This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Garrosh haters, COME!
Return to board index
Post by
306612
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
taurenmoo812
No, I'm just saying that I personaly dislike how the story is progressing, at least in this department. And I don't remember the last time Blizzard, as a company and not its employees as individuals, claimed that they cared more about the Horde.
IIRC, Metzen's a horde nut, so I based it off of that.
But yeah, I wouldn't mind the incongruities if they actually gave a #$%^ once or twice.
Whenever its brought up, someone that plays the alliance always wants to think its the other way round, in in truth, its not. All literature, all books written about warcraft, all comic books, and to the larger extent, the ingame lore, have been completely bias in the alliances favour. For all the good the horde has done in the last several decades of the lore, it always boils down to how they get seen from an alliance pov.
Even the details of the warcraft movie is completely in alliances favour.
So, the ONE good element the horde has, a leader that holds the horde back from appearing as the bad guys, gets taken away, and thats suppose to be a good thing is it?
The whole thing with orcs who only want to see bloodshed and war and killing the alliance, that comes from the old ways of the horde, where it failed them. That horde did not fight in silithus. It did not fight the burning legion and kil'jaeden, it did not fight the lich king, this horde has, all under Thralls leadership.
And yet, the nieve among those would think its good to change things around and it'll be better? When the horde is again painted as the bad guys?
As for the Metzen thing, I personally think his ideas on the lore are slipping, if it lets an ass like Garrosh taking charge.
Post by
Monday
No, I'm just saying that I personaly dislike how the story is progressing, at least in this department. And I don't remember the last time Blizzard, as a company and not its employees as individuals, claimed that they cared more about the Horde.
IIRC, Metzen's a horde nut, so I based it off of that.
But yeah, I wouldn't mind the incongruities if they actually gave a #$%^ once or twice.
Whenever its brought up, someone that plays the alliance always wants to think its the other way round, in in truth, its not. All literature, all books written about warcraft, all comic books, and to the larger extent, the ingame lore, have been completely bias in the alliances favour.
For all the good the horde has done in the last several decades of the lore
, it always boils down to how they get seen from an alliance pov.
What have they done in the last few decades? The Horde only uncorrupted itself ten years or so ago.
Post by
Patty
Whenever its brought up, someone that plays the alliance always wants to think its the other way round, in in truth, its not.Vice-versa can also be the case. All literature, all books written about warcraft, all comic books, and to the larger extent, the ingame lore, have been completely bias in the alliances favour....As artistically illustrated here. For all the good the horde has done in the last several decades of the lore, it always boils down to how they get seen from an alliance pov.I think you mean ~8 years.
Even the details of the warcraft movie is completely in alliances favour.Because the ugly Green-skin's point of view doesn't sell as much as the noble human who we like to relate ourselves to.
So, the ONE good element the horde has, a leader that holds the horde back from appearing as the bad guys, gets taken away, and thats suppose to be a good thing is it?I am reluctant to say that Thrall is the only "good" thing in the Horde.
The whole thing with orcs who only want to see bloodshed and war and killing the alliance, that comes from the old ways of the horde, where it failed them. That horde did not fight in silithus. It did not fight the burning legion and kil'jaeden, it did not fight the lich king, this horde has, all under Thralls leadership.But some of those people
did
fight at Silithus, the Dark Portal and the Sunwell. People may have always had these opinions, but are only publicising them now that Garrosh is some form of rallying point.
And yet, the nieve among those would think its good to change things around and it'll be better? When the horde is again painted as the bad guys?Some members of the Horde see the Alliance as the bad guys that need to be taught a lesson; they fear that Proudmoore's assault was the first part of an elaborate scheme to bring down the Horde and re-shackle them.
As for the Metzen thing, I personally think his ideas on the lore are slipping, if it lets an ass like Garrosh taking charge.When developing the Lore in something such as WoW, you can't let too much of your own ideals and what you think is the best way to have a picnic between orcs and night elves in Stormwind cloud your judgement in entertaining the playerbase.
Post by
Adamsm
And yet, the nieve among those would think its good to change things around and it'll be better? When the horde is again painted as the bad guys?No, one faction is painted as evil, in your eyes, as we know next to nothing about Garrosh reign beyond the expelling of all non-tauren and orc npcs from the center ring, the attack on Ashenvale and that's it. We still don't know which Warchief sends the Forsaken after Gilneas after all.
Post by
Skreeran
All literature, all books written about warcraft, all comic books, and to the larger extent, the ingame lore, have been completely bias in the alliances favour./facepalm
Rise of the Horde? Lord of the Clans? Warcraft 3? The Frozen Throne? Ahn'Qiraj? Nagrand?
Stormwind was missing it's king for 4 years and had Deathwing's daughter and corrupt nobles in its place. Meanwhile, Tyrande the B**** and Fandral "I'm a huge !@#$%^" Staghelm are running the Night Elves, and Magni can't keep the Dark Irons out of his daughter's pants.
You statement is absolutely incorrect. The comics and some of the recent lore have shown some Alliance bias, but it's just silly to say that all lore ever has shown complete bias to the Alliance.
Post by
451455
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Skreeran
Rise of the Horde? Lord of the Clans? Warcraft 3? The Frozen Throne? Ahn'Qiraj? Nagrand?
He is talking about things as of late, within the last three years: Tides of Darkness, Beyond the Dark Portal, Stormrage, The Comic, Gilneas, Frosthold chain quest.
By the way, I didn't get what you meant by Ahn'Qiraj at first, but then I
put some thought into it
heh.
Stormwind was missing it's king for 4 years and had Deathwing's daughter and corrupt nobles in its place. Meanwhile, Tyrande the B**** and Fandral "I'm a huge !@#$%^" Staghelm are running the Night Elves, and Magni can't keep the Dark Irons out of his daughter's pants.
The part your missing is that these things are outdated. Stormwind's King is back, Onyxia was taken down in a blaze of glory, and Fandral is gone.
Currently: Garrosh is becoming Warchief and Orgrimmar is becoming a city just for orcs and tauren. Elsewhere, Sylvanas is giving everyone on her team a bad name, and the Grimtotem tribe is making thier stand to take power.
A few months ago I would agree with you, but it seems like Blizzard is finally showing some love to the Alliance for once.I know, but look at what Tauren said:
All
literature,
all
books written about warcraft,
all
comic books, and to the larger extent, the ingame lore, have been completely bias in the alliances favour.
Post by
taurenmoo812
oh.. my word..
Dark, were you just on my side back then?
Post by
FarseerLolotea
All
literature,
all
books written about warcraft,
all
comic books, and to the larger extent, the ingame lore, have been completely bias in the alliances favour.Are you including
Rise of the Horde
and
Lord of the Clans
in that total?
Post by
taurenmoo812
All
literature,
all
books written about warcraft,
all
comic books, and to the larger extent, the ingame lore, have been completely bias in the alliances favour.Are you including
Rise of the Horde
and
Lord of the Clans
in that total?
As a matter of fact, yes.
1: The alliance weren't in rise of the horde. The draenei where but they weren't part of the alliance, victims, but not part of it then, and how the orcs were changed was that part of history where they fell from there shamanistic ways
2: Lord of the clans, one of the exceptions, where blackmoore, well under the alliance banner but with his own agenda, other then that the alliance were not part of that story, so neither example serves in this.
I'm talking about any story where both horde and alliance are in that story, now consider that.
Post by
Adamsm
I'm talking about any story where both horde and alliance are in that story, now consider that.Hm.... Day of the Dragon: Dark Horde. Tides of Darkness/Beyond the Dark Portal..... Dark Horde. Arthas Rise of the Lich King.... Dark Horde. The Last Guardian.... Dark Horde/Sargeras.
Blood and Honour: Etrigg attacked by those who don't let the past go.
The War of the Ancients: Good Horde, Thrall, Brox and others, not attacking the Alliance.
Sunwell Trilogy: No Horde vs Alliance conflicts in there.
Night of the Dragon: Corrupt Blood Elf being hunted by Both Factions for attacking the children of Archmage Rhonin.
Stormrage: Horde and Alliance fighting together against the Nightmare Lord, a corrupted Night Elf.
Legends 1-5: Variety of tales where both the Alliance and the Horde are evil/good.
The comics: Valeera is a good, Rhegar turns good at the end, and for the first arc he was part of an illegal Slavery/Gladitoral system. Beyond that; Warsong offensive seen from the Alliance perspective(which has been in the wrong ever since). Second Arc; Twilight Hammer plays off the tensions already there; Garrosh is an idiot. Third Arc: New Council, made up of Alliance and Horde members.
Yes.... they are always painted in the wrong aren't they Tauren?
Seriously Tauren, if your going to make broad sweeping generalizations.... at least think of what your saying heh.
Edit:
Even the details of the warcraft movie is completely in alliances favour./sigh Are you still complaining about something that doesn't even have a script yet? As stated before:
1. War Movie(duh)
2. Varian-Like Clone
3. Thrall is in it
4. Alliance perspective
Beyond that,
NOTHING IS KNOWN
!
Post by
Patty
I'm talking about any story where both horde and alliance are in that story, now consider that.
Are you seriously telling us that
every single thing
Blizzard has
ever
done, written or otherwise been involved in has painted the Horde as the bad guys and the Alliance as the good guys? If so, I would
thoroughly
recommend re-reading Lord of the Clans, and comparing Thrall and Orgrim's characters to Blackmoore, to think of an example.
Post by
Rankkor
yhea tauren, I wound't go as far as to say "all" lore is biased to the alliance.
I would say that all of the recent one is, but not all.
almost all of the lore introduced in WOTLK demonizes the horde (particulary garrosh and his groupies, as well as the forsaken in general) but not all of the WOTLK lore demonizes the horde, because if you had done (or read) the lore of the reforging of quel'delar (both alliance and horde versions) you see blood-elves turning a new leaf here, with liandrin's awesome speech, and the fact that blood-elven people controll the sunwell completely, but they don't refuse their high-elven brothers their right to enter the well, even when they could considering it was them the ones who turned their backs to silvermoon.
plus the "hero of the mag'har" questchain in nagrand can't be described as nothing else than pure unadultered "horde love" on behalf of blizzard, the induction of the taunka to the horde is another one of those moments when the game truly makes you feel proud of being horde.
overall, the lore established by blizzard IS biased toward alliance lately, painting them as good-guys, and us as bad-guys, and it doesn't seem to get any better in cataclysm with
Kratos from "God of War"
ejem Garrosh becoming the new warchief (his new looks don't really inspire much hope for me) but truth to the bone, not
All literature, all books written about warcraft, all comic books, and to the larger extent, the ingame lore, have been completely bias in the alliances favour.
Of Blood and honor is the most clear-cut example of horde-love, written by metzen himself, the alliance "alliance" shows up there, and while they are painted as stubborn, closed minded, greedy backstabing bufoons, (Minus Tirion) Eitrigg and thrall's new horde are painted as honorable, inteligent, tactical, peacefull untill provoked.
there is no way in hell that book can be interpreted as "aliance biased".
change your stance from "all lore is aliance biased" to "most recent lore has been biased towards alliance" and then we will agree.
Post by
taurenmoo812
change your stance from "all lore is aliance biased" to "most recent lore has been biased towards alliance" and then we will agree.
Actully Rank, I prefer to stand by it, mainly for the point Adam made.
Whenever the lore is written about the horde and alliance factor, it always whitewashes the alliance as the overall good guys, and the horde as either the bad guys, verging onto shards of grey.
As you know, the reason I find the horde more intresting is for just that reason, but from the perspectrive that they can be good, bad, or grey.
But, it forever undermines the horde in the presence of the alliance in lore and fiction, to them always appearing grey or less then, and even being in the background compared to the alliance overall. Its like, trying to do the right thing, but being overshadowed by something else.
Post by
Adamsm
I prefer to stand by it, mainly for the point Adam made.
Whenever the lore is written about the horde and alliance factor, it always whitewashes the alliance as the overall good guys, and the horde as either the bad guys, verging onto shards of grey.
As you know, the reason I find the horde more intresting is for just that reason, but from the perspectrive that they can be good, bad, or grey.
But, it forever undermines the horde in the presence of the alliance in lore and fiction, to them always appearing grey or less then, and even being in the background compared to the alliance overall. Its like, trying to do the right thing, but being overshadowed by something else.Huh? My point was that the basis you see isn't there; there is no book that says the New Horde is dark or evil or anything like that except in your very narrow view of things. And yes there is something there: 20 odd years of being under the hands of the Demons, of course that's going to leave a mark on the race for the rest of their lives.
There is gray everywhere in Azeroth for all the races; Dwarves with their interwar between the clans, Night Elves with the sundering of their species, the Humans.... entire history, hell they started out of a group that had one Clan conqueroring the other ones, the Gnomes and their destruction of their city, and the Worgen and the effects of the Curse over the last decade or so.
The only race on Azeroth that can be clean cut between Black and White is the Draenei, but that's over shadowed by the fact that for 25 thousand years they fled the Legion, giving them new planets to consume and new races to corrupt.
No one in Warcraft is perfect; Not Thrall, not Malfurion, not Magni Bronzebeard, not Wrynn, No One.
Post by
taurenmoo812
No one in Warcraft is perfect; Not Thrall, not Malfurion, not Magni Bronzebeard, not Wrynn, No One.
Well an agree totally.
But I've yet to see a balanced argument against finding both good and evil quests the alliance have to them.
Post by
Monday
change your stance from "all lore is aliance biased" to "most recent lore has been biased towards alliance" and then we will agree.
Actully Rank, I prefer to stand by it, mainly for the point Adam made.
Whenever the lore is written about the horde and alliance factor, it always whitewashes the alliance as the overall good guys, and the horde as either the bad guys, verging onto shards of grey.
As you know, the reason I find the horde more intresting is for just that reason, but from the perspectrive that they can be good, bad, or grey.
But, it forever undermines the horde in the presence of the alliance in lore and fiction, to them always appearing grey or less then, and even being in the background compared to the alliance overall. Its like, trying to do the right thing, but being overshadowed by something else.
Lord of the Clans say anything? Its only at the beginning Thrall likes them, the rest he doesn't like them. They aren't shown as good, just more neutral.
And what about Of Blood and Honor? The Alliance is shown as evil and cruel, except for Tirion and his captain.
Post by
Adamsm
No one in Warcraft is perfect; Not Thrall, not Malfurion, not Magni Bronzebeard, not Wrynn, No One.
Well an agree totally.
But I've yet to see a balanced argument against finding both good and evil quests the alliance have to them.
There are evil quests... from the Horde perspective all through the Alliance quests: Hell, Forest Song has you sent by a Night Elf Ancient to kill a two dozen Warsong orcs in cold blood. As said, Bartlett on the Breaker sends you to kill 15 Horde members in cold blood, and many other quests like that.
The biggest thing is something I've said many times through out threads on the boards: The Alliance polices itself; between the Highborne after the War of the Ancients, the War of the Three Clans, Alterac's betrayal in the 2nd War, the Gnomes blowing up Gnomeragon and the Council of Nobles before WoW, the Alliance watches for any threats from within and pounces on them and removes them as best as possible.
I know there are quite a few good quests on Horde side, but because of the overshadowing by the Forsaken, most people only see that.
Post by
306612
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
This topic is locked. You cannot post a reply.