Exactly this.
It’s quite strange how some things are framed by Blizzard. Especially event like the Draenei exodus and their interaction with the Orcs (not warning them).
Or like General Draven is one of the good protagonists of Shadowlands, even though he mentions he burned multiple worlds.
Is this Baine speaking? Ignore the jab. It’s not about your comment.
So it happened that some people in blizz state that the factions are the foundation of what makes WoW. But there is a disconnect between what is stated on a stage by Ion and what is told via the game story.
Factions are villains to overcome. Expansion after expansion story bash even consideration of not uniting and focusing on interests of somebody else all things be damned. Things like Khadgar moralizing in WoD / Legion, Legion class halls literally claiming that we need to succeed despite the factions, BfA celebrating “let’s be together” thing - all they demonize factions as a system.
Factions as a concept are not allowed to be heroic, to be a valid alternative to “Jaina touching Thrall”. Which IMO is a major contributor to this part of the game being so miserable.
Factions are not depicted as heroic, right thing to have and preserve, the foundation of WoW. Those things exist only on stage. For whatever reason, the players are not allowed to see this in the game. So then we have… what we have.
At least that’s how I see the faction side of the story of the WoD+ time.
To be honest, feedback in regards to how a certain part of content makes people feel is still a valid thing. It’s the job of game designers to act accordingly.
If as alternative there would be new developers trying to put new stories into the old characters that barely fits such characters, is killing them / phasing out of the story a bad thing?
Could you really separate the 2? There are many odd things in the story.
Let’s say, for whatever reason we would try logically look at the events of BfA.
So, do we see Tyrande during the possibly upcoming siege of Orgrimmar? No.
Malfurion? No.
Turalyon during battle for Undercity? No.
Sure, the alliance lost quite a bit, but won both warfronts, and some horde members sided with alliance. So, the horde army lost twice, lost extra people who sided with opponents, and supposedly had an upper hand?
Could, objectively, neutral organizations, ignore what could happen after burning of the tree™? Would it have no meaning for nature, and Cenarion Circle? Not meaning anything for stability of Azeroth, and thus, for Earthen Ring?
We now know that Bolvar saw Sylvanas as a threat. Any actions? No.
There are lightbound who promised to help if needed, and would likely not pick the same side as mag’har. Any discussions about them? No.
There is a spaceship [2 at least], which, at the very least, could be marvelous for solving logistical problems. Was it ever used? No.
And it’s not even a half of narrative elements that were used just for the story convenience.
It’s an odd thing and IMO poorly told. Might be one of those “it would be convinient for the future story” kind of decision.
Well, none of the Revendreth natives are good guys in a literal sense, but this quote is actually interesting. He says he burned entire worlds and “crushed entire afterlives to ruin”. Seems like the Shadowlands weren’t all peace and harmony even before the Arbiter got broken, and not only fighting against outside forces like the light and void but also each other.
It is a very interesting quote, you are right. Especially the light and void part. Yes in Revendreath no one is really clean. What 's giving me pause here is, when burning entire worlds is not bad enough to end in the Maw, what really is? But that’s for another topic.
Sylvanas was intruding on foreign grounds with a very muddy canonical info about Alliance knowing or not about her plans. Her final confrontation also happened on very questionable grounds so how much Horde could use that as unjustified violation of peace treaty in another thing.
So as it stands - is would Tyrande and Malfurion be caught in similar situation? Doubtful but possible.
The hypothetical premise I mentioned wasn’t really all that focused on the exact circumstances of the War of Thorns.
But it’s rather significant how its parallels showcase what would’ve happened if the situation had been reversed and it had been the Horde the ones that launched an attack that aimed at killing an Alliance leader alongside her army.
And how the reaction Saurfang had wasn’t all that illogical or uncommon given how other leaders react in similar scenarios