Official High Elf Discussion Megathread

[The Silver Covenant]

It is his misfortune that those seeking high elves on the Alliance that are identical to a core Horde race are apparently the group fated to lose out.

High Elves are a core Alliance race and have been heavily associated with the blue faction since Warcraft II. To state otherwise is to ignore Warcraft canon.

[Ramz]

I figured out that helves are like Bella Swan from Twilight. Every guy in the book was fixated over her ready to fight for her, but she was very shallow character that wasn't even good or remotely interesting person to justify the fight over her.

[Traveler Voltin]

High Elves are a core Alliance race and have been heavily associated with the blue faction since Warcraft II. To state otherwise is to ignore Warcraft canon.

they left after WCII except for a very small few.

[The Silver Covenant]

they left after WCII except for a very small few.

Who remained with the Alliance through it all, and are there to this day. Whose "very small few" is still more than the Void Elves and Lightforged Draenei can count among them.

What's your point?

[Aucald]

The request has been made. But it has also been answered. We are a long way from classic now and it's single elf option. Three more have since been added and one of those was a direct response to that request that was consistent with Blizzard's red lines. Does a request retain value simply because what was delivered was not an ideal? Should a request retain respect when clearly they have decided to disregarded the maxim that the perfect is the enemy of the good?

If it had been answered, this debate would not exist - your conclusion belies the circumstances you find yourself in. None of the four existing options are the option originally requested. I would argue that "yes, the request does retain value when your audience remains in want of something that could both have been and is easy enough to provide." The substance of the request is also not one of scale, but rather of a binary: what was provided was not what was asked for. Zero instead of one, false instead of true.

The request for playable High Elves cuts across that wider debate of which is more important, faction integrity or letting people play what they want to play. It is a subjective opinion for us as players, and had they decided the other way we wouldn't be having this conversation. But they did decide and they decided the other way. They created a variant form of high elf as a compromise that still respected their red lines.

The developers chose what will be or won't be, that much as certain - but their judgments are both open to quantification and, more importantly, criticism. As I've said multiple times in this long-lived debate: "the developers are not inerrant." They can make mistakes, their judgments can be in error, and their reasoning can be unsound. They're the final word on what happens, but they're not the final word on what *should* happen. It's an important distinction you seem to miss.

The point of them being a different flavour of Blood Elves is semantics. Blood Elves are High Elves, the terms are interchangeable to the point that the Void Elves have been defined as both a different flavour of high elf and as something like a Blood Elf. Both statements are true. Whether a Void Elf began their existence as a Silver Covenant exile who willingly subjected themselves to the procedure or as a Blood Elf mage caught up in Umbric's initial failed experiment, the importance of that lies only in the mind of the player who cares enough to personally headcanon the origin of that Void Elf.

We've had this discussion before, but suffice it to say you're simply wrong here - you've drawn a semantic line in the sand that is as arbitrary as it is immaterial to the discussion being had. "Blood Elves are High Elves" is true, but it's a truth that doesn't matter here - Blood Elves are not Silver Covenant High Elven exiles, they're not the sect of High Elves who were exiled from Quel'Thalas for refusing Kael'Thas' edict as concerns Mana Tapping, and they're not the sect who chose to remain loyal to the Alliance as opposed to the Horde. They're a separate people, now more than ever. The Void Elves, too, are not in the chain of descent from the High Elven exiles. This isn't a semantic distinction, either; they're majority Blood Elves who broke away well after the original schism following the Third War.

The original request could never be facilitated. This is not a case where the out of touch parent mixed up the requests and came up with the closest compromise, this is a case where the original request violated something Blizzard considers a pillar of the game. The real surprise isn't that they 'failed to facilitate the original request', it's that they went as far as they did in attempting to give those seeking a thalassian elf on the Alliance something at all.

The creation of the Void Elves violates the same "pillar of the game," invalidating this argument entirely. The request was easy to facilitate, especially as the assets and lore of the sect already exists in a non-playable schema. They chose not to for reasons poorly explained - no one is debating the reality of things, just the relative poorness of the provided reasoning.

And yes, it is entitlement. What's wrong with that? It's faction based game, they've encouraged factionalism. They've fostered it. They've facilitated it. They've marketed it to sell the game and it's expansions. They bellow 'For the Horde' and 'For the Alliance' at their conventions to stoke the crowd. They've told you it's a pillar of the game. They've used it to drive the game forward in multiple ways. And believe it or not, as the bickering that ensued among the crowd at Blizzcon when they were informed that the Alliance won both warfronts proved, plenty of people who play this game have an emotional investment in these factions.

Well, at least you admit it - and that means we can at least begin building some kind of dialectic bridge. That being said, your reasoning here fails as adding High Elven exiles to the Alliance doesn't dilute factionalism or remove it - it actually fosters it. The High Elven exiles are deeply opposed to their Blood Elven brethren, in emulation of the greater Horde/Alliance rivalry. If you want continued rivalry then a playable rivalry between Alliance High Elves and Horde Blood Elves will give you that in spades.

So if the argument seems like "Blood Elves are High Elves, both Blood and High Elves are ours, and we will not part with them and the developers stand by it", well you said it and you aren't wrong. You're portraying it as a negative of course because it cuts across 'let people play what they want to play', but if Blizzard ever believed in that or had been converted to that philosophy they'd have used the narrative off ramp provided by the end of the Fourth War to significantly weaken grouping restrictions and let everyone play with everyone. They memorably didn't, using every opportunity afforded them at Blizzcon when asked to say it wasn't going to happen and that this is a pillar of the game.

I'm portraying it as a negative because entitlement isn't really a good thing in the vast majority of cases. Also because the Horde doesn't own the High Elven exiles either in lore or externally in the form of a faction in the game.

And yes there are people who will continue to argue the faction system damages the game and they make a good argument but so long as the faction system exists I fully expect my faction's integrity and identity to be maintained. The fact that one small group of people can't play a duplicate of a core race of the other faction and feel aggrieved by that is likely not the biggest problem caused by the faction divide either, especially given they were given a 95% duplicate of that race which they then decided wasn't good enough because it happened to be blue.

We've covered this ground before, no real need to cover it again.

It's the closest they are probably going to get. The outcomes at this point are either confirmation that Void Elves can turn other elves into Void Elves,in which case they will be playing a Void Elf...high elf like customisation on Void Elves which as discussed won't change the fact it is still a Void Elf (and which proves the anti High Elf position correct that demand is really driven by the aesthetic), in which case they will be playing a Void Elf...or they weaken faction grouping restrictions and Blood Elves can group with other Alliance players, which is still a Blood Elf but which is also a high elf.

Probably so, but that's not a good outcome in my view. It leaves a lot of people understandably upset, and it doesn't make a whole lot of external sense gameplay or lore-wise. I like the Void Elves just fine, myself; but they're not High Elven exiles - they'd be great as an entirely new addition to the game, they're not so stellar as a fake shemp replacement for playable High Elven exiles.

[Strippling]

Who remained with the Alliance through it all, and are there to this day. Whose "very small few" is still more than the Void Elves and Lightforged Draenei can count among them.

What's your point?

They're not core to the Alliance. The SC (ironically who you've named yourself after) are more loyal to the Kirin Tor than the Alliance, hence why the SC were not participants during the faction war in BfA. They honored the neutral position of the Kirin Tor. If they were core to the Alliance then they would have been active members of the Alliance during this faction war, alas they were not and thanks to BfA it is evident where their allegiances lie first and foremost.

[FlubberPuddy]

They're not core to the Alliance. The SC (ironically who you've named yourself after) are more loyal to the Kirin Tor than the Alliance, hence why the SC were not participants during the faction war in BfA. They honored the neutral position of the Kirin Tor. If they were core to the Alliance then they would have been active members of the Alliance during this faction war, alas they were not and thanks to BfA it is evident where their allegiances lie first and foremost.

Dark Trolls aren't core to the Horde but now players will be able to make thousands of them just because.

The fact that increased customizations are bringing in these very niche groups with niche unique aesthetics adds strength to requesting High Elves on Alliance. Wildhammer are just tattoo options, as some put it.

[Strippling]

The creation of the Void Elves violates the same "pillar of the game," invalidating this argument entirely. The request was easy to facilitate, especially as the assets and lore of the sect already exists in a non-playable schema. They chose not to for reasons poorly explained - no one is debating the reality of things, just the relative poorness of the provided reasoning.

This is disingenuous. It's your subjective opinion that void elves violate the same pillar of the game. Objectively they don't, as Blizzard has given us sufficient explanation as to why alliance high elves are not a playable option, they are too similar to blood elves (aesthetically) and would blur faction lines. It's pretty clear that blizzard prioritize physical differences as a key distinguishing feature between playable races. Some ARs are very similar to their parent races but these parent races are within the same faction. Void elves on the other hand were given a completely different thematic to blood elves (a void thematic) to provide a sufficient level of physical distinction so as to not blur faction lines.

From a "lore" perspective there isn't much distinction between the two, but gameplay wise (and subsequently aesthetically) they are different and are so at a first glance. Players with a deep knowledge of lore can obviously differentiate between blood elves and high elves, but in general the playerbase at large probable views blood elves as the high elves of WoW. And blizzard intended it to be this way, as we have both Ion and Chris Metzen who have offered comments supporting this view.

This doesn't change the fact the void elves didn't hit the mark that pro high elfers were hoping for, but reality is Blizzard deemed it an inappropriate request in the sense that blood elves are high elves and as such the race is already available, and they don't wish to blur faction lines.

It would be easy enough for blizzard to have copy pasted blood elves, given them blue eyes and made them an alliance AR and said "here's your long asked for alliance high elves". But they didn't. And here's an honest question for you... why do you think Blizzard didn't just do that? Responding with "they were clueless, they make mistakes or they are Horde biased" is a disingenuous response. WoW developers work full time on this game, some of them for many many years. You are being dishonest if you think blizzard are not aware of what the exact request was.

Further to what Obelisk said regarding faction pride, I agree with him. WoW has been created in a way where it tries to encourage some sort of pride for a specific faction. This pride stems from a myriad of reasons, including but not limited to faction leaders, faction policies, faction structures, the races which constitute each faction, faction aesthetics and faction thematics. Why is it so wrong to have faction pride and appreciate a key feature of WoW "faction uniqueness". Instead we get called toxic or trolls (in which you omittely support as you don't call out pro high elfers who say we're toxic) simply because we appreciate an integral aspect of WoW. I've never said alliance high elves don't exist, I've just stated that they would directly or indirectly detract from the high elven group (both aesthetically and racially) that are and have been playable on the Horde.

I agree with you, void elves were not the answer high elfers were looking for... but it's clear what Blizzards stance on the request is. You can request something but that doesn't mean the request is reasonable (with overall gameplay in mind).

- - - Updated - - -

Dark Trolls aren't core to the Horde but now players will be able to make thousands of them just because.

The fact that increased customizations are bringing in these very niche groups with niche unique aesthetics adds strength to requesting High Elves on Alliance. Wildhammer are just tattoo options, as some put it.

Dark troll customizations does not blur faction lines. Unless somehow trolls are also an alliance race?

Likewise, wildhammer tattoos does not blur faction lines. Last I checked dwarves were an alliance race, and as such wildhammer tattoos does not infringe on a Horde race.

The high elf race however is a core Horde race. Void elves have been given a niche and unique thematic to differentiate them from their parent race, so naturally any future customizations they may get will likely respect that differentiation

[FlubberPuddy]

The high elf race however is a core Horde race. Void elves have been given a niche and unique thematic to differentiate them from their parent race, so naturally any future customizations they may get will likely respect that differentiation

Before Ion's clearly ignorant comment.

No one was confusing the High Elves on the Alliance with the Blood Elves on Horde and vice versa.

There were not threads upon threads of Horde/Blood Elf players/Alliance players going

"what aRe thesE BLOOD eLVES doiNg hERe"

"whO ArE THEse GUYS, I thOUgHT higH eLVEs weRe HORDe"

"BliZZ0Rd thESe AlLIance HIgH elVeS aRe RUInIng mY fACTioN IDENtiTY"

"hIgh elvEs don'T exISt, sToP aSKINg fOr horDe bloOd elvES"

and etc. Back then, everyone understood High Elves = Alliance and Blood Elves = Horde. People just got a free-pass recently to ignorant and inane is all.

Are we seeing people losing their minds and not having the will to live anymore that Nightborne are on the Horde, blurring Night Elven faction lines? The hypocrisy is so hilarious.

If 2 kinds of purple elves can exist, 2 kinds of fair skin elves can exist. I say this because the anti-position sticks to the skin color as they're seemingly a-ok with the fact that purple Blood Elves are on the Alliance (Void Elves). But seem to draw the line at skin color. Something anti-helves often cite as the sole differentiating factor yet try to admonish pro-helfers for also wanting.

Seemingly hell-bent on preserving fair skin yet not giving a shit about multiple different types of purple elves existing as choices.

[Aldo Hawk]

This is disingenuous. It's your subjective opinion that void elves violate the same pillar of the game.

I have stated this so many times and Aucald has just repeated it again, but well, here I go...

A faction game is defined by the factions, in Warcraft it happens to be that factions have a distinct pool on the races that are affiliated to these factions, however, the schism between High elves and Blood elves is a faction theme, and Void elves aren't simply Thalassians infused with void magic, they are former Blood elves, it's faction trespassing right in front of everyone's eyes, while High elves have been there since day one.

Horde will not be less Horde if High elves, an Alliance group, were made playable, by the simple fact that High elves are not Blood elves and thus, they confront one another just like Horde and Alliance does, they cooperate despite one another, just like Horde and Alliance does, they fight one another, just like Horde and Alliance does.

It's faction theme, it's faction identity, it's lore based.

It's not faction trespassing, it's not the same thing, it's not a copy.

Don't forget that this comes from someone that has only played Horde (and tried to not make all his characters Blood elves) and never stuck with an Alliance character to even max level, I want to go to a battleground and see High elves, I want to fight them, I want Alliance players to roleplay as that group that hates 'my kind' so to speak, I want that part of the lore to be brought to players in order for them to give actual life to it, it's part of the Warcraft lore, it's part of the faction scheme, god fucking dammit.

[FlubberPuddy]

I have stated this so many times and Aucald has just repeated it again, but well, here I go...

A faction game is defined by the factions, in Warcraft it happens to be that factions have a distinct pool on the races that are affiliated to these factions, however, the schism between High elves and Blood elves is a faction theme, and Void elves aren't simply Thalassians infused with void magic, they are former Blood elves, it's faction trespassing right in front of everyone's eyes, while High elves have been there since day one.

That right there.

It shouldn't need to be repeated so many times but I guess since others like repeating themselves so can we! As you and Aucald have put it

The schism between High Elves and Blood Elves is equal to schism between Alliance and Horde.

The faction war is actually personified between these two groups of the same race. A High Elf vs a Blood Elf , literal Blue vs Red color themes, Alliance vs Horde.

For people that like to laud faction identity/faction thematics. That is what High Elves vs Blood Elves are.

[ravenmoon]

That right there.

It shouldn't need to be repeated so many times but I guess since others like repeating themselves so can we! As you and Aucald have put it

The schism between High Elves and Blood Elves is equal to schism between Alliance and Horde.

The faction war is actually personified between these two groups of the same race. A High Elf vs a Blood Elf , literal Blue vs Red color themes, Alliance vs Horde.

For people that like to laud faction identity/faction thematics. That is what High Elves vs Blood Elves are.

A few years ago, I sgugested to blizzzard, that they should push asied generating a night elf/ blood elf schism, it came too late and felt forced, and not fitting the benevolent character of the Night elves.

Given how High elves v Blood elves was by far the most polarising alliance/horde enmity between fans, they should cetnre the Elven conflict schism between those two, that have a more organic feel to their enmity.

Blood elf fans should hate high elf fans - from a lore perspective, because they are being foolish, naiive, and now they are killing their own people (silver covenant ones which is the faction of high elves that is pro alliance [not necesarily anyhigh elf] and from a player perspective, t heir should be anger at high elves for in a sense (stealing our model - even though that's not really how it actually is. whining and kicking up such a fuss, resulting in stealing our model, - we will hate you eternally and go out of our way to slaughter you. Meanwhile alliance High elves can ride the moral high ground righteous indignation for reckless, magical use by blood elves that goes against everything the high elf stood for, - froma lore perpsective. And from a player perspective, pay back for causing this to drag on for so long with false and bad points, denying us our high elves out of pure spite - destroy them on sight.

I mean faction conflict? Nothing more intense between fans than High elf vs Blood elf. And they're wasting it ... lol

[Kithelle]

snip

Yet we literally have the same race on both factions and no one has complained since Pandaren were introduced...and look at Nightborne, they made them unique and a lot of players were angry that they don't look just like the Nightborne which look more like Night Elves...

Now either Horde players don't care or Horde players are hypocrites, which is it?

[protip]

Yet we literally have the same race on both factions and no one has complained since Pandaren were introduced...and look at Nightborne, they made them unique and a lot of players were angry that they don't look just like the Nightborne which look more like Night Elves...

Now either Horde players don't care or Horde players are hypocrites, which is it?

Yes, "Horde players..." That guy seems to have all kinds of opinions at once. What a hypocrite.

[Varodoc]

Yet we literally have the same race on both factions and no one has complained since Pandaren were introduced...and look at Nightborne, they made them unique and a lot of players were angry that they don't look just like the Nightborne which look more like Night Elves...

Now either Horde players don't care or Horde players are hypocrites, which is it?

It's both.

[Kithelle]

It's both.

Well dealing with absolutes so I responded to him with a absolute question

[Obelisk Kai]

If it had been answered, this debate would not exist - your conclusion belies the circumstances you find yourself in. None of the four existing options are the option originally requested. I would argue that "yes, the request does retain value when your audience remains in want of something that could both have been and is easy enough to provide." The substance of the request is also not one of scale, but rather of a binary: what was provided was not what was asked for. Zero instead of one, false instead of true.

That is a rhetorical reach in determining that the debate exists because the question was not answered. This debate persists, not because the question wasn't answered but because the answer was not to the satisfaction of some of those asking. Those who are asking do not have any intention of recognising the importance of the red lines that shaped the answer they were given. What was provided was not what was asked for, but what was asked for was an impossibility given the configuration of the game.

However, the question absolutely was answered.

The developers chose what will be or won't be, that much as certain - but their judgments are both open to quantification and, more importantly, criticism. As I've said multiple times in this long-lived debate: "the developers are not inerrant." They can make mistakes, their judgments can be in error, and their reasoning can be unsound. They're the final word on what happens, but they're not the final word on what *should* happen. It's an important distinction you seem to miss.

Yet you are also seemingly operating on the assumption that the developers are wrong and have made a mistake here when that is a subjective opinion in itself. This is not a developer action such as creating garrisons or azerite armor which ultimately ended up negatively impacting the gameplay experience, this is fundamentally an extension of the abstract debate of 'let people play what they want to play' weighed against 'faction as a pillar of the game'.

I agree with the developers faction is important. I agree with the developers that the faction division is a pillar of the game design. I agree with the developers that this is an important part of Warcraft's DNA. From that perspective, the developer choice on the exiles is not a mistake, it is in fact a wise move designed to emphasise that there are two distinct factions within Warcraft, each comprised of unique, faction exclusive races (leaving aside the Pandaren of course as that is a tangent that has been explored repeatedly) and that those races from the faction package.

In fact, in terms of the wider debate of 'let people play what they want to play' weighed against faction, this particular request takes on a grotesque and self element in that only high elf fans should get to enjoy the ability to play one of the core races of one faction without having to commit to that faction. Many players are doubtless playing factions on avatars that for them are second best, because the race they actually like happens to be on the other side. They may be weighed down by commitments to guild or to friends or they may overwhelmingly prefer the aesthetic of that faction even though they identify with that other race, but they are similarly constrained in their choices as everyone else is. Singling out one group for special treatment, not coincidentally the horde's most popular race, is unfair to everyone else.

We've had this discussion before, but suffice it to say you're simply wrong here - you've drawn a semantic line in the sand that is as arbitrary as it is immaterial to the discussion being had. "Blood Elves are High Elves" is true, but it's a truth that doesn't matter here - Blood Elves are not Silver Covenant High Elven exiles, they're not the sect of High Elves who were exiled from Quel'Thalas for refusing Kael'Thas' edict as concerns Mana Tapping, and they're not the sect who chose to remain loyal to the Alliance as opposed to the Horde. They're a separate people, now more than ever. The Void Elves, too, are not in the chain of descent from the High Elven exiles. This isn't a semantic distinction, either; they're majority Blood Elves who broke away well after the original schism following the Third War.

No, I don't think this is immaterial to the discussion at all. Particularly given your previous admission that from your perspective, other groups such as the Defias Brotherhood and the Grimtotem Tauren are also valid allied race choices because of their differing stories. What you are arguing here is the same, the vaguely different story the exiles have is sufficient to grant them allied race status.

Blood Elves are High Elves is not a truth as easily discounted as you would like. The phrase itself was plucked from the words of the game director when he explained why high elves were not selected as a valid allied race. Nor are the high elves a separate, distinct people. That gives them an agency they do no warrant. As was explained they are scattered, without a true sense of who and what they are and there are hardly any of them left. We are talking about a group whose use is so limited that the appearance of a datamined high elf npcs causes a certain user to rush here posting links to the wowhead database and proclaiming it as proof their story continues only for it turn out to be a result of a zone being phased for the new version of Icecrown.

As for Void Elves not being in the chain of descent, I think that isn't true. As I've stated before there is ample evidence supporting the conclusion that Void Elves can in fact convert other elves into Void Elves, as the high elf wayfarers seemingly demonstrate and other in game factors support. More importantly, whilst there is no explicit confirmation (except for the Moorgard quote from last year of course but apparently his word is only gospel when it seems to facilitate what pro high elfers want in terms of void elf customistion i.e the ability to pretend to be an actual high elf whilst playing a void elf) there isn't anything that says they can't either.

Moorgard was very clear in his recent interview. They don't necessarily see the need to be explicit about your Troll being Revantusk or your Dwarf being Wildhammer. That's entirely up to you as a player and if that's what you decide, then that's what you've decided. People who wish to play Revantusk or Wildhammer therefore have been given the go ahead to live that fantasy with the understand it won't be getting explicit support.
Therefore, why should Void Elf players who wish to roleplay as former members of the Silver Covenant expect more support than that which is being given to Revantusk or Wildhammer fans? Why should such an approach be deemed valid for the later but not enough for the former?

Until explicitly stated otherwise and given the weight of circumstantial evidence in favour, deciding your Void Elf is a former exile who has embraced the void is a matter of player choice that is not disprovable by anyone. And just as making that player choice is supposed to be enough for Revantusk or Wildhammer fans, it should be too for those seeking the fantasy of an eternally alliance loyal elf. Special treatment is not required, though of course further clarification would not be objectionable either.

The creation of the Void Elves violates the same "pillar of the game," invalidating this argument entirely. The request was easy to facilitate, especially as the assets and lore of the sect already exists in a non-playable schema. They chose not to for reasons poorly explained - no one is debating the reality of things, just the relative poorness of the provided reasoning.

If the creation of Void Elves violated this pillar of the game then they wouldn't have had to create Void Elves and would have simply given the exiles. If the Void Elves were the duplicate of a core Horde race that is desired, then those who seek the exiles would have declared victory when they got Void Elves. They did not. Attempting to argue Void Elves, who are similar, violate the core pillar of the game in the same way the exiles, who are identical, would, seems to be sour grapes reasoning. After all, people can grasp the distinction between similar and identical can they not. And that while one is permitted, one is not?

Void Elves use the same model. But they have a unique aesthetic, completely divorced from the Blood Elf aesthetic. As for their lore, the void based Void Elves are now diametrically opposed to the light infused Blood Elves. They are visually similar, but thematically they are on opposite poles. They are much further apart thematically than Lightforged Draenei are from ordinary Draenei, Dwarves from Dark Iron Dwarves, Highmountain Tauren from ordinary Tauren etc.
The only other parent race-allied race pairing that is as close in terms of thematic divergence is that of the Night Elves and the Nightborne with one being the game's Wood Elf analogue and the other being an arcane using city dwelling elf that is the living embodiment of ancient highborne culture, the culture the Night Elves specifically abandoned. Not coincidentally, the Nightborne and the Night Elves are also on different factions. So while they look similar the necessity of maintaining different factions has pushed these elf races poles apart thematically.

Saying the reasoning is poorly explained is a bit of a cheap shot. It reminds me of a political blog I read years ago where the author contrasted a centrist politician where I live against another politician who was more ideologically opposed to the author and he couldn't help himself but squeeze in a few cheap shots when comparing their personalities, clearly denigrating one because he didn't like her politics when both politicians had similar media profiles (bubbly, engaging, mumsy).

This is similar to that. State the reasoning is poor without any real evidence that it was. How was it poor? After all this topic is actually very simple. There doesn't need to be much said about it at all.
Blood Elves are High Elves, High Elves are playable, they are a part of the Horde, distinct factions are important and if you want to play a High Elf the Horde faction is there for you, there's a variant for you on the Alliance you can enjoy otherwise.

Nothing poorly explained there at all. An explanation I would warrant the vast majority of people would understand. The debate comes from this unhappy at the result, determined to overturn this answer.

Well, at least you admit it - and that means we can at least begin building some kind of dialectic bridge. That being said, your reasoning here fails as adding High Elven exiles to the Alliance doesn't dilute factionalism or remove it - it actually fosters it. The High Elven exiles are deeply opposed to their Blood Elven brethren, in emulation of the greater Horde/Alliance rivalry. If you want continued rivalry then a playable rivalry between Alliance High Elves and Horde Blood Elves will give you that in spades.

When was it ever in question? I have an equally strong sense of entitlement to Orcs, Trolls, Forsaken, Goblins, Tauren, Nightborne, Vulpera, Highmountain Tauren, Mag'har Orcs and Zandalari Trolls, but they aren't the subject of this debate, the Blood Elves are. It's intriguing to me that when Blizzard has spent fifteen years building up a faction based game some commentators are eternally surprised others are actually invested in those factions.

It's important to me and others that Alliance players can't play Orcs or Trolls or Tauren. Keeping those cultures unique and intrinsic to the Horde helps define the character of the Horde in opposition to the Alliance.
It's important to me and others that Horde players cannot play Humans or Dwarves or Draenei. Keeping those cultures unique and and intrinsic to the Alliance defines the character of the Alliance in opposition to the Horde.
Ion said it himself recently in the recent interview by sloot when asked about Covenants. CHOICE MATTERS. What more fundamental choice is there in this game than picking your faction? it defines not only who you play with in terms of players, but also the NPCs and stories you encounters from the races who make up that experience.

Nor is your absolutely unsupported and entirely subjective opinion on the supposed rivalry in any way, shape or form, correct. The cost to faction diversity for this supposed 'rivalry' isn't worth it in the slightest and faction diversity is an important component of those factions as described above. It's also wholly unnecessary.

Those who play up this huge 'rivalry' are like someone flogging an old car engine to whom they think is a buyer when the car has just had a new engine installed that does the job.

Why on earth would we need the exiles as rivals for the Blood Elves when the void elves, who form the opposite end of a light-void dichotomy, are there? That gives me the 'Alliance-Horde rivalry in spades', thank you. Your suggestion merely highlights an another area where the exiles have become functionally irrelevant. Their only story purpose in the past has been as foils to the Blood Elves. With the Void Elves, an actual player race, in the toolkit why would Blizzard ever use them in that capacity again?

I'm portraying it as a negative because entitlement isn't really a good thing in the vast majority of cases. Also because the Horde doesn't own the High Elven exiles either in lore or externally in the form of a faction in the game.

When it comes to fostering a sense of faction, entitlement is a very good thing. It helps deflect from people who make suggestions for things like Alliance Orcs or Horde Draenei and who don't consider the wider implications of their actions on a core pillar of the game. Choice is good, but rendering the fundamental choice of faction irrelevant is not a good outcome.

And it doesn't matter that the Horde doesn't 'own' the exiles. They are narrative chaff. What matters is that High Elves are playable as a part of the Horde. Humans aren't considered unplayable because you can't make a Defias Brotherhood human. Tauren aren't considered unplayable because you can't make a Magatha Grimtotem loyal Tauren. That certain groups can't be played or justified by headcanon doesn't take away from the fact the race overall is playable. The only reason the exiles stand out at all is the faction barrier, which as we have established Blizzard seems ridiculously keen to preserve. The faction barrier doesn't justify the exiles, it is why they are being buried in favour of the Void Elves.

Probably so, but that's not a good outcome in my view. It leaves a lot of people understandably upset, and it doesn't make a whole lot of external sense gameplay or lore-wise. I like the Void Elves just fine, myself; but they're not High Elven exiles - they'd be great as an entirely new addition to the game, they're not so stellar as a fake shemp replacement for playable High Elven exiles.

Given your previously expressed feelings that story is sufficient, I do question your final evaluation. You are pre-disposed to entirely minimise factors which are important to other people. And important to Blizzard themselves in fact given the commentary we have had on the factions. Story isn't enough.

Not everyone can be happy and there is no feasible outcome that leaves the pro High Elf people happy. They were given Void Elves as a substitute. It's not what they wanted. At some point you have to move from understanding sympathy and the comforting words of 'give it a try, it's close enough' to 'tough, it is what it is'.

There are two thalassian elf options in the game. If you want the traditional high elf the Blood Elves are there for you within the Horde. All the trappings of the high elf trope in fantasy, a magical kingdom and a magical city, undisputed lineage to the Warcraft 2 high elves AND probably soon to have the long desired blue eyes.

If you can't stomach the Horde, the Void Elves offer a unique take on the high elf fantasy with a theme diametrically opposed to the Blood Elves and a future all of their own to explore. The Void Elves ARE the high elves of the Alliance now. The sooner people reconcile themselves to that, maybe the happier they will be.

- - - Updated - - -

Yet we literally have the same race on both factions and no one has complained since Pandaren were introduced...and look at Nightborne, they made them unique and a lot of players were angry that they don't look just like the Nightborne which look more like Night Elves...

Now either Horde players don't care or Horde players are hypocrites, which is it?

Neither.

At the time Pandaren were created Blizzard internally had a huge production bottleneck in that the assets required for new content had to be manufactured by their art team and that took time. Creating two sets of playable races in TBC and Cata involved four models (two male, and two female), four starting zones and the quests involved in those zones and in TBC two new capitals.
They were an enormous investment of time and effort. If you look back you can even see some shortcuts. The faces for the Draenei and the Blood Elves were actually fundamentally the same. In Cata they didn't bother giving the Goblins and Worgens racial capitals.

Rather than create two sets again, they thought it would be cool as Brack said to experiment with a neutral race, one available to both sides. At a stroke, they halved the required work for adding a new race to the game. A single set of zones, a single set of models, what could go wrong?

As it turned out, the neutrality of the Pandaren was a mistake. They regretted it. The cost to faction diversity was too much. And they have never, ever repeated it as a result.
The Allied race system solves a lot of the issues they hoped neutrality would solve, perhaps even better. There is no need for a unique starter experience, you just have them skip all that and arrive in the faction capital. There is no need for unique models, you can repurpose existing models. And most importantly, you can deploy them in pairs to each faction and it's likely a lot easier to do so given the time investment needed to create a single Allied race is likely vastly lower than required by a single core race. Which is correct, Kul Tirans (the only allied race to be core race quality with unique models) took as much time to make as all the other Allied races at the time (there were 7 others) put together.

As for the Pandaren, the damage they did to faction diversity was mitigated by the fact they were introduced to the two factions as neutral at the exact same moment (preventing one faction developing a sense of ownership to them) and their entire storyline was predicated on the importance of neutrality and balance. They still did enough though. And that's the wonderful thing about mistakes. You learn from them. So the Pandaren aren't a precedent that justifies high elf exiles. They are a warning not to repeat the mistake on a far grander scale.

[elbleuet]

No that doesn't make sense. The Quel'lithien lodge was the only group who were explicitly exiled over the refusal to drain mana from vermin. This refusal has been held up as some kind of proof of High Elf virtuosity, so the fact they got themselves killed by messing with dark magics is important in demonstrating their hypocrisy.

If their fate is inconsistent with the narrative constructed of the magic avoiding noble High Elves, perhaps it is the narrative that is at fault rather than the events which do not fit it?

All high elven outposts from WoW Vanilla and TBC actually either belonged to Silvermoon and remained Alliance ( or in the case of the Allerian Stronghold, gave allegiance to Silvermoon without being part of it) because they didn't agree to drain mana.
This includes Quel'Lithien, but also the Farstrider Lodge in Loch Modan and Quel'Danil Lodge in the Hinterlands.

Vereesa's fartriders are also from Quel'Thalas. Halduron himself states it by saying they know the land.

And being part of the Alliance isn't enough to be exiled as demonstrated by Lor'Themar.
Alleria was already Alliance when she visited Quel'Thalas. She was even described as a daughter of Silvermoon so you seem to pretty wrong on that matter.

[Uthan]

If the creation of Void Elves violated this pillar of the game then they wouldn't have had to create Void Elves and would have simply given the exiles. If the Void Elves were the duplicate of a core Horde race that is desired, then those who seek the exiles would have declared victory when they got Void Elves. They did not. Attempting to argue Void Elves, who are similar, violate the core pillar of the game in the same way the exiles, who are identical, would, seems to be sour grapes reasoning. After all, people can grasp the distinction between similar and identical can they not. And that while one is permitted, one is not?

Except they did and were in the eyes of many, and since that is all a completely subjective thing you can't really say either side is more right. Getting a duplicate of a horde race was NOT what people wanted, but it is what we were given in the form of Void Elves, and that's why people aren't satisfied since we didn't get what we asked for (IE those elves who we've seen in WoW in the Alliance and been teased with since the original game launched and are in the eyes of many far more different to the Horde race than blueberry flavored ex blood elves are). Which of them YOU or Blizzard for that matter find the most similar to the other is all subjective, since different people put different weight in different aspects (be it aesthetics, background, ethics etc etc). The Void Elves LITERALLY used to be in the Horde but deserted, making them far more of a dissolution of the faction barrier than those elves known for choosing the Alliance despite their leaders and kin since the start.

[Aucald]

This is disingenuous. It's your subjective opinion that void elves violate the same pillar of the game. Objectively they don't, as Blizzard has given us sufficient explanation as to why alliance high elves are not a playable option, they are too similar to blood elves (aesthetically) and would blur faction lines. It's pretty clear that blizzard prioritize physical differences as a key distinguishing feature between playable races. Some ARs are very similar to their parent races but these parent races are within the same faction. Void elves on the other hand were given a completely different thematic to blood elves (a void thematic) to provide a sufficient level of physical distinction so as to not blur faction lines.

It wasn't my argument i.e. this "pillar of the game," I'm just saying that the Void Elves and High Elven exiles constitute the same basic violation based on the foundations set forth in that argument. Trying to shoehorn the Void Elves through it but waffling on the High Elven exiles is basically trying to have your cake, eat your cake, and then trying to sell me both cakes. Void Elves and High Elven exiles aren't aesthetically different in any real way, either. Void Elves have a bit of a different color, and that's it. You could argue that the High Elven exiles have even less differentiation, which would be true, but they have fundamentally more differentiation in the narrative than even the Void Elves have, having been at odds with their brethren since TBC.

From a "lore" perspective there isn't much distinction between the two, but gameplay wise (and subsequently aesthetically) they are different and are so at a first glance. Players with a deep knowledge of lore can obviously differentiate between blood elves and high elves, but in general the playerbase at large probable views blood elves as the high elves of WoW. And blizzard intended it to be this way, as we have both Ion and Chris Metzen who have offered comments supporting this view.

The High Elven exiles are part and parcel of the political schism that defines both races - and since they occupy two different sides of said schism, there's a huge amount of distinction between them in the lore. I would also say the general playerbase probably doesn't care if playable High Elven exiles ever come to pass, either; but they're not really part of the discussion behind had here. As I've already said multiple times here, appeals to authority don't work in an argument who basis is in the substance of a request.

This doesn't change the fact the void elves didn't hit the mark that pro high elfers were hoping for, but reality is Blizzard deemed it an inappropriate request in the sense that blood elves are high elves and as such the race is already available, and they don't wish to blur faction lines.

Blizzard was and is wrong, IMO. We are obviously going to disagree with no hope of reconciliation here - but it is what it is. It's also an odd stance from Blizzard as the Void Elves already blur faction lines more than the High Elven exiles would (as the High Elven exiles have been true to the Alliance since TBC). They were *already* an Alliance faction. Whereas the Void Elves are effectively traitors or expatriates of the Horde as former Blood Elves.

It would be easy enough for blizzard to have copy pasted blood elves, given them blue eyes and made them an alliance AR and said "here's your long asked for alliance high elves". But they didn't. And here's an honest question for you... why do you think Blizzard didn't just do that? Responding with "they were clueless, they make mistakes or they are Horde biased" is a disingenuous response. WoW developers work full time on this game, some of them for many many years. You are being dishonest if you think blizzard are not aware of what the exact request was.

I never made either claim, actually. And if you want to dig up my previous posts in this thread, you'll swiftly find that I don't think a copypasta of the Blood Elves with different eyes would be the best way to facilitate this request. Like the Void Elves themselves, I think the High Elven exiles need a sufficient justification to become playable - something to give them that needed spark of further differentiation. People have offered a lot of various story-based suggestions about what that be - from more fervent and iconic heraldry (like extensive Blue/Silver tattoos) to a magical alteration that changes their forms a bit (in echo of the Void Elven aesthetic). I personally don't think much would be required, to be honest, but YMMV. The problem with this is that the detractors have put up an ever-shifting obstacle course as to why it cannot or should not be done, to the point that the reason it shouldn't be done doesn't seem gameplay or story-based at all.

Further to what Obelisk said regarding faction pride, I agree with him. WoW has been created in a way where it tries to encourage some sort of pride for a specific faction. This pride stems from a myriad of reasons, including but not limited to faction leaders, faction policies, faction structures, the races which constitute each faction, faction aesthetics and faction thematics. Why is it so wrong to have faction pride and appreciate a key feature of WoW "faction uniqueness". Instead we get called toxic or trolls (in which you omittely support as you don't call out pro high elfers who say we're toxic) simply because we appreciate an integral aspect of WoW. I've never said alliance high elves don't exist, I've just stated that they would directly or indirectly detract from the high elven group (both aesthetically and racially) that are and have been playable on the Horde.

Faction pride is good, don't get me wrong - but it should not stand in the way of a good story. That's my main gripe with this odd entitlement that the Horde has on the playability of the High Elven exiles. It's a story I personally want to see explored, and reintroducing the Blood Elves' oldest "enemies" would be the best way to further that story. It's a faction story, too; giving it a wide best of both worlds appeal.

I post here only to speak for myself and my opinion, opting to join no "sides" nor raise the banner of any particular movement. I haven't called anyone toxic, nor a troll; and trying to force any such perspective onto me is both unwelcome and unnecessary. Having an opinion, regardless of the nature of said opinion, isn't a problem - it all comes down to how you express it. As I've said before many times in this thread, this is a disagreement that doesn't have an objective right or wrong answer. There are only positions, some more vehement than others. I'm actually pretty soft on the whole deal, and if playable High Elven exiles were introduced it's unlikely I'd actually play one. Even still, it's the story and lore I'm interested in, not the gameplay experience as much.

- - - Updated - - -

That is a rhetorical reach in determining that the debate exists because the question was not answered. This debate persists, not because the question wasn't answered but because the answer was not to the satisfaction of some of those asking. Those who are asking do not have any intention of recognising the importance of the red lines that shaped the answer they were given. What was provided was not what was asked for, but what was asked for was an impossibility given the configuration of the game.

However, the question absolutely was answered.

A question answered to no one's satisfaction can be considered unanswered. The problem in your reasoning here is that the Horde never made the request, and never asked the question to begin with - the retaining of the status quo isn't a valuable position in this context. We've already disagreed on this idea of it being an "impossibility," so no need to ford those waters again.

Yet you are also seemingly operating on the assumption that the developers are wrong and have made a mistake here when that is a subjective opinion in itself. This is not a developer action such as creating garrisons or azerite armor which ultimately ended up negatively impacting the gameplay experience, this is fundamentally an extension of the abstract debate of 'let people play what they want to play' weighed against 'faction as a pillar of the game'.

I believe that they have, yes. I hold the creation of the Void Elves as a stopgap measure to answer the desire of playable High Elven exiles as a mistake, similar to Azerite Traits, Garrisons, and Draenei/Eredar lore flub of TBC. That's my position, and we obviously are going to disagree on its substance. It's a solution that no one wanted to a problem that the Void Elves don't fix.

I agree with the developers faction is important. I agree with the developers that the faction division is a pillar of the game design. I agree with the developers that this is an important part of Warcraft's DNA. From that perspective, the developer choice on the exiles is not a mistake, it is in fact a wise move designed to emphasise that there are two distinct factions within Warcraft, each comprised of unique, faction exclusive races (leaving aside the Pandaren of course as that is a tangent that has been explored repeatedly) and that those races from the faction package.

The developers did what you wanted them to do, so your agreement with them is something of a given. Unfortunately, I disagree with both their reasoning and yours.

In fact, in terms of the wider debate of 'let people play what they want to play' weighed against faction, this particular request takes on a grotesque and self element in that only high elf fans should get to enjoy the ability to play one of the core races of one faction without having to commit to that faction. Many players are doubtless playing factions on avatars that for them are second best, because the race they actually like happens to be on the other side. They may be weighed down by commitments to guild or to friends or they may overwhelmingly prefer the aesthetic of that faction even though they identify with that other race, but they are similarly constrained in their choices as everyone else is. Singling out one group for special treatment, not coincidentally the horde's most popular race, is unfair to everyone else.

That would be true if the playable race in question didn't already have a preexisting factional schism that made the proposition almost undeniably simple to facilitate. They're already there, in other words. I think if playable High Elven exiles had been added to the Alliance and Blood Elves to the Horde all the way back in TBC no one would've batted an eye - it would have been a no-brainer to anyone familiar with the existing lore. It would also serve the interests of both factions. As well as be a choice that stands against the oft-employed Pandaren issue, as the Pandaren never had a stake in either WoW faction previously, whereas the Blood and High Elves had their lines drawn for them due to their political schism.

No, I don't think this is immaterial to the discussion at all. Particularly given your previous admission that from your perspective, other groups such as the Defias Brotherhood and the Grimtotem Tauren are also valid allied race choices because of their differing stories. What you are arguing here is the same, the vaguely different story the exiles have is sufficient to grant them allied race status.

A position I maintain, as I obviously don't hold this strange faction affinity quite as sacrosanct as you do. You say Faction > Story, whereas I say Story > Faction. That's just our different conclusions on the matter, and it's not really for either you or I to decide what is objectively better.

Blood Elves are High Elves is not a truth as easily discounted as you would like. The phrase itself was plucked from the words of the game director when he explained why high elves were not selected as a valid allied race. Nor are the high elves a separate, distinct people. That gives them an agency they do no warrant. As was explained they are scattered, without a true sense of who and what they are and there are hardly any of them left. We are talking about a group whose use is so limited that the appearance of a datamined high elf npcs causes a certain user to rush here posting links to the wowhead database and proclaiming it as proof their story continues only for it turn out to be a result of a zone being phased for the new version of Icecrown.

A game director who, in my opinion, reached an incorrect conclusion through a chain of reasoning with some holes in it. The same thing that gives Blood Elves "agency" grants it to the High Elven exiles, and they all possess the distinction of defining themselves against their Blood Elven peers. The schism that created the Blood Elves also created the High Elven exiles - you cannot claim one side of the schism possesses an essential entitlement to agency or distinction that the other side lacks, after all. They are two sides of the same coin, their aesthetic being a rejection of new cultural mores that the Blood Elves accepted - a quintessential redefining of their people. The High Elven exiles represent the High Elves as they existed before the Third War, the Blood Elves represent the High Elves after they permitted the war to change their people (for better or worse, depending on one's perspective).

As for Void Elves not being in the chain of descent, I think that isn't true. As I've stated before there is ample evidence supporting the conclusion that Void Elves can in fact convert other elves into Void Elves, as the high elf wayfarers seemingly demonstrate and other in game factors support. More importantly, whilst there is no explicit confirmation (except for the Moorgard quote from last year of course but apparently his word is only gospel when it seems to facilitate what pro high elfers want in terms of void elf customistion i.e the ability to pretend to be an actual high elf whilst playing a void elf) there isn't anything that says they can't either.

Ultimately that doesn't matter - Void Elves aren't High Elven exiles, and by dint of their storyline never can be. The same way as the San'layn aren't the Blood Elves, because they have a new and different story that circumscribes their being, aesthetically speaking.

Moorgard was very clear in his recent interview. They don't necessarily see the need to be explicit about your Troll being Revantusk or your Dwarf being Wildhammer. That's entirely up to you as a player and if that's what you decide, then that's what you've decided. People who wish to play Revantusk or Wildhammer therefore have been given the go ahead to live that fantasy with the understand it won't be getting explicit support. Therefore, why should Void Elf players who wish to roleplay as former members of the Silver Covenant expect more support than that which is being given to Revantusk or Wildhammer fans? Why should such an approach be deemed valid for the later but not enough for the former?

Because there are no explicit story barriers that prevent a Troll from be played as a Revantusk or a Sandfury, just as there is no hard and fast barrier to Wildhammer Dwarves. There *was* until the new Shadowlands leveling experience decoupled the starting zones that would've made this bizarre in-game. The reason it doesn't work for High Elven exiles is because their aesthetic is a story-based distinction the Void Elves can't facilitate - a Void Elf is a Void Elf regardless of whether the former Elf that became one was a Blood Elf or a High Elven exile originally. Their story has changed, they're now circumscribed by their transformation and not the schism that previously defined them. That's how the narrative works.

If the creation of Void Elves violated this pillar of the game then they wouldn't have had to create Void Elves and would have simply given the exiles. If the Void Elves were the duplicate of a core Horde race that is desired, then those who seek the exiles would have declared victory when they got Void Elves. They did not. Attempting to argue Void Elves, who are similar, violate the core pillar of the game in the same way the exiles, who are identical, would, seems to be sour grapes reasoning. After all, people can grasp the distinction between similar and identical can they not. And that while one is permitted, one is not?

One would think so, and yet that's not what they did for whatever reason. We've already covered the difference between what is permitted or done and what is requested, though; and I think you know very well why those who wanted playable High Elven exiles don't find the Void Elf solution a good one. I am unsure if you are being purposefully disingenuous here, or you actually don't understand the underlying principles.

Void Elves use the same model. But they have a unique aesthetic, completely divorced from the Blood Elf aesthetic. As for their lore, the void based Void Elves are now diametrically opposed to the light infused Blood Elves. They are visually similar, but thematically they are on opposite poles. They are much further apart thematically than Lightforged Draenei are from ordinary Draenei, Dwarves from Dark Iron Dwarves, Highmountain Tauren from ordinary Tauren etc.
The only other parent race-allied race pairing that is as close in terms of thematic divergence is that of the Night Elves and the Nightborne with one being the game's Wood Elf analogue and the other being an arcane using city dwelling elf that is the living embodiment of ancient highborne culture, the culture the Night Elves specifically abandoned. Not coincidentally, the Nightborne and the Night Elves are also on different factions. So while they look similar the necessity of maintaining different factions has pushed these elf races poles apart thematically.

The High Elven exiles also have a completely unique aesthetic, divorced from the Blood Elven aesthetic as a matter of imperative. Ditto for the diametric opposition, except of a Void/Light distinct you have a deeper and older underlying social opposition stemming from both their peoples' very legacy. I would argue that the High Elven exiles are even further apart from the Blood Elves than the Void Elves are - by a fair margin. The Void Elves themselves only recently left the Horde in light of their changed circumstances - the High Elven exiles have been apart from it for many years now, growing and changing separate from their parent stem. That's a huge and mostly unexplored distinction that deserves exploration.

When it comes to fostering a sense of faction, entitlement is a very good thing. It helps deflect from people who make suggestions for things like Alliance Orcs or Horde Draenei and who don't consider the wider implications of their actions on a core pillar of the game. Choice is good, but rendering the fundamental choice of faction irrelevant is not a good outcome.

Not when said entitlement categorically denies another faction a race that, bar playability, is already theirs. I have a hard time imagining that Horde players would be at all forgiving or complacent if the tables were turned and a playable race on the Alliance side denied them one they wanted on their side.

And it doesn't matter that the Horde doesn't 'own' the exiles. They are narrative chaff. What matters is that High Elves are playable as a part of the Horde. Humans aren't considered unplayable because you can't make a Defias Brotherhood human. Tauren aren't considered unplayable because you can't make a Magatha Grimtotem loyal Tauren. That certain groups can't be played or justified by headcanon doesn't take away from the fact the race overall is playable. The only reason the exiles stand out at all is the faction barrier, which as we have established Blizzard seems ridiculously keen to preserve. The faction barrier doesn't justify the exiles, it is why they are being buried in favour of the Void Elves.

Easy to call them "narrative chaff" when you stump for the status quo. Also, of all your examples, none of them underscore the essential difference between High Elven exiles and the Blood Elves. A Grimtotem Tauren would not be sympathetic to the Alliance, nor would a Defias Human. The High Elven exiles, however, are loyal to the Alliance and so distinct in-game.

Not everyone can be happy and there is no feasible outcome that leaves the pro High Elf people happy. They were given Void Elves as a substitute. It's not what they wanted. At some point you have to move from understanding sympathy and the comforting words of 'give it a try, it's close enough' to 'tough, it is what it is'.

A progression that, in my experience, never occurred. I have a Void Elf character myself, a level 120 Void Elf Hunter. The story, while fine on its own, isn't that of a High Elven exile, and never can be for pretty obvious reasons covered above.

There are two thalassian elf options in the game. If you want the traditional high elf the Blood Elves are there for you within the Horde. All the trappings of the high elf trope in fantasy, a magical kingdom and a magical city, undisputed lineage to the Warcraft 2 high elves AND probably soon to have the long desired blue eyes.

Which, as I said, may satiate some - but not those like myself who are interested in the original story and its existent veins threaded throughout current events.

If you can't stomach the Horde, the Void Elves offer a unique take on the high elf fantasy with a theme diametrically opposed to the Blood Elves and a future all of their own to explore. The Void Elves ARE the high elves of the Alliance now. The sooner people reconcile themselves to that, maybe the happier they will be.

I stomach the Horde just fine, personally speaking - my main is a Blood Elven Death Knight, and has been since WotLK (where I switched from Blood Elven Mage in TBC to Death Knight). What I think you and a few other hardliners don't recognize is that an exploration of the High Elven exile storyline enriches not just the Alliance but the Horde as well. Having to confront and reaffirm the choices the Blood Elves made in the past is a great things for the Sin'dorei story, and something I'd really enjoy seeing more of. This is also something that the Void Elves do not and cannot achieve, as they're just considered traitors from a Blood Elven perspective. They don't force confrontation with the age-old schism in the Elven people.

At the time Pandaren were created Blizzard internally had a huge production bottleneck in that the assets required for new content had to be manufactured by their art team and that took time. Creating two sets of playable races in TBC and Cata involved four models (two male, and two female), four starting zones and the quests involved in those zones and in TBC two new capitals. They were an enormous investment of time and effort. If you look back you can even see some shortcuts. The faces for the Draenei and the Blood Elves were actually fundamentally the same. In Cata they didn't bother giving the Goblins and Worgens racial capitals.

Rather than create two sets again, they thought it would be cool as Brack said to experiment with a neutral race, one available to both sides. At a stroke, they halved the required work for adding a new race to the game. A single set of zones, a single set of models, what could go wrong?

As it turned out, the neutrality of the Pandaren was a mistake. They regretted it. The cost to faction diversity was too much. And they have never, ever repeated it as a result. The Allied race system solves a lot of the issues they hoped neutrality would solve, perhaps even better. There is no need for a unique starter experience, you just have them skip all that and arrive in the faction capital. There is no need for unique models, you can repurpose existing models. And most importantly, you can deploy them in pairs to each faction and it's likely a lot easier to do so given the time investment needed to create a single Allied race is likely vastly lower than required by a single core race. Which is correct, Kul Tirans (the only allied race to be core race quality with unique models) took as much time to make as all the other Allied races at the time (there were 7 others) put together.

As for the Pandaren, the damage they did to faction diversity was mitigated by the fact they were introduced to the two factions as neutral at the exact same moment (preventing one faction developing a sense of ownership to them) and their entire storyline was predicated on the importance of neutrality and balance. They still did enough though. And that's the wonderful thing about mistakes. You learn from them. So the Pandaren aren't a precedent that justifies high elf exiles. They are a warning not to repeat the mistake on a far grander scale.

As I detail above, the Pandaren approach and the Blood/High Elven approach are not the same - neither the High Elven exiles nor the Blood Elves are or were ever neutral. The schism defines their polarity. I also don't agree that the Pandaren approach was a mistake, per se; I think it suits the Pandaren as a people just fine. Probably not an approach that would or should be used again, though; and that would strip the Pandaren of their own uniqueness among the playable races.