Tyrande: Had her power stripped while fighting with Sylvanas. Never got it back.
Malfurion: Was soundly beaten and imprisoned by Xavius. Lost a fight to Sylvanas. Then he was literally locked away during DF because he wasn’t able to do what was needed.
Jaina: Was locked away by her own family, and had to be saved.
Anduin: Currently can’t use his powers.
Alleria: Has not been shown to be on that level of power. AND she cannot fully control what the void does around her.
This is what I mean about you not paying attention to the story.
I said that is what you wanted to happen. Not that it happened.
Again, you make an objectively false statement.
In point of fact, the Alliance has lost more battles than the Horde, by a considerable margin. They have also lost more cities.
And, BOTH wars ended only because there were Horde rebels who made it possible. And specifically in BfA it was Saurfang who won the war. It wasn’t an Alliance victory.
Well, they developed the Horde story first, spent more time on the Horde story, and produced more content for the Horde story. Those are objective facts. If you are saying the writers are biased, evidence says it is not towards the Alliance.
You are asking for things that are insane. They will never happen. Blizzard is not going to retcon away any expac. They are not going to resurrect the dead characters just to appease you. Nor are they going to get rid of the ‘peace mongers’ to bring back hostilities.
If you can’t accept the game for what it is, you are just hurting yourself.
So far, it deals very little with either faction. But it doesn’t ignore the Horde. Heck, in the first quest chain you help more Horde NPCs that Alliance. After that short intro almost all of questing and story is entirely new groups. Neither faction plays that big of a part. AND it is only the first patch we have so far.
Don’t disagree. But I think most of that comes down to the people running it. Not the philosophy itself. Generally it is the rich, entitle people who have servants doing the domestic work for them, so they don’t really care about domestic labor among the peasants. And they want to get as much work out of the ‘peasant’ class as possible, so why worry about fair?
I don’t know if I would say that was entirely the reason. Neo-Marxism certainly has a subset of that in it. But my understanding of it, there are other aspects driving it as much or more. It probably would still be a thing even if the feminism was not in it. But, yes I agree the feminism still plays a part.