting to give Daniel Day Lewis acting tips. Still, I will indulge you.

    In fact, the whole crux of the debate is that now that you have failed in your attempt to define a core race as making High Elves core to the Alliance whilst arguing Blood Elves are not core to the Horde you are attempting to render the term core race meaningless.

    A core race is a major race you don't have to earn when you purchase the game and which is so integral to the faction they are provided as an option.

    An Allied race is one you seek out within the context of the game narrative.

    Like it or not, the addition of that button on the character creation screen defining Core races from Allied race resolved this argument. A Core race is self evident. Everyone knows what the core races of the factions are. Just as everyone knows what the Allied races are. It is truly presumptuous to arrogate to yourself the ability to define something within Blizzard's own game when Blizzard has now adopted the label for us. Just because it's a gameplay term does not mean it carries no weight. It is reflective of a truth implicit in the lore.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    I asked about pre-Cata goblins. Can you answer that?
    Goblins are a core race because they were introduced as a core race.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    So are the tauren playable. But we still got Highmountain tauren.
    Highmountain Tauren are a variant allied race you seek out in the game's narrative with a clear visual distinction and unique customization set from Mulgore Tauren. Frankly, they are Moose based rather than Cow based.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    They do, thanks to the pandaren.
    And the circle at last completes, back to Pandaren. You know, I think I've done a fairly good job dismantling your idea that Pandaren are some kind of trailblazer rather than a mistake so I think it is best if we agree to disagree...me with the mountain of evidence supporting my position and you with your insistence that none of that matters because it inconveniently goes against what you want.
    Last edited by Obelisk Kai; 2019-01-08 at 04:59 PM.

  7. #8367
    Quote Originally Posted by Obelisk Kai View Post
    To google the definition of compromise

    com·pro·mise
    /ˈkämprəˌmīz/Submit
    noun
    1.
    an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.
    "an ability to listen to two sides in a dispute, and devise a compromise acceptable to both"
    synonyms: agreement, understanding, settlement, terms, accommodation; More
    verb
    1.
    settle a dispute by mutual concession.
    "in the end we compromised and deferred the issue"
    synonyms: meet each other halfway, find the middle ground, come to terms, come to an understanding, make a deal, make concessions, find a happy medium, strike a balance; More
    2.
    accept standards that are lower than is desirable.
    "we were not prepared to compromise on safety"


    This definition of compromise makes clear it a settlement of a dispute with each side making concessions. This particular dispute is that the pro High Elf side wants a carbon copy of a Horde race to be available to their faction. The compromise was a group of that race become available to the Alliance, shorn of the visuals, theme and aesthetic that define the majority of the race. Believe me, if it were up to me the Alliance wouldn't even have gotten Void Elves and that model would have remained Horde unique (and the Horde wouldn't have gotten Nightborne either, I am consistent). So the model going neutral was the concession from the Horde side, and losing the theme and aesthetic was the concession from the Alliance side.

    Now, you say Void Elves aren't a compromise. And why? Because you are unhappy with the result. Why are you unhappy with the result? Because you wanted High Elves.
    Nice definition but I think you (intentionally?) forgot to read/understand and highlight certain words ?

    By the definition you provided:
    "an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions."

    I think it's clear there is no agreement that void elves are an alternative to Alliance High Elves or there wouldn't still be requests.

    The definition of "settlement" according to the cambridge dictionary is:

    "an official agreement that finishes an argument"


    and the definition of agreement given by the cambridge dictionary is

    "the situation in which people have the same opinion, or in which they approve of or accept something"

    I think it's clear based on forum posts here and on the official wow forums that Void Elves are accepted as a compromise to Alliance High Elves.

    Therefore according to the definition you provided they are NOT a compromise.

    Blizzard also never claimed Void Elves were a compromise (and they never would since their customers have no say in their development decisions and don't have to agree with them).

    What Blizzard did clearly state was: "...the Nightborne allow the Horde to play something that is similar to the Night Elf, and the Void Elves allow the Alliance to play something that's similar to a Blood Elf. So, that's kind of a, swapping of the factions where you get to experience the other factions." -- source

    The last sentence explains why they went with Void Elves rather than High Elves. Void Elves are in a very similar position as Blood Elves were in Warcraft 3/start of TBC. Blood Elves were effectively mana junkies fighting their addiction while Void Elves are mental patients fighting to retain their sanity. High Elves wouldn't offer this experience now that the Sunwell has been restored and they also don't share the mana tap history of the Blood and Void Elves.
    "I guess only blood elves feel like the odd man out for the Horde. I hope that we've engineered that into it as deftly as we could, but you know, it's the equivalent of a bunch of white chicks hanging out with goblin or tauren. It's weird." -- Chris Metzen

  8. #8368
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Garfurion View Post
    Nice definition but I think you (intentionally?) forgot to read/understand and highlight certain words ?

    By the definition you provided:
    "an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions."

    I think it's clear there is no agreement that void elves are an alternative to Alliance High Elves or there wouldn't still be requests.

    The definition of "settlement" according to the cambridge dictionary is:

    "an official agreement that finishes an argument"


    and the definition of agreement given by the cambridge dictionary is

    "the situation in which people have the same opinion, or in which they approve of or accept something"

    I think it's clear based on forum posts here and on the official wow forums that Void Elves are accepted as a compromise to Alliance High Elves.

    Therefore according to the definition you provided they are NOT a compromise.

    Blizzard also never claimed Void Elves were a compromise (and they never would since their customers have no say in their development decisions and don't have to agree with them).

    What Blizzard did clearly state was: "...the Nightborne allow the Horde to play something that is similar to the Night Elf, and the Void Elves allow the Alliance to play something that's similar to a Blood Elf. So, that's kind of a, swapping of the factions where you get to experience the other factions." -- source

    The last sentence explains why they went with Void Elves rather than High Elves. Void Elves are in a very similar position as Blood Elves were in Warcraft 3/start of TBC. Blood Elves were effectively mana junkies fighting their addiction while Void Elves are mental patients fighting to retain their sanity. High Elves wouldn't offer this experience now that the Sunwell has been restored and they also don't share the mana tap history of the Blood and Void Elves.
    Sometimes people are so hung up on their personal wishes, they fail to see (and accept) what kind of compromise is contextualized here. I mean, in the second last paragraph you much well address it.

    This was not a compromise of between blizzard and individuals' desires. This is a game design compromise of two general ideas.

    - Some players want to play with a blood elf model in the opposite faction
    - Blizzard doesn't want to blur faction identity lines

    It is this simple. And a compromise was reached: "we try to respond to these players' wishes in some form by having somewhat of a similar model, adding some distinct characteristics that we deem to be enough to not cross faction identity boundaries"

    Now, you can argue that this compromise does not fit your desires and that's ok. It wasn't meant to. But there was a compromise made nonetheless.

    I also understand a small amount of players within this minor movement wanted High Elves for their history and lore. But if there's anything to come out of the reaction to this silly interview with Alex stating that adding more Void Elf customization is something in the table... is how the conversation shifted tremendously and most pro High Elves were happy with the possibility of just playing a pretty model.

    Which to be completely honest, after months devoted discussion, I find it somewhat ironic.
    Last edited by mmoc56209c6654; 2019-01-08 at 04:28 PM.

  9. #8369
    Legendary! Obelisk Kai's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    The north of Ireland
    Posts
    6,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Garfurion View Post
    Nice definition but I think you (intentionally?) forgot to read/understand and highlight certain words ?

    By the definition you provided:
    "an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions."

    I think it's clear there is no agreement that void elves are an alternative to Alliance High Elves or there wouldn't still be requests.

    The definition of "settlement" according to the cambridge dictionary is:

    "an official agreement that finishes an argument"


    and the definition of agreement given by the cambridge dictionary is

    "the situation in which people have the same opinion, or in which they approve of or accept something"

    I think it's clear based on forum posts here and on the official wow forums that Void Elves are accepted as a compromise to Alliance High Elves.

    Therefore according to the definition you provided they are NOT a compromise.

    Blizzard also never claimed Void Elves were a compromise (and they never would since their customers have no say in their development decisions and don't have to agree with them).

    What Blizzard did clearly state was: "...the Nightborne allow the Horde to play something that is similar to the Night Elf, and the Void Elves allow the Alliance to play something that's similar to a Blood Elf. So, that's kind of a, swapping of the factions where you get to experience the other factions." -- source

    The last sentence explains why they went with Void Elves rather than High Elves. Void Elves are in a very similar position as Blood Elves were in Warcraft 3/start of TBC. Blood Elves were effectively mana junkies fighting their addiction while Void Elves are mental patients fighting to retain their sanity. High Elves wouldn't offer this experience now that the Sunwell has been restored and they also don't share the mana tap history of the Blood and Void Elves.

    Let's start from the end for a change, your assertion as to why Void Elves were added. From the interview with Shani Edwards and Paul Kubit you quote them saying that Night Elves are sort of like a Night Elf and Void Elves are sort of like a Blood Elves.

    From this, you extrapolate Void Elves were chosen rather than High Elves because they offer that particular plotline and High Elves wouldn't offer that plotline. Nowhere in years of reading posts from players on these forums or the official forums did I see anyone argue that what the game really needed was a race whose narrative paralleled the original Blood Elf storyline of dealing with an unpleasant addiction to magic by dallying with dark forces.

    This does not invalidate what Edwards and Kubit said, far from it. What they said is true. The problem here is that you've extrapolated the rationale for Void Elves whereas what we actually have is a consequence of their creation.

    We know what the rationale for the Void Elves was because on two occasions the game director was directly asked and both times he answered the same. You're no doubt familiar with the interviews by now, but in summary Ion stated Void Elves were chosen over High Elves (and that was the question directly put to him in the April 2018 Q and A) because High Elves are playable as Blood Elves, because they want to maintain the boundaries between the factions and because Void Elves 'felt a bit like a Blood Elf but had a unique flavour of it's own'...which matches up with Shani Edwards saying 'the Void Elves allow the Alliance to play something that's similar to a Blood Elf.'

    Both the developers appear to be on the same page in fact, it is merely you drawing the wrong conclusion. High Elves were not denied because they didn't fit the story. High Elves were denied because they are already playable.

    As for your assertion that Void Elves aren't a compromise...Greywyr does a very good job of explaining why you are incorrect on that so I will just advise you to read his response and know that I agree with him.
    Last edited by Obelisk Kai; 2019-01-08 at 03:14 PM.

  10. #8370
    Quote Originally Posted by Syegfryed View Post
    they do not, cause pandarens are not an allied race, and are just exceptions of the rule, they were introduced neutral, unlike the elves
    You are missing the point so hard I'm left wondering if it's intentional. It's irrelevant if pandaren are an "allied" race or "core" race. The point is that the pandaren represent the idea of both factions having the same "race".

    this is not ridiculous because they are in the same faction, and are not the same race, but a sub-race, nice try though
    Once again, you completely missed the point of what I was saying. Whether accidental or intentionally. I'm leaning toward the latter.

  11. #8371
    I am Murloc! FlubberPuddy's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    On the frontline
    Posts
    5,384
    Quote Originally Posted by Greywyr View Post
    I also understand a small scale of players within this minor movement wanted High Elves for their history and lore. But if there's anything to come out of the reaction to this silly interview with Alex stating that adding more Void Elf customization is something in the table... is how the conversation shifted tremendously and most pro High Elves were happy with the possibility of just playing a pretty model.

    Which to be completely honest, after months devoted discussion, I find it somewhat ironic.
    Even if question was about Void Elf customization, the main part was "possible to get the High Elf fantasy" that's what I know got me excited and most others.

    Because right now, you cannot have the Alliance High Elf fantasy, there is no way for you to play a high elf of the likes of those 7th legion, Silver Covenant, Highvale, or even the type you see around Dalaran where they've been and stayed loyal with Humans and the greater Alliance and didn't prioritize their self-survival over their ideals.

    If someone can point to evidence (outside of "just RP it man") where this kind of high elf fantasy exists then yes it makes the request fall flat. But if the only way to achieve it "just RP it" then it's valid. Because the same could've been said for a lot of other AR (Mag'har, Dark Iron, LF Draenei), which people did do previously for years.

    It should be easy to understand why having some fantasy available in the game is more fulfilling than just using your imagination.

    Also, you can't really point to the success of Void Elves and say "cool all the High Elf peeps are satisfied" because the reason for someone playing a Void Elf isn't as clearly conveyed as say those who were all "I don't want to give my money to Retail, I want to give it to Classic" wherein Blizzard replied they can track those who log on to each game type, so if people want to support Classic just play Classic.

    For a Void Elf player and their popularity it could be any number of things:

    - Could be that those that wanted a High Elf were satisfied
    - Could be those that wanted to play a Goth/Emo Elf
    - Could be those that wanted to play a Blood Elf
    - Could be those that love the Thalassian model
    - Could be those that love the Void and anything centered around it
    - Could be those that wanted to be an Elf Warlock on the Alliance (Warlock is the most popular Void Elf class at 120)

    See where I'm going? Void Elf players simply existing cannot be pinpointed exactly to be "yeah this High Elf compromise is a success", they can be a success for any number of reasons, until Blizzard themselves comes out and says why they are it's just player speculation.

    Versus if you simply see someone logging onto Classic and putting hours into Classic vs Retail it is very easy to quantify interest in Classic itself through that method.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Garfurion View Post
    What Blizzard did clearly state was: "...the Nightborne allow the Horde to play something that is similar to the Night Elf, and the Void Elves allow the Alliance to play something that's similar to a Blood Elf. So, that's kind of a, swapping of the factions where you get to experience the other factions." -- source
    From the same interview as well:

    "Is the current lineup of Allied Races something you envision being expanded down the line?

    Shani : "It's definitely something that we've talked about and we might do in the future, but no current plans to go with that right now."

    Sounds just like Ion's "in the near term", so if it was asked back then and came up again as a popular topic for Ion to address, and then again Alex has addressed one of those AR (Void Elves) about it but now a "it's possible- don't give up hope" type way and with Jeremy Feasel's "you've seen us taking this system in a bunch of different directions and we're not done yet" then more and more it's becoming likely that their tune is changing with how they tackle the AR system post BFA.

    - - - Updated - - -

    What I think is the biggest win in all of this is that regardless of if High Elves do become playable on Alliance, the biggest hurdle - getting the Thalassian model on Alliance side - is already done and over with.

    Therefore if High Elves are ever deemed to be playable they've already implemented the biggest hurdle - the model.

  12. #8372
    Quote Originally Posted by Obelisk Kai View Post
    I thought the mistake was self-evident in the context of the topic we are discussing. Pandaren neutrality was a mistake because they are identical to each other, leading to a feeling of detachment and rootlessness regarding them and diminishing the distinctiveness between the two factions.
    And hence why I keep asking, if this was such a problem, then why did Blizzard give the nightborne to the Horde, and void elves to the Alliance? Because nightborne are identical to night elves, and void elves are identical to blood elves. Model, animations... looking from afar, no difference at all. From up close? Again, no difference at all. Only difference? Green/blue outline vs red/orange outline.

    You also seem to have great difficulty with the concept of neutrality. Void Elves and Nightborne are not equivalent to Pandaren, they are clearly established variants on existing races that follow the criteria for allied races. Nightborne are not Night Elves. Void Elves are no longer Blood/High Elves. But a Horde Pandaren and an Alliance Pandaren are culturally and thematically identical. And as established, in hindsight that was an error. Blizzard did learn from the Pandaren mistake, which is why the Void Elves and Nightborne are clear variants rather than duplicates.
    I know exactly what is neutrality. Which is why I keep saying that you bringing "neutrality" into this conversation is useless and a meaningless waste of time. At no point I ever mentioned of making high elves neutral.

    To dive a bit deeper here Pandaren on the Horde are exactly the same as Pandaren on the Alliance. Attempting to force an equivalence between them and the Void Elves and the Blood Elves is an attempt to say Void Elves and Blood Elves are the same thing (and Nightborne and Night Elves).
    And this is you strawmanning the argument, because I never claimed that void elves and blood elves are the same thing. I'm talking about this argument of yours that "having blood elf models in the Alliance" is a bad thing, when we had that thing happen in the past (pandaren) and now in BfA (nightborne and void elves).

    To google the definition of compromise

    com·pro·mise
    /ˈkämprəˌmīz/Submit
    noun
    1.
    an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.
    "an ability to listen to two sides in a dispute, and devise a compromise acceptable to both"
    synonyms: agreement, understanding, settlement, terms, accommodation; More
    verb
    1.
    settle a dispute by mutual concession.
    "in the end we compromised and deferred the issue"
    synonyms: meet each other halfway, find the middle ground, come to terms, come to an understanding, make a deal, make concessions, find a happy medium, strike a balance; More
    2.
    accept standards that are lower than is desirable.
    "we were not prepared to compromise on safety"
    Here's the important part:
    "an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions."

    There was no "agreement" or "settlement" reached by the players' side. It's not a "compromise" if only one of the parties gets to decide how the "dispute" is resolved.

    Not all Humans are loyal to Stormwind but people aren't going around claiming Humans aren't playable. Blood Elves are High Elves, High Elves are playable.
    Blood elves are playable. High elves (and I repeat: by high elves I mean non-blood elves) are not.

    This is a strange position to take. Neutrality refers to the Alliance players being able to play a duplicate of a core Horde race.
    No, it doesn't. That's not what "neutrality" is. What you're saying basically is that Germany, on the aftermath of the second war, was "neutral" because each half of the country were part of different factions.

    Well it's certainly more representative of imagining that if they say something we dislike we can ignore them. But you keep using that word, personal, trying to box what they say in so as to render it of little value.
    "How do you feel about pandaren in both factions?"
    "[I am] Not a fan of it overall."

    How is that not a personal opinion? He's clearly not speaking for how the team felt there. Just his own. To say his opinion reflected the entire (or the majority) of his team back then is a big fallacy.

    What does Demon Hunter race restriction have to do with this debate?
    Playing innocent? You said: "It's been Y years since Blizzard did X": "It's been six years since Blizzard added pandarens" and used it as an argument that "if Blizzard didn't do so until now, that means they won't do it again." I simply countered it with another example of "it's been Y years since Blizzard did X".

    Sadly not possible.
    A pity, isn't it? That means you can't say that his opinion reflects the team's.

    Given your own definition of a core race was so laughable I see you've given up trying to defend it, attempting to poke holes in my own seems almost presumptuous. Like Tommy Wiseau attempting to give Daniel Day Lewis acting tips. Still, I will indulge you.
    [...]
    A core race is a major race you don't have to earn when you purchase the game and which is so integral to the faction they are provided as an option.

    An Allied race is one you seek out within the context of the game narrative.
    So I'll repeat my question, since you apparently refuse to address it correctly:
    What is the LORE difference between an "allied race" and a "core race"?

    Highmountain Tauren are a variant allied race you seek out in the game's narrative with a clear visual distinction and unique customization set from Mulgore Tauren. Frankly, they are Moose based rather than Cow based.
    They are cows. Not mooses.

    And the circle at last completes, back to Pandaren. You know, I think I've done a fairly good job dismantling your idea
    Textbook definition of "delusion", I'd say.

  13. #8373
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by FlubberPuddy View Post
    Even if question was about Void Elf customization, the main part was "possible to get the High Elf fantasy" that's what I know got me excited and most others.
    But what got you excited was the possibility of having fair skin, blue eyes and all the shenanigans being added to the customization, no? Because by reading the forums after, that was pretty much what I infered from most reactions. It wasn't really about the lore, but the model.


    Quote Originally Posted by FlubberPuddy View Post
    should be easy to understand why having some fantasy available in the game is more fulfilling than just using your imagination.
    I agree. But at this point, it should also be easy to understand why they aren't outright given to the Alliance. The way you want to have the fantasy available is clashing with something else.


    Quote Originally Posted by FlubberPuddy View Post
    Also, you can't really point to the success of Void Elves and say "cool all the High Elf peeps are satisfied" [...] Void Elf players simply existing cannot be pinpointed exactly to be "yeah this High Elf compromise is a success", they can be a success for any number of reasons, until Blizzard themselves comes out and says why they are it's just player speculation.
    Not going into the Classic/Retail part because that's a bit more complex than you're portraying and directs to another kind of discussion. Enough to say that it's not as clear as you make it sound to be, for the same reason people are playing BFA but doesn't mean they are satisfied with it, they might be playing it for other reasons other than pure enjoyment about features.

    But to the main point, I never said the compromise aimed to respond to all raised points or all types of players within each camp. A compromise does not aim to satisfy everyone, but to bring a better outcome within the realm of possibility of a given situation by conceding certain points and reach an agreement where the some points are checked. Otherwise you're not talking about a compromise, you're talking about a consensus. Which clearly cannot be reached here because you have two disparate arguments that clash with each other: 1) Wanting to play high elves as what they currently portrayed; 2) Players not wanting to give up on their faction identity brought by blood elves.

    Among the players defending High Elves addition, you see many different reasons, many different wishes. Even different suggestions aiming for a resolution. If in some form High Elves were introduced, you would still not have everyone satisfied. Even then it would be impossible to claim that "cool all High Elf peeps are satisfied".

    And Void Elves as a compromise never aimed to do so, it instead tried bring some sort of enjoyment for you by providing you an alternative model, which is what they feel was the essence of your reasoning.

    I'm not really arguing the solution was amazing or perfect either (even I have some issues with how it was made). Is it a good compromise? Some people have accepted that while this is not what they entirely wished for, it's enough; some have not, others love them for what they are.
    But it is a compromise.
    People should not be arguing this point over and over and saying "no this is NOT a compromise because it did not turn what I wanted into reality". At least, would be more accurate to say you're not entirely happy with this compromise, because the compromise is there.

    Now...

    Had this discussion with Thunder months ago, when Void Elves were introduced. And I completely agree with him. Personally, it does not make sense to me why they had to be a fringe faction from Blood Elves, instead of actually having High Elves follow Alleria's direction and succumb to the Void.

    What I ask you is: If this had been the case, if from a lore perspective this had happened and you'd have High Elves turning to the Void and look exactly how they look currently, would you be satisfied?
    Last edited by mmoc56209c6654; 2019-01-08 at 06:05 PM.

  14. #8374
    The Unstoppable Force Syegfryed's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Darkshore, Killing Living and Dead elves
    Posts
    21,776
    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    You are missing the point so hard I'm left wondering if it's intentional. It's irrelevant if pandaren are an "allied" race or "core" race. The point is that the pandaren represent the idea of both factions having the same "race".
    im not missing the point im saying its not factual and wrong. If they are different, you can't but then in the same bag, they are not allied race, they were not introduced with 10 years of difference and once again, they are an exception.

    They represent how this ida failed.

    Once again, you completely missed the point of what I was saying. Whether accidental or intentionally. I'm leaning toward the latter.
    Just because im not acknowledging your not valid points don't mean im missing. highmountain taurens are not the same race of taurens and are not in the different faction of normal taurens, unlike elves.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ielenia View Post
    Blood elves are playable. High elves (and I repeat: by high elves I mean non-blood elves) are not.
    The race is alreadyplayable, not the one specific group of elves of the same race you mean right?

    its like to say the maghar orcs are not playable because im talking about the outland ones, or the humans of [insert kingdom] are not playable, just stormwind humans, don't matter, those races are already playable


    So I'll repeat my question, since you apparently refuse to address it correctly:
    What is the LORE difference between an "allied race" and a "core race"?
    until now, allied races are sub-races, core races are "full races". by lore, core is race is the race who is the "face of the faction" with their lore being important withing the faction.


    They are cows. Not mooses.
    definitely mooses based too, their horns and the fur resemble that, they receive the cenarius blessing

    Textbook definition of "delusion", I'd say.
    delusion is something who can define this topic indeed.

  15. #8375
    I am Murloc! FlubberPuddy's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    On the frontline
    Posts
    5,384
    Quote Originally Posted by Greywyr View Post
    But what got you excited was the possibility of having fair skin, blue eyes and all the shenanigans being added to the customization, no? Because by reading the forums after, that was pretty much what I infered from most reactions. It wasn't really about the lore, but the model.
    Isn't it pretty common sense by now that whenever Blizzard adds in extra customization to existing races, they'll give lore reasons for doing so? Ex: Blood Elf Golden Eyes and Night Elf Night Warrior Eyes.

    In the case of Void Elves, how do people by now not understand how Void Elves came to be? It was through a forced and interrupted ritual that made them the way they are - to presume every type of elf that becomes a Void Elf goes through a different process has not be shown or spoken about. I bring this up because that means a lore explanation would 99% for sure be given why "the High Elf fantasy" gets brought to Void Elves if that is what occurred.

    I think a lot of excitement comes from the fact that it shows Blizzard isn't as against giving the High Elf fantasy to Alliance side as some other posters keep assuming.

    And again, I tried to have Syegfred there define for me what is unique to Blood Elves from the other existing elves, and it came down to looks, so regardless of whether there are individuals more for lore reasons or not - the way that is depicted through races is from their looks.

    AKA you cannot have one without the other unless it's some minor stuff like Dark Irons being given tattoos where previously there was never mention nor shown of any having it prior to becoming an Allied Race. Same for Zandalari tattoos I think? But I can't recall if there are some joe-schmo Zandalari NPCs with tattoos or not.

    With the way you're phrasing it, you're focused on looks, but everyone is. Because immediately seeing a Blue/Purple Elf of any kind the player won't go "That's a Blood Elf/High Elf" they will think of one of the others immediately.

    You're kinda saying "what got you excited was the possibility of looking like a High Elf" well, frankly yes because that's what they look like but that doesn't mean Blizzard would automatically add it without lore reasoning. It's just assumed.


    Quote Originally Posted by Greywyr View Post
    I agree. But at this point, it should also be easy to understand why they aren't outright given to the Alliance. The way you want to have the fantasy available is clashing with something else.
    I think we can infer from the recent remark about Wildhammer Dwarves by Jeremy Feasel, that they're moving in a direction post BFA to not mind as much. Again, people keep minimizing that in Ion's response he included the fact we're in a faction war expansion along with why there's a desire to have things be more different.

    Wildhammers were also previously given the "anything's possible but no plans right now" response prior to Blizzcon 2018. Then comes Blizzcon 2018 and the recent responses to both High Elves and Wildhammer are more favorable (both being related to character customization).

    And they're right and you're right - at this point - it's understandable why they weren't given. But the request for High Elves isn't "they need to be in the game right this moment or else the request is unheard" (though I won't say some people are like that), it's for what comes after BFA. Whether that's 1 or 2 expansions down the line (or 3) we don't know.

    Quote Originally Posted by Greywyr View Post
    Not going into the Classic/Retail part because that's a bit more complex than you're portraying and directs to another kind of discussion. Enough to say that it's not as clear as you make it sound to be, for the same reason people are playing BFA but doesn't mean they are satisfied with it, they might be playing it for other reasons other than pure enjoyment about features.
    What I meant with that example is that it answers the question "Is Classic a success?" not that it answers why Classic is a success. Just the same as seeing the popularity for Void Elves. Yes, Void Elves are a success. But the why can be for various reasons, same as the why Classic would be a success could be for various reasons.

    You cannot point to Void Elves and say "they are a success because of X reason", only that they are a success. That was my main point there with that analogy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Greywyr View Post
    People should not be arguing this point over and over and saying "no this is NOT a compromise because it did not turn what I wanted into reality". At least, would be more accurate to say you're not entirely happy with this compromise, because the compromise is there.
    The main premise is High Elves weren't given, therefore the request exists. Whether Void Elves are a compromise or not doesn't matter. Just like everyone knows Wildhammer Dwarves are not playable, therefore the request for them exists.

    You cannot say a Bronzebeard Dwarf has the same fantasy as a Wildhammer Dwarf, just like you cannot say a Blood Elf has the same fantasy as a High Elf. And what is this down to? Their overall difference in culture/personality. Doesn't matter that both pairs are fair skin types of the same race - it was never about having to be a different race yet many latch onto that strawman.

    Quote Originally Posted by Greywyr View Post
    What I ask you is: If this had been the case, if from a lore perspective this had happened and you'd have High Elves turning to the Void and look exactly how they look currently, would you be satisfied?
    And you'll get the same answer from me, that I've repeatedly stated in the thread as well. The same answer Thunder gave, if these Void Elves came from High Elves I wouldn't be here because I have enough mental faculties to understand this was the natural story progression of Alliance High Elves.

    That's not what we got though, we got a completely new Blood Elf group created out of nowhere who ended up turned, and still see High Elves among the Alliance represented in the 7th Legion as well as Stormwind, and as an Island expedition team - this is all reference from BFA just to clarify.

    Another question I'd have to those who think High Elves are turning into Void Elves, what purpose was there to place a High Elf on a team of Night Elf and Human. Wouldn't it make more sense to include a High Elf among the Void Elf team if Blizzard means to show this High Elves -> Void Elves transition?

  16. #8376
    Quote Originally Posted by Greywyr View Post
    Sometimes people are so hung up on their personal wishes, they fail to see (and accept) what kind of compromise is contextualized here. I mean, in the second last paragraph you much well address it.
    It seems you don't understand what a compromise is according to Obelisk Kai's definition. It requires an agreement between 2 or more parties which in the case of Void Elves is not the case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Greywyr View Post
    This was not a compromise of between blizzard and individuals' desires. This is a game design compromise of two general ideas.
    Ideas can't compromise. Given the definition of "compromise" as postulated by Obelisk which 2 parties agreed to this "compromise" ?


    Quote Originally Posted by Greywyr View Post
    - Some players want to play with a blood elf model in the opposite faction
    Sorry, I don't recall any statement by Blizzard that this was a major Allied Race requirement for Blizzard. Can you please give a source ?

    The reason that I'm asking is that Pandaren had been requesed since vanilla and Blizzard still made Goblins and Worgen playable first even though Pandaren were considered for TBC already so Player request doesn't seem to be a major requirement for Blizzard.

    The same is true for Naga which were originally planned to be one of the 9 playable races in vanilla and despite repeated requests over the years are still not playable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Greywyr View Post
    - Blizzard doesn't want to blur faction identity lines
    This is a design requirement/restriction, not an idea.

    Quote Originally Posted by Greywyr View Post
    It is this simple. And a compromise was reached: "we try to respond to these players' wishes in some form by having somewhat of a similar model, adding some distinct characteristics that we deem to be enough to not cross faction identity boundaries"
    It's not a "compromise", it's the outcome of Blizzards design goals regarding Allied Races and their overall design requirements (which ruled out High Elves).

    So let's review which potential Allied Races they discussed:


    "Pretty much anything with two legs we discussed being an Allied Race - but these were the four that stuck because thematically, you played alongside them in Legion and they just made the most sense for the story."
    -- source: Shani Edwards

    So clearly one of the initial requirements for Allied Races was a thematic link to Legion which meant that Highmountain, Lightforged, Nightborne and Void Elves were probably the first 4 chosen as referred to by Shani Edwards.

    Assuming Void Elves weren't part of some scrapped Legion content and were designed specifically for BFA they are the logical result of Blizzards decision that the Nightborne would go Horde. I can imagine Blizzard didn't want an "elf" inbalance between the factions.

    It could be High Elves were maybe briefly considered but they violate a major design requirement:

    "So, Blood Elves kind of are High Elves with different eye colors and backstory in terms of their relationship to magic in the Sunwell. But if you want to be a fair-skinned, light, blonde-haired, tall, majestic, elf...that is a Blood Elf.

    Giving that race directly to the Alliance would have blurred a lot of the lines between the two factions, but also there isn't a clear example of who or what High Elves are as a larger group which remains in Azeroth. There's a couple...we just met Alleria again...but they're not out there in the same way."
    -- source: Ion Hazzikostas

    Moreover, there was also another major design requirement for Allied Races:

    "When we add an Allied Race, there's a desire to have things be even more distinct especially between the two factions with the faction conflict being so prominent. " -- source: Ion Hazzikostas

    So given these design requirements:
    - A Blood Elf model derived race to balance out the Night-Elf derived Nightborne
    - High Elves blurring faction lines
    - thematic link to Legion ->

    "And so, the Void Elf angle, as it tied into the story of Argus, the powers of Alleria awakened and was able to train others to harness, was able to give something that felt a bit like a Blood Elf but had a unique flavor of its own to the Alliance." -- source: Ion Hazzikostas

    it's easy to see these design requirements resulted in Void Elves, including their Blood Elf background as indicated by Both Shani Edwards and Ion Hazzikostas.

    Quote Originally Posted by Greywyr View Post
    Now, you can argue that this compromise does not fit your desires and that's ok. It wasn't meant to. But there was a compromise made nonetheless.
    I understand what you try to say but compromise is the wrong word here. There was no compromise, since again, that requires agreement or settlement between 2 or more parties. There were no parties involved here. Compromise would also suggest something like negotiations or at least back-and-forth communication to exchange ideas/demands. That didn't take place.

    Void Elves are the result of a list of hard and soft requirements that Blizzard has/had for designing/choosing Allied Races. Potential reactions of the player-base may have influenced their list of soft requirements, but certainly not hard requirements.

    After all, other popular race requests over the years like Taunka, Wildhammers and Naga were not considered or didn't make the cut for BFA.

    Also, if the long time request for playable Alliance High Elves was the major reason for Blizzard to design Void Elves then why are they former Blood Elves and not High Elves which would probably have satisfied both Blood and High elf fans ?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Obelisk Kai View Post
    Let's start from the end for a change, your assertion as to why Void Elves were added. From the interview with Shani Edwards and Paul Kubit you quote them saying that Night Elves are sort of like a Night Elf and Void Elves are sort of like a Blood Elves.

    From this, you extrapolate Void Elves were chosen rather than High Elves because they offer that particular plotline and High Elves wouldn't offer that plotline. Nowhere in years of reading posts from players on these forums or the official forums did I see anyone argue that what the game really needed was a race whose narrative paralleled the original Blood Elf storyline of dealing with an unpleasant addiction to magic by dallying with dark forces.
    I never claimed Void Elves were designed according to player request.

    Quote Originally Posted by Obelisk Kai View Post
    This does not invalidate what Edwards and Kubit said, far from it. What they said is true. The problem here is that you've extrapolated the rationale for Void Elves whereas what we actually have is a consequence of their creation.

    We know what the rationale for the Void Elves was because on two occasions the game director was directly asked and both times he answered the same. You're no doubt familiar with the interviews by now, but in summary Ion stated Void Elves were chosen over High Elves (and that was the question directly put to him in the April 2018 Q and A) because High Elves are playable as Blood Elves, because they want to maintain the boundaries between the factions and because Void Elves 'felt a bit like a Blood Elf but had a unique flavour of it's own'...which matches up with Shani Edwards saying 'the Void Elves allow the Alliance to play something that's similar to a Blood Elf.'

    Both the developers appear to be on the same page in fact, it is merely you drawing the wrong conclusion. High Elves were not denied because they didn't fit the story. High Elves were denied because they are already playable.
    Your correct. What I intended to write, but lost in re-editing and shortening the text too much, was that Shani Edwards response could explain why they came up with Void Elves rather than a new unique model for High Elves like there are now 3 models for humans (normal, Kul Tiran and skinny).

    However, after re-reading some of Blizzard dev responses I can see how even a different model for High Elves would probably still blur the faction lines too much.

    Quote Originally Posted by Obelisk Kai View Post
    As for your assertion that Void Elves aren't a compromise...Greywyr does a very good job of explaining why you are incorrect on that so I will just advise you to read his response and know that I agree with him.
    I'm afraid he also didn't state which two sides/parties agreed to a settlement resulting in Void Elves according to the definition of compromise you gave.

    "an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions"

    So, I'm afraid I am going to have to ask you for a full quote and source reference to which 2 sides/parties agreed to a settlement resulting in Void Elves ?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by FlubberPuddy View Post
    Even if question was about Void Elf customization, the main part was "possible to get the High Elf fantasy" that's what I know got me excited and most others.

    Because right now, you cannot have the Alliance High Elf fantasy, there is no way for you to play a high elf of the likes of those 7th legion, Silver Covenant, Highvale, or even the type you see around Dalaran where they've been and stayed loyal with Humans and the greater Alliance and didn't prioritize their self-survival over their ideals.

    If someone can point to evidence (outside of "just RP it man") where this kind of high elf fantasy exists then yes it makes the request fall flat. But if the only way to achieve it "just RP it" then it's valid. Because the same could've been said for a lot of other AR (Mag'har, Dark Iron, LF Draenei), which people did do previously for years.
    I'm not sure what exactly you want from the Alliance High Elf fantasy but on Guard day (forgot the exact date/name) you can /salute an Silver Covenant Guard in Northrend Dalaran and it will transform you into a Silver Covenant Guard (including /silly and /dance) for the rest of the day I think..or until you die. Maybe not perfect but it does allow for HE-ing for day. I think it even works in dungeons and BGs but I'm not sure.

    So I guess Alliance already has 1/365th playable High Elves

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by FlubberPuddy View Post
    Another question I'd have to those who think High Elves are turning into Void Elves, what purpose was there to place a High Elf on a team of Night Elf and Human. Wouldn't it make more sense to include a High Elf among the Void Elf team if Blizzard means to show this High Elves -> Void Elves transition?
    After listening to Vanilla WoW Devs in podcasts I wouldn't be surprised if there are individual devs sneaking in High Elves when designing quests or NPC characters without there being some official plan behind it.
    "I guess only blood elves feel like the odd man out for the Horde. I hope that we've engineered that into it as deftly as we could, but you know, it's the equivalent of a bunch of white chicks hanging out with goblin or tauren. It's weird." -- Chris Metzen

  17. #8377
    You High Elfers need to see this from Blizzard's point of view.

    Put yourselves in the mind of a Blizz dev. Would it really seem practical for you to implement a 2nd belf variant when you can still have Gnome, Goblin, Worgen, Forsaken, and even Pandaren variants that have yet to see the light of day?

    Then once BfA is over and they move on to completely new stories, would they really pass the opportunity to create a brand new race from scratch over one that is basically a copy paste model wise?

    If you look at that from a non biased point of view you'll realize that High Elves are pointless to just appease a very loud small minority. Obviously it's not impossible, but it's highly unlikely.

    If they decide to roll 2nd variants for core races once each one has gotten their own AR, then and only then would Helves make more sense, especially if the lore justifies the Helves depicted in the OP. Other wise, don't hold your breath.

    Just hope for for lighter skin tones for velves and a story progression to include transformed High Elves instead of just Belves and move on with your lives.
    Last edited by Varx; 2019-01-08 at 11:06 PM.

  18. #8378
    I hope they never add High Elves so that this thread just goes on forever.

    Also I'm pretty sure I was the only one who played the Velf starting scenario because nearly half of the NPCs training in the void were High Elves. When Blizzard said that Velves are Helves they weren't being sarcastic, it's pretty literal.

    Either way keep the flame war going, you're all doing great. 444 down 556 to go. Lets get this ridiculous thread to 1k posts! Smash the like button!

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Varx View Post
    You High Elfers need to see this from Blizzard's point of view.

    Put yourselves in the mind of a Blizz dev. Would it really seem practical for you to implement a 2nd belf variant when you can still have Gnome, Goblin, Worgen, Forsaken, and even Pandaren variants that have yet to see the light of day?

    Then once BfA is over and they move on to completely new stories, would they really pass the opportunity to create a brand new race from scratch over one that is basically a copy paste model wise?

    If you look at that from a non biased point of view you'll realize that High Elves are pointless to just appease a very loud small minority. Obviously it's not impossible, but it's highly unlikely.

    If they decide to roll 2nd variants for core races once each one has gotten their own AR, then and only then would Helves make more sense, especially if the lore justifies the Helves depicted in the OP. Other wise, don't hold your breath.

    Just hope for for lighter skin tones for velves and a story progression to include transformed High Elves instead of just Belves and move on with your lives.
    You severely underestimate the fortitude of the keyboard warrior friend, this dumbass argument has got legs like the million dollar man. Expect more posts into 2020 about High Elves.

  19. #8379
    I am Murloc! FlubberPuddy's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    On the frontline
    Posts
    5,384
    Quote Originally Posted by Garfurion View Post
    After listening to Vanilla WoW Devs in podcasts I wouldn't be surprised if there are individual devs sneaking in High Elves when designing quests or NPC characters without there being some official plan behind it.
    Yeah I can get this, but I'm not sure it applies to stand out moments like the Island teams, or literally putting in High Elves by mention from Elisande was done sneakily.

    Frostfencer Seraphi also when originally conceived had green eyes and they fixed it to blue. It's not the same as slipping that baby into a bird's nest in Drustvar that was discussed at Blizzcon 2018.

    While I don't think they have some long-detailed official plan for High Elves that will come to fruition in 20 years of the 15 that WoW's been available, I see it more as they're a compelling group that's being kept in the books.

    Just like even though they made an official comic about Anduin far into the future, they at a later time hand-waved it as "one of the possible futures" reinforcing how often their plans change and how flux they are.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Varx View Post
    If they decide to roll 2nd variants for core races once each one has gotten their own AR, then and only then would Helves make more sense, especially if the lore justifies the Helves depicted in the OP. Other wise, don't hold your breath.
    I can't speak for everyone but this is the major sentiment I've noticed. The talk is just on-going right now for the next go around of an elf alliance race.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Talvindius View Post
    I hope they never add High Elves so that this thread just goes on forever. Expect more posts into 2020 about High Elves.
    Nice to know you'll be checking in on the thread!

  20. #8380
    Quote Originally Posted by FlubberPuddy View Post
    - - - Updated - - -



    I can't speak for everyone but this is the major sentiment I've noticed. The talk is just on-going right now for the next go around of an elf alliance race.


    !
    That's a huge IF. Read the rest of my post. It's not very prudent at all and would probably be some kind of last ditch effort near the death of WoW to try and rake in some subs.
    Last edited by Varx; 2019-01-09 at 12:46 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •