They didnât state it was removed because of a kid.
All we know is it was brought to the attention of being changed by someone who was playing whilst their kid was there.
if thatâs enough to conclude the kid is the reason, then logically speaking if they posted âso i was playing wow with my dogâŚâ everyone would be concluding it was changed for the benefit of the dog, which is utter nonsense.
The stated reason was âit didnât fit/wasnât consistentâ. There has been no statement about changing it because of âoh noes the childrenâ. Thatâs people jumping to conclusions because the word âkidâ appeared in a tweet. See my âdogâ point above for how bizarre that is if you look at it rationally.
Coming from a Blizzard employee thatâs a compliment.
Companies this days think everything they do is made out in gold and donât like criticism, only when it suits them.
For me, thereâs no difference between your opinion and one working for Blizzard.
Please tell mr Blizzard employee.
Is that so ?
I can say also itâs not about fictional characters itâs about the cinematic.
Did they needed to animate it in HD ?
If you are grown up to see fictional characters being burned alive you are grown up to accept swearing.
Nope.
Itâs only valid when otherâs complain about it.
Thatâs called double standards.
hahaha Iâm a Blizzard employee now? Donât forget your tinfoil hat, snowflake.
Oh no, someone disagrees with my views, theyâre white knights and blizzard employees!!!
Donât forget to contact profesional help, so you can talk about how triggered you are and about fictional races in a videogame.
People like you are also the same kind of people who are the loudest when thereâs an dumb article being written about linking murders to violent videogames. Then you have no problem defending that it is indeed utter bs, itâs not real and what have you not.
Unlike you I like to discuss the game with people who donât play it.
A very old co-worker told me once regarding Blizzard stance being against showing Sylvanas/Jainaâs belly but perfectly ok with themes of extremely violence.
âWhen they care more about nudity than violence, you know how twisted this world has become.â
I wouldnât bother arguing tbh, There is obviously a difference between asking for something to changed because youâre personally offended than agreeing with censorship. Clearly youâve to play along and agree with art/movies/books being changed because thatâs whatâs on their agenda.
If you want something to be censored/changed after 10 years for a good reason fair enough, However the reasons been given have been pathetic, hence the complaints.
If you canât see the difference from people not letting you get away with using your own personal agendas to silence art forms than people not accepting it, Thatâs on you really. However trying to silence people from your hidden agenda wonât happen. They can counter use the term snowflake and crying all they want.
Common tactic from people trying to get away with their attitude to get what they want, Wasting your breath really.
There is one reason that has been given: âit wasnât consistentâ.
The other âreasonsâ are ones people have assumed to be the case, and there is a significant difference between âthe reasons that have been given are weakâ and âthe reasons I suspect are the reason are weakâ because the second one rests on assumptions being made.
Iâm not saying the given reason is an airtight one or perfect, but to be honest, for a creator in a process to justify a change theyâre making to that process itâs good enough. People shouldnât need to provide pages and pages of justifications to make a change to something theyâre responsible for creatively. If I build a commerical aircraft plane and I have the word âdie b wordâ on the side, I can scrub it off and give âI just felt like itâ as a reason and thatâs just how it is. The customers might not like it, they might feel the word added âcharmâ, but at the end of the day itâs up to me whether itâs there or not - and given my plane is a private service and not a public one, I have no obligation as such to them, rather they can vote with their wallets if itâs that big a deal to them.
So thatâs what this comes down to. If itâs super important, vote with your wallet. If itâs not worth walking away over, clearly itâs not that important.
So the arguement of âIts out of place in gameâ is not valid i did precise âthis word is used in the game not only here and didnt get removedâ But! Since its not about Sylvanas then Steve Denuser a guy that enforced everything to make his char (Nathanos) being important in the game, will not nothing about it!
As for swearing, you can say that âit dosent have its place i nthe gameâ im sorry but swearing its what logicially an adult does in a world with genocides, masse murderers and other horrible stuff happensâŚho just like in our real world then? Well yes exactly!
Like what because its wow you will have Tyrande coming to Sylvanas after the burning of teldrasil and bel ike âho here i give you a cookie dearâ well noâŚplus i must remind you that before garrosh made that sentance to Sylvanas she just litherally talked to him like if he was retarded âHo but i serve the hordeâ even if we all know its a lie and she is actually really saying it like a bâŚ
I donât mean âdoesnât have a place in the gameâ, I mean itâs inconsistent with Garroshâs portrayal in the game. Theyâre two very different concerns.
Garrosh engages in all manner of violent and confrontational stuff and he only swears in game in this one instance. Itâs not consistent with his portrayal in game. He hates Thrall way more than he hates Sylvanas and yet when confronting Thrall in the SoO when he is completely unhinged he doesnât make any such remarks.
It comes down to whether you interpret the âit doesnât fitâ as a âit doesnât fit with his characterâ (which is how I do) or âit doesnât fit in the gameâ (which I donât, because iâm aware swearing takes place in other places in the game)
You seem to forget and/or focus only on the Garrosh part of the probleme but i remind you that Godffrey bword got also removed so it dosent concern only Garrosh at this point (and Goddfrey was also talking about Stlvanas when saying this word which add even more to the âits made to protect Sylvanasâ thing)
Iâm not âignoring itâ, youâre including it for some reason.
The situation is to do with a dialogue between Garrosh and Sylvanas.
It concerns a word Garrosh uses against Sylv.
A word HE uses NO WHERE else in game.
It is removed with the statement âit was out of placeâ
For some reason you are assuming this means ââŚin the gameâ so you are bringing up examples like Godfrey and co, but they have nothing to do with this situation. They are not part of the conversation between Garrosh and Sylvanas. Why would you assume the âout of placeâ comment meant those too?
If I wrote a paper/book, and then took the decision to remove some words because I deemed them âout of placeâ why on earth would you assume I meant that those words are out of place in works other than the book iâm specifically talking about? Realistically, you wouldnât do that because it makes no sense.
Yet in this instance for some reason people are assuming that concerning the one conversation being focused on, when it is stated âit was out of placeâ it means the entire game as a whole rather than just the conversation or characters concerned. Itâs a wierd jump in logic to make.
Hes using it as an example because Garrosh b-word was removed together with Godfrey calling sylvanas the same if engaged by Horde players at the same time with patch 9.0
Thing that i dont want to argue about if this change was made to make sense with Garrosh character, i just bring you the fact that this is not the reason that word got removed since it would only be removed in this sentance only if it was the case
If you are smart you will ask yourself âIs it about Garrosh?â No because Godfrey also got the word removed then you will ask yoruself âIs it the word itself then?â No again since if it was the word they would remove it everywhere els in the game and its not the case either so its only ONE particular thing : The b-word when its about Sylvanas in the game and here you have all the problem
You say i bring the godfrey point for some reasons well no the reason is that i just want to show you that your arguing that blizzard said âout of the placeâ tto say âout of garrosh charâ is wrong and flawed and that its useless to argue about it since its not only Garrosh who is concerned and it also dosent concenr this only conversaiton either since the b-word got also removed from other conversation so stop focus on garrosh and the conversation because its not the point
I wasnât aware the Godfrey word was removed. Thatâs my bad.
I have no idea then, who the heck knows why. I donât honestly care. What I do know is that iâm not prepared to engage in a âcall to arms against censorshipâ over a couple of swear words in a video game.
You mean that when it touch to âloreâ and âcharacterâ you are ready to rise up and argue with ppl for hours and hours but when it concern more important things like dumb censorship you give up? Dam look at your priorities its like thoese ppl who tell me that this removing of bad word is a âretconâ and that its not important to the loreâŚlike what is this? its not about the lore here its about a blind censorship made up by a sylvanas fan who will sell you out if it would mean making his goddess waifu being a rock star ><
I just wish they changed the b-word with a different, more in-universe insult if they wanted to touch that quest. The dialogue seems a bit empty, right now.
The difference here is censorship typically applies to stuff that impacts the public sphere such as expression of liberties or consciences and a video game is a private sphere governed by the expressions and whims of the creators ultimatley.
So yeah, I do think itâs a bit daft to try and turn this into some ânoble battle against censorshipâ because honestly, there are far bigger and worthier fights you could pick to forward that cause rather than going for the bargin-bin option of wringing hands over a few swear words in a video game.
Iâve put myself in situations where iâve been physically harmed or put at physical/financial risk defending others and their principles so iâm not about to be told by someone on a video game forum that iâm afraid of âthe causeâ because iâm not getting worked up over the omission of a couple of words.
If thatâs your idea of a worthy cause, you knock yourself out and keep up the fight of trying to combat the horror that is content creators taking the executive with decisions pertaining to their own creations which they are entirely within their rights to do, and that you agreed theyâre able to do by agreeing to their EULA. Iâll keep to sticking my nose into matters where people are actually violating things I havenât tactitly agreed theyâre able to do through legal frameworks.
Ofc im sure it is on purpose to prepare the ground when Sylvanas will be shown as a goddess and most importantly âa good guy who did no wrongâ at the end of SL