A little humor slapstick in my ideal “Draenor is free” Cinema, he’d be screaming that, only to be beaten up the next moment in the best anime style.
Best so really nice cartoony, would have fit at least to the addon…
1 Like
From Xe’ra, I got the impression her main power was reflected (refracted? Because Light?) through her followers—they were the Army of the Light.
Like, each warrior, especially Turalyon, possibly held a bit of her power, for example.
So, she was “powerful” in the sense that Sauron was powerful in Lord of the Rings despite being a giant, floating eyeball; more as a general directing troops through their will than actually being on the battlefield.
Which, of course, means Illidan would have become one of the most powerful extensions of Xe’ra’s will had she succeeded, but of course her critical error was that she was physically vulnerable to an attack like his.
The question that dominates the whole thing and, by the way, made the Lich King so great is: Should mortals be able to do such damage ALONE, even powerful mortals.
The LK was an opponent for mortals, he was somehow one of “us” and not a super being like Prime Naaru, old gods, Titans, eternal ones etc.
in my eyes, nop, thats partly bad story telling and serve only the “We can everything” narrative.
no mortal could have won against sauron in an 1on1…in military and mental power, everyone was weaker then sauron…only by destroying the ring, he was defeated. also an MMO should find creative solutions instead of sacrificing everything that makes a world great to the player character and destroying the depth of the story with it.
Hurdles should remain hurdles, some even forever. (like no mortal should be able to defeat titanlvl beings, even hundreds of powerfull mortals should not be able to do so. )
Except he wasn’t; Arthas might have been, back when he was a Death Knight. But we’re clearly meant to believe the Lich King at the time of Wrath—after Arthas had merged with Ner’zhul—was essentially god tier.
This is a being whose entire raid encounter is literally revealed to be him toying with the heroes who are there to kill him—he effortlessly slaughters them in a second before proceeding to begin raising them as death knights. It took a very literal deux ex machina from Tirion and the Light to even shatter Frosmourne, let alone fatally injure the Lich King.
Surely everyone on this forum knows that came from literally rewriting the plotline for the expansion halfway through, though. They originally announced Grom would be the final boss of the expansion and then changed their minds–in addition to cutting the whole expansion short. So it’s hardly surprising if the story doesn’t hang together.
2 Likes
And would have lost to the Thunder King, a weakened Thunder King. The LK was not as powerful as people always imagine him to be, in a 1on1. he was powerfull yes, but more so like a demigod being, not really this “UBERPOWERFULL” god-tierlvl being.
Lei’Shen was a bit above wild gods, and the lk was a bit beneath mighty wild gods
1 Like
That’s in fact an actual Blizzcon quote from one of the ask question segments.
1 Like
…and what do you base this on…?
This sounds a lot more like your opinion than anything stated in-game, since pretty much every interaction players have with him throughout Wrath indicates the exact opposite.
Blizzcon of… hm. I would have to search for it. If I do, give me time. This could get long.
1 Like
“In a one on one fight with the Lich King, Lei Shen would win. However, if the Scourge battled Lei Shen’s army, Lei Shen’s army would lose”
https://twitter.com/DaveKosak/status/759552173579591680
The LK was allways not this uberpowerfull being, he was powerfull, but in an iconic way defeatable. the lk is believably defeatable, titanlvlbeings are not.
4 Likes
Eh, I don’t know if I would say “iconic”…
The thing about the Scourge—and this is explained in-game by, essentially, Arthas’ little boy spirit, Mathias Lehner—is that their primary strength comes from their foes. Literally every other time we meet a necromancer, their go-to line is, “You brought my reinforcements with you!”
And then proceeds to crush whoever’s trying to defeat them by turning that person’s army against them.
Knowing this, it’s pretty doubtful that the Lich King would ever engage a being as powerful as Lei Shen one-on-one to begin with, especially after his (Arthas’) duel with Illidan, for example. He would play to his own strengths and use Lei Shen’s army against him rather than fighting the Thunder King mano-a-mano.
I was talking about the LK, not the scourge. The Scourge is powerful too, of course, no question, but it doesn’t change the fact that the LK was and is a much more believable down-to-earth opponent than against Titans, Eternal Ones, or even Old Gods. you know, for example, i liked 8.0, 8.1, 8.1.5 the N’Zoth representation, the azshara cinema was great! …8.2 and 8.3 screwed him, and made him somehow weak in the end.
its kind of a shame, thats no old god get the “moment” to shine, to really show the powerfull force they are ment to be.
1 Like
It should be noted that we have been told that undead are pretty much the only creatures who are resistant to/immune to Old God corruption; it’s largely why Arthas was building up his forces all throughout Wrath and constructing Icecrown Citadel out of saronite (Yogg Saron’s blood), because he knew Yogg Sarong was right next door, over in Ulduar.
We’re told the same thing years later by Alleria in BfA, when she suggests letting Sylvanas fight N’Zoth (which is, of course, pretty stupid because of course they’re in league with one another; Sylvanas is just so ebul she’s in league with everybody).
That was never said, that was always a statement from players. We even know that the Scourge only withstood his mental barrier of not being taken over by the old imprisoned god because of the LK.
because she thought, sylvanas have a greater army, then they have.
Arguably existence of the “high king” is becoming that crisis. It should’ve been a military leading position according to Metzen, yet it seems that it’s role is bloating more and more.
That was not my comment you was answering to, but more clearly placing Calia away from the horde would not be that bad of a clean up, would it? 
By the time Metzen left blizz, Legion was released. So, while we could argue about team responsible for Teldrassil, even though Afrasiabi is no longer in the company too, Theramore story was a gift from Metzen.
I would argue that a lot of it is centered around Anduin not being allowed to make mistakes or show that his decisions could lead to disasters.
If you’ll have some free time and remember where was this interview, could you share pls? Not nitpicking, I did not play in the early MoP - Shadowlands pre-patch time, so it would be interesting to learn a few things about infamous expansion. Thanks.
gl hf
The various conflicts between the Horde and Alliance have sparked once again because of the Azerite. But, it seems that Sylvanas Windrunner is showing as a villain too much according to the revealed story so far. Is there any chance that she will be corrupted and become a boss in the future, or has a chance to redeem her image?
Steve: Oh, you never know. Anything can happen, and we have nothing to answer on that front, but I know what you mean. I think that it just depends on your perspective, she’s an interesting character, and a very charismatic leader too. She’s very effective. You’re right, I think throughout the history of Warcraft, the Horde and Alliance have always been just a hair’s breadth away from war. We’ve hit war several times in the history. This is the first time in World of Warcraft where we actually get to set everything aside and go after each other. There have always been other bigger things such as Lich King that we’ve had to either come together for or at least set our differences to the side to be able to take care of. And now, it’s turning back on each other. They’ve got plenty of reasons not to like each other.
Travis: That’s a cool idea, but I do think that, and it’s just the way it’s been represented so far. As we closer and closer to launch, we are going to have some of those that fill in the blanks as you play through the siege of Lordaeron and such, I think it will tell you the story that it’s even-handed. I think we want to end up in a place where the Horde can make an argument that the Alliance started it and vice versa, as is the lead of all conflicts.
Jimmy: It’s a matter of interpretation. There’s no clear like this person is good and that person is bad. It really depends.
Travis: Because Sylvanas is not evil. In the story for her, it’s much more. She’s definitely aggressive, and she definitely believes in having power and control, but I also think that she does take seriously the representation of the Horde. She has a different perspective which is that the Horde will never be safe until the Alliance is wiped out. But, is she acting in a cruel, mustache-twirling evil way? Not really, she’s just trying to defend her people.
2
Q. So Sylvanas is the bad guy, Anduin is the good guy? Horde is Evil, Alliance is good? What is different Sylvanas from Garrosh?
A. This is our mistake, but we have to first release the story of Teldrassil and Lordearon in order to gain the game’s popularity and this helped make Sylvanas and the Horde “Evil”. Three animations will be revealed before Battle for Azeroth. We’ll cover a variety of people here. For instance, Jania may have an abnormal side of her. You’ll see the good side of the Horde. Nor will Anduin’s Lordaeron’s attacks be done for justice. Frankly, it is meant to show the king’s dignity. The head of the state does not represent the camp.
http://www.inven.co.kr/board/wow/1896/27860
3
Was it frustrating to have players criticize and take what happened and chalk up to bad writing before they’ve seen the whole picture?
Hazzikostas: It can be a bit frustrating, but it’s also understandable and expected and natural. It’s human. Emotions aren’t rational. When you’re feeling anger—or grief even—you lash out. Some people channeled those emotions in ways that are maybe more constructive in giving feedback than others, but I mean… think back to the internet the evening after the Red Wedding episode of Game of Thrones aired. How many people were like, “I’m done with this. I’m never watching this show again! I don’t understand how they could do this?” It’s because they just watched something they had an emotional investment in struck down before their eyes. That’s part of good storytelling. Clearly you can’t just alienate people and never let them back in, but there are ups and downs and those complement each other. They combine to make a coherent and effective narrative.
4 Likes
My god, they truly are stuck up their own butts lol! Like, they didn’t just alienate “some fans”, they alienated anyone who’s even halfway invested in the narrative they claim is both “coherent” and “effective”. On top of the narrative itself (on any side that wasn’t Sylvanas’) being rendered inert and powerless to the power of plot-convenience. Which … I suppose has always sort of been Sylvie’s most prolific superpower, so at least that’s consistent. They just do revel in the spectacle of the Red Wedding with no understanding of the nuance of it. Or what led to it.
15 Likes
something something Society of the Spectacle something as Debord said something Horde is the Global Subaltern something Writers are Alliance Mains something
Blizzard is writing drama for the sake of drama, thinking that a spectacle will lead to either satisfaction within the narrative or at the very least positive engagement with the story they’re writing.
And then get surprised when the players en masse engage in twitter wars with devs/writers after essentially excusing genocide and justifying slavery and concentration camps.
I’m going to shameless copy/paste some bits I wrote for an essay once upon a time, which I expect at most 2 of you to read lmao:
As mentioned, WoW is a Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Games, while still not entirely respected within the scope of academia as meaningful objects or activities, have fundamentally been a part of human civilization for its entire existence; there is evidence of games and playing in ancient artifacts whether textual or material. Games are not simply a part of our world like any other subject of analysis, rather “[a] consideration of games […] is a consideration of reality” because games themselves often are, either intentionally or unintentionally, a sort of representation or “manifestation” or reality itself10.
They do this in part by creating and using what’s ultimately described as “the magic circle”11 within any game. The essential point of the magic circle here for our purposes (there are many variations to the theory) is that the circle exists to limit the world of the game/ritual/play; the player creates an ultimately firm but permeable boundary between the gameworld and the real world. […]
Yes, you as the magician are performing the ritual (game) within the circle, but the intent is actually to protect the ritual (game) and the magician (you, the player) from what’s beyond the circle. The implication here if we follow the same logic is that there may be something that is intended to protect the player from when playing the game if the game (magic circle) creates the gameworld (ritual space, play space).
As games are manifestations or representations of reality, they can also be and are (intentionally or unintentionally) “powerful means for disseminating ideas into the population” and to create “civic agendas”, whether or not the ideologies imparted are turning people “good”14. That is to say, games carry with them a particular and self-contained ideology that one must, by necessity, engage with in order to play the game. In quite a bit of the literature, there were very bold claims by theorists stating that there is a “clear system” of good and evil15 within World of Warcraft. […]
WoW is specifically a Role-Playing Game. That is to say, when engaging with the game one is creating a character/avatar that has some modicum of identity within a fictional universe that has a particular genealogy in the construction of its narrative. The question here to consider what is the relationship, or are possible relationships, between player and avatar and also what are the larger implications between the particular genealogy and construction of the gameworld by the developers. It is important to first discuss a concept created by Dr. Fox Harrell:
Phantasms are a combination of imagery (mental or sensory) and ideas […] It is a challenge to the idea that human thought, especially thought regarding society and culture, reflects a “real” and objective world. […] much of what humans experience as real is based upon imagination.16
The ideas that Harrell refers to are systems of cultural knowledge and beliefs, whether traditional, stereotypical, ideological, or based on experiences17, and that within his definition of cultural system he is including computational systems18 (such as video games and the code that constructs them).
Indeed, within the scope of a video game, the existence of a limited set of possible options when creating an avatar/character contains within in an epistemic belief that those options should accommodate most players. This belief and assumption goes unchallenged, that is to say it is an Invisible Phantasm19, until someone excluded from the cultural system points it out, rendering it a Revealed Phantasm20. […]
The player within World of Warcrafted is “anchored” via the avatar within the gameworld, only able to engage with the gameworld/cultural system through the avatar; this is unique and is not present in any other media21. While some of the literature maintains that identification with the avatar and role-play are not the same but are often confused, wherein role-play is by necessity performative of what you think the character should act as while identity regards personal association with one’s invented avatar22, I would go back to the example I gave when demonstrating that not all engagement is on the same level to instead posit that identification with the avatar within the scope of an RPG is a sort of spectrum. […]
However, World of Warcraft while within the West occupies and maintain a specific global hegemony:
[…]I would suggest that the globalization of media access has combined with America’s role as the world’s most pervasive cultural producer to situate the Western cultural mythos as familiar to audiences worldwide. There is also the simple fact that Blizzard is an American company, which likely influences its tendency to construct its games’ ethnocultural schema along the lines of Western - particularly American - social ideology.32
This results however in the reality that the Alliance are thus Good because they are West and the Horde is implied Bad because it is Rest. Indeed, the back of the box art for the original Warcraft: Orcs & Humans game reads “Enter the world of WarCraft, a mystical land where evil Orcs and noble Humans battle for survival and domination. […] Destroy the Orcish hordes or crush the weakling Humans… the choice is yours”, wherein the choice is implied to be between being “evil” and crushing the noble weaklings or being noble and destroy the evil hordes33. The game inherently makes the Horde the Other from the onset and the (soon to be) Alliance as the Center. The ironic thing here, as we will discuss later, the majority of the Alliance races are in fact not “Native” or natural to Azeroth. […]
To continue then with the magic circle game metaphor, the avatars (the manifestation of ourselves whether one fully or partially identifies with the character) that we create for the purposes of the game (ritual, World of Warcraft) to engage with the gameworld (separated from reality by the magic circle) are ultimately phantasms (sensory image + culture system to provide context) that are either Revealed or Invisible depending on whether one’s own subjective reality is contained within the cultural system of the game itself. This gameworld in turn is also a phantasm with its own cultural systems and images (the coding of the game by the developers) that is based upon both Invisible Phantasms of real-world peoples perceived through Western/White gaze and derivatives of prominent fantasy worlds (e.g. Tolkien’s mythology) which likewise are Revealed Phantasms by the authors of those elaborate popular fantasy worlds (e.g. Tolkien and Western European mythology with Catholic mythology).
To put it another way, there are two magic circles: the player creates a phantasm-of-self (on a spectrum) as an avatar to engage with the gameworld within the limits/magic circle of the game, but the game creates the (Western) society-as-phantasm as a gameworld to engage with the players/magic circle within the limits of their audience. One magic circle is a reflection of the other magic circle, mutually imposing limits upon the other, both separating the other from the “real world” or their “real selves”. What is also left outside the circle are the cultural systems that Western society makes “virtual” by invoking their image without their idea (a sort of demi-phantasm) and likewise the cultural system of the subaltern that is most natural to the excluded player36. […]
I can share my list of references if anyone wants them btw!
10 Likes
It’s the classic Blizzard Bunker “No negativity in the Dojo” nonsense. Instead of confronting the fact a significant portion of their playerbase was disappointed in the narrative direction, they default to trying to hand-wave it away with lawyer speak. Ignorant to the fact they messed up and underestimated player kickback to bad, demoralizing, and ultimately negative direction of the game and its lore.
11 Likes
Sigh … it just … with their opinions and takeaway on why The Red Wedding worked … it just explains so much about Teldrassil. Truly, holy crap that one quote was so illuminating.
What they took away from it was “the shock and awe value” spectacle is why it was received as “good writing”. And not the “this tragedy was earned by Robert Stark through his own repeated mistakes as King of his people” leading up to it. Just as Ned’s failure as Hand of the King led to so many tragedies before and after his death. It may be shocking, it may be tragic, you may hate it for a while … but reading Martin’s work there is always some sort of Karmic “earning” of such shock moments at play.
No wonder they were so damned blindsided by the negative response from almost all sides of the fanbase who even slightly cared about the story. They really equated “shock value” to a “quality narrative”.
18 Likes