Seriously wondering how BtS fits in with what I said. (shrug)
When was that, by the way? Was that around the time of the “Captain America vs Wolverine” comparison?
Like release dates?
I think we both know we’re never going to get anything like what you’re demanding.
Nope, nothing.
Just:
A) The release date of the cinematic, which was shown at Blizzcon 2017, which was of course long before the release of the expansion itself (because that’s generally how announcement cinematics works).
B) Along with Chris Metzen himself stating in an interview with Scott Johnson that the last thing he worked on, his very last project for Blizzard, as stated in his bio, was the cinematic for Battle for Azeroth and nothing else, meaning he had no knowledge whatsoever about how War of the Thorns was going to go.
This can be found on WoWHead, where the full interview, as well as a short summary stating Metzen had no knowledge on WoT, was posted.
But please, all of you keep ranting on about circumstantial evidence and how we “don’t know” anything about what Blizzard has done.
It’s quite amusing when literally everything you say is wrong.
7 Likes
Cataclysm. Its partly why the Alliance zones are memes and the intro questlines are slapstick comedy.
Captain America really only works in the overall scheme of what Blizzard was trying to force the Alliance into being. Down in the nitty grittiness of questing, the Alliance was Scrappy-Do. Except the writers of Scooby-Do eventually caught on that everyone HATED Scrappy-Do. Blizzard never really did.
They don’t play nice together when you think “subtle writing” involves sky-writing or smearing fecal matter on the bathroom wall. You can even hide the “deep” lore in the background like other MMO’s do.
This requires more than “minimal” effort. That’s why the people in charge aren’t interested in it. We saw this in class and game mechanics when they made decisions off Excel math with bad formulas. Shadowlands is just highlighting the fact that they’ve finally realized that the Art Team is carrying the franchise, so they are hoping customization options and new zones will make up for the lukewarm “lore” that’s commonly found in a puddle down an alley behind a fast-food restaurant.
3 Likes
Pretty much hit the nail on the head here. This all goes back to the corporates up top wanting fast cash with little to no effort put in.
It’s even more insulting when you finally realize just what it is they expect the playerbase to accept at face value.
2 Likes
Or they wanted Anduin Sylvanas and Saurfang in the cinematic.
I liked him.
Way to ignore the fact that the cinematic directly shows the Battle of Lordaeron; the cinematic itself is literally all about Lordaeron, of all places, being sieged, so your whole “oh, the cinematic’s just about those three without any further context” argument just went out the window.
I’m guessing you also didn’t even bother reading my previous post re: Chris Metzen.
I read it. I ofered an alternative explanation.
Ok, except your explanation, again, does not take into consideration the fact that the cinematic goes out of its way to show Lordaeron under siege.
If it were simply a few snapshots or minutes of Anduin, Sylvanas, and Saurfang at war, I’d agree. But literally the first 3-5 min. or so is all about showing the outer walls of Lordaeron getting bombarded by the invading Alliance.
Not to mention, again, at the time no one knew why the Alliance was invading.
Which means that Blizzard had already decided on the Siege of Lordaeron (the “What”) before coming up with War of the Thorns (the “Why”).
there was chapters that where leaked and blizzard themselves released pages, we knew sylvanas wanted to kill stormwind way early
um the day blizzard announced the xpac, one of the devs said in a interview that the alliance was invading lorderan because of the burning of teld, the literal day bfa was first known to everyone. THat stuff is on wowhead too lol
They could spin a Lordaeron first attack from Alliance with the Arathi? meeting but Sylvanas arc was planned since Edge of night. I don’t think they were considering a story were the Alliance executes the plan to feed the hungering darkness without Sylvanas acting first.
They fulfilled their quota too well.
https://i.imgur.com/P1RtpfV.jpg
The chapter released by Blizzard was the first thing we saw, and that happened at Blizzcon 2017. We already know they had decided that Teldrassil happened first by then, as you yourself pointed out earlier in the thread.
Ok, point me to the interview.
Because as of this writing, I currently have a separate window open on WoWHead, where I’m looking at the BlizzCon 2017 Q&A Panel.
Q: With the Horde attacking Teldrassil and the Alliance attacking Undercity, what are your plans for starting zones?
A: Starting zones won’t change, other than improvements. In order to appreciate the burning of Teldrassil, you need to start there - grow up there and when you hit 110, we’ll burn it all down. Same thing with Lordaeron. Once you level up and catch up to events, the world changes around you.
Now, if they did announce that the Alliance invaded Lordaeron in retribution for Teldrassil, I’m not seeing it. What I am seeing, however, is that they had already decided on Lordaeron and Teldrassil, but again, had not decided on–or at least hadn’t revealed–the War of the Thorns storyline itself, let alone Sylvanas being the one to burn down the tree.
So again. BlizzCon 2017. We saw the cinematic. We knew about Teldrassil and Lordaeron.
We did not know the specific context of those events, which goes all the way back to the OP of this thread:
The pre-written story prior to Battle for Azeroth going live.
its in this thread dude and really they had the sylvanas warbringers art already at blizzcon like grasping at straws
So…a piece of art showing Sylvanas standing in front of the tree was “proof” at the time that she was responsible for burning it? And I’m the one grasping at straws?
Really?
Nobody should have to tell you the obvious: that the image you’re referring to was deliberately released to generate speculation about who really burned down Teldrassil. It was a marketing tactic, and it worked; for months following BlizzCon, players speculated on whether Sylvanas had burned down the tree or was actually trying to save it.
You might want to consider Alex Afrasiabi’s words from BlizzCon 2017’s panel, as quoted in the BlizzardWatch article, “Who actually burned down Teldrassil?”:
Why would the Horde burn Teldrassil? … Why would the Alliance attack the Undercity? … It doesn’t matter who fired the first shot…”
Like I said, the only things that were clear at Blizzcon were the Siege of Lordaeron and the Burning of Teldrassil.
The context of both hadn’t been planned out yet.
1 Like
its proof they had the story planned out lol, theres that theres the stuff the devs said theres so much you ignore cause for somereason it bugs you that blizzard wrote it this way lol
It’s a picture of Sylvanas standing in front of the burning tree. Literally the only thing that proves is that the Burning of Teldrassil had been planned out, and Sylvanas was going to be there. No more, no less.
Until you learn the meaning of context, and how to form a coherent argument, I suggest you stay off the forums.
2 Likes
yeah and you are ignoring that it happened first, and that the alliance was going to undercity for justice. The only thing we didnt know was who did it, but you act like it couldnt have been sylvvanas like on please couple that with the fact that it was released the pages from bts saying she wanted to go to war she was the number one contender to burn teld.