What was the point of siding with Sylvanas in BFA?

[Nubpwn]

Yes, it was an illusion of choice.

That does not mean it was pointless. First off I know plenty of hordies that complained they had to sit by and watch while Garrosh went on his crusade with no choice in the matter. Likely this was mere fluff content to appease those players, give the illusion you can reject her while still remaining loyal to the Horde.

It can also be seen as the inevitable result of siding with the Horde in general. The Alliance has always been the "flawed hero" faction, absolutely the "good guys" in this story with nuanced "evil" elements to keep it interesting. The Horde has always been the opposite, the "flawed villain" faction. Absoluetly the Horde are the "bad guys" in this story with nuanced "good" elements to keep it interesting. This is seen in Thralls failure as warchief, no redemption happened, the only time the Horde was relativly "peaceful" was when Thrall forced them to be. BFA has taken it a step further in giving hordies the illusion of choice, see you're not really a bad guy, except at the end of the day no matter your "choice", you are still supporting and siding with the bad guys.

[huth]

Yes, it was an illusion of choice.

That does not mean it was pointless. First off I know plenty of hordies that complained they had to sit by and watch while Garrosh went on his crusade with no choice in the matter. Likely this was mere fluff content to appease those players, give the illusion you can reject her while still remaining loyal to the Horde.

Accept, you mean. The original plan only had the "traitor" storyline, the loyalist one was the added one.

[Ophenia]

They could have expanded with implementing two paths/questlines in Shadowlands, but it was either too complex to implement (then what was the fcking point of implementing it in BfA in the first place), or maybe they got the numbers and only 0.5% of players were siding with Sylvanas so they didn't feel like it made sense to waste dev time on that.

[Baneto]

They should've gone the WW1 and 2 route and executed the banshee loyalists. Everyone can "renounce" Sylvanas and still be loyal to her. Why take the risk?

I think your passion for a video-game faction has gone a little overboard when you start using terms like that, dont you think?

[Moonrage]

I think your passion for a video-game faction has gone a little overboard when you start using terms like that, dont you think?

Which term? Execution? I know this game isn't realistic in the slightest, but that is what would've happened to the loyalists after Sylvanas was dethroned. Historically speaking, people don't take kindly to traitors.

I know that the player character can't be killed, but all the NPCs that were loyal to Sylvanas? Why not just execute them? We've seen way more disturbing things in WoW.

[Baneto]

Which term? Execution? I know this game isn't realistic in the slightest, but that is what would've happened to the loyalists after Sylvanas was dethroned. Historically speaking, people don't take kindly to traitors.

I know that the player character can't be killed, but all the NPCs that were loyal to Sylvanas? Why not just execute them? We've seen way more disturbing things in WoW.

Sounds too alliance-like to me, we're not that uncivilized in the Horde.

[Soon-TM]

Historically speaking, people don't take kindly to traitors.

Considering that several Nazi figureheads sought refuge in the West after WWII and found it, you might want to rethink that statement.

[Moonrage]

Considering that several Nazi figureheads sought refuge in the West after WWII and found it, you might want to rethink that statement.

The majority of the nazis that managed to escape, fled to South America. Most people do not considere these to be Western countries (unless you literally meant the "western" part of the world).

Aside from that, traitors were still heavily looked down upon after WW2. Men that collaborated with the nazis were generally executed or imprisoned. Women who had relationships with German soldiers were pulically humiliated à la Game of Thrones.

[Soon-TM]

The majority of the nazis that managed to escape, fled to South America. Most people do not considere these to be Western countries (unless you literally meant the "western" part of the world).

South America has always been under the US aegis. The political West isn't limited to US/EU.

[FuxieDK]

Considering that several Nazi figureheads sought refuge in the West after WWII and found it, you might want to rethink that statement.

Have you ever heard of a small thing called the Nürnberg Process?

You might want to rethink that statement.

[Metrox]

I never sided with anyone of any faction. I ignored the storyline from Day 1. I played the content they offered without thought to any RP or Lore. It was a nasty expansion to me and I treated the backstory as unimportant and unengaging. Only WoD and BFA were played this way.

[Soon-TM]

Have you ever heard of a small thing called the Nürnberg Process?

You might want to rethink that statement.

The Nürnberg process only sent to the gallows a handful of Nazi kingpins. Several others who found shelter in South America, the US and even West Germany. But history isn't your strong suit, it seems... Just google "Odessa" (not the Russian city nor the American one of the same name) and see for yourself.

[FuxieDK]

The Nürnberg process only sent to the gallows a handful of Nazi kingpins. Several others who found shelter in South America, the US and even West Germany. But history isn't your strong suit, it seems... Just google "Odessa" (not the Russian city nor the American one of the same name) and see for yourself.

Your statement was that the top escaped prosecution. Nürnberg Process dealt with the 24 (that was captured) that was considered the very top.

[Soon-TM]

Your statement was that the top escaped prosecution .

Incorrect.

[FuxieDK]

Incorrect.

Figureheads.. Sought refuge... Found it..

Oh yes, you claimed the top escaped prosecution...

[Rioriel]

So... Sylvanas eh?

[Soon-TM]

Figureheads.. Sought refuge... Found it..

Oh yes, you claimed the top escaped prosecution...

You can be a figurehead without necessarily being the #1 big bad, for instance Adolf Eichmann in this case. But I guess that might be too much for you, my bad.

[Thage]

What was the point of introducing branching in BFA war campaign questline if the choices don't have any impact and all we got in the end is Garrosh 2.0?
Did I miss something here? Was something scrapped out of the game or just not completed at all?
I don't see any suitable conslusion for those who chose to side with Sylvanas, and now with Nathanos' death there surely be none coming.

Because people got mad that the story they were constantly told wasn't just a retread of 5.1-5.4 turned out to be a retread of 5.1-5.4, right down to Lor'themar and Jaina striking up a wary ceasefire after remembering Taran Zhu reading them the riot act. Some of them just wanted to have their cake and eat it, openly supporting an omnicidal maniac while still playing generally-heroic characters, because she wasn't omniciding her own team yet. So there was a lot of complaining on the forums and Blizzard hastily patched in the loyalist route, which culminated in the omnicidal maniac outing herself to everyone but, for some reason, the loyalist player continues helping her on her agenda of omnicide, because I guess the loyalist character is almost as much of a bootlicker as Nathanos.

The conclusion is that the character got played and disposed of the second they ceased to be useful, just like Nathanos. Anyone who honestly thought there would be any other conclusion with Sylvanas hasn't paid attention to anything she's done from the second she made her first appearance (after getting her body back) in The Frozen Throne.

[Raisei]

If the conclusion is the same disregarding choices, what was the point of introducing them in the first place? To create an illusion of choice?

The choice was put in because proponents of the "Evil Horde 4Life" camp demanded to be able to side with the genocidal monster after being denied that opprtunity with Garrosh.
Blizzard hadn't planned for it when they designed the plot, hence why it was never going to go anywhere. Sylvanas was always going to be the enemy of the next expansion in the end. The player however cannot be the enemy of an expansion, hence it was always clear that she would drop you and (again) try to kill you.
And it was also clear that her hardcore fans would not accept this reality and demand to stick to her in Shadowlands no matter how many times she told them to their faces how little she cared.

Again I need to resist the temptation to make irl political comparisons... just open your eyes Loyalists! She does not need you, does not want you and will kill you without a second thought. Stop supporting someone that is obviously unfit to lead anyone.

Way to miss the point. The thing is, why open the possibility of allying with her if the ending was going to be the same as the rebel choice? Oh, and spare me your morality lessons, I don't need the one Alleria fan in these boards to tell me that her sister is EvVVuUUulL.

@Vardoc is hardly the only Alleria fan in the forum, just the most obvious one. And even if you don't need to be reminded how depraved Sylvanas is, many many people are still in hard denial of this reality.

[Varodoc]

Because people got mad that the story they were constantly told wasn't just a retread of 5.1-5.4 turned out to be a retread of 5.1-5.4, right down to Lor'themar and Jaina striking up a wary ceasefire after remembering Taran Zhu reading them the riot act. Some of them just wanted to have their cake and eat it, openly supporting an omnicidal maniac while still playing generally-heroic characters, because she wasn't omniciding her own team yet. So there was a lot of complaining on the forums and Blizzard hastily patched in the loyalist route, which culminated in the omnicidal maniac outing herself to everyone but, for some reason, the loyalist player continues helping her on her agenda of omnicide, because I guess the loyalist character is almost as much of a bootlicker as Nathanos.

The conclusion is that the character got played and disposed of the second they ceased to be useful, just like Nathanos. Anyone who honestly thought there would be any other conclusion with Sylvanas hasn't paid attention to anything she's done from the second she made her first appearance (after getting her body back) in The Frozen Throne.

Indeed, Varimathras even remarked in WC3 that Sylvanas was becoming more and more like the Nathrezim. The Nathrezim being conniving devils who see people as mere pawns to be used and discarded once they are no longer useful.

The writing was so much on the wall that it was literally digging inside said wall.

@Vardoc is hardly the only Alleria fan in the forum, just the most obvious one. And even if you don't need to be reminded how depraved Sylvanas is, many many people are still in hard denial of this reality.

The funny thing is that I'm not a Sylvanas fan and I still know her personality better than these Sylvanas fanboys. From WC3:

Varimathras: Come now, you have no intention of giving them their lands back.
Sylvanas Windrunner: Of course not. The humans are simply a means to an end.
Varimathras: You sound more like one of us with every passing day, my lady.
Sylvanas Windrunner: Watch it, dreadlord.

Sylvanas fanboys: "WHAT! HOW COULD SHE BETRAY US! I DON'T BELIEVE IT! UNFATHOMABLE! I TRUSTED HER!"