Ok you helfers are double thinking too hard. Lore and factions aside, we can all agree that helves and belves are the same race. Just like how two oranged from two different companies are still oranges.
That being said, when that lore mumbo jumbo is stripped away you're left with two blond and fair skinned elves. So in that sense helves are belves and belves are helves. So using simple logic if belf=helf then that means high elves are playable. Just not your preferred faction of helves, which is fine. You don't see playable defias humans or grim totem tauren running around.
Honestly what is so damn difficult to understand about this. Stop using lore as an excuse to twist them into a supposed different race.
Last edited by Varx; 2019-06-05 at 01:38 PM.
High Elves are playable. How many quotes from Warcraft developers do we need? And comparing with flat earthers is apt. The only way they can keep their case intellectually consistent is to deny all evidence from those in authority on the matter.
And you have how many quotes stating he is wrong? Zero? I thought so. As I said, standard pro High Elf modus operandi, if you don't have any evidence of your own to present, attack the evidence the other side has.
And for the record, I have THREE quotes, one from Ghostcrawler in 2013 and two from Ion Hazzikostas in 2017/2018 on the subject of faction diversity.
Except that something not happening is also accompanied by two developers at separate points in a five year history saying faction diversity was undermined by a neutral race and would be undermined by the addition of a duplicate of an existing race, both of which undermine faction diversity as the end result is the same race on both sides.
So we have on the one hand the absence of new neutral races, and on the other developers talking about the importance of faction diversity.
Tell me, do you really think everything a wow developer says is just 'personal opinion' if it's something you don't agree with? Do you think these opinions are magically disregarded when they go to work?
If two developers are telling you something is a bad idea or had unintended and unfortunate consequences and they don't do it, do you truly wish to argue there is no correlation between what they are saying and what they are doing?
How do we know?
Simple. They tell us in interviews. They tell us over twitter. And from these statements we can extrapolate intent. For example, Ion has now mentioned a level squish in several different interviews in the past year and a half. It is safe to assume therefore that a level squish is incoming. But how do I know that? I am not a Wow developer and, last time I checked, I had no access to their offices. What is my mysterious source of information that allows me to make such a statement?
The fact Ion brought it up three times.
The critical difference here is that because the developers are saying things you don't want to hear, you've wilfully blinded yourself to the evidence they give us. You don't extrapolate, or interpret, or reason. You just deny everything. And you have to blindly deny everything because to look the evidence in the face is to admit you have no case right now. And because you have blinded yourself, you wish to drag everyone down to the same level, where everything becomes subjective, or possible, or merely opinions.
Because it amuses me.
'Discrete' as in individually separate and distinct, as in each piece of evidence can stand it's own, nothing to do with discretion or subtlety.
Well you literally took each of my five pieces of evidence and attempted to argue why it didn't matter. In each case you didn't offer any evidence of your own and merely attacked. So not only can I say it with a straight face, I thank you for providing even more evidence confirming my point.
So the big takeaway from this passage is that you know what a high elf is better than Ion Hazzikostas, the game director. And that somehow Chris Metzen's words have been twisted because the obvious interpretation, that Blood Elves are High Elves, is somehow wrong.
Quoting the developers is not 'completely stupid'. Developer commentary is critical evidence when divining developer intent. I understand why you think it is completely stupid of course, as you have just proclaimed your own opinion superior to what they have said, but for the rest of us who seem more grounded we understand that what a developer probably has more value on this topic.
You are, again, attacking the existing evidence without offering any of your, except attempting to get us to substitute your deeply biased opinion for developer word of god. One of your favourite counter-points when attacking word of god is 'appeal to authority', the argumentative fallacy that something must be true because someone who is believe to be an authority on the subject says so, with the person quoting them ignoring the possibility that authority could be mistaken.
The obvious problem with this retort is that it does not apply in this case. World of Warcraft is fiction. The developers therefore have 'authorial' word of god, in that what they say is true becomes true until contradicted by future word of god.
In the case of Blood Elves are High Elves, they cannot be wrong because Blood Elves ARE High Elves. We have followed their story from Warcraft 3 onwards, we have seen the destruction of their kingdom, their embracing the term of Blood Elf, their alliance with Illidan, their entry into the Horde and the restoration of the Sunwell. It is impossible to argue that Blood Elves are not High Elves when their entire story is based upon that truth.
Saying Blood Elves are High Elves, as Chris Metzen did, as Ion Hazzikostas did, as everyone has said and even the game itself reminds us of on numerous occasions, is not controversial. It is truth.
Only you and the more extreme elements of the pro High Elf community reject this because you are desperate to pretend that Alliance High Elves are as distinct a race from Blood Elves as Night Elves are from Blood Elves. This is the real source of the fixation with blue eyes, the one physical difference Blizzard bothers to preserve between Alliance High Elves and Blood Elves. Which is sad because at the end of the day, it's just an eye colour and if that's the sum total of the differences, then it's essentially nothing. It would be a nice customization option one day for Blood Elves of course and I live in hope that it will be provided.
And yes, Void Elves are pretty far from what a High Elf is. That was the point. They are thalassian elves with a different theme and aesthetic from Blood/High Elves. That is why they are available to Alliance. The differences are deliberate and designed to preserve faction diversity. You know, the faction diversity you are so keen to argue Blizzard doesn't care about despite the evidence showing that they do.
Discussed above. I am actually beginning to find your ability to deny what is right in front of you quite curious.
Given in this very thread you have proclaimed your opinions on this matter as being superior to the developers, I would argue you suffering a lack of perspective in terms of your ability to 'demolish' opposing arguments. It's like you are throwing pebbles at a wall and then telling everyone to look at the rubble you've left and yet the wall still stands despite your boasts.
- - - Updated - - -
The thread exists as a trap. If it did not exist, multiple pro High Elf threads would spawn and start cluttering up the forum. Instead, the mods are able to close down any thread where someone comes up with their own twist on the matter by saying 'this belongs in the official high elf thread'. And the rest of the MMO champion community is free to go about it's day.
It's a win win.
Last edited by Obelisk Kai; 2019-06-05 at 02:07 PM.
You thinking what you want doesn't change the fact, i'm sorry.
Oh i see lack of evidence is enough for you. It's self evident what you pretend to do.
It is not an opinion if it is a retcon or pointing to something anyone can check out.
2017 Q&A regarding High elves was not a retcon nor pointing to something that is factual by the lore. It was a tattered statement in various ways.
You don't have any kind of insight on their work, but you pretend you do because you take what they say at face value.
Sorry to say, they don't spout holy words that are always true.
I'm sorry to know that you find amusement by stating half truths, getting upset and creating passive-aggressive responses.
Why should i bother myself to provide anything when simple linear logic demonstrate it's flaws?
You just rely on lack of evidence and appeal of authority. I'm just gonna bother to point whenever you bring out a point that is everything but honest. Which you do a lot by the way.
It is not wrong, you are just yet again going in circles.
Circles and circles of not acknowledging simple logic.
The irony oh.
The problem with your assumption is that i don't think my opinions are superiors to those of the developers.
The problem with your stance is that you are pretty much whiteknighting statements just because devs said them even after pointed out how tattered those statements can be.
Not a case of thinking what I want, my statements are underpinned by evidence. Although I think the hypocrisy of you making this statement is quite something, considering your entire argument is based upon presenting your opinion as superior to the developers and the game.
You mean, the fact they are not doing something they said they believe damages the game is somehow absence of evidence? I think you'll find that's actually evidence.
No the real problem with it was that they told you something you didn't want to hear. The statement itself is perfectly valid and entirely consistent with lore. But you thinking what you want doesn't change the fact, I'm sorry.
I do have insight. It's called listening to what they are saying.
Spare me the whole 'they are human and can be wrong' spiel. It's a work of fiction. It is what they say it is.
Considering I have never done any of that you have nothing to be sorry for. I have stated the complete truth, I have been passionate without getting upset, and if you think my responses are passive-aggressive that is merely your own opinion.
Because you are the one arguing to change the game, because the developers have said things proving you wrong and because being self satisfied that you have answered every criticism doesn't actually mean you've won.
Actually I have a lot of evidence which you then attack. And you deride quoting developers as an appeal to authority. All of which is rooted in the same problem, you have no evidence at all of your own to offer. Instead you offer your opinion as if it was fact.
Once you accept Blood Elves are High Elves, then the next step is that High Elves are playable and that there is no issue. Far from circular logic, this is actually linear logic.
No, this is your inability to intellectually engage with critique. Here is a second opportunity to do better.
"Quoting the developers is not 'completely stupid'. Developer commentary is critical evidence when divining developer intent. I understand why you think it is completely stupid of course, as you have just proclaimed your own opinion superior to what they have said, but for the rest of us who seem more grounded we understand that what a developer probably has more value on this topic.
You are, again, attacking the existing evidence without offering any of your, except attempting to get us to substitute your deeply biased opinion for developer word of god. One of your favourite counter-points when attacking word of god is 'appeal to authority', the argumentative fallacy that something must be true because someone who is believe to be an authority on the subject says so, with the person quoting them ignoring the possibility that authority could be mistaken.
The obvious problem with this retort is that it does not apply in this case. World of Warcraft is fiction. The developers therefore have 'authorial' word of god, in that what they say is true becomes true until contradicted by future word of god.
In the case of Blood Elves are High Elves, they cannot be wrong because Blood Elves ARE High Elves. We have followed their story from Warcraft 3 onwards, we have seen the destruction of their kingdom, their embracing the term of Blood Elf, their alliance with Illidan, their entry into the Horde and the restoration of the Sunwell. It is impossible to argue that Blood Elves are not High Elves when their entire story is based upon that truth.
Saying Blood Elves are High Elves, as Chris Metzen did, as Ion Hazzikostas did, as everyone has said and even the game itself reminds us of on numerous occasions, is not controversial. It is truth.
Only you and the more extreme elements of the pro High Elf community reject this because you are desperate to pretend that Alliance High Elves are as distinct a race from Blood Elves as Night Elves are from Blood Elves. This is the real source of the fixation with blue eyes, the one physical difference Blizzard bothers to preserve between Alliance High Elves and Blood Elves. Which is sad because at the end of the day, it's just an eye colour and if that's the sum total of the differences, then it's essentially nothing. It would be a nice customization option one day for Blood Elves of course and I live in hope that it will be provided.
And yes, Void Elves are pretty far from what a High Elf is. That was the point. They are thalassian elves with a different theme and aesthetic from Blood/High Elves. That is why they are available to Alliance. The differences are deliberate and designed to preserve faction diversity. You know, the faction diversity you are so keen to argue Blizzard doesn't care about despite the evidence showing that they do."
?
You literally said your opinion on what a High Elf is, is superior to that expressed by a developer.
That isn't an issue. In every other topic developer commentary supporting a position is regarded as extremely helpful. And the person pointing out how 'tattered those statements are' is...well...it's you. Who are you to say they are 'tattered'? What insight into WoW developement do you have? Have you been to their offices?
You just don't like what they said. That's fine. You are entitled to argue to change their minds, also fine. What you aren't able to do is say they are wrong and you are right because you aren't able to do that.
Enough, i can't care anymore about answering these long posts.
Anyone with the least amount of wow lore knowledge, wanting to learn about it and having a non egotistical point of view will see through your logical traps.
That's why i took the bother to do it, for lurkers out the fence. I think it has been enough at this point.
You have just constantly proven that this crusade is just about protecting your selfishness about Blood elves.
I'm open to discuss anything with anyone else.
I have continually challenged you to do more than put forward your own opinion or attack existing evidence.
Instead you have doubled down on attacking existing evidence and exalted your own opinion as if that would prove anything.
I regard your inability to effectively rebut my charges against your contributions, and your desire now to stop speaking about it, as an acknowledgement that you simply do not have the evidence to back up your opinions and prove me wrong.
And yes, logical traps. How did you describe those 'logical traps' again?
That's right. Listening to the developers and taking them at face value. What an insidious web I have woven indeed.
I'm gonna quote myself and go play wow, there's a pretty sword waiting for me.
That's because they only care about the lore when it fits them.
The last example in this same thread was about Half elves.
If there are not enough High elves to become playable as these people cluelessly tend to say then why is Half elves acceptable?
Oh right, there is when jealousy and selfishness enters. They don't -accept- the existence of High elves and people asking to play as them because they feel Blood elves would be less special.
It's sad but that's how it goes. High elves are Alliance and they are a legitimate request as lore and gameplay shows. We also had a dev who liked the idea https://twitter.com/candacerthomas/s...547962880?s=19 and there are more but i don't have any links nor i want to bother searching (basically i had the prior link on my screen while writing this xd).
It's just how it goes. They don't care about anything else than themselves, 'lore and devs and faction wall here and faction identity there' are just twisted excuses. This request is -based- on the lore of this game.
Alliance High elves are not an invent of any kind.
I don't get the point of quoting yourself, although considering I've been accusing you of exalting your own opinion over the developers this seems a weird tactic to go out on...
And that twitter link isn't working by the way. Looks like if something was there it's been deleted. Do you have any proof she said what she said and if she did say it, isn't it funny it's been deleted now?
I'm not gonna feed this attitude anymore.
https://twitter.com/candacerthomas/s...547962880?s=20
Whelp, thanks for showing everyone else what your participation in here is all about again.
No. High elves not being playable is a fact, not opinion. If you go to the character selection screen, there is no "high elf" option on the blue banners, "allied race" or not.
That's like saying "zandalari trolls are already playable" back in the past, before the idea of "allied races" were introduced.
Which are just his opinions, and may not necessarily reflect Blizzard's as a whole.1.) That developer comment from Ghostcrawler.
2.) The clarification a post Blizzard Ghostcrawler offered on that comment in regards to High Elves.
It's not. Especially since there are myriad of other possible factors that you seem to be ignoring.3.) Yes, the fact they haven't introduced any neutral races since MOP IS a sign.
Except "reduction in faction diversity" did happen, with the introduction of nightborne and void elves.4.) The existence of the Allied race system, which gives many of the positives a neutral race also offered (in terms of reduced development costs) while almost none of the drawbacks (a reduction in faction diversity)
I'm not sure those were his words. Can I have the link to that interview, please?5.) Ion Hazzikostas stating faction diversity was the reason Alliance High Elves were rejected and Void Elves created.
Your arrogance aside, you're wrong. The pro-high elf community do have evidence. The fact the "faction identity" excuse has been rendered null and void with the addition of nightborne and void elves, the fact high elves existed since the game's inception and continue to be used by the game developers throughout the expansions, etc.In contrast against that you again, have nothing to offer. This is a perfect example of the pro High Elf modus operandi, without evidence of your own, attempt to attack or denigrate the mountain of evidence against you.
Just like the Knights of the Ebon Blade were 100% Scourge aligned before siding with the Horde and Alliance? Things change. Remember when, in MoP, Dalaran was made Alliance? Who can say the Silver Covenant decide to "officially" (i.e. just a formal announcement) join the Alliance? They can even move out of Dalaran, too.Individual high elves are members of the Alliance. The Silver Covenant, the sole organisation of any size, is based in Dalaran which is a neutral state. The Silver Covenant is not a member of the Alliance, but it is Alliance aligned.
But not all high elves are blood elves.Blood Elves are High Elves.
They are not. No "high elf" option in the Alliance side in the character creation screen.High Elves are playable.
Falsified by the addition of nightborne and void elves.Faction diversity is a key part of the game.
Of blood elves. Not high elves.Void Elves are a variant created for the Alliance.
Your link was https://twitter.com/candacerthomas/s...547962880?s=19
You have now corrected it so that it works, but the initial error was yours.
- - - Updated - - -
You are stating the pro High Elf community has evidence. What evidence? I keep being told about the evidence, the huge amount of evidence your community has, but all it ever is is either fan art or an argumentative opinion as to why the devs are wrong.
You state the faction identity argument has been rendered null and void with Nightborne and Void Elves, but you've said that in the past and frankly this is just another case of substituting your own opinion for fact. You've never adequately explained how Nightborne and Void Elves demolish the faction argument when both are clearly different from their parents and that Alliance High Elves did not fall because they were similar to Blood Elves, they fell because they were identical.
Similar does not undermine faction identity because similar implies there is still some difference. Identical means there is no difference.
Sure. Continue to dishonestly handwave all the evidence away. Makes it easier to claim the other side has no evidence when you refuse to acknowledge its existence, right?
It's not opinion. It's fact. This things "so precious" to "faction identity" like character silhouette and lore have been spread around: kal'dorei lore to Horde, sin'dorei lore to Alliance.You state the faction identity argument has been rendered null and void with Nightborne and Void Elves, but you've said that in the past and frankly this is just another case of substituting your own opinion for fact.
Yeah. Continue to handwave everything that goes against your narrative. Never mind how I explained how silhouettes are important for "identity" and how "exclusive faction" lore has been given to both sides.You've never adequately explained how Nightborne and Void Elves demolish the faction argument when both are clearly different from their parents and that Alliance High Elves did not fall because they were similar to Blood Elves, they fell because they were identical.
Handwave away WHAT? What concrete evidence do you have to support your claims? I note that when I asked for evidence, you simply responded that I was denying it's existence rather than telling me what it is.
It very much is an opinion. If Ion tells us Alliance High Elves aren't in the game because they damage faction diversity, but then tells us Void Elves are fine, then you can't state it's fact when it's clearly an opinion.
If you think 'your' explanation counts as evidence there seems to be a misunderstanding on your part. 'Your' explanation is by definition, opinion. It is not evidence. You have clearly latched on to the fact that Void Elves and Nightborne share models with Blood Elves and Night Elves as an attempt to argue faction diversity is ruined. This of course ignores that Blood Elves and Alliance High Elves are identical, which leads to two possible conclusions.
1.) Sharing the silhouettes DOES damage faction diversity, but it is within a certain range of toleration set by Blizzard and it is offset by the many differences Blood Elves and Void Elves have in terms of aesthetic, culture and yes, lore. Alliance High Elves, because they are identical to a Horde race, are far outside this range of toleration.
2.) Sharing the silhouette does not damage faction diversity, but Alliance High Elves fail because they are completely identical to a Horde race in every respect.
No matter how hard you argue this point, Alliance High Elves are always going to be closer to Blood Elves than Void Elves because Blood Elves ARE High Elves and Void Elves are the clear variant and even if you are right that Void Elves deal damage, Alliance High Elves would clearly deal so much more.
Except "faction identity", in this context, is not about something "in the game", i.e. in the lore. In this context, it's about player perception. In lore, neither Anduin nor Sylvanas care how a potential ally looks in terms of physical appearance.
No. "Faction identity" is about the player identifying a given faction.Which is why character/race silhouettes are so important in design. Looking at a black silhouette of an orc, you'll know it's Horde. Looking at a black silhouette of a draenei you'll know it's Alliance. But looking at the silhouette of a nightborne you won't know if it's Horde or Alliance. Looking at a void elf silhouette you won't know if it's Horde or Alliance.
It's not a "false equivalence" because "official vanilla servers" has been requested for just as long, if not more so, than playable high elves, and the answer has always been the same: "no".Now this I have indeed repeated myself on again and again and again. And unironically, this is also a false equivalence. The move for private servers was done to protect their IP as well as put millions back in their pocket via two ways:
You say that Classic servers were added to protect their IP and to make money. Maybe. But then this is your speculation only, considering Blizzard has gone on record to call this a "love letter to fans". But wouldn't the addition of high elves also "make money" for them?
Except I have evidence from their own game, their own actions? They're saying "no" but their actions on the game say "yes".And just because you believe them to be wrong or want them to be wrong doesn't make it true either.
They are the same in the important check boxes. They even share the exact same silhouette. You cannot tell them apart before their outline/name/health bar color tells you about their allegiance.And this comes to personal opinion. They may have toed the line, but it certainly wasn't a cross imo. Pandaren are a cross as they're the exact same on either side. Nightborne and Void Elves are different, close.. but different.
- - - Updated - - -
Because I've already presented it to you, several times, and you continue to ignore it.
I can still call it a "fact" because their actions clearly don't match their words. The fact void elves are purple while blood elves are fair-skinned is such a tiny difference, to the point of being meaningless. Silhouette is what matters, and those allied races have the same silhouettes, to the point you won't be able to tell them apart until their health bar, name or outline color gives you the answer.It very much is an opinion. If Ion tells us Alliance High Elves aren't in the game because they damage faction diversity, but then tells us Void Elves are fine, then you can't state it's fact when it's clearly an opinion.
Yeah. My opinion, And surely the fact that basically every character designer in the world has the same opinion is meaningless, right?If you think 'your' explanation counts as evidence there seems to be a misunderstanding on your part. 'Your' explanation is by definition, opinion. It is not evidence.
Skin color is practically irrelevant when defining "identity" in a game with different-looking races, like WoW. If "preserving faction identity" was so paramount to today's Blizzard developers, nightborne would've gone to the Alliance, and void elves would've stayed with the Horde. Clearly Ghostcrawler's opinion, from the tweet you've shown, no longer reflects Blizzard's.You have clearly latched on to the fact that Void Elves and Nightborne share models with Blood Elves and Night Elves as an attempt to argue faction diversity is ruined. This of course ignores that Blood Elves and Alliance High Elves are identical, which leads to two possible conclusions.
Aesthetic and culture are still the same, especially for void elves. They're still the same Silvermoon elves as blood elves. Same lore.1.) Sharing the silhouettes DOES damage faction diversity, but it is within a certain range of toleration set by Blizzard and it is offset by the many differences Blood Elves and Void Elves have in terms of aesthetic, culture and yes, lore. Alliance High Elves, because they are identical to a Horde race, are far outside this range of toleration.
Skin color is meaningless, as explained.2.) Sharing the silhouette does not damage faction diversity, but Alliance High Elves fail because they are completely identical to a Horde race in every respect.