The Masterplan for Sylvanas

Story Forum
Prev 1 7 8 9
11/10/2018 01:11 PMPosted by Pellex
That was really our goal with Sylvanas, to create enough plausible deniability in the actions she's committed where she can still have a fanbase, where she could still have people supporting her actions and saying, 'Well of course she's doing that for the Horde.'"

How on earth is there plausible deniability for her actions when they already explicitly confirmed that she started the war under false pretenses?
11/10/2018 09:55 PMPosted by Xavierl
How on earth is there plausible deniability for her actions when they already explicitly confirmed that she started the war under false pretenses?

Plausible deniability for the character in universe does not necessarily equate to plausible deniability for players who have out of game knowledge.

For example, even as a Troll my toon has every reason to remain loyal to Sylvanas despite her shady actions. It's only me who is aware of what is going on with Saurfang, Vol'jin, and how Sylvanas isn't being honest that has cause to doubt her.
11/10/2018 09:57 PMPosted by Mustakraken
Plausible deniability for the character in universe does not necessarily equate to plausible deniability for players who have out of game knowledge.
but the whole point of blizzard wanting her to have plausible deniability is so she can have a fanbase
11/10/2018 09:57 PMPosted by Mustakraken

Plausible deniability for the character in universe does not necessarily equate to plausible deniability for players who have out of game knowledge.

For example, even as a Troll my toon has every reason to remain loyal to Sylvanas despite her shady actions. It's only me who is aware of what is going on with Saurfang, Vol'jin, and how Sylvanas isn't being honest that has cause to doubt her.

to create enough plausible deniability in the actions she's committed where she can still have a fanbase

Unless he just misspoke, the use of the phrase "fanbase" seems to imply that he's talking about players.
11/10/2018 09:55 PMPosted by Xavierl
How on earth is there plausible deniability for her actions when they already explicitly confirmed that she started the war under false pretenses?
He's saying he thinks Sylvanas fans are morons and Blizzard only thinks they need to put minimum effort into making the story make sense from a Horde perspective.

I mean, doesn't that feel like that's how much effort Blizz is putting into BFA Horde story?
11/10/2018 10:35 PMPosted by Hahahahahaha
11/10/2018 09:55 PMPosted by Xavierl
How on earth is there plausible deniability for her actions when they already explicitly confirmed that she started the war under false pretenses?
He's saying he thinks Sylvanas fans are morons and Blizzard only thinks they need to put minimum effort into making the story make sense from a Horde perspective.

I mean, doesn't that feel like that's how much effort Blizz is putting into BFA Horde story?


Felt like he's saying Sylvanas' fans will literally support her no matter what she does as long as it is "For The Horde."
11/10/2018 10:39 PMPosted by Yagarr
<span class="truncated">...</span>He's saying he thinks Sylvanas fans are morons and Blizzard only thinks they need to put minimum effort into making the story make sense from a Horde perspective.

I mean, doesn't that feel like that's how much effort Blizz is putting into BFA Horde story?


Felt like he's saying Sylvanas' fans will literally support her no matter what she does as long as it is "For The Horde."


Seems more like he's talking about the Horde in general. Sylvanas fans will support her as long as it's not something completely pants on head stupid. It's the rest of the Horde that needs the "Well she's doing it for the Horde" excuse to not turn on her.

Though, thinking about it more, he's probably still talking Sylvanas fans. Which is strange since it's hard to make them hate her. (They're certainly managing though.)
11/10/2018 10:06 PMPosted by Withpuppys
but the whole point of blizzard wanting her to have plausible deniability is so she can have a fanbase
It really feels like Blizzard expects us to have an identical mindset to our characters. As if we have no meta knowledge whatsoever.
Good. More reason as to why she should be removed from the horde. Extra plus points for that!
11/10/2018 09:05 PMPosted by Yagarr
Any time we get a player base that's divided in their support for a character, I feel like we're doing our jobs.


I feel like Afrasiabi needs to understand that even if people feel divided on their support for Sylvanas/Saurfang, they're generally disappointed or frustrated in both.

The measure of success should not be parity in support, but whether or not people enjoy supporting their leaders.

Go take a look at the various "Who will you choose?" threads. It sounds like a bunch of protest-votes.

It's common to hear from Sylvanas supporters that they wish she had never been made Warchief, feel like she's losing her redeeming qualities, or think she's ruining other elements of the Horde. The sensation of defeat and depression is palpable. They mostly choose her over Saurfang out of fear that choosing Saurfang would stifle any chance of her restoration as a character they like.

On the flip side, it's common to hear from Saurfang supporters that they hate his connection to the Alliance/Anduin, disapprove of his delayed response to dealing with Sylvanas, and think it's nonsensical for him too declare back-stabbing Malfurion a dishonorable act after he unleashed siege equipment on Night Elves in Ashenvale. However, he is still their best chance to inject some moral fiber into the Horde's story.

Blizzard has to understand, at large the Horde playerbase is NOT ENJOYING THE EXPANSION. Which should be concerning.

Some people might love the story, but they seem to be a minority. Everyone else is coming to the forums to try and advocate for their own version of damage control.

The developers need to stop patting themselves on the back, acknowledge their short comings, and ask the playerbase how they'd like to see the story progress.


While we don't agree on a lot of lore and story discussions, I must say this is spot on. This seems to perfectly encapsulate problems the horde story is having, and how it is effecting the playerbase.
Conclusions I gleaned from this interview:
...

2. Blizzard doesn't think Alliance players need or want an "interesting" story.

Frankly, that is what I took from this interview. One more time, the over arching story arc of the xpac is supposed to be about the Horde. Doesn't make it a good story for the Horde, but it does make it about the Horde. We just did this through Cata and MoP. Heck, look at the discussion of the playerbase in the interview - it seems clear to me that when he says "playerbase" he means the Horde playerbase, he isn't sparing a thought for the Alliance playerbase at all.

And before someone says WotLK and Legion - I will stipulate that those were dominated by Alliance aesthetics, and that many of the character specific story arcs were Alliance (Tyrande, Alleria etc). However, the overall story arc of the xpac was not an Alliance story, since in both cases - defeating the LK and defeating the Legion were neutral stories.

Also, it's nice that they are giving Horde players a choice and branching questlines. Where is my choice to tell Anduin to stuff it with his kid gloves war strategy?
11/10/2018 11:48 AMPosted by Granfaloon
Saurfang wins and the dark side of the horde is pushed into the background while the alliance have to give half of their victory over the horde to the horde.
So

Option 1: piss off 1/2 of 1/2 of the playerbase. 25%.
Option 2: piss off 1/2 of the playerbase and 1/2 of the remaining playerbase. 75%.

Seems pretty cut and dry which is the lesser headache.
Chronicles does mention regarding the Wrath Gate incident, that like all good lies, Sylvanas' statements in its aftermath had "some truth", but makes it ambiguous whether or not she really did plan it beforehand, it just says people continued to remain suspicious of her despite her denials.
A couple of things just clicked for me. When you put these two quotes together side by side, doesn't it make pretty clear what the right and wrong is going to be?

"Once you play a choice like that [between Sylvanas and Saurfang], you have to follow it through, so in subsequent quests that come out, you're going to be on the side you pick, and we'll see what comes of that, if you're right or wrong."

Q. So Sylvanas is the bad guy, Anduin is the good guy? Horde is Evil, Alliance is good? What is different Sylvanas from Garrosh?

A. This is our mistake, but we have to first release the story of Teldrassil and Lordearon in order to gain the game's popularity and this helped make Sylvanas and the Horde "Evil". Three animations will be revealed before Battle for Azeroth. We'll cover a variety of people here. For instance, Jaina may have an abnormal side of her. You'll see the good side of the Horde. Nor will Anduin's Lordaeron's attacks be done for justice. Frankly, it is meant to show the king's dignity. The head of the state does not represent the camp.


(Source for the second quote: https://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/2390689-Interview-with-Blizzard-about-Horde-Alliance-and-Good-vs-Evil)
11/12/2018 06:32 AMPosted by Pellex
You'll see the good side of the Horde.

they are referring to the warbringers? so genocide is now the good side of the horde?
or saurfang and zekhan are supposed to embody the best of the horde even when they still support sylvanas?

11/12/2018 06:32 AMPosted by Pellex
attacks be done for justice. Frankly, it is meant to show the king's dignity.

i am still trying to find out what the hell they mean with this.
what king's dignity? where he spares saurfang? or how he comments about "she is killing her own troops.."
i am so confused.
they are referring to the warbringers? so genocide is now the good side of the horde?
or saurfang and zekhan are supposed to embody the best of the horde even when they still support sylvanas?

I'm positive they mean "Old Soldier" there.

11/12/2018 06:32 AMPosted by Pellex
attacks be done for justice. Frankly, it is meant to show the king's dignity.

i am still trying to find out what the hell they mean with this.
what king's dignity?

As far as I can tell, that storyline was dropped.

where he spares saurfang? or how he comments about "she is killing her own troops.."
i am so confused.

No, it pretty much would have had to happen before the invasion. It says his "Lordaeron's attacks" won't be done for justice, so it can't refer to things that happen during the battle and are not attacks.
Cdev realizes that Horde fans love both the aggressive and noble parts of the Horde. As I think about it more and more I think they are gonna go with both Saurfang and Sylvanas are right.
11/09/2018 02:07 PMPosted by Deathisfinal
11/09/2018 01:48 PMPosted by Pellex
Sylvanas' destiny is to be found out and discussed by the player base, but it would be dismissive to think she'll just go down as another raid boss


You guys can go ahead and mark raid boss of the list. Alex thinks she's above raid boss status.

This is a great article thanks for posting it.


This puts my lightforged undead and sylvanas theory one step closer to fruition. Itll be a great day when every undead main complains they got their entire race changed because they wanted sylvi to get away from raid boss.

Now we wait.
11/12/2018 10:06 AMPosted by Revaniite
11/09/2018 02:07 PMPosted by Deathisfinal
...

You guys can go ahead and mark raid boss of the list. Alex thinks she's above raid boss status.

This is a great article thanks for posting it.


This puts my lightforged undead and sylvanas theory one step closer to fruition. Itll be a great day when every undead main complains they got their entire race changed because they wanted sylvi to get away from raid boss.

Now we wait.


Oh, geez I'm afraid to ask.

What is your Lightforged undead and Sylvanas theory?

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum