It is absolutely, hilariously mind-blowing that transphobes are honest to god now saying here in this thread that they “only care about the consistency,” as if we don’t remember them pulling exactly the same code-word dogwhistling when they said gamergate was “just about ethics in games journalism.” Or when deadnaming Wookiepedia editors “just care about consistency.”
1 Like
There is a distinction between cisgender and transgender, right? And Blizzard feels they lack in LGBT representation. Therefore, I cannot imagine Metzen was referring to anything other than cisgender.
The issue is that Flynn’s crush on Taelia is more than just flavor by storytelling convention.
Two new main characters that will be seen throughout the expansion are introduced to the player.
Both Characters have a shared history and are friends.
One has said feelings for the other and repeatedly talked about her in the past.
When confronted about these feelings he is dismissive and says “Not now”. (Done to pique the listener’s interest)
All of these writing techniques would indicate that this is more than flavor. It is a huge setup.
I think it is clear Blizzard never had that intention for two reasons. The first is that they feel that they lack representation as I mentioned earlier. And the second has to do with life spans.
Unless altered by magic, humans appear to have a life span like us in real life. The reproductive characteristics of Wow’s humans should parallel real-life humans since reproduction compensates for a species’ longevity. For example, flies and insects reproduce quickly because they don’t live long.
The most mechanical and basal purpose for heterosexuality is procreation. Although the exact number seems to fluctuate, studies indicate that heterosexuals consist of 90-98% of the population. It isn’t a stretch to assume that Wow’s humans probably follow that pattern.
Since Blizzard feels they had a dearth of LGBT representation and most Wow humans would be heterosexual, I’d have to imagine Shaw follows suit.
I agree with you that settling down is realistic. My point is that the metanarrative points to the impetus being a need to checklist than a desire to create a genuine story. Shaw would not be on the top of the list for a love arc given his personality, general game direction in regard to relationships, and his time of creation. It feels like Blizzard just needed a body to fill a role rather than create something new.
1 Like
There is no reason nor basis to imagine that. If someone tells you they are a man or a woman, you don’t materially know if they are cis or trans.
The narrative has not changed because trans women are women.
Overstatement.
Speculative.
2 Likes
Doesn’t that undermine what it means to be trans if we have no distinction? Doesn’t that erase everything they have been through if that doesn’t matter? Why fight so hard for an identity if it means nothing?
It isn’t though. It is a classic writing trope. We have reason to expect those characters would return for that story.
How Is it speculative if Blizzard themselves said they are trying to rectify things? They themselves have stated they lack those characters and now they are trying to bring them into the world.
1 Like
Non sequitur, nobody said “it doesn’t matter”, nobody said “it means nothing”.
Metzen saying Chromie is a woman and Danuser saying chromie is a trans woman do not contradict each other. Trans people do not owe you their truth, you are not owed transparency by anyone you know whether they are cis or trans (or intersex, or otherwise).
Speculative.
Speculation was in the statement that “Shaw follows suit”.
Lazy attempt at trolling, the care-trolling really oversells it, you can do better.
5 Likes
Every Trans person Ive ever known would above and beyond anything just like to be seen and treated as the gender they feel they are on the inside. The need to tack on if it is cisgender or transgender I have found to be normally something people uncomfortable with the concept feel a need to tack on as sort of a very subtle attack. It is in a way saying “but you are not a real man/woman”.
7 Likes
Your initial reply also departed from the spirit of the arguemnt. Because the purpose was what Metzen intended. It had nothing to do with what one does or doesn’t know when meeting someone. We were talking about what Metzen meant by his answer based on Blizzard’s previous stance regarding gender and sexuality.
Furthermore, the rhetorical question I asked was " There is a distinction between cisgender and transgender, right?”.
The response was “There is no reason nor basis to imagine that. If someone tells you they are a man or a woman, you don’t materially know if they are cis or trans”
You are saying there is no reason or no importance to ascribe a difference between the two. I.e. the distinction doesn’t matter much.
Also, I don’t understand the part about owing me truth. I never said anything of the sort.
We are talking about writing. If you mean a character should not have to be stated as outwardly trans, then wouldn’t that defeat the whole point of representation?
All females could potentially be trans. Therefore we don’t need to talk about the issue seems to be the logical conclusion from that train of thought.
That isn’t speculative. Those two characters were just introduced to us. They are members of the main characters of the expansion. Of course, they would return later.
I’m not sure what you mean by care-trolling? I was just stating what Blizzard has said. They feel they need more representation. That was my purpose in the message.
And, if Blizzard said that they lack LGBT Characters and most humans would be heterosexual (based on lore life expectancy), Shaw would most likely be straight.
I am not sure what the stance is on double-posting for replies, so I added this in. Sorry if it doesn’t notify you. I am not sure how all of this works.
But the trans community identifies as trans. They use the label, it is what the “T” stands for in LGBT.
How is it an attack if that is how the community identifies?
1 Like
Non sequitur, your claim is Metzen and Danuser cannot be reconciled, and Danuser retcon’d. It does not.
I am not.
In insisting that you must know whether Metzen thought of Chromie as trans, you are.
It isn’t.
It is.
Speculative, evo-psych is degenerate otherwise.
Blocking for lazy trolling, and evo-psych discourse.
2 Likes
L stands for Lesbian… it is the T you are looking for.
And people form a community largely for protection and a sense of belonging. Because even though folks above and beyond anything would like to be just treated as they feel inside, all to many people sadly refuse to do so.
The need to identify with characters is very important. The ability to see that character like you be treated like a normal member of society, or even as a hero, is important. It is self affirming. This is the same reason that television producers have come under so much fire over the last decade or two for tending to display WASP to some degree or another, aside for the token Black or Asian person.
2 Likes
I caught the change, that was a simple mistaken on my end.
I don’t understand what that has to do with my point. The use of trans isn’t something evil if the community rallies around it. If they felt the word trans was demeaning, then it wouldn’t be used.
Yet if Danuser retconned, then surely that means the two were irreconcilable.
How is “There is no reason nor basis to imagine that” in response to " There is a distinction between cisgender and transgender, right?” not lead to my conclusion?
But what is the issue there if we are trying to discover if there was a retcon. The only purpose to know what Metzen meant was to see if there is a retcon.
But how is it speculative? The most basic function is procreation. It doesn’t mean that there isn’t more to sex or that there is only one way to have it. I just meant that part of biology dictates a species longevity- like insects.
Also, why block me? I would like to have a discussion.
1 Like
No, I disagree, characters, especially ones who did not have lore can and should be free to be developed. They are not static things and you are simply projecting what you think this character should be.
Oh, I don’t know, maybe find me someone nice, settle down on a little farm somewhere…
What do you THINK I’m gonna do, mate?!
I’m gonna get my money from Cyrus, buy everyone a round at The Snug Harbor, and look for the next adventure.
Only way to live, my friend.
Looking at wowpedia this is the quote from Vigil Hill, notice how Flynn doesnt mention Talia at all and seem to want to settle down(yes I know the next line he says but from the looks of it the first part seems half meant) and seem to want to do it with someone, not neccesarily with the girl he has clearly figure out doesn’t want to go out with him.
And years ago the draenei were never intended to exist! The original Horde wiped it out and in the process also retconned how Sargeras was corrupted. Lets say all these characters being lgbt+ are retcon, as far as I am concern as long as it is done well who really cares. A retcon for a better/more inclusive story seems a small price to pay in the grand scheme of things.
If the world was fair at all Blizzard should have been able to write LGBT+ characters from the very start. It wasn’t and now if a degree of retcon is needed to make characters diverse characters so be it. I was just as ok with how characters ethnicities were changed after WoW finally added the new human skins to more or less seamlessly integrate them into Stormwind.
2 Likes
I didn’t mean a character should be static. I clarified in an earlier post that I don’t think Shaw was ever intended to be gay because Blizzard lack representation during that era. Character’s created back then never had the intention of being gay. And because of this, the reveal feels very contrived and ham-fisted.
I mean it sounds like he is being sarcastic to the character. And of course, he wouldn’t mention Taelia to her face, especially if he still likes her. It seems more like joke saying “Thanks’ captain obvious”.
I like the Draenei, but I think Blizzard should have stuck to their original intent. Retcon’s hurt the integrity of the storytelling. It isn’t a good precedent to rely on to fix problems in writing. Ideally, the Draenei should have remained what they initially were written as.
My point is that retcons shouldn’t be a way to writing inclusivity. I would prefer newer characters, settings, and stories. I really love how Elder Scrolls represents the different cultures of mankind. I was hoping more of the Kingdoms in Wow took that flair. And while SW does seem like a trading hub where outsiders would travel, I think Blizzard should focus on creating distinct human cultures.
Like how Gilneas was Victorian England and Uldum had a bit of a Middle Eastern Aesthetic. It would be cool to see how adaptable and versatile humanity is in new settlements throughout Azeroth.
The same goes for LGBT representation, let them be new characters with their own hopes and ambitions. Let them grow into the world.
2 Likes
The quest developer who wrote that dialogue has already confirmed that was not the intention. For someone who keeps on going on about respecting the intent of the writers, you keep going well out of your way to ignore this. Now, it’s fine if you don’t feel that intent was communicated clearly, but you can’t claim that your interpretation is what the writer intended when we have clear evidence to the contrary.
Let’s see, you mean the same Metzen who in 2011 said, “We have I don’t know how many quest designers. Probably seven? So there’s a lot of people that plug away on story for this thing and certainly, like, our CDev’s department’s always chasing fiction and hooking characters and stuff like that, and we totally appreciate every component of our audience and want the game to kind of sing to everybody, so… Off the top of my head, I don’t know if we’re currently developing gay or lesbian characters but it’s certainly a possibility.” Metzen himself didn’t claim to be certain that no one on the team was working on something. There’s also this more recent interview quote from John Hight in July 2020, as part of a discussion about Pelagos: “WoW is a game that doesn’t try to emphasize sexual relationships so in that regard, we don’t necessarily tell that part of the story other than to hint around it. But we certainly have characters [that have] - or we’ve always thought of characters as having - different gender identities in the game.” When asked if this meant there were other trans characters already in the game, Hight replied, “Knowing some of our designers and having conversations with them, I’m sure that was the intent. But we like to keep things subtle.”
I am not going to get into a debate about the merits of evolutionary psychology, but I will point out that it is indeed a massive stretch to apply it to Warcraft humans. Warcraft humans only resemble real life humans superficially, in that their anatomy appears to be more or less the same as ours (bipedal, same number of fingers and toes, organs appear to all be in the same place). Warcraft humans did not originate through evolution over eons. They are a very young species descended from Titanforged Vrykul, who were created as inorganic creatures and became organic as a result of the Curse of Flesh. To paraphrase another poster from somewhere else on the forums (apologies, I don’t remember who), Warcraft humans are the runt offspring of robots who were created by space deities and cursed by eldritch squid monsters. Evolution and natural selection are not major factors in Warcraft like they are in real life.
Again, not having declared that he’s gay doesn’t mean he’s straight or asexual. Where’s your evidence that Blizzard thought that Shaw, specifically, was straight or asexual prior to BfA?
Also, to get into pure speculation here, I’ll point out that Shaw in Vanilla is portrayed as having been personally close to Edwin VanCleef, and that Vanilla also contained information that could be reasonably interpreted as indicating that Edwin was interested in men. More recent information leans into that interpretation and gives more credit to that theory, but the initial hints date all the way back to Vanilla.
3 Likes
That would be an interesting short story. Of Shaw/Edwin being close/breaking up when he decided to go against Stormwind and Shaw being forced to gather the adventurers/intel that ultimately lead to his death.
2 Likes
The intent was for Shaw.
For Flynn, I said It’s a disconnect in writing between what they show and mean.
They are using writing techniques that don’t correspond to their intent. That was my argument for Flynn. The two were separate.
The Metzen portion was to his answer on Chromie. People stated in the comments that he said Chromie wasn’t trans.
My overall point about Blizzard was their general stance and answer to LGBT representation being “when the time is right”. They have given that answer as well during Blizzcon Q&As. The indication being nothing is really in the works.
Also, from an interview discussing representation in October 2020 Danuser said “This is a beginning for us. It’s not well, we did that, and now we’re all done… We always think of more quests, more stories, more art to make and more systems to build. We’ll absolutely be thinking and looking for more ways to allow further representation in the future”
If there were concrete plans from early era Wow to have LGBT characters front and center then they wouldn’t have said “it is a beginning”. Blizzard would have noted how they can finally bring these characters into the spotlight that were already created. Yes there were occasional references to LGBT characters going back, but nothing like Pelagos or the Night Warrior.
It would be less or a beginning and more of “it is about time”.
But this doesn’t require in-depth discussion about evolutionary psychology. I was really referring to basic biology. Evo-psych pulls from biology, but I’m not discussing evo-psych’s extrapolation. No matter where one stands, the basic purpose of sex is for procreation. I brought up the life span of flies for example.
We know sexual reproduction and population function in Wow already. Most recently being the Tortolan world quests with the baby turtles and crabs. The whole point of that WQ refers to the cycle of life and death. Many druid quests and themes revolve around nature balancing the population of animals.
If human beings reproduce sexually and have a similar lifespan, then they have to follow that simple concept.
The evidence was what is said earlier. Blizzard feeling that now is the time to start representation, that humans have a lifespan similar to ours, that relationships weren’t central to wow, and even that Shaw took inspiration from James Bond.
All of that together would indicate that Shaw was never intended to be gay because most characters weren’t gay.
Now I would be interested in the quest text you mention. I would like to see what you are talking about and take that into account.
1 Like
Communist Revolutionary Outlaw vs Capitalist Monarchist Spy Romance
2 Likes
I actually spit my drink. Another 
for you!
1 Like
In real life, yes. Titanforged don’t reproduce sexually as far as we’ve seen, instead increasing their numbers through forge facilities, but they are still capable of romance (ex: Thorim and Sif). If sexual reproduction is therefore the result of the Curse of Flesh, then it’s purpose would be to spread the influence of the Old Gods, but we’ve also seen that the Old Gods can corrupt individuals directly into being their servants, so sexual reproduction is not necessary to their plan. IRL evolutionary biology is not applicable to Warcraft humans.
One of the common criticisms directed at Blizzard about representation has been that too many of their existing instances of representation were mere hints, too subtle to be easily noticed or hidden away in side quests. For example, I can think of two examples of romantic interest between female characters in Legion, well before Danuser’s statement in October 2020, but they were extremely minor characters and were in quests that not everyone could play through. What has begun more recently is Blizzard making representation much more visible, not the mere existence of LGBT+ characters.
Now, regarding VanCleef, there’s Shaw’s report about him which establishes that they have personal history. Notable quote here: “Having personally known Edwin VanCleef my entire life, I can tell you that facing him as a foe is quite a daunting task. You see, he was my childhood friend, and I personally trained him in the ways of the shadows thinking that one day he might consider a career alongside me. If VanCleef is heading up the Defias Brotherhood, may the Light have mercy on our souls.” Then there’s the Unsent Letter, retrieved from Edwin’s body after killing him in the Deadmines. The letter is addressed to Baros Alexston, Stormwind’s chief architect and former member of the Stonemasons’ Guild. We don’t learn the contents of the letter, but we do get Alexston’s reaction after he reads it, which includes this phrase: “Edwin…I see the years haven’t changed you a bit, an idealist as ever, and a romantic.” This could of course be interpreted as just referring to VanCleef having a romanticized view of his own actions, but it could also refer to something between him and Alexston. We also have Alexston’s report on the Defias Brotherhood, which alludes to Alexston parting ways with VanCleef: “First, it was at this time that I was offered the position of city architect if I did not join with VanCleef. Because of certain idealogical differences, I chose to remain in Stormwind.” Alexston also mentions in another quest that Shaw owes him a favor for something, but “—well, let’s not get into that”, and we never find out why. The favor doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with VanCleef, but it further establishes a connection between Shaw and Alexston. In total, we can establish that all three men knew each other well at some point in the past, and VanCleef for some reason decided to write a letter to Alexston shortly before his own death that he never sent, all from Vanilla sources. There are additional possible hints at the history between Shaw and VanCleef that are more recent.
Relevant links for the above, since I can’t post them properly for some reason even though I’ve been able to post links before:
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Shaw%27s_Report
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/The_Unsent_Letter
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Report_on_the_Defias_Brotherhood
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Shadow_of_the_Past_(quest)
I’d read it. “Trading in secrets, trading in lies, operating on the fringes are all the Spymaster knows. His lost passions, lost loves are all gone, crushed under his own duty and loyalty to the crown. Nothing is left, nothing but the pain.” - Quest text from the Faceless Mask of the Pained, worn by Overlord Mathias Shaw in the Horrific Vision of Stormwind.
3 Likes
From Wiki:
As stated in the book’s introduction by one of its editors, Allison Irons, the authors were free to explore Azeroth through their own vision using direction from the Warcraft team. As such, "some of the tales you’ll encounter here may be rooted in canon, or they may be another traveler just telling a tall tale."
Other flesh and blood beings exist without The Old Gods’ intervention, including animals. All of them reproduce sexually.
It seems the curse of flesh made titanforged mortal. As mentioned before, the domain of life seems to incorporate the ideas that reproduction compensates lifespan. It is the balancing of nature theme.
Yes exactly. There were some minor references before, but never a major lore figure. I always remember the earliest one I know of is the Night Elves in Dragonblight. And these previous references were never outright.
I think the article said Danuser was responsible for the Legion quest, so it makes sense with him kicking it off.
Now that you mention it, I do remember doing this quest. Thank you for sharing.
It is interesting, I can see how romantic could be taken that way. Given the whole ideology surrounding the Defias debacle, I do think Alexston means romantic as another synonym for Edwin’s idealism.
Shaw just seems like a friend based on what is written. However, it sounds like Alexston would be the most likely candidate for a prior relationship.
1 Like