Before reading through all the replies, here’s my initial thought: I didn’t choose Forsaken to be good guy. I didn’t choose Horde to be good guy.
I simply hate it.
Eta: Couldn’t read through the replies. Every discussion lately gets transformed into one about genocide. Every race has their past. But can we leave it out now and then to focus on the subject at hand?
From Steve Danuser’s twitter:
"To clarify, the Horde race descriptions that were datamined were for content not yet playable.
They were placeholders and had not been vetted.
I agree that the tone is off, particularly in the Forsaken entry. This was not an intended change of perspective for the race."
You’re saying the outrage is canceled? :’(
But the Horde was never framed as being the bad guys aswell they were always the savages that still tried to be good. Granted the Forsaken never really fit into that narrative and I think in Vanilla it was also explained that they just are allies out of convenience.
But going forward I think it is ok for a Race to change and I think it is ok for “veteran” players to dislike some of the changes but i personally think the Forsaken needed a change in their characterisation and culture since the start of cata.
You simply can´t have a Race that destroys every piece of land it touches and goes around doing little human experiments and kill everything that´s not sustainable in a setting were half of their faction is supposed to be the good guy.
The Forsaken need a purpose beyond killing Arthas and following Sylvanas and since they are undead, things like claiming land to prosper and starting a family is out of the question.
I do think the harsh change in the opposite direction is sudden and kinda forced but having them devote themselves to securing the lives of their allys could be one of this goals.
This.
/chars
Thank effing God.
PS:
Found the tweet:
Watch them do a complete 180 and turn us all into soulless ghouls that stomp on puppies and eat babies.
Looks like meat is back on the menu boys!
I feel we have broken the devs. Or BfA has. For years they seemed to be in a constant struggle to justify all the stuff they did in the game, no matter how hated it was. But now they seem to be totally resigned to cave to public outcries. I feel we deserve Ion’s skull as a trophy, or something like that. You think if enough people ask for it, they will send one to my character?
Do you want it as a Helmet to wear or a chalice to drink blood out? But remeber you only can choose one. no refunds.
I guess that is the natural outcome when the team that is responsible for the story goes trough a lot of changes and the people in charge for said story change but your playerbase stays more or less the same. And that is my guess they simply realized bending to the whims of what seems to be the majority of players you can at least secure their favor and money. I think WoW Classic is a great example for this.
It will be interesting going forward what else will happen.
Ah and sign me up for the Skull.
In a sense they got the emotional response they asked for from the Burning of Teldrassil. I think the devs severely underestimated the level of anger it and what followed would spark in the community however.
So it’s being changed as it’s supposedly a “placeholder” and was never intended to be the final note according to Danuser. Anyone actually believe that? 
At least it’s being changed now anyway
Just think about this if this was not a placeholder then the plans they have for the Forsaken stay the same regardless.
I mean if Blizz really want to turn them good and want to put Calia in charge they will just do that and change only a bare minimum of flavor text so it would not rub Fans the wrong way.
Not like the War Campaign Choice for Horde or the slight changes in the Darkshore Quests for Alliance changed the whole story ultimately both was rahter pointless as of yet.
For me it feels as if they are testing the waters.
They do seem to have a certain goal in mind, and now they are toying with the number of steps they’ll need to get to it.
That makes them throw certain stuff around from time to time, and quickly backpedal if they feel they’ve gone to far and need some extra steps.
There are simply to many indicators flying around with the likes of Calia, for that to not be the case.
Agreed. I feel like community backlash to Calia probably resulted in some changes being made in the immediate aftermath of 8.2.5, with her being benched until they figure out how they want to try to ease her in on the Forsaken playerbase.
I think it’s too early to tell if they backpedaled on anything here. That they didn’t make her the Forsaken leader (for now) doesn’t mean they strayed from the story they had in mind for her. They were probably quite cognizant of the upcoming Shadowlands addon when they wrote Before the Storm, and there is a lot more than the Forsaken plot that could reasonably be tied to the heir to the throne of Lordaeron. Especially considering that a very large number of the dead WCIII era Alliance/human characters are tied to Lordaeron. Not to mention her child.
Also, I always felt that the big role set up in BtS for Calia was a lot more related to the “evil Light” plot, than to the leadership of a Horde people.
Throwing around a more moderate alternative at a time when your are actively shown removing the conflicting characters, and have said character coincidentally be one that would relate to the leading position you are just now leaving open, is simply to much of an active effort for it to be a red herring.
We even had the ending for the war campaign about how the remaining Forsaken character goes ahead to tighten a relation with the aforementioned character, and an introductory book from a writer that just now started getting a more active role in the games storytelling, further highlighting how much better said “gentle” traits are in the Forsaken society.
Not saying that we are not to have some unexpected turn at the last moment.
But even then, and after Derek, Lillians new personality, Calia, Zelling, and the new characterisations for both Nathanos and Sylvanas, it does seem that it could be a Plan B in case the tentative tries at Plan A are welcomed in a poor way.
And I don’t think it’s a red herring. She will certainly play a role in Forsaken politics, and she will certainly lead someone. But I don’t think she was ever meant to lead a part of the Horde. That was player speculation that I never ever found convincing.
So there’s been a new update to the Alpha, and now the description is as follows:
“The undead Forsaken may be shunned by the living, but your people are determined to rise above the ruins of the past to forge a new future.”
While this is better, it’s still essentially implying the same thing between the lines in my view.
Its more generic, and far less alienating. Considering this is supposed to be some vague notion regarding the overall theme of the race, i’d say that it serves its purpose rather fine.
We might have some idea regarding what Blizzard may try to do with the race further down the line, but as of now, at least the introductory race description is no longer restricting the race’s development to that very specific goal.
This new text allows some wiggle room for writers to discard certain venues without making it feel contradictory.
PS: Still find the Darkspear one rather irksome.
Troll:
Renouncing the savagery of the other troll tribes, you and your fellow Darkspear trolls protect Azroth with cunning ferocity.Renouncing the savagery of other troll tribes, you and your fellow Darkspear protect Azeroth with cunning ferocity.
I don’t want to play a defanged tribe that is meeker than the average race dude. Why can’t Darkspear be savage?