The OP’s question is nonsense because the contexts surrounding the two universes are drastically different.
7 Likes
Care to elaborate bro or did you just think this sounded clever
2 Likes
As a Godzilla fan, I approve of him Gozilla-ing in movies, but wouldn’t want him Godzilla-ing at my house IRL.
5 Likes
I enjoyed watching giant Mechs fighting giant Monsters in Pacific Rim despite all the death and destruction said fighting incurred upon the populace. That doesn’t mean I would enjoy watching said battle happening in real life, near to me or even from a safe distance because of all the death and destruction that comes with it.
In the Warcraft universe, the solution to most problems is violence. There is rarely any talk about negotiation or peace with any of the dozens of minor factions of sapiens we kill regularly. When most quests boil down to “Murder them until they’re not a threat”, there’s no real reason to single out the opposite faction as being exempt from the same practices both sides routinely apply to others.
1 Like
Actually there was an entire trial for Garrosh because of his “War Crimes”. So the precedent has already been set for such a moral line and exemption when it comes to faction war and stuff in universe. Sorry bro.
1 Like
Except there were no established rules for war created either before or during Garrosh’s trial. It was simply a show trial with a guilty verdict being given from the outset to determine his punishment for the purposes of offering a scapegoat to both factions, and the ultimate conclusion of the book was literally pulling alternate timeline versions of characters in to teach the lesson that they could all easily have done the same things.
And if you want to say the moral line was set at Garrosh, it fails in multiple regards. First, because just about everybody from both factions has already crossed that line in terms of killing their enemies for just about any reason no matter how petty or nonsensical, and has practically never gotten punished for it. And second, given that the moral line from a Horde perspective and the reason that they turned on Garrosh was his mistreatment of them, that line has not been crossed. Vol’jin turned on Garrosh because Garrosh tried to have him assassinated - Saurfang and Baine turned on Sylvanas because they don’t like what she’s doing to fight the Alliance. Those two situations are not equal, and from the perspective of a player having been told for years on end to solve most problems by killing whoever or whatever is in front of you, their hangups about Sylvanas being too cruel, to an enemy everyone has been encouraged to fight since the very beginning, are an absolute joke.
I’ll take their idea of Sylvanas’ crimes seriously when they admit that by those same standards both the Horde and the Alliance were completely illegitimate criminal organizations from their very inception.
Look pal, I just believe, in some contexts, starting wars with genocide is okay! And that’s why the OP having trouble seeing where our lines are is dumb.
Would I approve? No. But living in the US, I see that ugly rhetoric and actions can lead to a winning strategy.
Is what Sylvanas doing really any worse than what some of the world leaders have done? Separating families, burning trees, its all terrible but there will always be real people to follow and condone this behavior.
Sadly, she would get re-elected IRL.
Yes, and the Park Service would like to have a discussion with you.
1 Like
I mean the movie comparisons don’t exactly work 100% because this game allows a degree of interactivity that movies don’t exactly have, my guys.
Micheal Bolton’s less popular brother! 