WoW lore? what do you like and what dont you like?

Discussion in 'Blizzard Forum' started by ijffdrie, Sep 18, 2008.

WoW lore? what do you like and what dont you like?

Discussion in 'Blizzard Forum' started by ijffdrie, Sep 18, 2008.

  1. ijffdrie

    ijffdrie Lord of Spam

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,725
    Likes received:
    17
    Trophy points:
    38
    i know a lot of you people hate what WoW did to the warcraft lore. state here what added things disgust you, and what added things were okay you guess.




    Disgust:
    NE and forsaken joining the horde and alliance, they should have been neutral factions
    Gnomes and trolls losing their capitals(i seriously would have loved to see them and who the hell would lose their capital to troggs? and srsly, one guy mind controolling half the troll population? OP)
    The horde having camps all over azeroth, i would have liked them to be more like expeditions instead of towns.
    Goblins are Neutral but still perform transport using airships solely for the horde

    okay i guess:
    i liked the story of the silithid and Un'Goro crater, though i would like them to be more impressive
    The blood elves joining the horde because of the undead being in there
    the exodar crashing
    The war for outland
     
  2. Kimera757

    Kimera757 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,035
    Likes received:
    3
    Trophy points:
    0
    I'll preface this by saying I don't have a problem with retcons. The draenei retcon, for instance, doesn't bother me at all.

    However, the lore has been harmed in many ways, in order for further gameplay.

    For instance, why are orcs allowed to be warlocks in Durotar/the Horde? Orcs have been warlocks before, and there will always be villainous orcs, but Thrall would not tolerate warlocks in the Horde. Instead, now they're "barely tolerated". Considering how screwed up the orcs got due to warlocks, and Thrall's own personal history, this just does not make sense.

    The blood elves left the Alliance for no reason that I can see other than "the Horde needed a pretty race" and "the Horde needs paladins[/b] blood knights". The forsaken reasons are a bit more valid, but you'd think Thrall would be too smart to trust them, as Sylvanas is clearly evil. The reasons seem to revolve around politics (eg the Alliance wasn't happy with this).

    Warcraft III was able to separate single and multiplayer. For instance, you would fight "fel" orc warlocks, and the only time you got to use orc warlocks was due to a plot-specific event (and they were quickly cast out of the Horde).

    I don't like how many evil bosses meet their end. Illidan and Kael'thas, for instance, went insane (more insane, in Illidan's case) just to give you an excuse to kill them. In Kael'thas' case, I really don't see how this even made sense; it was just character derailment.

    Now, answer me this question -- who killed Illidan? Maiev, Akama and ... random raiders. We don't even know what faction they belonged to. The random raiders had fewer reasons (and no personal reasons) to take Illidan down. If this was Warcraft III expansion #8 or something, you (the player) would be controlling a character who had personal reasons to oppose Illidan and leading a faction that had personal reasons for doing so.

    Finally, a problem that seems to be going away. There were several really weird moments in the storyline, such as the Scarlet Crusade's Saidan Dathrohan being controlled by Balnazzar who we saw die, and the Ambassador storyline being cut off. It took comics, which are outside of WoW itself, to fix these problems. Well, at least they're fixing it.