I think people get confused by “positive” racism, in this case a very condescending “you are good despite not being civilized” that also creates a lot of stereotyping and misconceptions rather than a fair understanding of all the actual positives and negatives of a society. I think the concept also evolved from someone’s doomer thoughts about civilization at the time to “token good who lacks actual agency and is shown to be good by being friendly to the ‘nice’ colonizers”. Which is exactly what we see in WoW.
I agree that such would make things better, but not to the extent that I think it could cause the audience in general to forget the major takeaways from what happened. My contention here is that something has to follow that actually attacks the twin perceptions that I mentioned, and I don’t think that a retcon is going to do that.
Okay, I think I see where you’re going with this. While I argue that it would be better for business if they actually admitted fault and then committed to fixing things, ATVI likely won’t until things are so bad that they just can the game and pour the resources into something else.
Which, to me is adopting an is-ought fallacy, or I guess a “probably”-ought fallacy. I don’t really see the point in making suggestions if I am going to punctuate it with “oh, but that will never happen because [unfalsifiable cynicism].”
Um … what? What’s wrong with the question? Okay, I’ll try to reformulate.
What happens at the first contact between orcs and humans that cannot be regarded as racism?
The first contact with Azeroth was, it seems, the killing of some animals?
I don’t understand how you rattling off names explains how the orcs are being a noble savage in wow or shown as blood thirsty monsters that just love to fight in Warhammer is racist.
Lets say Games Workshop decides to fix their orcs because now they believe its racist. How would you change this beloved race that so many people love?
You haven’t even explained what is racist about it and towards whom.
Indeed and, as much as I like on paper the positive results it could attain regarding the decade long narrative fiasco that figuratively exploded with the WoT, and as much as i appreciate Baal for his efforts, truth is, to expect Blizz to make such monumental backpedal reagding not one but TWO expacs is a waste of time to put it nicely.
Alright I had to google it because I just don’t understand what Baal is talking about.
Noble savage
Description
A noble savage is a literary stock character who embodies the concept of the indigene, outsider, wild human, an “other” who has not been “corrupted” by civilization, and therefore symbolizes humanity’s innate goodness.
I struggle to throw this at anyone’s feet in either wow or warhammer.
It’s still better than the Subhuman Savage trope Blizzard keep trying to paint the orcs with for the past several expansions for some godforsaken reason.
You’ve spent the entire thread implicitly (and not so implicitly) accusing others of being racists because of their video game opinions. Maybe it’s time to actually produce some receipts and defend your assertions when people ask you to elaborate on them given the serious accusations you’ve been throwing around. You’ve already accused this game’s most prominent female writer of being sexist and unable to properly write women (as determined by you, a man)
Otherwise it comes off as either you not actually caring about the merits of the discussion and just wanting to ragepost about social injustice du jour as manifested in an aging MMO, or worse, you trying to capitalize on legitimate grievances by marginalized groups in order to score points against your video game enemies.
I don’t want to believe you’re either of these things so maybe it’s time to actually engage or stop posting.