11/10/2018 08:37 AMPosted by
Kazala
First time the Pellex/Jellex thing has received a legitimate double-take from me.
I have succeeded, at long last.
Amusingly there is also an Overwatch League player named Kellex.
11/10/2018 08:38 AMPosted by
Saiphas
@Jellex, I think I’ve been on record enough times I’d hope you know my position on these things :P
You are right, I do know. I have just been extra frustrated over the interview that spawned this thread because now it feels like Blizzard is joining in the attack on players that don't like the current direction of the story.
Jellex: We should do identical mogs just to mess with people's heads even more.
Saiphas: I will say this--at least Alliance players have a way out of this that can make them happy. I don't think Horde players do, because even if we aren't forced to live through MoP 2.0 and Sylvanas somehow isn't killed, then we're going to be deeply resented by Alliance players for it and have to listen to "You burned our tree and got away with it!" for eternity. There is no way for us to win against ourselves unless we already hate Sylvanas.
honestly the best solution is if sylvanas is exiled, for the horde sylvanas supporters it would mean she wouldn't be another warchief who dies but she also wouldn't be in charge and can appear later. for the alliance players it would mean that even though we did not get the justice we hoped for we still held her accountable for her actions
and that is really the only compromise that would somewhat satisfy both faction. because if you kill her off and knock her out of the story forever, it would leave a bitter taste in horde mouths, but if she get off scott free after everything she has done like the blighting of gilneas or burning of teldrassil, it would leave a bitter taste in alliance mouths
11/10/2018 08:52 AMPosted by
Jellex
11/10/2018 08:37 AMPosted by
Kazala
First time the Pellex/Jellex thing has received a legitimate double-take from me.
I have succeeded, at long last.
Amusingly there is also an Overwatch League player named Kellex.
11/10/2018 08:38 AMPosted by
Saiphas
@Jellex, I think I’ve been on record enough times I’d hope you know my position on these things :P
You are right, I do know. I have just been extra frustrated over the interview that spawned this thread because now it feels like Blizzard is joining in the attack on players that don't like the current direction of the story.
Absolutely and quite frankly, even if I can see where/why they want to go the story direction they have, I truly feel they, at their Everest level vantage point, can not see how their actions effect player interactions at the microscale. It is only when social media gets involved through things like that silly pauldrons campaign, or feedback from prominent community members backed by large outcry like the Darkshore framing of events, that they change stuff.
It is, as you say, frustrating.
11/10/2018 08:01 AMPosted by
Pellex
11/10/2018 07:14 AMPosted by
Serevèn
Well I think I've read enough "I want to choose the genocidal team damning people to hell without Blizz calling it wrong. Is that so much to ask?" For one morning. Idk what's so hard about owning it. Eesh.
I, for one, do not want to follow an evil warchief.
But I ALSO do not want to have to overthrow another evil warchief, especially if I have to ask for the Alliance's help in doing it.
I don't know what's so hard to understand about that.
The Horde has been written as a coalition of groups with wildly disparate ideologies since WC my friend. Thrall starting a new one bent on trying to be more accepting didn't change this. Its a core facet of the Horde's characterization and identity. More, the writing on the wall for these two current ideologies coming to a head and needing reconciliation has been here since Vanilla.
Maybe the Alliance is more what you were after? We currently lack much of any friction thanks to our decidedly mundane hook ;)
honestly the best solution is if sylvanas is exiled, for the horde sylvanas supporters it would mean she wouldn't be another warchief who dies but she also wouldn't be in charge and can appear later. for the alliance players it would mean that even though we did not get the justice we hoped for we still held her accountable for her actions
I have my doubts that would satisfy some of the more bloodthirsy Night Elf players, though.
11/10/2018 09:02 AMPosted by
Serevèn
The Horde has been written as a coalition of groups with wildly disparate ideologies since WC my friend.
Agreed. What does that have to do with the fact that I don't want to have to deal with yet another evil warchief? Blizzard can put anyone they want in charge of the Horde. Even if they refuse to make the Alliance throw the first punch, wars don't have to be started by evil people for evil reasons.
Maybe the Alliance is more what you were after? We currently lack much of any friction thanks to our decidedly mundane hook ;)
I have been maining Alliance since Legion because I have friends who play Alliance who will invite me to their raids. It doesn't stop me from wanting a better story for the Horde than what we're getting.
11/10/2018 08:54 AMPosted by
Pellex
Jellex: We should do identical mogs just to mess with people's heads even more.
That'd be hard with plate and cloth, but I'd be down for it. :P
honestly the best solution is if sylvanas is exiled, for the horde sylvanas supporters it would mean she wouldn't be another warchief who dies but she also wouldn't be in charge and can appear later. for the alliance players it would mean that even though we did not get the justice we hoped for we still held her accountable for her actions
and that is really the only compromise that would somewhat satisfy both faction. because if you kill her off and knock her out of the story forever, it would leave a bitter taste in horde mouths, but if she get off scott free after everything she has done like the blighting of gilneas or burning of teldrassil, it would leave a bitter taste in alliance mouths
At this point, I feel something in this vein - Saiphas' "redemptive sacrifice" idea - is probably as close to a compromise as we are going to get. I feel like it will still irritate Alliance players if they don't get to loot pinata her for months, but this is the best we can hope for as far as a mutually agreeable solution.
I have my doubts that would satisfy some of the more bloodthirsy Night Elf players, though.
it is the best i could come up with, because most of the other options significantly worse for alliance players or horde players
11/10/2018 09:06 AMPosted by
Pellex
I have been maining Alliance since Legion because I have friends who play Alliance who will invite me to their raids. It doesn't stop me from wanting a better story for the Horde than what we're getting.
I guess pride is it then. I really never had that spirit. Ive mained Alliance for a decade because Night Elves are there. That's about it. Coming to this game, my favorite races coming out of WC3 were Nelf, Troll, Tauren, Orc, and Forsaken. Things have changed over time but everything I say remains as a fan of all those races. I feel its regrettable Blizz took the Forsaken down the path I hoped they'd avoid back in vanilla but the story right now for Horde honestly doesn't bother me that much.
The ability to choose is a legitimate interesting new thing they get to try even. For the people who want pride in choosing the evil lady, idk what to say. I still had fun playing as Arthas back in WC3. Don't let labels like "genocide", "slaughter of the innocent", "damning souls to an eternal hell", or "that is bad" get in the way of your enjoyment.
11/10/2018 09:54 AMPosted by
Serevèn
The ability to choose is a legitimate interesting new thing they get to try even. For the people who want pride in choosing the evil lady, idk what to say. I still had fun playing as Arthas back in WC3. Don't let labels like "genocide", "slaughter of the innocent", "damning souls to an eternal hell", or "that is bad" get in the way of your enjoyment.
Please stop making this reductive argument.
11/10/2018 10:00 AMPosted by
Jellex
11/10/2018 09:54 AMPosted by
Serevèn
The ability to choose is a legitimate interesting new thing they get to try even. For the people who want pride in choosing the evil lady, idk what to say. I still had fun playing as Arthas back in WC3. Don't let labels like "genocide", "slaughter of the innocent", "damning souls to an eternal hell", or "that is bad" get in the way of your enjoyment.
Please stop making this reductive argument.
Please tell me where the story has presented Sylvanas' true motives as anything beyond it. She's a cartoon villain. And that's fine. I love cartoon villains. It's not an attack on your personhood to call her what she is. It's okay to like the evil woman murdering and damning people to the hell she fears so she can feel less alone in the world.
11/10/2018 09:06 AMPosted by
Jellex
At this point, I feel something in this vein - Saiphas' "redemptive sacrifice" idea - is probably as close to a compromise as we are going to get. I feel like it will still irritate Alliance players if they don't get to loot pinata her for months, but this is the best we can hope for as far as a mutually agreeable solution.
I so much want Sylvie to just say "!@#$ everything" by the end of this lol!
Like, whatever her "true motives" are, they're something completely selfish. She'll use the Horde to get as close as she can to her objective, then if push-comes-to-shove and holding that Warchief position (that she never even wanted, but will exploit) becomes too dangerous for her; she'll bail. She'll disappear into the night and leave the Horde with the check for the War she got them into.
Just make her a SUPER %^-*!, and reinforce that she is still that type of person that values a person for their usefulness TO HER, than she values them as a person.
Its like you're talking directly over Jellex. Maybe if you were directing your comments at someone like me it wouldn't seem like you're ranting.
Edit:
@Sereven, not you Droite.
11/10/2018 10:05 AMPosted by
Serevèn
Please tell me where the story has presented Sylvanas' true motives as anything beyond it. She's a cartoon villain. And that's fine. I love cartoon villains. It's not an attack on your personhood to call her what she is. It's okay to like the evil woman murdering and damning people to the hell she fears so she can feel less alone in the world.
When I say 'reductive argument', I mean that you are conflating every possible motivation people could have for remaining on Sylvanas' side - many of which have nothing to do with supporting her actions. It is not hard to find examples of people who have explained their motivations in this regard. However, you ignore this in favor of ascribing pejorative motivations with a broad brush in the guise of concern trolling.
11/09/2018 01:48 PMPosted by
Pellex
"Any time we get a player base that's divided in their support for a character, I feel like we're doing our jobs. Any time it's one-sided to the point of 'this is clearly the right direction', it's not as interesting. That was really our goal with Sylvanas, to create enough plausible deniability in the actions she's committed where she can still have a fanbase, where she could still have people supporting her actions and saying, 'Well of course she's doing that for the Horde.'"
Sounds like he doesn't understand Sylvanas' fanbase.
Granted, there're people that're racist, nationalistic asshats that would willingly commit needless acts of genocide for whatever group they identify with, but most people have a moral backbone that considers people outside of their own "group/team/side/faction" as deserving of some measure of compassion and mercy.
Virtually every person agrees Sylvanas is a Hitler analogy and her decisions are neither moral nor intelligent. (I.e. Burning the Horde's only advantage in an otherwise 50/50 war, instead of using it to negotiate from a place of power.)
If you read the forums at all, you'll see most of her fanbase thinks she has gone in the wrong direction - they just have hope she'll turn around and get more sensible development.
11/10/2018 10:43 AMPosted by
Yagarr
Virtually every person agrees Sylvanas is a Hitler analogy and her decisions are neither moral nor intelligent. (I.e. Burning the Horde's only advantage in an otherwise 50/50 war, instead of using it to negotiate from a place of power.)
Well, if you think of Stormheim as Pearl Harbor, she would be a Truman analogy...
But is still think maybe she went too far.
Speaking of division and choice:
"Beyond that," he added, "once you play a choice like that, you have to follow it through, so in subsequent quests that come out, you're going to be on the side you pick, and we'll see what comes of that, if you're right or wrong.
Does anyone think there's actually gonna be a right or wrong path? I'm putting my money on Sylvanas being right.
I mean, that would be an absolute kick in the teeth to people who have not been on board with the Horde's characterization this expansion, so it's got about even odds. If they make it that cut and dry, they're going to lose a portion of the Horde player base, regardless of who is "right". If they do vindicate Sylvanas, of course, they're also likely to lose a portion of the Alliance player base.
It's anyone's guess, at this moment.
11/10/2018 11:25 AMPosted by
Mellow
11/10/2018 10:43 AMPosted by
Yagarr
Virtually every person agrees Sylvanas is a Hitler analogy and her decisions are neither moral nor intelligent. (I.e. Burning the Horde's only advantage in an otherwise 50/50 war, instead of using it to negotiate from a place of power.)
Well, if you think of Stormheim as Pearl Harbor, she would be a Truman analogy...
But is still think maybe she went too far.
It would have made sense if they were losing too many troops and she wanted to end the fighting by crushing their hope. Instead it's, we won gg way to go, now we just need to occupy the city and... ITS GONE.
You can't even say that it worked in our favor in anyway. Hell the NE might have been made stronger because of it.
11/10/2018 11:44 AMPosted by
Kirango
Speaking of division and choice:
"Beyond that," he added, "once you play a choice like that, you have to follow it through, so in subsequent quests that come out, you're going to be on the side you pick, and we'll see what comes of that, if you're right or wrong.
Does anyone think there's actually gonna be a right or wrong path? I'm putting my money on Sylvanas being right.
I mean, that would be an absolute kick in the teeth to people who have not been on board with the Horde's characterization this expansion, so it's got about even odds. If they make it that cut and dry, they're going to lose a portion of the Horde player base, regardless of who is "right". If they do vindicate Sylvanas, of course, they're also likely to lose a portion of the Alliance player base.
It's anyone's guess, at this moment.
No matter who wins, half of us lose.
Either sylvanas wins and the honorable horde is pushed into the background while the alliance get trounced by the horde.
Or
Saurfang wins and the dark side of the horde is pushed into the background while the alliance have to give half of their victory over the horde to the horde.
11/10/2018 11:44 AMPosted by
Kirango
Speaking of division and choice:
"Beyond that," he added, "once you play a choice like that, you have to follow it through, so in subsequent quests that come out, you're going to be on the side you pick, and we'll see what comes of that, if you're right or wrong.
Does anyone think there's actually gonna be a right or wrong path? I'm putting my money on Sylvanas being right.
I mean, that would be an absolute kick in the teeth to people who have not been on board with the Horde's characterization this expansion, so it's got about even odds. If they make it that cut and dry, they're going to lose a portion of the Horde player base, regardless of who is "right". If they do vindicate Sylvanas, of course, they're also likely to lose a portion of the Alliance player base.
It's anyone's guess, at this moment.
It’s DiF, if they
they did not think Sylvanas was right I’d think something was wrong:P
11/10/2018 11:44 AMPosted by
Kirango
It's anyone's guess, at this moment.
My guess, there will be a compromise.
11/10/2018 11:50 AMPosted by
Saiphas
It’s DiF, if they they did not think Sylvanas was right I’d think something was wrong:P
Its between Sylvanas being right and a compromise.