Citing historical facts and asking people to do research isn’t a dog whistle; historical facts and independent research can only be understood by a particular demographic?
I think you don’t know what that term “dog whistle” actually means. Going by your comment’s upvotes, I think it is a dog whistle and/or several others don’t understand the definition either.
For all you know a Prime Naaru may be behind what was done to the post-Warlords Draenei.
Now you know how the Forsaken players feel.
Marad at least got a heroic ending. He gave his life to save Y’rel even after their disagreements, and that’s not a bad way for a Paladin to go.
No, he used it exactly in the right context when calling out your statements as political dog whistles.
A lot of what you said about history had Islamophobic undertones.
I dunno, Forsaken fanboys were riding pretty high and smug in Cataclysm through to Legion. I don’t think that Draenei fanboys ever got an equivalent period
I would say the problem might be that the whole Light image shift is a clear retcon that does not fit pre-Legion naaru narrative. Plus IMO it has a couple problems:
The biggest mistake that anyone can make of the Light is to assume it’s benevolence.
is the current usual vision, replacing the old one, not expanding it IMO.
Not to mention that the current push with the cosmo forces is “it has a pantheon, it stubbornly follows it’s nature, it may or may not try to use us for their goals”, repeat 6 times.
Unfortunately the problem with retcons is that they are retcons. And overall symptomatic of the devs picking convenient elements in the story while ignoring both the other parts of the story, and how the players see things and react to them. So, the current canon seems to be that the conflic did not go away actually.
As I mentioned when this interview was posted soon after the blizzcon, and after looking at the info coming out at that time, I am not angry. I am just disappointed.
gl hf
Looks at the Scarlet Crusade that was perfectly capable of wielding the Light despite being fanatic monsters. Yes, clearly, the Light’s capacity to be used and do evil has never been established before. Or rather, it has always been established that it was a possibility, but has never been meaningfully explored. A wholly benevolent force would not allow itself to manipulated by the Scarlets; unless it considered what they were doing as benevolent (which opens up a whole can of worms).
Plus, I like that the Naaru are allowed variety and diversity in opinion. It makes me appreciate those we’ve met prior to Xe’ra far more knowing that wasn’t just their default programmed state. It also makes their sacrifices have far more weight, knowing they are individuals. Rather than a hive mind.
IMO a missed opportunity - exploring the Scarlets. Because not only the presence of dreadlords was not revealed, but also seemingly it were the visions from the Light that led Scarlet onslaught to being slaughtered in Northrend.
I am not sure if I can fully agree. The TBC version of the stuff that could be seen even in the early draenei quests could be summarized as “many are the paths of the Light”. So, the “end user” could pick whatever path. It could be a path of wraith and unquestionable servitude
Vindicator Boros: We are agents of the Light. We serve without question. We die without question.
Or, it could be a path of compassion and forgiveness. But it was up for the followers to pick their path.
There was a peculiar line in one of older interviews, which I am not sure what could mean in the future:
there are was a naaru within the Seat of the Triumvirate dungeon; and as we have seen in places like Mu’ru in the Sunwell, naaru that are sort of left alone, or naaru that are exposed to corruption, they can become shadow. They can turn to the void, and actually become a powerful source of darkness.
© https://warcraft.blizzplanet.com/blog/comments/gamescom-2017-world-warcraft-legion-patch-7-3-interview/2
So, conceptually if naaru are just seeking attention across the universe there could be a turn of events where at some point they got trapped by something they encountered. Or it is because they were afraid (assuming they can be afraid at all) to turn into something else, some naaru just accepted a bond with not the most benevolent entities, such as Scarlets in their current iteration.
But it’s such an odd statement, that it can go who knows where.
I would like it too. What I am not a fan of is a total narrative shift so that only zealotry could be expected in the future.
I wish those would be acknowledged by the narrative. We’ll see where it goes.
gl hf
You say it’s wrong but still think they have any kind of leg to stand on. Were you taught growing up it’s okay to force your religion onto others?
I don’t know what Xe’ra thought Illidan would do afterwards. I wonder if she thought he’d be happier free from Fel-induced cravings.
Or maybe she thought Illidan needed to move on; when Illidan said “I am my scars!”, I wish she’d said “Scars fade”. It reminded me of Po’s response in Kung Fu Panda 2 when Shen said “I don’t care what scars do”; “You should, Shen. You gotta let go of that stuff from the past 'cause it just doesn’t matter. The only thing that matters is what you choose to be now.” (course Xe’ra would have made a point better if she said that without the forcible Lightforging).
I get that you’re desperate to put the villain mantle on anyone but the Horde, and REALLY don’t like the fact that the Mag’har aren’t all innocent victims and that the Draenei might have a valid point, if not method. We don’t know enough, but the reason you’re assuming the worst of Yrel’s group doesn’t prove that.
Given that X’era pretty much shows herself to be modeled after Dark Kosh, I’m not surprised that Illidan didn’t buy into her.
X’era is not a benevelont being. She certainly isn’t tolerant, or empathetic. She’s a sociopathic zealot.
I looked up Kosh. The original Kosh was the nice Vorlon. And sociopathic? that’s really grasping at straws, since Xe’ra’s actions come nowhere near those of Kosh II/ Ulkesh. Plus Xe’ra’s tolerant; she allows mages who use arcane - such as Archmage Y’mera - despite being more hardline in comparison to the other naaru. At least you’re not spouting that false claim she’s as bad the Legion or the Void Lords.
It’d be really lazy of Blizzard if they made the naaru baddies because the naaru have inspiration from the vorlons and Babylon 5 made the vorlons baddies in later seasons.
That’s the name the NPC’s are labelled as.
What, morally? I think slavery is a hard sell, at least for me. Unsurprisingly, I’m anti-slavery.
This entire post reads like a justification for colonialism.
The victims are being blamed. While the aggressors are being white washed.
This is the equivalent of ‘the original Horde was mostly right’ post.
So you bringing up the Crusades is a-ok, but me bringing up the Byzantine-Seljuk Wars has Islamophobic overtones? Quite the double standard. On that note, do you condemn atrocities from people of every religion or just single out Christianity?
Also, your contempt for history, calling encouragement to check facts a “dog whistle” and flinging an accusation of being an “ist” or “phobe”… spoken like a true Twitterati ideologue. It’s funny how those people who agree with your worldview are vote-brigading to upvote your comments.
Are you the person so triggered by me pointing out the “Lightbound” aren’t moustache-twirling, one-dimensional evil, that they flag my comments? Blizzard acknowledging that the situation isn’t “Mag’har good, Draenei bad” can only do good things for the story going forward.
The literal point of a dog whistle is to signal something without being explicit about so you can deny it precisely like this. Citing historical facts and asking people to do research can absolutely be a dog whistle given the context.
‘There were a lot of horrible deaths in WW2. But everyone should really check the records, the numbers reported may not be entirely accurate. I’m not doubting a lot of people died! Just, you know, take a closer look…’
Thereby nothing incorrect is being said. Facts are being referenced and ‘research’ is being encouraged. All while the person can deny responsibility or intent relating to the comments.
How is this tolerant? Arcane isn’t a religion and there’s no sign that Xe’ra disagrees with arcane use.
Since you mentioned slavery and colonialism…
And this isn’t whataboutism how?
So you’re intentionally engaging in a fallacious thinking. Gotcha.
The facts I raised in those points are accurate and valid, like it or not.
The Mag’har aren’t simply innocent victims and the Draenei aren’t simply big bad fanatics. Plus I was wrong about Xe’ra being tolerant; since she has no problem with arcane use, that makes her more open-minded than certain people give her credit for.
Those who use whataboutism as I did just then – my only “fallacious” thinking in this thread - are not necessarily engaging in an empty or cynical deflection of responsibility: whataboutism can be a useful tool to provide context for criticism, expose contradictions, double standards, and hypocrisy.
To disregard those facts because of how I presented them is also fallacious thinking.
I’m not criticizing the validity of the facts, I’m criticizing why they’re being mentioned to me at all.
I’d say by definition they are doing so.
I don’t think disregarding fallacious points is fallacious at all. Their very nature makes them irrelevant to the discussion. That’s the entire point of an appeal to hypocrisy, to avoid actually attacking the other argument by pointing out supposed hypocrisy. It doesn’t actually further what’s being discussed.
My comment was about Y’rel and the Lightforged/bound of Draenor and their bad actions.
We can have a separate discussion about the Iron Horde if you want.
Did you read the comment I posted that started this thread? I said the “join or die” was something the “Lightbound” did wrong.
I brought up the atrocities of the Mag’har is to point out the situation isn’t a simple “Mag’har good, ‘Lightbound’ Draenei bad” situation certain fans make it out to be for whatever reason (maybe they’re Horde or Orc fans, maybe Void fans, maybe they’re edgelords, maybe they’re looking at the game through the lens of their real world religious/anti-religious beliefs, maybe it’s something else). That’s not fallacious.