Blizzard screws the Loyalists over in Shadowlands

[Raisei]

Do people really have this big of a problem with understanding how enacting a role in an rpg works?
Or in any game for that matter.

You take the role of someone who is loyal to the end?
Is ironic how you can comment on someone's intellect while not understanding this fundamental reasoning for choices in games.

"Loyal to the end" simply does not work in WoW. In a tabletop RPG the GM will give you fitting consequences if you play fully evil. Your character is not gonna be heralded as "Champion" for long. You are in a world with rules. If your character breaks them and pisses the wrong people off you will loose your head for it.

I can imagine the millions of threads exploding when Blizzard actually "kills" the Loyalists in SLs, because they were hellbent on being "loyal to the end".

It's really that simple: The villain Sylvanas will not win. Because if she wins the universe ends. So everyone that associates with her will loose too. If the Loyalists are aware of this and want their character to go out in a blaze of glory that is fine with me.

BUT we all know they are not. They will go and be evil because it is keeeewwwll, and then they will cry our ears off when the game actually imposes consequences on them. No matter how many warnings Blizzard put up, the shit storm will be epic.

Blizzard, being fully aware of this, is avoiding it. Obviously.

[Skayth]

You keep talking as if Alliance is the enemy, but the only reason this retarded war started in the first place was because Sylvanas was an insecure bitch in before the storm. Whoever sided with saurfang had a brain to realise that this war is not the Horde's, but Sylvanas' stupid war.

There was literally no reason to start a war with the Alliance since... I don't know? After banding together a billion times to save azeroth?

Oh, I agree there is no reason to start a war with the Alliance. But, if the warchief says we are going to war, then we are going to war. After what the Alliance did in Stormheim, its justified. Yall had a rabid dog get off its leash and bite the Ally, causing this. Technically, all this comes down to Genn screwing over Sylvannas' plans, and war was the result. So if you want a petty reason as to why BFA happened, its that. So why wouldnt I be Loyal, when the ALLIANCE struck first?

[Samuraijake]

That's my idea too. Last time it was 7 years when i celebrated with this song, and when sylvanas dies, it's happy time again!

yo agreed... i CANNOT WAIT... for sylvannas to finally get her ass out o this game... i cannot wait... can you imagine the day that finally comes? do we need a full cinematic for it?

- - - Updated - - -

God, it is so incredibly difficult to keep myself from drawing an IRL political parallel here.

Something about blindly supporting an egomaniacal leader who doesn't, and never had, truly cared for you or your needs.
Someone who just used you to further their own goals, and has all the traits of a true sociopath.


*bites knuckle*

i dont mean to sound "woke" but husbands, wives and people in general are doing this everyday... not just the president... edit: i didnt mean to use the "P" word but its out there now.

[shise]

Do you understand that you can not please everyone? you pick one side out of a few, obviously, you always knew that things could go south, there was a high chance of it.
So, as you say, stand with it and face it,, simple.

If it didn´t happen this way, someone else would feel like you do instead. Or someone else, or someone else... get the point?

[Kumorii]

People have a distorted view on what kind of RPG wow is.
It is not a pen and paper where you can do whatever you want.

In wow we do not play an evil character. At some point it would not be in character of our character to support stuff like Sylvannas anymore.

Same like in other RPGs. Mass Effect, Dragon Age, JRPGs (they are quite linear anyway most fo the time).

The tag RPG doesn't make the game a sandbox suddenly with infinite choices. You will always be on a premade path in PC Games. And MMORPGs make that even harder as the outcome has to be the same across the board unless you make the story singelplayer and inconsequetial for the world itself.

Sure, but it's not what's being touched upon. Paths leading to same results is expected since its an MMO. It's the notion and comments like "why would you make x choice" and others in similar fashion. All those comments highlights the poster don't know what enacting a role is.

"Loyal to the end" simply does not work in WoW. In a tabletop RPG the GM will give you fitting consequences if you play fully evil. Your character is not gonna be heralded as "Champion" for long. You are in a world with rules. If your character breaks them and pisses the wrong people off you will loose your head for it.

I can imagine the millions of threads exploding when Blizzard actually "kills" the Loyalists in SLs, because they were hellbent on being "loyal to the end".

It's really that simple: The villain Sylvanas will not win. Because if she wins the universe ends. So everyone that associates with her will loose too. If the Loyalists are aware of this and want their character to go out in a blaze of glory that is fine with me.

BUT we all know they are not. They will go and be evil because it is keeeewwwll, and then they will cry our ears off when the game actually imposes consequences on them. No matter how many warnings Blizzard put up, the shit storm will be epic.

Blizzard, being fully aware of this, is avoiding it. Obviously.

Which has nothing to do with my comment on how people throw out comments such as "how can you make that choice?" and similar.
Making ANY choice no matter HOW vile they are in a game is all about enacting a role in which the writers and developers enable you to do.

My comment didn't touch upon that loyalists would or wouldn't be evil for as long as they wanted because that's irrelevant to the point as of WHY people made the choice. Which has nothing to do with intelligence as the poster suggested and have more to do with ENACTING a role in a RPG to see where it leads.

"How can you side with evil?"
"because that's the role I wanted to take in the story in which they enabled us to do"

This fundamental basis seems to be lost on the people who asks any of those questions.

[Adoxe]

Duh, that's what happens when you're siding with the villain

[Bailine57]

I just don't get it.
Staying a Sylvanas loyalist was never an option they entertained completely. It was at best a band aid to quell the people who wanted to stay loyal to the Warchief (I'm not just gonna call them all Sylvanas fan boys, but I'm sure those are there too).

Suppose they allowed the loyalists to stay loyal, what happens then? Their characters get executed or jailed for remaining loyal to her? They follow her into the Maw and some third faction nonsense ensues? Neither of those would make sense or work from a gameplay perspective, so I don't think those are really options.

Then the question becomes "How do we make the loyalists decide to not follow Sylvanas anymore?" The only answer I can come up with is having some loyalist specific scenario where Sylvanas personally tries to murder the player, and even then, I'm sure a significant number of people would be upset when they weren't given the "agency" to allow their queen to kill them. That's the only idea I could come up with, but maybe someone more creative than me can do better.

Blizzard's mistake was doing this in the first place, especially if they knew where the story was going. That said, even if there was no option and you just helped Saurfang the whole time, people would whine and complain that they couldn't bow down to Sylvanas.

[Raisei]

Oh, I agree there is no reason to start a war with the Alliance. But, if the warchief says we are going to war, then we are going to war.

This sheep instinct of following whoever is wearing the Warchief hat this week without question is exactly why that position had to go. The Horde excells at turning their brain off whenever some shouts "For the Horde", even if that someone is complete and utterly unworthy of that position as everyone knows.

After what the Alliance did in Stormheim, its justified. Yall had a rabid dog get off its leash and bite the Ally, causing this. Technically, all this comes down to Genn screwing over Sylvannas' plans, and war was the result. So if you want a petty reason as to why BFA happened, its that. So why wouldnt I be Loyal, when the ALLIANCE struck first?

So true. Sylvanas, who has never done anything wrong in her life ever, and certainly not blighted a kingdom called Gilneas, just wanted to become immortal by enslaving one of our allies and that evil monster Genn, who has no history with Sylvanas whatsoever, just attacked her for no reason at all. /s

Stormheim was AN EXCUSE not JUSTIFICATION. Sylvanas started a war because she needed people to die, without Stormheim she'd have taken Dalaran or Taurajo as an excuse. How did this not get through by now? She started the war because she wanted to start a war, stop believing her propaganda like a sheep.

[BrintoSFJ]

This is what light a fire in my belly.
When the ending of BFA faction war happened I was pissed off at the mediocre writing, that Sylvannas' cry "You are all nothing." suddenly turns the whole Horde on her. But then I was like, "well, what's happened, happened I made my choices and when the time comes I'll stand where I stood" since I played the forsaken loyalist.
And then this happens...


Blizzard can go faf itself with its ineptitude and creative bankruptcy.
Esecially when they brag about "it's an RPG".

Serves you right! I really wish that blizzard would let us execute the Sylvanas loyalists in game which will permanently delete those characters from the server.

Also, Accolon is a moronic oaf. Gets offended every time some questions his theories or provides a counter to his theories. And then goes on rant that those people are attacking him or trying to put word in his mouth. Considering he is fat and white, I am not very surprised at his behavior.

[LanToaster]

Im pretty sure that in warfronts and invasions there were more troops than just sylvanas and they didn't seem to have any moral dillemas.

Soldiers will fight even if they are not invested in the War, but dont bother Answering. Read whatever you want in the story. If you think that "All the Horde is totally invested in the war", when almost all other Leaders say: "Hey we should stop"

[Raisei]

Which has nothing to do with my comment on how people throw out comments such as "how can you make that choice?" and similar.
Making ANY choice no matter HOW vile they are in a game is all about enacting a role in which the writers and developers enable you to do.

My comment didn't touch upon that loyalists would or wouldn't be evil for as long as they wanted because that's irrelevant to the point as of WHY people made the choice. Which has nothing to do with intelligence as the poster suggested and have more to do with ENACTING a role in a RPG to see where it leads.

"How can you side with evil?"
"because that's the role I wanted to take in the story"

This fundamental basis seems to be lost on the people who asks any of those questions.

As you see in my previous statement, it is not purely the notion that people want to be evil that confounds me. It's that they choose to side with someone that wants to kill them and has already tried. Ergo they make their characters commit suicide.

And because they will not accept this as the consequence of their own choices they will afterwards complain loudly about this outcome.

Also I accuse the people that want to play an evil character in WoW of wanting to play evil but without consequence and only then. If they had to suffer the consequences of other evil characters they wouldn't demand this and in fact will demand to be safed by game mechanics when they clearly made the wrong choice themselves.

I do not accept this "evil without consequence" for a simple reason: It makes my character and everyone else look stupid for allowing them to keep breathing. We are either too stupid to notice they are dangerously evil or too stupid to do anything about it.

Neither is acceptable for me. I simply refuse to have my character dumbed down because someone wants to play an evil genius that is protected by game mechanics.

[Arrashi]

Soldiers will fight even if they are not invested in the War, but dont bother Answering. Read whatever you want in the story. If you think that "All the Horde is totally invested in the war", when almost all other Leaders say: "Hey we should stop"

And yet they didn't. Even sadfang was making excuses like "good war" which shows pretty well what horde mindset is.

[Chonar]

Looking at this video I love how this fella is mocking the "expected reaction" to Saurfang's death (gasp!), which, indeed, loyalists wouldnt care much about.
And completely ignore the "THE HORDE IS NOTHING.... YOU ARE ALL NOTHING!" screech that the in-cinematic loyalist (bannerboy) reacts to.

The "you are all NOTHING" was aimed at everyone, people. Loyalists and "Traitors" alike. THAT was the point where Blizzard took agency back.

And as a reward for following the loyalist route, you had the little one-on-one in Ghostlands at Windrunner Spire. You went there, wondering if Sylvanas truly had abandoned you, and she told you she basically didn't give a damn.

[bowlink]

People who who sided with sylvanas should had their faction reputations reset to unfriendly so they can't use their utilities in there main cities (bank, ah flight points) untill they farm it back. Or they can leave it and can only use steamweedle utilities.

Its a inconvinience. But thats all it is. And no i don't think the same way about covanants.

Also with faction reputations i mean the ones you have tabards for.

[Accendor]

This video confirms a lot of suspicions I had about Sylvanas' fans.


It's incredible that people would want to side with a character that not only not cares about them but is actively working towards their damnation and has abandoned everyone who was loyal to her. Crying about Blizzard not providing an option to further side with the mustache twirling villain now that every shade of grey has been washed out is just ridiculous levels of cope.

Since BfA started, there never was any shade of grey. Every horde action was unquestionable evil. That's one of the big issues here, for whatever reason the horde had to be evil.

[Raisei]

Then the question becomes "How do we make the loyalists decide to not follow Sylvanas anymore?" The only answer I can come up with is having some loyalist specific scenario where Sylvanas personally tries to murder the player, and even then, I'm sure a significant number of people would be upset when they weren't given the "agency" to allow their queen to kill them.

You are correct. This is exactly what is happening. Blizzard desperately tried to show the Loyalists that it is a really bad idea to follow her, they have her tell them to their faces how she does not care, how she released N'zoth so there would be a massacre and added a scene where Sylvanas clearly demanded Azshara to kill the Horde and Alliance people in Nazjatar alike, including her Loyalists. But it just does not get through. The reality the Loyalists created for themselves is impervious to these truths.

Blizzard's mistake was doing this in the first place, especially if they knew where the story was going. That said, even if there was no option and you just helped Saurfang the whole time, people would whine and complain that they couldn't bow down to Sylvanas.

Agreed. It was a mistake. It gave some people the illusion that they could actually play the evil faction and now they refuse to go back. Which you see with the daily "Horde is dead now", "I hate Baine and Thrall" - threads.

I have no idea how this will be concluded. Maybe it will blow over or we are lucky and these people unsub and leave, but I doubt it will be this simple.

[Nerovar]

Since BfA started, there never was any shade of grey. Every horde action was unquestionable evil. That's one of the big issues here, for whatever reason the horde had to be evil.

I mean, at the start there was at least a hint of "Sylvanas has a great plan that will all justify it in the end".

[Wangming]

I mean, at the start there was at least a hint of "Sylvanas has a great plan that will all justify it in the end".

Well anyone who this late in the game's narrative trusts blizzard to pull off big mistery plans properly, quite honestly deserves to be disappointed. The hints that something ain't right have been there since Wrath.

[Kumorii]

As you see in my previous statement, it is not purely the notion that people want to be evil that confounds me. It's that they choose to side with someone that wants to kill them and has already tried. Ergo they make their characters commit suicide.

And because they will not accept this as the consequence of their own choices they will afterwards complain loudly about this outcome.

Also I accuse the people that want to play an evil character in WoW of wanting to play evil but without consequence and only then. If they had to suffer the consequences of other evil characters they wouldn't demand this and in fact will demand to be safed by game mechanics when they clearly made the wrong choice themselves.

I do not accept this "evil without consequence" for a simple reason: It makes my character and everyone else look stupid for allowing them to keep breathing. We are either too stupid to notice they are dangerously evil or too stupid to do anything about it.

Neither is acceptable for me. I simply refuse to have my character dumbed down because someone wants to play an evil genius that is protected by game mechanics.

Which is something I didn't brought up. Consequences should be had even if it's just a sentence within the story. Anyone claiming choices shouldn't have consequences are indeed wrong. But also not something I touched upon with my reply...

I couldn't put it more simply than in my latest reply and if you follow my track backwards you can see that's how simple the interaction was to start with.
The rest of your post is a hypothetical which I agree with, but also doesn't apply to what I said. It's another topic completely that people can't handle certain consequences based on their choices.

To me it also sounds like you sort of agree with how poorly this was handed, since there are no consequences at all for a loyalist. There isn't even one sentence saying "you did bad now you have to atone by helping us" it's just plain forgotten afaik, which is just dumb.

Feels like you want to steer this into another discussion, which is fine but please confirm if so. That way I don't have to try and understand what it has to do with my reply, because I don't see it atm.

[bowlink]

Sylvanas stans don't realise they're in an abusive relationship