We want the devs to "get" factions.

General Discussion
Prev 1 7 8 9 26 Next
Did you play Wrath of the Lich King?

I understand Cataclysm has been horde heavy in some respects, but let's not rewrite history.


WotLK wasn't Alliance heavy. The major move pushers are neutral figures; Tirion, Mograine, and the Kirin Tor with dabblings here and there with the Wyrmrest Accord. Any attempt to claim that it was Alliance centric just because Arthas used to be a Lordaeron prince falls flat because that same reasoning would mean that any Forsaken developments are actually Alliance developments since their entire population are former Alliance subjects.

If you attempt to use Tirion as the reason then he doesn't qualify either as he's shown nothing but disdain for both factions and their petty bickering, and he was exiled from Lordaeron long before the events of WC3 ever occured (let alone anything that happened in WoW).

Bolvar becoming the new Lich King doesn't make it Alliance centric either, any more than Saurfang being turned into a raid boss made it Horde centric. Bolvar's involvement in Wrath was limited to 2 or three quests that lead up to him getting scorched into brisket prior to that cut scene, which is hardly "Alliance centrism".

So please, enlighten me with why you feel Wrath was "Alliance heavy" because I'd love to hear how all of the lore and character development that exists for Sylvanas and Garrosh just don't count in Wrath's big picture (especially since both tie heavily into the developments in Cataclysm, while nothing from Wrath ties into the Alliance advancements except as footnotes).
Galanis: Excellent work. I concur completely. But will nayone at Blizz read the walls we've written? Probably not. Bashiok has already snarked us off.
Just because Artha's was the bad guy in WoTLK doesn't make it favored towards the Ally. Tirion was also not with the Alliance anymore as well. These are all world characters just like Thrall is "supposed" to be right now.

Fact is, Ally isn't getting ANYTHING from this expansion. Varian has sat up on his throne in his battle stance for too long and I am upset about that. (I play both factions and am neutral because I love them both).

We will see if Blizzard and the Dev's are being truthful when they say Alliance has some good stuff coming in MoP, though it shouldn't have taken that long. How hard could it really be to add a few minute or so long in game cinematics like "The Wrath Gate", or a quest where you have to help a leader of one of your capitals accomplish something.

Take Varian having to go "rescue" Anduin in Ironforge after Moira took over with the Dark Irons. Having to go on that type of quest with him would be awesome. It can work for any class. If your a tank, you could tank for him and the other assassins, healers can heal them and dps can dps while Varian tanks.

More depth into the story for the Alliance and keep Hordes involvement where it is at now and we would be balanced and all having a good time. Get ALL of the leaders more involved. It is bad enough that we see everyone sitting around ORG and SW waiting for que's to pop that we don't have any interaction with the story itself after we are done hitting the level cap. Make weekly events where politics are involved. Have parades that get attacked and the players have to help.

Just be creative.
Wall-of-Text incoming, sorry.



I wish I could favorite this post, very well done.
I doubt the blues are even reading this thread.

If they do post again it will either be:
1. "Wait and see"
2. Responding to a post that has a weak argument that can be countered
3. Taking a quote in a post out of context
These are obvious to anyone who has ever read a book beyond Go Dog, Go! but it's not the point. Nor is counting territories lost, conflicts won, defeats suffered the point. And this is why these threads continue to exist: you either refuse to see or just don't actually get the point.

We recognize that struggle is necessary. We, the Alliance, want the struggle. We want the conflict. We want the fight. We want the hardship.


I think you're speaking for yourself here, because dozens of capped threads have been made on the exact points Dave brought up, and you claim no one is concerned with.

I can appreciate if you don't believe those things are important, but many people obviously do, and so they were mentioned in the article. If that's all you took away from what was said though, I'd recommend taking a second read-through.

Of course, the proof is in the pudding as they say, so I don't expect anyone to get super excited over us just saying it's going to get better. We'll have to do the work and make it happen, and I can't really offer you anything other than a request that you take a wait and see approach.


Are the design/philosophy decisions that have lead us to this point being examined to determine where things went wrong so they won't be repeated in future expansion?
11/30/2011 04:36 PMPosted by Obzen
Did YOU play the wrath of the lich king? uhhh the blood elves and the FORSAKEN would like to have a word with you? and just how exactly was it alliance centric? other then see jaina cry...and then cry some more...


Blood elves didn't do anything in wrath. Forsaken had a minor role only because of the faction of them that betrayed the horde. Other than that, the only thing that the horde was doing during wrath was being sad about losing saurfang the younger, and having one of the most painfully long RP segments of any fight in the history of the game. We were just along for the ride.


I'm sorry, I thought that the entirety of patch 3.2 was crawling with nothing but horde blood elves. And I seem to remember following Sylvanas into the heart of the Lich King's Sanctuary. Oh, and screwing that greedy prick Lorthemar out of his precious little blood elf blade that I put back together with the sweat of my brow, and ore mined by alliance slave in the Pit of Sauron.
These are obvious to anyone who has ever read a book beyond Go Dog, Go! but it's not the point. Nor is counting territories lost, conflicts won, defeats suffered the point. And this is why these threads continue to exist: you either refuse to see or just don't actually get the point.

We recognize that struggle is necessary. We, the Alliance, want the struggle. We want the conflict. We want the fight. We want the hardship.


I think you're speaking for yourself here, because dozens of capped threads have been made on the exact points Dave brought up, and you claim no one is concerned with.

I can appreciate if you don't believe those things are important, but many people obviously do, and so they were mentioned in the article. If that's all you took away from what was said though, I'd recommend taking a second read-through.

Of course, the proof is in the pudding as they say, so I don't expect anyone to get super excited over us just saying it's going to get better. We'll have to do the work and make it happen, and I can't really offer you anything other than a request that you take a wait and see approach.


I am another person that agrees with the OP 100%, so your first sentence is incorrect. Do they teach bad public relations when you get hired at Blizz? It sure seems that way as you demonstrate what by now seems like an intentional missing of the point.


Which is kinda the point, Wrath was actually balanced between the factions. The Alliance got cool stuff, and the Horde got cool stuff. In Cata, the Horde gets cool stuff, and the Alliance gets dumped on.


Why must "good story" for Alliance be all happiness and smiles and rainbows and unicorns? I would think being the underdog makes for a good story especially given the fact the Alliance is more than likely going to rise up in the near future after Theramore is destroyed. Blizzard has all but come out and said it point blank that Alliance is going to take a turn for the better yet these threads continue endlessly anyway.


It doesn't have to be happy, but it has to be interesting. Look at the gap between the TH intros. The Horde got an awesome invasion that segeued into the construction of a massive fortress of black steel. The Alliance got a lousy ride with a poorly constructed character who's origins were designed to mock the Alliance.

"Like you could've done any better."

Yes, Fargo, I could have. Almost any idiot who even made a machinima could have done better than that garbage.
Did you play Wrath of the Lich King?

I understand Cataclysm has been horde heavy in some respects, but let's not rewrite history.


Was gonna post on my current main, but here, as proof that I have done just that even. This character has also been used to run various parts of Horde Cata content 1-60, but it should be clear that I indeed did play WotLK Horde side.

The Horde experience was very comparable to the Alliance one in Wrath. A stark contrast to Cataclysm, where the Alliance quite literally missed the cut. Horde were advanced greatly in Wrath, as others have listed. These themes carried into Cataclysm, as well as the events of the big bad dragon wreaking havoc as well. Alliance... Had been forgotten on the editing floor.

It's not as simple as people don't like the way the story went, as the Blog portrayed. It's a case of the story being missing and incomplete, broken and chapters not at all making sence as you move from arc to arc.
Just be careful what you wish for, with our luck they'll take the complaints as a reason to stop having major character arcs in-game at all, putting them all into books. It's so wonderful to have what could be incredible quest events revealed by "go escort our captive Staghelm. Didn't you know he's evil now? There was a whole book about it. By the way that book also means we can stop promising to let players fight the Emerald Nightmare, since it was mostly fixed." Would have been a nifty instance for early Cataclysm that would still leave things set up for Firelands later and would have given people in-game a major event for both NElves and Druids.
11/30/2011 04:39 PMPosted by Xanzul
Why must "good story" for Alliance be all happiness and smiles and rainbows and unicorns? I would think being the underdog makes for a good story


It does...but the alliance does not have that kind of story.

as I said earlier we are just THERE...we have not had a shake up or major development deep within the ally for quite a while.

Nothing that had an impact anyway.
This "subject" (as pointed out) is problematic in that people have different ways of defining who is "winning" getting more "air-time" being "favoured" etc etc.

The other muddying factor is what are you discussing? Lore? Character growth? Empire size?

I honestly have enjoyed all expansions for different reasons. I have played Horde since near-release and believe that in most areas the game has ebbed and flowed rather nicely.

Lore wise (which is what really matters imo) has favoured the Alliance, marginally.

WotLK truly did favour the Lore of the Alliance, it wrapped up much of its loose threads for beloved heroes (both fallen and absent) returned your rightful King to you and even was kind enough to replace Arthas with another human giving much melancholy to the whole Lich-King arc. As a hordie, I am fine with that. Alliance that refute that need to get a CAT scan.


The difference is, I have no personal stake in the story, which honestly is most peoples problems. You are not what governs the course of this game, sure you might be able to influence it, but truly, Metzen and Blizzard are what will drive this story and if you dont like the way it is going, no one and I do mean NO ONE is forcing you to continue participating.

Example; I stopped reading the Wheel of Time books as soon as Rand faded into the background. I did not complain to Robert Jorden about it. Why not? Because it was his story to tell and not mine to control.
11/30/2011 04:50 PMPosted by Beohrn
Just be careful what you wish for, with our luck they'll take the complaints as a reason to stop having major character arcs in-game at all, putting them all into books. It's so wonderful to have what could be incredible quest events revealed by "go escort our captive Staghelm. Didn't you know he's evil now? There was a whole book about it. By the way that book also means we can stop promising to let players fight the Emerald Nightmare, since it was mostly fixed." Would have been a nifty instance for early Cataclysm that would still leave things set up for Firelands later and would have given people in-game a major event for both NElves and Druids.


What difference does that make at this point? All the Alliance lore is put into books anyway. Only people playing horde have something to lose if they remove story arcs.

I think you're speaking for yourself here, because dozens of capped threads have been made on the exact points Dave brought up, and you claim no one is concerned with.

I can appreciate if you don't believe those things are important, but many people obviously do, and so they were mentioned in the article. If that's all you took away from what was said though, I'd recommend taking a second read-through.

Of course, the proof is in the pudding as they say, so I don't expect anyone to get super excited over us just saying it's going to get better. We'll have to do the work and make it happen, and I can't really offer you anything other than a request that you take a wait and see approach.


The proof IS in the pudding, but to continue the metaphor the pudding is in the oven right now, and ovens have windows that allow people to take a look. There is a serious credibility problem for Blizzard's writing staff and its not all about "oh noes Theramore got kablooied". That's the Blizzard perception, that Alliance players are upset because they're losing. To be fair, a lot of them are, I am stating in no uncertain terms that I'm upset because your storytelling has gone down the toilet and if I'm going to make decisions as a consumer regarding my future time and money and this game, I want to see how tasty that pudding is looking.

And, honestly, I think Blizzard could stand to be more transparent. We should have the option as players to get more detailed previews of where the story is headed. Catchy slogans like "putting the War back in Warcraft!" don't actually mean anything. We know Theramore is being destroyed, okay, can we hear a little bit about how this is going to affect the major leaders and how we'll interact with them? How about the (insert every species except Human and Orc) what are they going to be doing? There should at least be a plan, even if its not this patch or expansion as to the simple question of What These People Are Doing. It would do a lot to restore trust in Blizzard if we were given some concrete examples of what the future holds for stories we care about. Let's have a real story Q&A where "we don't have any plans" is not an acceptable answer for something as big as the story of an entire species/nation/planet.

I like Lor'Themar for instance, I don't play Horde but I enjoy good stories and there is a lot of potential for drama and action there. You've got a faction leader who is a blank slate upon which you could project anything. Why does he have to stay in Silvermoon all the time? Why couldn't he have an interest in archaeology and lead the horde's equivalent to the Explorer's League? I think he could be a damn good counterpoint to Brann. Your guys went a different way and that's fine, but there should be a goal for such a character/faction/race, one that you can share with us so we know that its not just being ignored entirely.
Why must "good story" for Alliance be all happiness and smiles and rainbows and unicorns? I would think being the underdog makes for a good story especially given the fact the Alliance is more than likely going to rise up in the near future after Theramore is destroyed. Blizzard has all but come out and said it point blank that Alliance is going to take a turn for the better yet these threads continue endlessly anyway.


A good underdog story is wonderful. Note, however, I specified "good". I love the Horde, but it's easy to see that Blizzard has mishandled the Alliance in a huge way. There's a reason why there's so much Horde-pride, but it has nothing to do with the players. It's all about how Blizzard has presented both sides.

So far, Blizzard has shown itself to be incompetent in its dealings with the Alliance. I have just one question, since Fargo said that Blizzard wants players to be polarized by their faction choice.

Blizzard, if you aren't excited and proud of your Alliance, how do you expect your players to be? In every bit of commentary and public events, we see big name employees crying "For the Horde!" at the top of their lungs. Chris "Thrall" Metzen whose heart lies with the Horde. Samwise "Samuro" Didier, master artist and singer. Mike "Mai'Kyl" Morhaime, president and co-founder of Blizzard Entertainment. Dave "Fargo" Kosak, the man who rides around with his wife screaming "For the Horde!" at random pedestrians.

All of these people have an obvious fire and excitement for the Horde. They have an intense passion for the faction that many fans can and do relate with, resulting in the constant barrage of "For the Horde!" and "Lok'tar ogar!" But I have to ask, where are the big names who are excited about their work with the Alliance? Who is honestly proud of the Alliance and where it's going?

Blizzard, if your own members can't find reason to be excited and proud of the Alliance that you've crafted with your own two hands, your players will never have a chance to.
11/30/2011 04:12 PMPosted by Galanis
Wall-of-Text incoming, sorry.

While it is indeed a wall of text, it is also the most detailed and accurate post about the current development issues plaguing World of Warcraft that I've seen to date (and they aren't just issues that affect Alliance, either). I desperately hope that someone at Blizzard reads it and takes it very seriously, but after years of these problems not being addressed, I'm not holding my breath.

That's part of the problem. This isn't the first or second year of the game any more -- it's been out for seven. At this point, the game is entering its twilight; with newer and, in some ways, more interesting games on the horizon, it's no longer enough for Blizzard to ignore legitimate complaints about longstanding issues with responses of "everything's cool, just wait and see".

Blizzard, if you truly hope to maintain your dwindling subscriber base, it's time to quit making excuses, and start showing some genuine acknowledgement of these kind of important concerns.


In Vanilla, which had a relatively disorganized endgame in terms of storyline, Alliance had unarguably the better questline for Onyxia, with Bolvar Fordragon generally being awesome and such. To me, this is the pinnacle of how an endgame questline for the Alliance should play out, it should involve faction leaders, have high stakes, and genuine threat not just to the players on the quest.

This, personally, is what makes me the saddest. The perception problem isn't just one on Blizzard's end, it's the players as well. More specifically, there is a large amount of Horde only players who are under the mistaken impression that things are the way they are now because "Alliance is just boring".

I've been primarily playing Alliance since Classic (I've given Horde plenty of chances, they're just not for me). I used to genuinely enjoy my faction's storyline, back then. The Onyxia chain, the whole extended Defias storyline from level 1-40 . . . that was compelling stuff, some of the best story work Blizzard has done to date, and right out of the gate no less.

Since then, almost none of those plot threads have been followed up on, and the ones that have ("The Missing Diplomat" into King Varian returning) have been done in a halfassed manner, as if to say Blizzard's heart really isn't in it. This is made even worse by most of the old compelling Alliance quest lines being "revamped" right out of the game in Cataclysm; the Defias now only existing inside Deadmines makes me sadder than you could possibly imagine.

Now, the interesting bits we had before don't even exist anymore, reinforcing the faulty idea that "Alliance is just boring". It's not fair to the half of your playerbase that pays $15 a month to play Alliance, and if you don't start taking drastic actions to address the problem, many of those players won't be here for much longer.

This includes myself. But I'm just one guy, right -- how many of us could there be? ;)

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum