In hindsight, just one change could've made WoW's story more coherent

[Veritus7]

Main Scenario Quest system like in FFXIV

[Arikara]

You just can't write Garrosh out of the plot. There's no one else that can fit his role. Someone who is both very influential, as the son of a legendary war hero, and mentally unstable, willing to commit genocide and remake the world in his image.

You absolutely can write Garrosh out of the story, it would just lead to a story with less faction conflict

Which would be far preferable because the faction conflict was old and tired from its inception

[jzhbee]

There should never have been apocalypse-level crisis events. The story was doomed the moment they turned every conflict into an existential crisis for the entire world. It ties the story's feet to a chain of concrete blocks and throws it into the deepest part of the lake and dooms it to unmanageable power creep. Never do the armies that be in Warcraft fight for anything other than to save the world from an absolute threat, and the threats themselves are barely interesting in the first place. We've got our Milton inspired Judeo-Christian devils or the Lovecraft inspired horrors, wow, so original.

Real stories of war are nothing like that. They battle for supremacy or in defence of ideology, belief, values, tradition, religion, commerce, and so on. Functionally none of the factions have meaningful long-term ambitions that aren't vague referents to peace and or survival. But we rarely ever see any of that in Warcraft's story. The power struggle in Zandalar as well as in Kul Tiras between Rastakhan/Zul and Jaina/Everyone was actually pretty interesting, but it was so quickly overpowered by the routine existential crisis.

I guess what I'm saying, is that apocalyptic scenarios are really bad for the story. It trivializes so much of the interesting personal character story development that happens throughout the earlier parts of the expansion, and Blizzard unfortunately always seems to leave them in the dust when they move the story forward to the 'big bad'.

The problem is that WoW evolves from WCIII, although they were made concurrently. WC3 had some faction conflict, like Thrall vs. Proudmoore, but mostly it was Burning Legion and in Frozen Throne, the LK. Which are morally black and white, full evil villains.

And it didn't stop having morally black and white, evil villains.

Even Illidan was devolved into a mustache-twirling villain. Same with Kael'thas.

[Varodoc]

You absolutely can write Garrosh out of the story, it would just lead to a story with less faction conflict

Which would be far preferable because the faction conflict was old and tired from its inception

Then it wouldn't be leading to Cataclysm and MoP. This thread does not rewrite Cataclysm and MoP, it only rewrites TBC and retcons WoD, and takes for granted that nothing would change before that.

[Arikara]

Then it wouldn't be leading to Cataclysm and MoP. This thread does not rewrite Cataclysm and MoP, it only rewrites TBC and retcons WoD, and takes for granted that nothing would change before that.

Of course. OP's proposition is silly.

Garrosh does have one redeeming quality; he's a great villain. However, his influence has wreaked irrepairable damage by escalating the faction conflict nonsense and by splintering the horde player base into two camps. Then they repeated that with Sylvanas. Cue most of the arguments that occur on this forum.

[Varodoc]

Of course. OP's proposition is silly.

Garrosh does have one redeeming quality; he's a great villain. However, his influence has wreaked irrepairable damage by escalating the faction conflict nonsense and by splintering the horde player base into two camps. Then they repeated that with Sylvanas. Cue most of the arguments that occur on this forum.

He was definitely a better villain than Sylvanas. I felt more emotion for him during his fight with Thrall than I did for Sylvanas in the entirety of Legion and BfA. Also his actions made a lot more sense than Sylvanas'. Sylvanas literally had no reason to start the war, whereas with Garrosh you can at least argue that he was forced to do so because his people were literally dying in the streets.

It didn't have to be like that though, and World of Warcraft was an opportunity for a real fresh start. WC3 happened, apocalyptic war that threatens the whole world, but Vanilla starts in the aftermath of all of that. They could have kept the story-scope scaled down such that no conflict would ever endanger the world like the Burning Legion did. I think TBC was good in that many of their villains were localized threats, except for KJ at the Sunwell. But WOTLK fucked up and made it so that if the LK wasn't stopped, he'd conquer the whole world. But world domination is such a lazy motivation that doesn't even fit Arthas' character at all. It could have started with a Scourge invasion of Lordaeron and Stormwind as Arthas tries to conquer the Human Kingdoms. And then we beat him back into Northrend and the story goes on. It becomes a story about bringing this asshole to justice instead of merely preventing an undead apocalypse.

Deathwing literally blowing up the world with his nuke-bod was truly the worst and the laziest though.

It wasn't just world domination. Maybe in the old lore. Chronicles explained that Lich King wanted to conquer the world so that he could protect it against the Legion and the Old Gods. Also he wanted to remake the world into a paradise where there are no more wars and no more injustice, which ties back to the idea that Arthas originally had good intentions but was misguided. Plus he had dreams of world domination or anyway world apocalypse since WC3. Remember what he said after he killed Terenas? "And from the ashes shall arise a new order that will shake the very foundations of the world". He was set up as a world-ending threat long before WotLK.

I also don't see what the problem is, it's just natural that villains get stronger and stronger with each expansion. Especially in a story like WoW that is centered around fighting enemy bosses. MoP pretty much reset the story anyway, because all the villains between Deathwing and Garrosh were confined to Pandaria (even Sha-empowered Garrosh was an ant compared to Deathwing).

[shoc]

The problem is that WoW evolves from WCIII, although they were made concurrently. WC3 had some faction conflict, like Thrall vs. Proudmoore, but mostly it was Burning Legion and in Frozen Throne, the LK. Which are morally black and white, full evil villains.

And it didn't stop having morally black and white, evil villains.

Even Illidan was devolved into a mustache-twirling villain. Same with Kael'thas.

It didn't have to be like that though, and World of Warcraft was an opportunity for a real fresh start. WC3 happened, apocalyptic war that threatens the whole world, but Vanilla starts in the aftermath of all of that. They could have kept the story-scope scaled down such that no conflict would ever endanger the world like the Burning Legion did. I think TBC was good in that many of their villains were localized threats, except for KJ at the Sunwell. But WOTLK fucked up and made it so that if the LK wasn't stopped, he'd conquer the whole world. But world domination is such a lazy motivation that doesn't even fit Arthas' character at all. It could have started with a Scourge invasion of Lordaeron and Stormwind as Arthas tries to conquer the Human Kingdoms. And then we beat him back into Northrend and the story goes on. It becomes a story about bringing this asshole to justice instead of merely preventing an undead apocalypse.

Deathwing literally blowing up the world with his nuke-bod was truly the worst and the laziest though.

[StationaryHawk]

Malkorok and Zaela became his top brass during the late stages of the war. Cata had Cromush and several Garrosh-style generals from Northrend leading the charge. The point is that Cromush and later Malkorok and Zaela always felt like outsiders rather than the core of the Horde, at least from a Horde player's PoV. I think the story would have worked out much better if core Horde members were the ones pushing a more aggressive stance and the racist angle wasn't brought in at all. It would have forced the Horde to reevaluate itself way way before BfA instead of pinning all the blame on Garrosh. There's no reason a similar Azerothian orc character couldn't have been built up to fulfill Garrosh's role. Hell, Agmar was a Garrosh-style general through and through and he was an Azerothian orc rather than a refugee from Outland.

Fair enough about Cromush, though without the orc superiority angle you lose significant chunks of Cataclysm and Mists of Pandaria.

But Garrosh's role was possible because he was Warchief, and he gained the mantle almost solely because of his relation to Grom. Take that away, and you just have another Putress or Krom'gar.

[TheVaryag]

TBC should have come after MoP and WoD should have been scrapped entirely. The Blood Elves and the Draenei can still be introduced in WoW's first expansion, WotLK. Here's how things would have made more sense:

1. Vanilla transitions organically into WotLK after Naxxramas' fall; the Lich King unleashes the second plague as retaliation and the Alliance and the Horde invade Northrend.

2. The Blood Elves don't get their redemption arc until much later and can remain the Horde's second token evil teammate for much longer instead of being High Elves with green eyes.

3. The characters of Illidan, Kael'thas and Vashj don't get thrown away because of WoW's earlier story weirdness.

4. The Horde - Alliance war would feel more meaningful with the Horde's hardliners coming to the forefront instead of all the pro-war top brass being Garrosh's outsider alien orcs from another world.

5. Garrosh is introduced much later and his story arc could be about living up to the Hellscream bloodline and fighting DEMONS instead of... just about everything else.

6. The Legion doesn't launch another half-assed invasion of Azeroth right after their defeat in WC3. Instead, they recoup for years before trying again with their full might.

7. New TBC leads directly into Legion, no need for WoD.

8. WoW's overarching story elements like the Naaru and the Void Lords can be introduced much later and fleshed out more in new TBC.

9. Foreshadowing is cool - M'uru turning dark would be fresh in people's memories as they interact with Xe'ra and L'ura.

10. But most importantly, Illidan doesn't need a half-assed redemption arc because by the time new TBC launched, Blizzard would know that they want him to be a hero instead of a villain.

That's all assuming WoW didn't go from expansion to expansion bumbling their way forward without a true vision for the story just like the "Trilogy" of Star Wars 7, 8 and 9 they had no Idea how the story would go forward years ahead. Imean just during Wrath's launch people seeing Wrathgate cinematic made them go "maybe we should change the ending of the expansion entirely" and they did that alot, to their defence they listen to players but that doesn't mean always listen to us especially the vocal minority like the one on MMO-Champ and other sites.

The only time as far as I'm aware they had a coherent narrative was MoP with Garrosh being the big baddie at the end, and then they fudged up with Grom supposedly being the endboss of the expansion again until they changed It to pre-introduce the Legion Invasion of Azeroth and screw up the lore with Archimonde showing up and devaluating everything we've done in Warcraft 3 and Introducing the worst gaming systems possible in Legion. I don't care we had pretty weapons, 1 out of 20 positives Is still 19 negatives.

[Neuroticaine]

just one change could've made WoW's story more coherent

Good sir. This was way more than one change.

[matrix123mko]

It looks good on paper but it is the details that matter:

- how to make MoP without Garrosh?
- how would you change TBC?
- how would Legion feel different enough from TBC?

[Powerogue]

Saurfang could never replace Garrosh. He would never become so hostile, because he has PTSD from the Genocide of the Draenei and can't even eat pork anymore. He's not Garrosh. He knows that war brings only death, destruction, pain to everyone. He would not start anything, much less for some "utopia" where only the orcs rule and the "lesser races" are exterminated.

He would not blame the Alliance for his son's death. He would've been told that his son died bravely fighting side by side with Fordragon, and that the only culprit for the Wrathgate is Putress (and, secretly, Sylvanas herself).

Furthermore, since Saurfang is calm, patient, and wise, he would never start all those shenanigans with the Sha and Y'Shaarj. So you are cutting ALL of MoP after Lei Shen.

You just can't write Garrosh out of the plot. There's no one else that can fit his role. Someone who is both very influential, as the son of a legendary war hero, and mentally unstable, willing to commit genocide and remake the world in his image.

On top of that, he's a soldier. "The Old Soldier." He's not a leader. We see that as part of his BFA arc, where he's being given the opportunity to truly be out from under a warchief and make his own decisions, and even being expected to lead the forces against Sylvanas and potentially be the next warchief, which he struggles with. That's a big part of his arc, and part of what made him the right choice for our main relatable character to the PC.

- - - Updated - - -

It looks good on paper but it is the details that matter:

- how to make MoP without Garrosh?
- how would you change TBC?
- how would Legion feel different enough from TBC?

-no idea, and I'm only just realizing how wonky trying to jam Saurfang in there would be.
-A more clear storyline of us believing Illidan has gone rogue on us only come to find out later in the expansion that was the Legion luring us into Outland, not his forces invading Azeroth. (All these demons look the same to me!) Vashj escapes after ominously hinting at this in her boss dialogue, and Kael'thas still goes crazy to keep that the same. Top it off with a humbling beating of Illidan before he reveals his plans and leaves for Azeroth, having still accomplished freeing Outland of him.
-On reflection not all that much of it was fighting the Burning Legion, BC was kind of all over. We went to Karazhan at one point. I don't think it'd be too bad. Mostly I just salivate at the thought of what Outland could've looked like with modern graphics.

In hindsight it's rather hard to write an arc where we keep relatively close to the existing BC (freeing Outland from Illidan's tyranny and exploitation) without making it sound like WOD's original ending (Draenor is free! All is forgiven, Grom!).

[matrix123mko]

In hindsight it's rather hard to write an arc where we keep relatively close to the existing BC (freeing Outland from Illidan's tyranny and exploitation) without making it sound like WOD's original ending (Draenor is free! All is forgiven, Grom!).

Well, in real world politics it is common practice to "forgive everything" to prevent war. If Illidan maintains bulk of his army by the end of expansion, we may need to sign a peace treaty with him.

[Varodoc]

On top of that, he's a soldier. "The Old Soldier." He's not a leader. We see that as part of his BFA arc, where he's being given the opportunity to truly be out from under a warchief and make his own decisions, and even being expected to lead the forces against Sylvanas and potentially be the next warchief, which he struggles with. That's a big part of his arc, and part of what made him the right choice for our main relatable character to the PC.

Of course. Why would Saurfang even get the position of Warchief? Garrosh was the son of the most renowned hero in orcish history and took the merit for the Horde victory against the Lich King. That's why he was made Warchief.

But Saurfang? 0 reason to make him Warchief. He's not even a high-ranking member of the Horde, he's a strong soldier, but a soldier nonetheless. If Garrosh didn't exist, Thrall would have likely appointed either Vol'jin or Cairne as his successor. Or perhaps even Sylvanas, depends if Danuser was already working for Blizzard at that time.

[Kokolums]

Blizzard had NO idea WoW would get as popular as it did. Back then, it was standard to release a game and then 2 xpacs. The natural expansions were Outland and Arthas. Outland was an obvious choice as the original plot was about Orcs from Outland invading Azeroth via the Dark Portal. Arthas was set to wrap up the trilogy as he was the most popular lore figure. Once WoW got huge, they had to scramble and start setting up more stuff.

But there was absolutely no way they were gonna hold off the Outland xpac for 5 years.

[DookuDookuTree]

Didn't understand all of that but IMO there is too much content & too many expansions, too many raids per expansion & even more severe the fact that the xpak tales intertwine, there are 2 warchiefs in Orgrimmar atm for an e.g., make a sturdy game not a fragmented one.
Instead of expansion releases there could be 2 new bosses every 6 months & some minor new stuff.

[talwynn]

6. The Legion doesn't launch another half-assed invasion of Azeroth right after their defeat in WC3. Instead, they recoup for years before trying again with their full might.

Do you think its only been a year or 2 after WC3? According to the official timeline it's been at least 5 years since the end of Frozen Throne and the beginning of Wrath. According to this, Arthas claimed the Helm of Domination in the year 22 and we are in the year 33, with Legion taking place in year 32. So they had 10 years to regroup to attack Azeroth again. Hell at this point, Bolvar has been LK longer than Arthas was.

[Kokolums]

The Horde and Alliance invade the Shadowlands to stop the global threat of the Jailer.

[Florena]

Changing the order of expansions wouldn't make the writing team any more or less skilled. You can't salvage the bad parts of WoW's story just by shuffling around the order of some expansions.

[Eurhetemec]

Blizzard had NO idea WoW would get as popular as it did. Back then, it was standard to release a game and then 2 xpacs. The natural expansions were Outland and Arthas. Outland was an obvious choice as the original plot was about Orcs from Outland invading Azeroth via the Dark Portal. Arthas was set to wrap up the trilogy as he was the most popular lore figure. Once WoW got huge, they had to scramble and start setting up more stuff.

But there was absolutely no way they were gonna hold off the Outland xpac for 5 years.

Yeah, it's nice to see someone remembers. Blizzard were absolutely blown away when they sold 250k copies virtually instantly with WoW, and scrambled to print/make more copies and scale up their server architecture and so on to cope with the massive and ongoing demand. They were on the back foot for much of Vanilla as a result (hell, it took nearly 11 months to clear up the "loot scoot").

They were expecting a sub-EverQuest level of success, probably more in the DAoC range (i.e. 200k to 500k subs). A game that would be popular, and likely gradually sell millions of copies, but not instantly explode. And at the start, as they explained quite a few times, their content pipeline was even longer than it is now. Stuff had to be planned well in advance, and it's likely that they had the first two expansions sketched out, at least in the broadest terms (i.e. where they were set), either by launch or in the first year or so of WoW. I agree that they probably thought they would do a couple of expansions and then didn't have detailed plans. I suspect they thought the game would go into a slower kind of development after that, possibly with a smaller team (IIRC, they did indeed shrink the team with Cata and didn't re-grow it until they started developing Legion).