View Poll Results: NOT VENGEANCE...JUST ICE!

Voters
375. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    100 26.67%
  • No

    275 73.33%
Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ...
9
10
11
  1. #201
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    Knowing that she'd turn into a murdering monster across the universe, she committed suicide.
    As written, she had the choice of being a goddess of destruction, and being human...with a capacity for self-sacrifice.
    The Dark Phoenix Saga is usually ranked among the top 5 greatest storylines ever made in comicbooks. Claremont admitted later that it was a better ending than his initial offering. It really hit hard if you followed the story.
    panel one
    panel two
    That's a different spin than what you originally said. It's not "character does bad thing -> gets punished by the narrative", but "in spite of great personal struggle, character finds the strength to sacrifice herself for the good of others". Jean Grey comes off as a hero, not as a villain that's been made an example of through righteous retribution, and that is in spite of the billions she killed. I don't know what dramatic ramifications there are to the destruction of that planet (i.e. whether you care all that much for it versus your emotional investment in Jean Grey), but from the short version of the story, it sounds like all those deaths rather serve to "rule of cool" the character, to pump up her power level and implicitly the power level of the part of her she must suppress in order to self sacrifice, when the arc itself is rather similar to the self sacrifice of someone who self-quarantines, for example, but taken up to 11 billion.

    Ironically, it's exactly that "spark of humanity inside a tortured monster" - or rather the "Elven heart", as Balnazzar put it in TFT - that made Sylvanas sympathetic and compelling before Blizzard arguably pushed her too far with Teldrassil... And yet you DO NOT want a redemptive Jean Grey-like ending for her, you want a savagely punitive one, "her worst fears realized". Perhaps you are subjective because you were more invested in Teldrassil than in Random Planet with Billions of People, and less invested in Sylvanas prior to BFA than you were in Jean Grey back when you were reading X-Men?

  2. #202
    Quote Originally Posted by Coconut View Post
    That's a different spin than what you originally said. It's not "character does bad thing -> gets punished by the narrative", but "in spite of great personal struggle, character finds the strength to sacrifice herself for the good of others".
    That was the writer's words. The editor didn't care how it was written. But he did say it that way. (Not as contradictory as it sounds as the editor and writer is "god," and in control of a character's fate)
    Quite frankly I'm certain you'd have to read the story all the way through. There's no "rule of cool" here. Just damn good writing.
    Something sorely lacking these days...for Blizz as well.

    But I guess that's enough of the off topic stuff.
    I certainly don't see anything resembling good writing for Sylvanus.
    I did see it for Arthas. And he got what he deserved.
    And I will rarely accept taking the big baddie from a previous story and shine him up to play the hero. Illidan's arc was hamfisted nonsense that only served to rob everyone of a villain from an earlier expansion to appease players of the well maligned WoD. And worse, it seemed rushed. They had a couple of years for that, and they couldn't do any better? I'd like to give points for a mediocre effort, but it doesn't feel as if they put even that much into it.

    I'd say scrap the Silvanus arc but it's too late for that.
    But that's how I feel about much of the lore for the whole of WoW post WoD.
    Had Silvanus been destroyed fighting Arthas and freeing the Forsaken of his control that would have been glorious and heroic...and freed the story for something more fresh...new.

  3. #203
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    That was the writer's words. The editor didn't care how it was written. But he did say it that way. (Not as contradictory as it sounds as the editor and writer is "god," and in control of a character's fate)
    Quite frankly I'm certain you'd have to read the story all the way through. There's no "rule of cool" here. Just damn good writing.
    Something sorely lacking these days...for Blizz as well.
    I can't say I'm a fan of that mentality, even though the writer was professional enough to hide the behind the scenes rationale from the narrative and actually gave the character an emotionally satisfying arc. It reminds me of the old horror movie trope where the sexually active girl always got killed, a symbolic "punishment of the sinner" meant to send the message that sex outside of marriage is dangerous and bad (being a black person hanging out with whites was probably coded as a "sin" too, now that I think about it...). It evokes the same kind of logic as the 90's paranoia that "violent video games make people kill" - "we can't allow the hero to remain unpunished after killing people, because then readers will think killing people is cool!".

    I also disagree that a writer who always exercises complete control over the character's fate is good. If you don't allow your characters to grow on their own, if you don't explore them to the point that they surprise you, then they certainly can't be very deep, or very consistent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    I certainly don't see anything resembling good writing for Sylvanus.
    I did see it for Arthas. And he got what he deserved.
    And I will rarely accept taking the big baddie from a previous story and shine him up to play the hero. Illidan's arc was hamfisted nonsense that only served to rob everyone of a villain from an earlier expansion to appease players of the well maligned WoD. And worse, it seemed rushed. They had a couple of years for that, and they couldn't do any better? I'd like to give points for a mediocre effort, but it doesn't feel as if they put even that much into it.
    Arthas had an excellent arc in Warcraft III. More than that even, he got an epic story in three acts. And he reached his zenith as a villain. Arthas was basically the winner of TFT, as far as we knew. It literally ended with him on top of the world. His story in Wrath wasn't really that great, he monologued a lot, kept leaving his minions to deal with us like a Saturday morning cartoon, and didn't have much of an objective besides the obvious "turn everyone into zombies" - at least we never saw him that invested in anything. But everyone accepted that there was no other way than down for him, and he was pretty epic with his new Nazgul look, so he made a great end boss.

    Illidan, Kael'thas and Vashj were beloved antiheroes, however. From a storytelling perspective, Illidan and Kael still had unfinished business and room to grow, but at that time WoW was less story-driven, so it was mainly that people didn't perceive them as villains and wanted to hang out with and getlegendary quests from them. I remember a lot of people, including myself, were very disappointed with how they were used in TBC. It felt like a huge waste to villain bat them and throw them into raids. I strongly disagree that resetting Illidan's role in WoW robbed us of anything. Rather, it restored something that had been discarded to easily in the past.

    Don't get me wrong, I would have preferred something new. But all in all, Illidan was handled better, and there was more to gain from his reintroduction (playable Demon Hunters, a few cool edgy moments from him) than the AU bullshit in WoD, or the repeat of the Scourge themes in Shadowlands (at least that's what I feel so far). And he wasn't the only nostalgic nod to Warcraft III in Legion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    I'd say scrap the Silvanus arc but it's too late for that.
    But that's how I feel about much of the lore for the whole of WoW post WoD.
    Had Silvanus been destroyed fighting Arthas and freeing the Forsaken of his control that would have been glorious and heroic...and freed the story for something more fresh...new.
    The problem is that there wasn't a Sylvanas arc so far. There were disjointed actions, motivated by something that has been kept in the dark. Even now, we don't really know the how and the why of what's been going on with her all this time.

    I have a strong feeling that the original plans for her at the start of Legion were very different (we were still gonna get a war and Shadowlands, but with different narratives), but then Metzen left and the new writers wanted to do it a different way. In early Legion, there was a mellowing down of Sylvanas compared to how she acted in Cata. Even in WoD, there was a particular quest chain where she sent a Dark Ranger to you, and she turned out to be very useful and saved the life of an inkeeper. The way they presented Vol'jin's death cinematic, it doesn't play like there's something ominous going on. The emotions on Sylvanas's face play to what's going on in the moment, not some distant scheming. Even the BFA cinematic (which was still developed under Metzen) gives totally opposite vibes from where Sylvie started in BFA.

    It felt like a complete hijack by Danuser, Golden & Co., a hijacked I strongly empathize with, because they hijacked my character too. There's no way in hell my character would have stood by during the Burning of Teldrassil, yet the writers said that's exactly what he did. So if I have to step out of the story to explain my part in it, I can just as easily do it for Sylvanas, and place the burden on the writers to deal with that episode without "punishing" the character. If they want to force me to want her dead with this blatantly Doylist curveball, I'm just going to resent them more. If, however, this is some meta tactic to make me empathize with her desire to be in control of her own fate... I'll have to admit they're pretty clever.

  4. #204
    Quote Originally Posted by Netamin View Post
    Here's the problem. "Where she was coming from," when applied to her actual actions as a character is asinine. Actions such as genocide. Are people forgetting that she stood there feeling SMUG about the fact that she was slowly roasting babies alive?!?

    I laugh every time people start tossing around crap like "morally gray." No... Just no. There is no possible redemption for Sylvanus. There is no feasible, "Where she was coming from," that makes delighting in the slow and agonizing death of many thousands of people, among which were children, even remotely, "understandable."
    Oh I agree, she is not morally gray anymore, she's bad. But I think they're planning on showing "she knew she was going down a path for the greater good, even though the means to get there were not pure" w/e reasoning they decide to give. I'm not defending her at all, but I think they have some kind of plot they have yet to reveal that won't redeem her, but be like "here's why she did it"

  5. #205
    I am Murloc! Dellis0991's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Detroit,Michigan,USA
    Posts
    5,782
    Let that bitch die.

Posting Permissions

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