New interview with Steve Danuser about BfA

[Coconut]

I had this whole wall of text in mind about how there's neither nuance nor exploration of the Warchief seat or the Horde as well as how Sylvanas being motivated by completely unconnected bullshit means that by default it is neither about the structural issues of the Horde nor about the cycle of hatred since she is affected by neither, but @Coconut already said everything and saved me the time. Great post and cheers. Also Danuser is a hack.

He's not just a hack, he's also so full of shit he might as well be an outhouse...

This interview tickled me the wrong way and made me finally post again after a long-ish absence, but I do peruse the forums every now and then and I enjoy your comments. Keep fighting the good fight!

What's different this time?
We are.

Except they're not different, they are simply reverting back to their Warcraft 3 selves. What's worse, this change seems forced onto them because those versions of the characters were more popular, and Blizzard wants to set them up for yet another nostalgia jab in the future. I could be on board with them coming full circle if it was earned, but Thrall was pulled out of nowhere just before that patch, giving him no stakes in the current state of the Horde except as a sidekick for Saurfang, and Jaina didn't get a chance to take her thirst for vengeance too far either; there was no pay off on her finally "listening" to her father that would maybe trigger some sort of guilt or new perspective (her attack on Dazar'alor was tangential, and it didn't even play off on her story line on the Isle of Thunder - nor did she transgress too much in it, as she wasn't the one who killed Rastakhan and she failed to kill the players on the pursuing ship).

[DemonHunter18]

It was wishful thinking at best. They stopped doing single-villain expansions since Cataclysm with Deathwing (TBC was also meant to be about Illidan, Zul'jin and Kil'jaeden were added later to stretch for WotLK's release). All expansions since then follow the general rule of having multiple main villains per patch.

So in truth it was pretty obvious that there would never be a 100% Azshara expansion. There might have been an expansion where Azshara played a major role as villain.

And that was BfA.

Should we even classify her as a villain???

She is more like an anti-hero at this point LMAO.

[Varodoc]

Should we even classify her as a villain???

She is more like an anti-hero at this point LMAO.

She is still a villain. She only helped the player because she also wanted to topple N'Zoth, since she is a vainglorious psycho with a god complex.

Now she is after the "true seat of power". She'll most likely return as a villain in the future.

[BB8]

Lol, really, ignorant as ever.

And he kind of admitted they straight up lied to the fans when saying Sylvanas won't be Garrosh 2.0. - No instead she's a Garrosh 2.0 with nuances... with a shade of purple maybe?

These old white men at Blizzard are just complacent dickheads. If they haven't learned how to make a good expac or tell a good story by now, they most likely never will.

Exactly what I thought. how many times did I read that she was not a Garrosh.2

[DemonHunter18]

She is still a villain. She only helped the player because she also wanted to topple N'Zoth, since she is a vainglorious psycho with a god complex.

Now she is after the "true seat of power". She'll most likely return as a villain in the future.

We already had some examples where someone kills innocents for "greater good" only for them to walk free.

Who wants to bet that Sylvanas will survive SL xd

[Queen of Hamsters]

Just wait until Shadowlands has been out for a while.

Then this insipid, selectively forgetful song and dance in regards to WoD will start to shift.

As for the "she was meant to be Garrosh 2.0 with nuances" though, I cackled. She wasn't Garrosh 2.0 but it's funny due to how they denied that was their intention for her character.

[kansor]

It was wishful thinking at best. They stopped doing single-villain expansions since Cataclysm with Deathwing (TBC was also meant to be about Illidan, Zul'jin and Kil'jaeden were added later to stretch for WotLK's release). All expansions since then follow the general rule of having multiple main villains per patch.

So in truth it was pretty obvious that there would never be a 100% Azshara expansion. There might have been an expansion where Azshara played a major role as villain.

And that was BfA.

Azshara PLUS N'zoth is plenty of fuel for an expansion. South Seas islands, a multizone treatment of underwater Nazjatar, and a proper zone treatment for Ny'alotha. All you have to do is think of a less contrived method for her to open N'zoth's prison. Maybe pull some bullshit with Sargeras's sword causing tidal disturbances that send the naga onto land, have that be the lead-in scenario, add a garrison-like ships feature, and voila.

[Varodoc]

Azshara PLUS N'zoth is plenty of fuel for an expansion. South Seas islands, a multizone treatment of underwater Nazjatar, and a proper zone treatment for Ny'alotha. All you have to do is think of a less contrived method for her to open N'zoth's prison. Maybe pull some bullshit with Sargeras's sword causing tidal disturbances that send the naga onto land, have that be the lead-in scenario, add a garrison-like ships feature, and voila.

Doubt that. Old Gods are cool when they are side threats who work in the shadows. As soon as they become the main villain, like in the case of N'Zoth in 8.3, they are no longer interesting.

[Nerovar]

I feel like they only planned with the faction war story in mind and then somehow cramped Azshara and N'zoth in there. Those stories were completely disconnected and hamfisted.

[DemonHunter18]

Doubt that. Old Gods are cool when they are side threats who work in the shadows. As soon as they become the main villain, like in the case of N'Zoth in 8.3, they are no longer interesting.

More interesting than faction war garbage where a character herself doesn't know what her true motive is...

[Varodoc]

More interesting than faction war garbage where a character herself doesn't know what her true motive is...

Faction war isn't inherently a bad story. MoP did it fine. Garrosh was a better villain than Sylvanas, and the Alliance also had their own "unsavory" elements with Jaina and Vereesa.

The problem with BfA is that Sylvanas is a bad villain. If the villain is bad, the story sucks. That's why the villain is even more important than the protagonist. Had they written Sylvanas as a more coherent villain, the story would've been better.

N'Zoth isn't much better. Dumb octopus with generic evil motivations gets boring after a while.

[Steelangel]

Consider that every Mak'gora we've seen in World of Warcraft involved rules being broken, or blatant cheating. We have nwver had a legitimate, honourable mak'gora.

And what does this say about the Horde, and the fanbois who still think they are the good guys?

[DemonHunter18]

Faction war isn't inherently a bad story. MoP did it fine. Garrosh was a better villain than Sylvanas, and the Alliance also had their own "unsavory" elements with Jaina and Vereesa.

The problem with BfA is that Sylvanas is a bad villain. If the villain is bad, the story sucks. That's why the villain is even more important than the protagonist. Had they written Sylvanas as a more coherent villain, the story would've been better.

N'Zoth isn't much better. Dumb octopus with generic evil motivations gets boring after a while.

Faction War is boring ever since WC3.

It's gets annoying with each expansion.

Old Gods stuff are everywhere.

Everything is related to Old Gods nowaways.

[Queen of Hamsters]

And what does this say about the Horde, and the fanbois who still think they are the good guys?

Ah yes, I'm sure there are no examples of treachery amongst the Alliance.

Whilst I don't necessarily subscribe to "being teh good gui", my character has done nothing but fight in wars and ultimately oppose those starting said wars and turmoil, and help Azeroth.

[TickTickTick]

She wasn't Garrosh 2.0 - Her arc has a lot more complex strings than Garrosh had. He was only there to be a warchief. A character like Garrosh is a permanent problem for faction unity. Sylvanas is, too. But they chose a more creative and versatile approach with her.

You are making things too complicated.

Sylvanas was there only to be a bridge to Shadowlands, same as Garrosh was there to be a bridge to WoD.

[Ielenia]

What? I wasn't saying Sylvanas being evil was pulled out before 8.2.5. Heck she's been evil and cruel since Warcraft 3. They pulled the "Death Lord" as an explanation for this war, her shifty actions and her supposed "betrayal of the Horde" this expansion some months before 8.2.5 considering none of it was being foreshadowed as the result of an additional party's involvement. I mean even Bwom didn't have any complaints about soul delivery to the shadowlands or his realm being disrupted this whole expansion, you'd think that would be a major indication that something else was happening.

You are, simply put, wrong. Blizzard doesn't decide on story progression for an expansion... mid-expansion.

For context: the main story beats for Shadowlands, from beginning to end, have already been decided, and the main story beats for the expansion AFTER Shadowlands are likely being brainstormed right now.

[Omedon]

The storytelling *IS* good, it's the story being told that was such a turnoff for me and mine. Throughout BFA we (as in me and the people I play with) kept saying "man, imagine all these storytelling tools and content relations to the story occurring for an actually GOOD story?"

"Good story" is certainly subjective, of course I concede that, but it's that line of thought that makes me look forward to shadowlands!

The story was well told, it was just such a bad story (again, subjective), so Danuser does have something to be mechanically and systemically proud of in their actual methods and tools available.

Anyone saying that the full on cinematics were bad is just being ridiculous. The storytelling has gotten better, the stories will always be hit or miss.

[Asrialol]

Lol, really, ignorant as ever.

And he kind of admitted they straight up lied to the fans when saying Sylvanas won't be Garrosh 2.0. - No instead she's a Garrosh 2.0 with nuances... with a shade of purple maybe?

These old white men at Blizzard are just complacent dickheads. If they haven't learned how to make a good expac or tell a good story by now, they most likely never will.

Oh my goodness the irony.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, he speaks as a representative of Blizzard, not as a private person. But to be honest I'm sick and tired of them saying "Yeah, we learned a lot from that,..." bla bla. They were saying that in WoD already, look where it got us. Downwards. What the heck. Seems like everyone at the WoW devs office is still in the I'm only the intern-phase of employment, even after 12 years working as a dev... holy shit.

What does this "interview" have to do with WoW devs? Steven Danuser isn't even a dev. Holy shit.

[Queen of Hamsters]

The story was well told, it was just such a bad story (again, subjective), so Danuser does have something to be mechanically and systemically proud of in their actual methods and tools available.

Anyone saying that the full on cinematics were bad is just being ridiculous. The storytelling has gotten better, the stories will always be hit or miss.

Definitely can agree with this.
I have hope for Shadowlands as a result of the delivery mechanisms.

And people claiming that BfA had worse storytelling than WoD (as in going downhill from then), are jokes.

"Draenor is FREE!!!" - Never forget.

[DemonHunter18]

Definitely can agree with this.
I have hope for Shadowlands as a result of the delivery mechanisms

I'll go back to this post when SL launches and when it ends xd