And there has been racism and prejudice among people probably ever since we have known the word possession and have possessions and cultures have arisen from that.
I don’t think this thing is accurate. Racism is as old as mankind itself and probably came from distrust, hatred and dislike of the whole advance as a perceived exaggeration of their own civilization against these “savage people”. (not so far developed people)
This is handwaving posturing with no historical basis; the Roman Empire for example extended citizenship to the entire empire at one point of its history, regardless of ethne/genus heritage, when before that point Roman citizenship was tied to ethne/genus.
This is meaningless drivel Zahir and you need to learn more history if you seriously believe such vapid, lazy claims.
Moreover, my statement stands. At every point in history, legal hierarchy of peoples comes first (whether as basic as the conquering and the conquered), which later extends to either what we would call “racism” (remember, race as a stand-alone construct didn’t exist until the 16th century, and as a word until the 15th) or some attempt at inclusion (the Roman Empire Citizenship Reform I mentioned).
He is describing racism in its most accurate, historical trajectory.
Maybe the game legit just doesn’t want you to think you’re being horrible when you do stuff like that? Because they’ve already shown a precedent of creating an outrage for things the narrative does treat as a horrible act, I think the opposite also applies when the story’s silent about it for other things.
No I’m not lol
I’ll answer this one, because I’ve given it some thought in the past. I’d create a new character for the purpose—not a racial leader, but a high-ranking military officer. Maybe a young, charismatic one who rockets into prominence after winning some skirmish against the latest Big Bad and becomes known as a grand hero to average Alliance citizens. This new character could be a foil to Anduin and put him in a position where he’d occasionally have to choose between doing what’s right and being popular.
I haven’t thought about this one, but off the top of my head, I think it would be better if the new character does something to a mixed Horde coalition or settlement. If it goes against any single race, people will get caught up in debating whether they deserved it.
I think this will happen regardless. I mean, we have people in this very thread that say Horde civilians unconnected to the fourth war are also war criminals. They say things like “Sylvanas had the support of the people” so in their head the common citizenry is no different than those who operated the ICBMs catapults on Darkshore.
I think at this point it’s far too late to shift anything. Just deal with it the horde are the evil monster race bad guys. At best you can hope for the edgy anti hero group but that’s really pushing it. Almost every restart of the faction wars have been from the horde. The major race that runs it having pretty much pissed off most sentient life on the planet.
There doesn’t have to be 2 good guy factions. Nobody wants retcons.
Sadly, you’re probably right. But we can try to minimize it, at least.
What horde civilians both sides pretty much had an all in from casualties. It even talks about it in game. That’s WoWs WW2 with a heavy draft and the horde were the Germans.
Yeah, nothing sketchy as hell about that with which RW cultures Blizz decided to humanize their Evil Monster Races with … when they wanted to try something more nuanced. Especially when combined with how flawless and mary sue the clearly Eurofantasy inspired Alliance races have been built to. The Alliance may be incapable of discrimination and racism (again, Mary Sue faction, can’t have flaws like that) … but that sure as hell doesn’t stop the writing from accidentally being laced throughout the subtext of this game I suppose. If they were going to do Good Race/Bad Race tropes, they REALLY would have been better off not subverting them in WC3 in the first place. Hell, they splatted 5 ex-slave races into the Horde race roster too to boot lol!
And as a note, on a Meta-Level, part of the reason that the Horde HAS to be aggressors in these stupid Faction Conflict bouts is partially because the Alliance can’t be. Blizz has been absurdly non-committal with Alliance aggression since Cata. Where the Alliance “starts crap” and its retroactively invalidated or whitewashed, so the Horde still pseudo-reacting to those now invalidated acts … can be the ones to “start it”. It happened in WotLK/Cata and here in BfA. Blizz is simultaneously WAY too comfortable using the Horde as a plot-device (no wonder they like “writing” it), and really, REALLY uncomfortable committing to the Alliance being antagonistic or aggressive. After all, antagonism or aggression aren’t virtues, the Alliance can’t have those.
I’m not sure why you would put this much effort in responding to an obvious, low-effort troll.
LOL, fair enough. I’m just board this morning I suppose. Got some free time.
I’m not convinced that the Siege of Lordaeron would have ended the same way if it had been the start of the war.
Not. Yes. I do not know.
Probably not. Did the Horde claim to be a villain? Then you have to admit your weakness. Not that I have never offered this kind of deal. But I know no one will agree. The consequences of consent will be unpleasant - consolidating the role of “punching bag” for the night elves. Foolishness, vulnerability, a terrible lag in all military areas (including those in which the night elves were considered dominant). Everything that Droité said.
Feeling unpleasant.
Нет. Да. Не знаю.
Наверное, все таки нет. Орда признала себя злодеем? Тогда придется признать свою слабость. Не то что бы я никогда не предлагал подобного рода сделки. Но я знаю, что никто не согласится. Последствия согласия будут неприятны - закрепление роли “боксерская груша” за ночными эльфами. Глупость, уязвимость, жуткое отставание во всех военных областях (включая те, в которых ночные эльфы считались доминирующими). Все то, что говорила Droité.
Неприятное чувство.
Well, provide us some feedback.
With my suggestions (not the hypothetical) in post #4 is there anything I missed?
Kinda an over simplification of WoW to just say its a race war. They’re two factions at this point. Its hard to even say the old warcraft games were race war based, as one was the clear invader from another world.
Its hardly discrimination and racism when most of your faction can point to the other and go. Thats them officers. Thats the guys who burned my farm. Who used living people as plant test subjects. Thats the people who tried to genocide a whole race with fire. Who used a massive bomb on a city in the marsh. Go get them.
The issue here is the Alliance could be, but they never have to. They don’t waste all their resources like orcs do to a point where durotar has nothing left of economic value. The horde has a -need- to take things over, because they over exploit the land. The orc Nelf war practically has never ended. (Well until now cuz no more NE land up there.) It always ends with the Alliance coming in and stomping the horde into the ground saying. Don’t do it again. Then we wait 3 years for them to do it again. Repeat almost every xpack, and shocker. You’ve a faction that really has 0 redeeming qualities to it.
How many times are we going to hear orcs go . But muh honor. and we’re tricked! At this point either orcs have the minds of children, or they always knew what was happening and orcs gunna orc.
I’m just going to point out here - racism is in no way a one-way street in this conversation. Garrosh promoted racial supremacy, and used that as a justification to war with, and later on as a justification for exterminating non-Horde races. Sylvanas then later stoked Saurfang’s own racial paranoia in parallels eerily similar to a certain “Thousand Year Reich’s” assertions that certain racial groups, alleged to have power, were going to start a world war against their “superior” people in order to bring about their own hegemony, and that the only way to counter this was, eventually, with a “final solution”.
Saurfang didn’t get to the “final solution” part, but he nevertheless planned an attack constituted to end a people as a people out of racial paranoia - an attack that by the UN definition would qualify as genocide.
Atrocities are not a bug of the kind of culture that the Horde promotes, they are a feature. The Horde’s own ideology therefore becomes an important element of context when examining opposition to them. Is it possible for that to backslide into racism that ought to be considered immoral? Yes, and a purely moral actor would realize that methods other than genocide or racial internment (which is still in the UN definition) exist. (For instance, the dissolution and disarmament of the political entity)
Meh. It may as well be a one-way street as far as the game is concerned; it’s just all horde-side.
Careful with this, cause the Horde is STILL a playable faction. And that means it can´t disapear nor get punishing treatment like becoming an Alliance asset.
Tl;dr: If we have to deal with the Horde as the evil monster race bad guys, you will have to deal with being the goodie two shoes pretty race good guys, who usually don´t commit nor even think about questionable acts ever and always forgive and forget -cause that´s how extreme lawful good are portrayed. So no vengeance nor “justice” nor nothing.
And frankly by looking at most of the answers of the Alliance fans in this thread, this “let´s keep the status quop and move on” is the last thing they want, cause as tired as we Hordies are about being villain batted for literary convenience, they are tired of being the forgiving angels that will never properly reach further than barebones defense (martyr complex).
No. 
