A worrying trend I've seen growing on SF has been this idea that, if a character is disliked by [insert group here], then that character should be killed off, and that's the only way to resolve their character arc in a way that's cathartic/satisfactory/what-have-you.
I'd like to lay out why this idea horrifies me.
For starters, let's look at professional wrestling, a la WWE. Weird turn, stick with me. I know very little about wrestling, but what I do know is that the audience is attending to pump their fists, scream wildly, wave their signs/shirts/children above the crowd's heads, just in general get really excited and have a good time. Emphasis on the "good time" part. There's sad, funny, and enraging moments in wrestling, but at the end of the day fans of Insert Face/Heel Here are not necessarily looking for nuance.
Fans of John Cena, for instance, grew to love him because he's a classic All-American Marine boy who wrestles in jorts. If John Cena turned around and suddenly declared his love for France, described his French heritage, and then started beating people with a baguette in all of his matches for the next few years, his original fans will lose interest and grow to hate what he's become.
Similarly, if John Cena outright killed off every Heel he came into contact with, or all of his mortal enemies met their end at his hands, eventually there'd be no compelling villains left, no Heel/Face turns, and poor John Cena will be alone with his baguette and his jorts at a match attended by a fraction of his former fans. Even sadder, all the fans of John Cena's enemies, their favorites now dead, have nothing to cheer for.
I hope my parallel is becoming clearer. If every character in WoW, ESPECIALLY NPCs who've been wrapped up in one or two decades of story, just died as soon as a fraction of the playerbase grew to dislike them, that would be a neverending black hole of wasted potential, and it would leave Blizzard scrambling to pick up the pieces and asspull new NPCs to replace these iconics.
Here's where the thread title comes in. I'm sure I stole this narrative concept from somewhere, but I'm gonna call it Positive Storytelling vs. Reductive Storytelling. Positive in this context does not mean good, entertaining or happy, it means to build upon, while Reductive in this context means to remove.
I see this push on the part of the players to kill off any character they dislike as purely reductive. I also view Blizzard's direction with the faction war as reductive. For instance: there's a faction of Alliance and Horde players who want to see Sylvanas dead permanently. I see this a complete waste of character potential even more egregious than Garrosh's death (which, need I remind a few people, seems to be a major point of regret even for Blizzard itself.) The thing about reductive storytelling, in a two-faction story, is that one faction is always going to suffer from a loss far worse than the other faction is going to celebrate a win.
Case in point: Teldrassil. How many Horde players felt genuinely happy to see Teldrassil burned? This is not a moral question. I know, personally, that it didn't feel like a vengeful blow against those dirty nelves. Hell, Lorash doesn't even have a very good reason to hate nelves so viciously, let alone one from recent memory. Sure, if I try I can summon up some anger over the nelves ignoring the tauren while they were being hunted down, or for refusing to make peaceful trade with Orgrimmar when its people were starving. But Blizz didn't even capitalize on that, so Teldrassil feels kinda like running up to the dude you HATE at a bar and then knocking his girlfriend out cold right next to him.
So for the Horde, Teldrassil was a win, but it didn't really feel all that vindicating considering most Horde players haven't really fought nelves since 1-60. On the nelf side however...dear God, they haven't stopped talking about it. As a nelf fan, it's all I think about. So which narrative is better for the sake of the players, that WWE audience who's attending to wave their signs and pump their fists? A reductive narrative, in which each faction loses important things as plot strokes (Teldrassil, Sylvanas/Jaina/whoever dying, Rastakan, Undercity, etc.) or a positive narrative in which characters are given a chance to grow, change, and go through unique character and faction arcs over just "A attacks B, B loses X, A gains...the ruins of X. Yay?" or "Character A is doing bad things. Make Character A a raid boss, kill Character A, fans of A are distraught, the people who hate A gain a brief moment of vindication but then lose that villain for future plotlines. Yay?"
inb4 "you just like sylvester windrunner because gray boob lol"
I couldn't agree more, and what's disturbing is that it increasingly feels like the story team genuinely can't tell the difference between those two kinds of storytelling.
11/01/2018 12:09 PMPosted by KirangoI couldn't agree more, and what's disturbing is that it increasingly feels like the story team genuinely can't tell the difference between those two kinds of storytelling.
Which is why this entire escalation is dumb.
11/01/2018 11:53 AMPosted by Vozulinb4 "you just like sylvester windrunner because gray boob lol"
You just like the Banshee Thong because you want her to step on you OMEGALUL
11/01/2018 11:53 AMPosted by Vozulinb4 "you just like sylvester windrunner because gray boob lol"
AU where everything's the same but this is Sylvanas' canon name.
Jokes aside...yeah, no, this is pretty much nail on the head. For all my copious amounts of salt at Sylvanas('s especially overzealous fans), I'm always an advocate far more for characters actually growing and changing rather than just getting the axe.
It feels like Blizzard really wants to make the players all hate each other, but all I see happening are various parties becoming more frustrated with the story instead.
I want an arc where the forsaken can grow and change, but that means Sylv must die
11/01/2018 11:53 AMPosted by VozulA worrying trend I've seen growing on SF has been this idea that, if a character is disliked by [insert group here], then that character should be killed off, and that's the only way to resolve their character arc in a way that's cathartic/satisfactory/what-have-you.
As much as there's a call for Sylvanas to be Garrosh 2.0 for "Reductive" storytelling, there is an equally loud call here on the Story Forums in concern that Blizzard will swing the pendulum to the other extreme of "Positive" storytelling and make Sylvanas Kerrigan 2.0.
i don't disagree.
I remember when i first created this noble worgen, i remember the epic liam speech.
I remember the sense of being threatened and forced to flee.
The sense of revenge on sylvanas who was presented as the antagonist and blighted the city and killed liam who had an heroic sacrifice.
World of warcraft isn't a fair world,if you want justice you have to it for yourself.
But as the story progressed, i started to realize.
one of my motivations to keep playing, to keep fighting the horde, wherever i liked or not, was to just get revenge on sylvanas, that is why i was so happy with stormheilm, i didn't cared about the world or the legion invading, genn attacking like a damn rabid dog is everything i could want as a main worgen.
In time, i started to care less and less about sylvanas and more about my faction and characters, how they grow and interact with a never ending threat that keeps pushing their narrative further and further.
like i said many times, i don't really care about what they do with sylvanas, one thing is for sure, if she stays present, that would mean that she will still develop more my faction as an antagonist,almost every story needs one.
The story often present the alliance with these kinds of defeats that makes you angry for not being able to do anything, but i guess that is good, it means that you care, you are invested,and most importantly, you have your motivation.
Because, let's be honest here, would i be satisfied if sylvanas eventually faces justice?
"the hunter is nothing without the prey".
I remember when i first created this noble worgen, i remember the epic liam speech.
I remember the sense of being threatened and forced to flee.
The sense of revenge on sylvanas who was presented as the antagonist and blighted the city and killed liam who had an heroic sacrifice.
World of warcraft isn't a fair world,if you want justice you have to it for yourself.
But as the story progressed, i started to realize.
one of my motivations to keep playing, to keep fighting the horde, wherever i liked or not, was to just get revenge on sylvanas, that is why i was so happy with stormheilm, i didn't cared about the world or the legion invading, genn attacking like a damn rabid dog is everything i could want as a main worgen.
In time, i started to care less and less about sylvanas and more about my faction and characters, how they grow and interact with a never ending threat that keeps pushing their narrative further and further.
like i said many times, i don't really care about what they do with sylvanas, one thing is for sure, if she stays present, that would mean that she will still develop more my faction as an antagonist,almost every story needs one.
The story often present the alliance with these kinds of defeats that makes you angry for not being able to do anything, but i guess that is good, it means that you care, you are invested,and most importantly, you have your motivation.
Because, let's be honest here, would i be satisfied if sylvanas eventually faces justice?
"the hunter is nothing without the prey".
I agree. Before Teldrassil burned, there were many threads suggesting that killing Malfurion and Tyrande would free the Night Elves of two weighty story Anchors. Same with Thrall and the Horde. Some people complain Genn drives the Worgen story to a place it also will never grow from.
Characters should not be removed for taste alone. However, losing a few here or there gives a feeling of urgency. So it just depends on how it plays out.
I feel people ought to focus on how the story would lead to a character dying, instead of forming a cyber-lynch mob and petitioning Blizzard for characters to die, in daily rants.
Sometimes this place can seem less a discussion and more an incestuous echo chamber of wish lists.
Characters should not be removed for taste alone. However, losing a few here or there gives a feeling of urgency. So it just depends on how it plays out.
I feel people ought to focus on how the story would lead to a character dying, instead of forming a cyber-lynch mob and petitioning Blizzard for characters to die, in daily rants.
Sometimes this place can seem less a discussion and more an incestuous echo chamber of wish lists.
I feel like you should've just started the post right around here, and left all the "as soon as a fraction of the playerbase" and "a worrying trend I've seen growing on SF" stuff out.11/01/2018 11:53 AMPosted by VozulI also view Blizzard's direction with the faction war as reductive.
The fans in your wrestling example aren't screaming for John Cena's adversaries to be given a pleasing positive development arc. They're screaming for John Cena to kick all their asses. That's how it's supposed to work. It's up to the writers to tell the story, not the fans.
11/01/2018 03:56 PMPosted by SkytotemI want an arc where the forsaken can grow and change, but that means Sylv must die
Like how the Orcs did after Garrosh?
11/01/2018 04:23 PMPosted by ArlifrexLike how the Orcs did after Garrosh?
but the orcs didn't grow and change anything.
11/01/2018 04:27 PMPosted by Etheldald11/01/2018 04:23 PMPosted by ArlifrexLike how the Orcs did after Garrosh?
but the orcs didn't grow and change anything.
Exactly.
Which is EXACTLY WHY I’ve been calling for Sylvanas to be exiled ot to leave the Horde. She is literally the only thing keeping not only the Horde from being able to change, but also her own forsaken.
She DOESNT NEED TO DIE for change to happen, she simply needs to go take a break and let others start driving the Horde story rather than doing it entirely on its own. Its bad enough that she hardly represents any of the core Horde ideologies, but it feels like she’s taking us to a place of no return. Burning Teldrassil is not a crime that can so easily be forgiven, by the Alliance or by anyone on the planet.
Exile would be a mercy for her and for us as well as we can get someone else on the wheel and try to turn this ship back around before we hit an iceberg. Killing her would only result in one less Horde figure capable of driving the narrative, especially because the writers refuse to develop new characters capable of that. Thalysra and Mayala, for how great they are as characters are simply too new to be able to drive the Horde narrative and need some time to grow in influence before they can really direct the story.
This is why it was so stupid of them to kill off Garrosh. They spared his life at the end of MoP, something they seldom ever do with big bads, they had the potential to put him on the path of turning around and begin a redemption arc that the writers had in mind for him. But constant whining and content cuts resulted in just a complete backtrack and having Thrall off him because “that was what was needed from a story perspective”. They comitted to something that could have been really cool and then backed out at the last second resulting in a rather dissapointing conclusion to an arc that had lasted no less than FIVE EXPANSIONS.
I don’t want this same fate to happen to Sylvanas, but at the same time she’s literally been poison to the Horde narrative since the start of Legion, constantly doing everything she can to make people and myself hate her. I’ve tried my very best to see the bright side, but it’s been made near impossible and every time i would, she’d immediately do something to fuc it up.
The best thing that can happen to Sylvanas AND the Horde by the end of this expansion is for her to leave a lay low for awhile. Because frankly, there is no other way for this expansion to end other than with her head on a pike or all life in the world being scoured and raised into undeath.
She DOESNT NEED TO DIE for change to happen, she simply needs to go take a break and let others start driving the Horde story rather than doing it entirely on its own. Its bad enough that she hardly represents any of the core Horde ideologies, but it feels like she’s taking us to a place of no return. Burning Teldrassil is not a crime that can so easily be forgiven, by the Alliance or by anyone on the planet.
Exile would be a mercy for her and for us as well as we can get someone else on the wheel and try to turn this ship back around before we hit an iceberg. Killing her would only result in one less Horde figure capable of driving the narrative, especially because the writers refuse to develop new characters capable of that. Thalysra and Mayala, for how great they are as characters are simply too new to be able to drive the Horde narrative and need some time to grow in influence before they can really direct the story.
This is why it was so stupid of them to kill off Garrosh. They spared his life at the end of MoP, something they seldom ever do with big bads, they had the potential to put him on the path of turning around and begin a redemption arc that the writers had in mind for him. But constant whining and content cuts resulted in just a complete backtrack and having Thrall off him because “that was what was needed from a story perspective”. They comitted to something that could have been really cool and then backed out at the last second resulting in a rather dissapointing conclusion to an arc that had lasted no less than FIVE EXPANSIONS.
I don’t want this same fate to happen to Sylvanas, but at the same time she’s literally been poison to the Horde narrative since the start of Legion, constantly doing everything she can to make people and myself hate her. I’ve tried my very best to see the bright side, but it’s been made near impossible and every time i would, she’d immediately do something to fuc it up.
The best thing that can happen to Sylvanas AND the Horde by the end of this expansion is for her to leave a lay low for awhile. Because frankly, there is no other way for this expansion to end other than with her head on a pike or all life in the world being scoured and raised into undeath.
11/01/2018 03:56 PMPosted by SkytotemI want an arc where the forsaken can grow and change, but that means Sylv must die
You do realize that people don't use absolutes in writing for a reason, right?
Usually because they're wrong.
Which you are.
Sylvanas could have been written off as “lost at sea” and reappear an expansion later, giving Nathanos and the Forsaken race in general time to breathe and grow and not be haplessly evil. Unfortunately, as long as Sylvanas remains as a faction/racial leader that can’t happen. I’d like to see the Forsaken struggle with what it means to be honorable, good even, without Sylvanas’s influence driving them down a path of destruction.
Even then, she has been set up as Genn’s nemesis since Cataclysm. Her dying by his paw in BFA would be a great way of denying her a Kerrigan or Garrosh treatment. It gives Alliance players that mythic “fist bump moment” and doesn’t force players down a SoO path
Even then, she has been set up as Genn’s nemesis since Cataclysm. Her dying by his paw in BFA would be a great way of denying her a Kerrigan or Garrosh treatment. It gives Alliance players that mythic “fist bump moment” and doesn’t force players down a SoO path
11/01/2018 05:55 PMPosted by DetrikEven then, she has been set up as Genn’s nemesis since Cataclysm. Her dying by his paw in BFA would be a great way of denying her a Kerrigan or Garrosh treatment. It gives Alliance players that mythic “fist bump moment” and doesn’t force players down a SoO path
Aaaaaand so we once again end up at screwing over the Horde and robbing it of its last Vanilla leader that isn't a ghost or a neutral Shaman and one of its few heavy hitting characters (who still doesn't hold a candle to the variety of superhero level characters the Alliance gets to keep alive all the time) in order to please Alliance players.
Hard pass.
this gave me a giggle.11/01/2018 11:53 AMPosted by Vozulinb4 "you just like sylvester windrunner because gray boob lol"
But the entire post got me thinking back to when people were screaming from the rooftops back in MoP, calling for the death of Jaina Proudmoore because she... had the audacity to have emotions after her town was obliterated and most everyone she was close to was killed.
There's no regulating this kind of thing. "I don't like this character, I want them dead" is an unfortunate staple that isn't going away.
11/01/2018 06:34 PMPosted by Cantaloupethis gave me a giggle.11/01/2018 11:53 AMPosted by Vozulinb4 "you just like sylvester windrunner because gray boob lol"
But the entire post got me thinking back to when people were screaming from the rooftops back in MoP, calling for the death of Jaina Proudmoore because she... had the audacity to have emotions after her town was obliterated and most everyone she was close to was killed.
There's no regulating this kind of thing. "I don't like this character, I want them dead" is an unfortunate staple that isn't going away.
It's the nature of people. "Only this character I like is allowed to have righteously angry or sad emotions, when the character I don't like has them they need to die and are bad".
The people who go really in on that are a minority but not really one you can scrub away. People are how people are.
I'm pretty sure we've all had those sorts of thoughts in at least a fleeting way, anyway. It's very much a human thing.