+- The Lurker Lounge Forums (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Lurker Games (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-6.html)
+--- Forum: World of Warcraft (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-16.html)
+--- Thread: Changes in the Warcraft backstory (/thread-8184.html)
Changes in the Warcraft backstory - Ajax - 07-27-2004
(fyi, here's the link of the backstory)
WoW Backstory
Now, I have played Warcraft I,II, and III as well as their expansions; however this doesn't mean I'm totally knowledgeable on this stuff, and may make mistakes in this post. Feel free to correct.
However, when I was reading this backstory a few weeks ago, it struck me as pretty shoddy workmanship to alter the game's world history so profoundly. The first thing that came to mind was that Blackrock spire was originally just the HQ of the Blackrock Clan. Now, it's a volcano created inadvertantly from the dwarven civil war.
Some of these changes have been made necessary by the evolving morality of videogames (or at least Blizzard).
Back in the day, it was just play as the orcs if you want to be evil, or play as the humans if you want to be good. WarII was marketed as allowing you to play as the "savage orcs or noble humans" to determine the fate of Azeroth. But postmodernist influence has WarIII and The Frozen Throne unequivically "amoral"--all factions are equally noble and evil (except for the Burning Legion which is clearly evil; and revealingly, you can't play as them).
So how did Blizzard decide to make the orcs have a "good" side to them? They were just the unwitting puppets of the Burning Legion. Well, fine; but the way they decided to implement this into the backstory goes beyond creativity. The WoW backstory has the corruption of the Horde and the conquest of the Draenei happen over the course of a few months:
Quote:Over the course of a few months, the Horde eradicated nearly every draenei living on Draenor. Only a scattered handful of survivors managed to evade the orcs' awesome wrath. Flushed with victory, Gul'dan reveled in the Horde's power and might.
But in Gul'dan's history for the second game (from the WarII manual), he claims:
Quote:The destruction of the Draenei left nothing upon which the great beast of warâ¦could feed. After centuries of violence and warfare, we had finally conquered the whole of our world.
So a campaign which took years suddenly only took months? That's a pretty serious revision of Orcish history!
Geography also is conspicuously alered as well. First off, "Stormwind Keep" was "Stonewind Keep" in the first game (although names can change). But with the introduction of Kalimdor, the Warcraft II geography got all screwed up. The Tomb of Sargeras is moved almost halfway between Azeroth and Kalimdor, and nobody seemed to notice the big freaking storm out to the west. Between WarIII and WoW a giant tree has managed to spring up just north of Kalimdor, or else everybody managed to miss a tree which is big enough to house cities.
I guess the point of all this is that Blizzard either should have used more creativity and subtlity in crafting WoW/WarIII; or else they should not have made the games morally neutral. By comparison, look at Bungie Software's classic Marathon series. The three games of the series promoted a cult fan club which still has an avid base. One website has been around for almost a decade (Marathon's Story) and is still going strong. But what does Blizzard do? Tries to make the game as appealing as possible by adapting it to a cultural facet (which is fine by me); but they do it so badly that it becomes a Frankenstein-like construct with the crude stitching clearly visible.
Just something I wanted to throw out there. Let me know what you all think.
Changes in the Warcraft backstory - --Pete - 07-27-2004
Hi,
While WoW is a whole new game, it is a sequel to all the WC games till now. But those were thrown together without he thought of supporting anything bigger than themselves. So they have neither a history nor a geography that would support a MMOG. Happens all the time in all shared fantasy worlds that are not well thought out.
But what does Blizzard do? Tries to make the game as appealing as possible by adapting it to a cultural facet (which is fine by me); but they do it so badly that it becomes a Frankenstein-like construct with the crude stitching clearly visible.
Yep. But it doesn't really matter. If Blizzard took the backstory and the world seriously and expected the players to do the same, then the backstory would be a major flaw. Since Blizzard continuously trumps any attempt at seriousness with inappropriate (for the backstory) humor, the whole thing is one big running joke. Does anyone ever care if the background to a joke is consistent? Or even plausible?
That attitude is both a weakness and a strength for Blizzard. A weakness in that it breaks "immersion". Even as I laugh at a Zeppelin ticket seller called "Hin Denberg" (approximately), it causes my mind to veer out of the game and flash to *this* world and what I know of lighter than air craft here. Whatever immersion I had is gone. A strength in that humor breaks what is ultimately just another level/gear grind.
But the backstory to WoW is something that will not be of importance to me or to most of the people playing the game because the backstory has no effect on how we play the game. And that is sad, for if what we did were somehow more influenced by the desire to bring some vast saga another step forward and less by "another three critters and I'll level and be able to buy the next mace in a never ending series of 1% better maces", then WoW would have a chance of engaging our intellect as well as our appreciation for beauty and humor and would possibly be a "lifetime" game. People could then indeed *be* their characters.
I don't know how such a game could be made. I don't even know if such a game could be made. I do know that it will not come from a company that is trying for the least common denominator of dungeon crawls.
--Pete
Changes in the Warcraft backstory - TheDragoon - 07-27-2004
Now, I'm not that great on the history of Warcraft (it's been a long time since I've played the other games), but there is one thing I think I can respond to:
Quote:Between WarIII and WoW a giant tree has managed to spring up just north of Kalimdor, or else everybody managed to miss a tree which is big enough to house cities.If you've tried playing as a Night Elf, the reason for that would be clear enough for you. I'll not give spoilers but I'll say that this is taken into account in game. :)
Changes in the Warcraft backstory - Cryptic - 07-27-2004
I think the backstory is currently malleable, ready to fit any and all of Blizzard's needs. Which is good. But I also feel they could be doing a much better job of it.
;)
Pete is right - is this high fantasy, or is it "just a game"? They seem to be leaning hard toward the latter. As such, any backstory is just the "blah" stuff you have to click through to get the next fetch quest going. Anachronistic humor just tilts the balance that much farther.
But hey - as long as they're starting from scratch, they should write in some potential friction among the races of the Horde, since it's almost impossible to have balanced RvR with only two factions.
B)
Changes in the Warcraft backstory - MongoJerry - 07-27-2004
Quote:But hey - as long as they're starting from scratch, they should write in some potential friction among the races of the Horde, since it's almost impossible to have balanced RvR with only two factions.
There's a quest for the Undead on the edge of Duskwood where we learn that the Undead outpost is there to spy on the orcs in the Swamp of Sorrows. Also, non-Undead can get a quest in TB involving getting a book from the Scarlet Monastery that tells one how the undead will eventually turn on the rest of the horde. OK, this isn't much, but it's a start. Send in some /suggests that they add more quests like this.