Thoughts on why the Elune Cinematic didn't work

From my personal perspective as someone whose played horde 99% (because everyone’s just dying to know my opinion, I’m sure), I just find the races’ cultures secondary in importance compared to the faction appeal itself. As a certain dwarf likes to point out, humans / dwarves / elves are a fantasy staple in settings, so I guess you kinda know what you’re going to get into before you even look into the franchise.

A playable minotaur, though? And you say they can be a hero protagonist too? Okay, that piques my interest. Lemme take a look to see how the game spins that…

I think for most alliance races, being a hero (or at least the lighter of two shades of grey) is assumed, and maybe the focus is put on the cultures you’re supposed to protect. For a horde race, being a hero has to be impressed, and you need noteworthy characters to represent that first.

13 Likes

I hadn’t considered that, but this makes sense. Ultimately though I was mostly concerned with that section with establishing that difference in visions in order to lay out why the fate of the playable race versus the fate of the characters matters to us - and I feel like this point doesn’t always make it across. I’ve been told that I should be happy because Tyrande is being spared, or invested in the deep character drama between Elune and the Winter Queen - and these perspectives just completely miss the point about what Alliance and Night Elf fans, generally speaking, look for from their experiences.

Sorry for derailing, by the way. I know the point of the thread is to talk about Elune but since the horde perspective side topic came up, I just wanted to get that stuff out of my head. I don’t mean it as some sort of detraction for why someone should be satisfied with the characters they do have.

It reminded me of a moment on the story forum discord a long while back where I rather flippantly said something like “At least you have other alliance races to play if you don’t like night elves anymore,” to which you had to remind me that you weren’t interested in the greater alliance, and that your preference was focused on night elves.

To be clear, I’ll comment on the main thrust of the thread when I have time to properly devote to it on something other than my mobile. By no means do I think Night Elves aren’t being absolutely crapped on right now. All the deadend flailing from that corner of the narrative is, frankly, some of the worst I’ve seen in the entirety of the game.

However, the aside re: Horde investment left me gobsmacked. Expect more words there, haha.

6 Likes

Honestly even before I’d completely given up on her as a character I was pro a Sylvanas hiatus. She’d been the only relevant Forsaken character for too long now, and let’s be real here she’d struggle to break the top 10 list for most interesting undead.

I hope to God one day Blizz realizes I truly do not care about sad Elves. If you are pushing three millenia and don’t know how to roll with trauma yet then frankly I’m not sad somebody came and wrecked your hundred acre wood.

What are we but slaves are we to this torment?” Sylvanas says, waxing poetic, while the Forsaken are orchestrating death metal concerts and have made dry, gallows humor their national pass time.

Of course I figured they’d replace her with any of the innumerable number of Forsaken characters I adore. What you wouldn’t want to see Calder Gray interact with like Lor’Themar and Baine?

"No need to thank me gentlemen. I was able to stich together a gigantic super chicken out of the hawk and plainstriders you sent us!

… Why would think that was their purpose?

"… Why wouldn’t it be?"

Meanwhile a kaiju sized Frankenstein flamingo stomps around in the background

Can you at least control it?

Enslave such a beautiful creature? And here I felt the Tauren respected nature

That’d be so much more fun.

14 Likes

https://i.imgur.com/rnNm1YG.gif

(Obligatory mention: Thrall definitely has intentional parallels to Superman, for better or worse, although not specifically the scene or movie you’re describing.)

I’ll accept the phrasing of the Elune cinematic and assume that Elune was not able to stop Teldrassil from being destroyed. That the best she could do was send the souls of the dead to Ardenweald, where they could be… I dunno, I don’t think Night Elves work like Wild Gods. Maybe they’d just become denizens of Ardenweald? The thought that Night Elves can all be killed and reborn again just like Cenarius seems wrong.

Presumably, Elune has no influence over the Arbiter, and yet she was able to send Ysera to Ardenweald to be reborn. This would indicate Elune has some capacity to bypass the Grand Design and send souls directly to her sister’s realm. Otherwise, the souls would need to filter through the Arbiter as normal, which would necessarily mean Elune can’t decide where souls go. But, the Arbiter being broken is what condemns souls to the Maw. I’m left wondering why Elune wasn’t able to bypass it. It would have been a way to alleviate the sting of the situation a bit. It leads me to believe that the Narrative Team somehow managed not to anticipate how much hate Teldrassil was going to elicit, and all of this Elune/Ardenweald stuff is a panicked rush to try something, anything to salve.

Here’s where I’ll depart from most of the Night Elf players, I think. Teldrassil happening was not inherently a bad bit of storytelling. The building blocks could have been arranged in a way that didn’t put everyone off. They weren’t, obviously, and I’m not going to focus too much on that. As it relates to the Night Elves though, what was more important than The Burning itself was the followup. You just tilled the soil and sowed the seeds, but forgot to water them (“You” as in the writers). Instead of the Alliance players following an intense storyline about the Night Elves pushing the Horde out of Ashenvale, Wild Gods rampaging in response to the sacrilege, or marshalling forces to exact justice… we focus on Anduin telling Tyrande “get over it” and follow Saurfang to Orgrimmar to watch The Sylvanas Show some more.

Anduin (as big a narrative black hole as Sylvanas, let’s be clear) sucked all of the oxygen out of the room (which would have been handy to stop the fire) and commandeered where the plot could have gone in… y’know, the expansion that was supposed to be about the faction war and faction pride. Maybe giving the Night Elves an in-game march instead of just assuring us it happened off camera would have at least been worth exploring?

The Night Warrior, Teldrassil, Elune—all bundled up into a disappointing dead end. Elune lent Tyrande her power to kill Sylvanas—vengeance, according to the game—then yoinked the leash at the moment of truth. Sylvanas escapes, Elune and the Winter Queen have a chat, then she says Tyrande must choose vengeance or renewal. What? She chose vengeance like 10 minutes ago and you CUT HER OFF haha! Even dumber, she wouldn’t let Tyrande die WHILE SHE WAS IN ARDENWEALD, where she had just sent thousands of her favored children.

I’m tellin’ ya, it’s just kneejerk bandaids. I seriously think they are caught off-guard by how much players hate this stuff. But I agree it probably can’t be fixed. That’s partly why the appeal of a time skip and soft reset of some sort seems to be building up steam around here.

Back to Horde Player Investment:

There is no question Blizzard views characters as vectors through which “faction development” is achieved. By extension, players are forced along for the ride (because we aren’t the ones writing the story or designing the game). Using your own example with Tyrande, being “so thoroughly vandalized that there were widespread calls for her replacement…” Green Jesus Thrall circa Cataclysm was so insufferable that people still hate Thrall to this day; Baine “I-Heart-Anduin” Bloodhoof is viewed as more sympathetic to a faction we’re at war with than his own people; Varok “Let Me Die” Saurfang who wanted a teenage human to do his dirty work. All of this is to emphasize that the Horde playerbase hates the focus being on the characters.

The way you feel about Tyrande and Malfurion in your example is how we feel about Sylvanas and Saurfang (I know I don’t speak for everyone, but there’s enough historic sentiment to inform a plurality). We want the noble savage Horde, rough around the edges and willing to fight to the bitter end to survive in a world that can’t let old grudges die. It’s why there’s been so much pleading for the Alliance to be allowed to be in the wrong, for the Horde to stop being unjustifiable aggressors, to return to that original place that drew us to the game to begin with. We don’t want WoD to tell us we didn’t need Fel Gatorade to make us genocidal. We don’t want to “fight for the soul of The Horde” again, because we already know what it is. We don’t want whatever the hell this council of peaceniks is about. We just want to be The Horde again, Warchief and all.

I’ll push back on The Forsaken being nothing without Sylvanas in terms of player buy-in or faction identity. While it’s literally true that The Forsaken would not exist without Sylvanas, she bears surprisingly little resemblance to the rest of her supporters. The macabre, gallows humor and propensity for a Frankensteinian blend of mad science is notably absence from the Banshee Queen herself. Taking Sylvanas out of the picture doesn’t change those elements, it just snips away their deification of their dark messiah.

Speaking of Sylvanas, while there was plenty of mustache-villain comparisons, the bulk of the outrage in BFA was centered around the Horde being complicit or out for lunch while another genocidal Warchief took the helm. Heroes and armies that fought alongside Vol’jin when he rebelled against Garrosh were given no voice when the intercontinental catapults rolled out. In fact, there was a sort of spiteful pact that emerged within the Horde community to support Sylvanas unequivocally to the bitter end as a form of protest against the writing—we were intended to hate Sylvanas, so they deliberately threw in with her out of spite for the rancid storytelling.

To sum up what I’m getting at is that the player buy-in to faction identity happened before the character driven chapters of WoW. Warcraft’s Narrative Team chose to begin exploring their stories through characters instead of peoples. This meant that if your favorite race was getting screentime, it was through someone like Garrosh/Thrall, Jaina/Varian, Tyrande/Malfurion, etc. When those arcs disagreed with the players, they expressed contempt for the arcs of said characters. That doesn’t mean they divested from faction identity, it just means they’re responding to the way Blizzard chose to express their stories.

26 Likes

So, first off, thank you for the attention you’ve given to your analysis. It’s clear that you put a lot of thought into your reply, and that I had you wrong a few posts back.

Your commentary on the idea that the Night Elves should have followed up with an in-game march in the “faction pride” expansion is something we agree on in near-lockstep, certainly. My pessimism regarding Teldrassil came in part from the expectation that we were never going to get this - carried over from Cataclysm/MOP, which also chose to open by brutalizing the Night Elves and then not letting them substantively hit back. That they were going to do this again wasn’t a surprise to us.

We disagree, I feel philosophically, on the idea that Teldrassil was inherently a bad idea. I think you’re saying that it could have been justified on the basis that there could have set up a strong follow-up in the narrative. My reply to that is that I don’t feel that the rivalry, something that I interpret as PVP content, is best explored through an ubernarrative. I believe that PVP storytelling should be expressed through competitive play, which does in this case require that we maintain something of a status quo between the participants, and focus in on people getting their feelings of competence from actual gameplay.

Regarding Horde player investment - when I said that you were “in the wilderness”, I meant that your interests weren’t being represented - and most of the Warcraft III crowd is in this position - that being in contrast to say, Sylvanas loyalists or the people who to this day really like Garrosh. These characters are controversial, as opposed to being universally reviled - but I think more importantly, their presence was so large that nothing else was allowed to exist alongside them. Sylvanas once again is the poster child for this - and this is why I feel for Forsaken players as many of them have told me “Kyalin, you don’t understand - the forsaken were built around this one character. It’s a literal cult built around her - without her, everything has to change” - which is a change on the level of well, having the basis for your religion destroyed.

2 Likes

/random_thoughts

Continuing with the same assumptions that you mentioned, the questions I have (to the story) are:

  • why some night elves could be found in other afterlives?
  • why night warriors are in other afterlives?
  • how it fits Ysera story with “being brought directly to Ardenweald”? © Dreamweaver
  • how to coherently explain it all? Or is a night warrior going to Revendreth is also “unreliable narrator”?

Well, true, but the word “genocide” IMO should’ve never been used by the devs given all the baggage it brings.

Time skip won’t help with inconsistencies and lore contradictions though.
:thinking:

Horde being the horde and the alliance being the alliance would’ve been a nice “change”. Instead I recall in one of interviews Danuser saying that the Alliance is like the family. To which I can only :man_facepalming: because theme of informal-ish family-alike bond was what the horde started with.

On a side note, I find it comical that the horde with a warchied is bad-bad, Revendreth with a sire is bad-bad. But Anduin being the high king is not condemned by the devs. I wonder why :clown_face:

There were like 3 or so “iterations” of who Sylvanas is, her motivations, goals, etc., which she changed like there was a switch turned instead of any character progression. At this point I have a really hard time talking about Sylvanas because I see this character as a narrative tool, rather than a person.


gl hf

5 Likes

Genocide, not genocide, morally grey, wait and see! Wait and see! It might surprise you!

Genn is out for blood against Sylvanas;
Sylvanas doesn’t burn Teldrassil, actually tries to do the right thing by the Forsaken/Horde;
Dreadlords who are manipulating everything are responsible.

I’m sure if I sat down and actually gave this a think it would preserve the exact same story beats without sacrificing every bit of lore and character development on the altar of lazy metaplots.

I agree a time skip won’t fix anything, mostly just highlighting that community sentiment has withered so far that people want to distance themselves from the turd parade that has been going on since, to some degree, Legion. Original narrative team were a bunch of abusive creeps, new narrative team are writing spastic novels for themselves and vomiting it into an MMORPG. Sad part is, the answer has been staring me in the face for a while, it’s just hard to swallow 16-17 years of investing something going out like this.

7 Likes

“Unnourishable”?

Weeding out the abusers, while absolutely needed, isn’t going to fix the story. Roux’s book was utter garbage and so were Golden’s. From Wolfheart to present we’ve only gotten one novel that was worth anything and that was Illidan.

The story suffers from the prevailing sexist culture in Blizzard for sure. But that’s not the only reason it suffers. The story team in it’s entirety needs to be gutted from the franchise.

1 Like

Categorically false, it was the first good piece of Horde writing that got the spirit of the faction in ages.

Correct.

False.

It was written by a racist and did nothing more than continue the garbage from BfA but Talanji got angry for half a second so I guess it’s a masterpiece.

It also started walking Tyrande back to make room for Sylvanas’ redemption by having her spare Sira. She should have just decapitated her then and there.

The Illidan novel had two hiccups in it. The part where Maiev is homesick for Darnassus and the very end where Illidan is told he’ll be the golden angel that saves the universe.

The first is negligible and the second was walked back and had Illidan directly spit in the face of the idea later on in game.

William King wrote an amazing book.

1 Like

In one of interviews Roux mentioned that from her PoV it would make sense to kill some of the characters in the story she was given. As examples she used Sira and Zekhan. But was prohibited to do so.

IMO the book is good by WoW standards and the only thing that I’d call relevant is that is that it was well received by the community (mostly).

Her tweets were… better not to say such things. But at the same time, I do have my share of things said and done that did not age well. So, if that would be doable to get over the tension, and move on with what is agreed to be good (like her disagreement with the alliance being pushed as white knights / pushovers / always forgiving), maybe over time she could’ve make a few interesting story arcs for the game.

IMO the main hiccup is that it exists. With the current “revelations” about Frostmourne, Illidan’s soul story as well as how it got in a possession of the ally of the Jailer, and the effect of this all on the personality, TBC would fit just fine into the Illidan’s story without any retcons.

Instead we got “ackshually, he was doing ze good stuff all along”, which diminishes TBC story, adds extra confusion and contradictions into the story IMO.


gl hf

1 Like

What tweets? This is not the first time I have heard them mentioned.

most viral version you could get if you search for “asmongold roux” on youtube. Not sure local moderators would be happy with bringing out almost a years old drama.


gl hf

Can I offer a uniquely female approach to this arguement which seems to be lackibg about Garrosh’s “Orc-ness” i feel like it was a deliberate jab by Golden and Co towards toxic masculinity.

Garrosh has always embodied that machismo which was central to orc culture. Thrall on the other hand developed empathy as a result to being raised by humans.

The undertone here is toxic masculinity is bad, but it seems like to appease the fanbase they just kind of dropped that all together and gave Garrosh a positive ending just because (probably the same reason why they are now forgiving Arthas) they don’t want to have to unpack this and there’s probably pushback on the other side of the writing team on potentially ostracising WoW’s target demographic.

It’s really not that deep.

Depends on how far you want to go with it.

We have sadly quite a few devs considering anybody not liking their content to be toxic by default. Paired with how far is the stuff that the devs do with from how a sizeable portion of the community feels about the things (both gameplay and story)

Not to mention that irl given the situations where instead of engaging and discussing with the community the 9.1 story which even mainstream media considers to be a “narrative disaster” they just hopped away, if I assume good will behind it, and that it’s just hard to deal with community, then suddenly we have a situation (dealing with overly vocal and not so friendly people) which demostrates why “toxic masculinity” is precisely the right tool for the job (sometimes it is).

Now, there is a caveat that it needs internal balance of such people to seek for ways to unfold the situation and get the actual useful information out of raw emotions, instead of just trolling attempts.

Yup. Garritos would be proud of such "orcs are inherently… " rhetoric of our big story team figures.


gl hf

12 Likes

That’s the same thing and also worse

Golden pinned Garroshs problems on being of the Orc race.

Now you’re saying she just meant Thrall is good because he was raised as humans because the entire Orc race is a toxic masculinity metaphor

Which, she also said earlier in the same panel on a separate point, about Thrall being good cuz he was raised by humans

Lmao

14 Likes