Scrolls of Lore Forums  

Go Back   Scrolls of Lore Forums > WarCraft Discussion > WarCraft Lore Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old 03-25-2016, 05:56 AM
Marthen Marthen is offline

Eternal
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 4,965

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterCrow View Post
Admittedly, I'm not so sure there's a good way to do a complex geopolitical story in Warcraft, given how much the gameplay (both the RTS and the MMO) is predicated on direct combat. Even saying "there's a complex reputation matrix for how you interact with the factions" still doesn't answer the question of how such a system would translate into gameplay that's still as engaging and accessible as WoW is currently.

Put another way, I'm not certain how feasible it is do Sid Meier's Civilization to Chris Metzen's Warcraft.
I have thought we are talking about "ifs"? Such a difference would likely lead to a very different game, thus a different story unfold as well.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-25-2016, 06:42 AM
MisterCrow MisterCrow is offline

Eternal
MisterCrow's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,421

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marthen View Post
I have thought we are talking about "ifs"? Such a difference would likely lead to a very different game, thus a different story unfold as well.
Marthen says: What if the game had soft factions that reflect complex geopolitics?
Crow says: Well, okay, but I don't know if that game would be as accessible as WoW has been, from a gameplay perspective.
Marthen says: So the game, adding in complex geopolitics, would by necessity need to be a different game, with a different story?
Crow says: Yeah, I'd say so.
Marthen says: One could then argue that such a game, by virtue of being different from WoW either in genre or style, might not be as accessible to people strictly because it's not an MMO designed for accessibility, correct?
Crow says: ...Yeah.
Marthen says: Since we know that games other than MMOs designed for accessibility exist and are successful, one could posit that such a game COULD exist, even if it were not to occupy the same spot as "World of Warcraft," correct?
Crow says: I see where you're going with this. We can theorize about a "Warcraft Civilizations" game that exists outside the context of World of Warcraft as a game, specifically because that game would by necessity use different mechanics and engagement than an MMO.
Marthen says: Das ist richtig. Though I have one more question.
Crow says: Shoot.
Marthen says: Does this exchange make me Socrates?
Noitora says: No.
__________________
Lore Observation, Systems Design, and other science dropped at Power Word: Remix


Expect nothing and anything will surprise you.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-25-2016, 06:52 AM
Marthen Marthen is offline

Eternal
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 4,965

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterCrow View Post
Marthen says: What if the game had soft factions that reflect complex geopolitics?
Crow says: Well, okay, but I don't know if that game would be as accessible as WoW has been, from a gameplay perspective.
Marthen says: So the game, adding in complex geopolitics, would by necessity need to be a different game, with a different story?
Crow says: Yeah, I'd say so.
Marthen says: One could then argue that such a game, by virtue of being different from WoW either in genre or style, might not be as accessible to people strictly because it's not an MMO designed for accessibility, correct?
Crow says: ...Yeah.
Marthen says: Since we know that games other than MMOs designed for accessibility exist and are successful, one could posit that such a game COULD exist, even if it were not to occupy the same spot as "World of Warcraft," correct?
Crow says: I see where you're going with this. We can theorize about a "Warcraft Civilizations" game that exists outside the context of World of Warcraft as a game, specifically because that game would by necessity use different mechanics and engagement than an MMO.
Marthen says: Das ist richtig. Though I have one more question.
Crow says: Shoot.
Marthen says: Does this exchange make me Socrates?
Noitora says: No.
Okay, you have killed it now.

However, I am not sure a more intricate (and meaningful) reputation system would require the game not being an MMORPG anymore. It would be a different kind of an MMORPG , more "sandboxy" and focused on the world, still an MMORPG. And I would not even say less accessible, most Vanilla players had loved the world and adventuring anyway, not raiding and the "end game" storytelling.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-25-2016, 07:09 AM
MisterCrow MisterCrow is offline

Eternal
MisterCrow's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,421

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marthen View Post
Okay, you have killed it now.
"Killed it" in a good, amusing way? Or "killed it" as in "no wait now the idea is crap"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marthen View Post
However, I am not sure a more intricate (and meaningful) reputation system would require the game not being an MMORPG anymore. It would be a different kind of an MMORPG , more "sandboxy" and focused on the world, still an MMORPG. And I would not even say less accessible, most Vanilla players had loved the world and adventuring anyway, not raiding and the "end game" storytelling.
I agree that it could still be an MMO, but if you want to drive home the geopolitical angle then I don't think there's a good way to deliver on that story without more exposition, which would require something closer to Bioware's Old Republic in terms of delivery. And even that still doesn't do geopolitics much justice, I don't think.

I'll contest your statement about most players loving the world and adventuring and eschewing the endgame during Classic WoW, because the raiding paradigm at that point left a lot of players without much choice in the matter. The world successfully drew people in, but Blizzard was expending a ton of resources in order to create gameplay for a very small fraction of those people. The increased emphasis on accessibility, throughout the history of WoW, has been very clearly intent on Blizzard ensuring that their content gets seen by as many eyes as possible.
__________________
Lore Observation, Systems Design, and other science dropped at Power Word: Remix


Expect nothing and anything will surprise you.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-25-2016, 08:04 AM
Marthen Marthen is offline

Eternal
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 4,965

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterCrow View Post
"Killed it" in a good, amusing way? Or "killed it" as in "no wait now the idea is crap"
The good one, of course.


Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterCrow View Post
I agree that it could still be an MMO, but if you want to drive home the geopolitical angle then I don't think there's a good way to deliver on that story without more exposition, which would require something closer to Bioware's Old Republic in terms of delivery. And even that still doesn't do geopolitics much justice, I don't think.

I'll contest your statement about most players loving the world and adventuring and eschewing the endgame during Classic WoW, because the raiding paradigm at that point left a lot of players without much choice in the matter. The world successfully drew people in, but Blizzard was expending a ton of resources in order to create gameplay for a very small fraction of those people. The increased emphasis on accessibility, throughout the history of WoW, has been very clearly intent on Blizzard ensuring that their content gets seen by as many eyes as possible.
I think we have a slight misunderstanding here. I am not saying geopolitics should be the focus of the story, I am merely saying I prefer "soft factions" over "everyone is friends", because I would like geopolitics to be present in some smaller extent.

I am not saying "soft factions" should even exist as some gameplay feature. I would be completely fine with them only existing storywise, without any effect on gameplay at all (bar the reputation system, where naturally humans and dwarves would have better relations than say humans and orcs).

As for the second thing. My opinion comes from my Vanilla experience, when I saw most people who even hit 60 not engage in raiding, bar some occasional Zul'Gurub. Not because of the lack of accessibility, but because of the lack of interest. However, my experience might not be representative of the general state of things, I am well aware of that.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 03-25-2016, 09:11 AM
MisterCrow MisterCrow is offline

Eternal
MisterCrow's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,421

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marthen View Post
The good one, of course.
I always worry. ^_^


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marthen View Post
I think we have a slight misunderstanding here. I am not saying geopolitics should be the focus of the story, I am merely saying I prefer "soft factions" over "everyone is friends", because I would like geopolitics to be present in some smaller extent.

I am not saying "soft factions" should even exist as some gameplay feature. I would be completely fine with them only existing storywise, without any effect on gameplay at all (bar the reputation system, where naturally humans and dwarves would have better relations than say humans and orcs).

As for the second thing. My opinion comes from my Vanilla experience, when I saw most people who even hit 60 not engage in raiding, bar some occasional Zul'Gurub. Not because of the lack of accessibility, but because of the lack of interest. However, my experience might not be representative of the general state of things, I am well aware of that.
Re: "soft factions" vs. "everyone is friends": Okay, I can see the discrepancy. I get where you're coming from.

Re: classic experiences: To wit, our experiences differed, because when I saw that stories from the 5-man dungeons and long quest-chains didn't really get their termination unless you went into the raids, that compelled me to try to get into the raids, which was a generally frustrating experience if you didn't have enough friends playing on one server/faction to field a team. In effect, I didn't end up doing much raiding above Zul'Gurub myself either, but it wasn't for lack of interest. And yes, our personal anecdotal experiences can't possibly be representative of the whole, but the bottom line is that those experiences would still inform the decisions that you or I would make as designers.

I think there's merit in the idea of "Warcraft Civilizations" but I also think there's merit in the idea of Warcraft as the setting for a Dynasty Warriors-style game, which in itself invokes the idea of a huge cast of characters and an interweaving (if not somewhat nonsensical) narrative. What I mean by that is I think a Civ-like or BioWareRPG-like game is totally worth exploring, but I also love exploring wacky ideas in general. ^_^
__________________
Lore Observation, Systems Design, and other science dropped at Power Word: Remix


Expect nothing and anything will surprise you.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 03-25-2016, 10:43 AM
Arashi Arashi is offline

Eternal
Arashi's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 4,796

Default

Jesus even when theres no alliance and horde this thread still manages to be boring as fuck.

Lets not have factions.

Okay. What do we have now.

Factions.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 03-25-2016, 11:14 AM
MisterCrow MisterCrow is offline

Eternal
MisterCrow's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,421

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arashi View Post
Jesus even when theres no alliance and horde this thread still manages to be boring as fuck.

Lets not have factions.

Okay. What do we have now.

Factions.
Was the core discussion about "let's get rid of factions" or was it about "let's have more than Red vs. Blue"?

Honest question. I came into it kinda halfway through and might have missed the initial context.
__________________
Lore Observation, Systems Design, and other science dropped at Power Word: Remix


Expect nothing and anything will surprise you.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 03-25-2016, 12:51 PM
Morvant Morvant is offline

Ranger
Morvant's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: World's End
Posts: 309

Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marthen View Post
Ah. I can't agree with that, as I like geopolitics and anything connected to them.
I don't think that Ratastosk idea is fundamentally incompatible with yours, if I understand both of you correctly. You can have thing like the Alliance exist, while having a faction by faction rep. You can tie those faction specific rep together through their relation to each other.

Ironforge is friendly with Stormwind, because they are together in the Soutern Alliance. Gaining rep with Ironforge gives me a % of that gain in Stormwind rep.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterCrow View Post
I agree with folks who are saying that you can do an Us vs. Them scenario in the same manner GW2 did it in World vs. World. In that case, it's not Horde vs. Alliance on the same realm, but instead players on Sargeras vs. players on Illidan. [...]

So I don't think there's any reason not to divorce PvP from the narrative completely and just have it exist in its own pocket dimension that nonetheless still impacts the broader game (to whatever degree Blizzard sees fit to do).
The only reason I can see is that World vs World is just not as compelling and engaging as Horde vs Alliance. You lose the identification to each side of the battle. I don't know if the level of rivalry between Horde and Alliance players could be recreated between players of servers X and Y.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterCrow View Post
Admittedly, I'm not so sure there's a good way to do a complex geopolitical story in Warcraft, given how much the gameplay (both the RTS and the MMO) is predicated on direct combat. Even saying "there's a complex reputation matrix for how you interact with the factions" still doesn't answer the question of how such a system would translate into gameplay that's still as engaging and accessible as WoW is currently.

Put another way, I'm not certain how feasible it is do Sid Meier's Civilization to Chris Metzen's Warcraft.
I don't think that mechanically there would be that much to change to the game. The problem would be one of content. How to make sure that no matter the factions preferred by the player, they don't get stuck with less content than other. Careful balance between the faction relationship would be needed. Which I guess is why we have only two factions in the first place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterCrow View Post
Was the core discussion about "let's get rid of factions" or was it about "let's have more than Red vs. Blue"?
I was in it for the "let's have more than Red vs Blue" .
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 03-25-2016, 03:57 PM
MisterCrow MisterCrow is offline

Eternal
MisterCrow's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,421

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morvant View Post
The only reason I can see is that World vs World is just not as compelling and engaging as Horde vs Alliance. You lose the identification to each side of the battle. I don't know if the level of rivalry between Horde and Alliance players could be recreated between players of servers X and Y.
I agree that there's a trade-off when you don't get to have your rivalry wear markedly identifiable colors, but for me, if I have a choice between screaming "IF IT'S RED IT'S DEAD" and being able to play with all of my friends who are online at the same time, I'll take the latter.

To a great extent, I'm just not really a big fan of fervent factionalism. Especially in the context of a fantasy world where mutually hostile threats keep cropping up, factionalism is largely counter-intuitive.
__________________
Lore Observation, Systems Design, and other science dropped at Power Word: Remix


Expect nothing and anything will surprise you.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 03-25-2016, 04:59 PM
Morvant Morvant is offline

Ranger
Morvant's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: World's End
Posts: 309

Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterCrow View Post
I agree that there's a trade-off when you don't get to have your rivalry wear markedly identifiable colors, but for me, if I have a choice between screaming "IF IT'S RED IT'S DEAD" and being able to play with all of my friends who are online at the same time, I'll take the latter.
If they were truly your friends, they wouldn't be Red :p.

But yeah, I see your point.

I don't think it's needed to completely detach the pvp from the game, you could actually justify in universe Horde/Alliance-blind pvp while maintaining some form of player involvement. The warcraft universe is vast. You just need two well characterized "neutral" factions fighting each other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterCrow View Post
To a great extent, I'm just not really a big fan of fervent factionalism. Especially in the context of a fantasy world where mutually hostile threats keep cropping up, factionalism is largely counter-intuitive.
I like factionalism as long as its not overused and pushed to ridiculous extreme.

I don't know if it's counter intuitive, history has shown that lots of people think that it's a good idea to continue bickering with their neighbours when a giant invading army is on the horizon.

It's just that the end result is normally the bickering neighbours getting smashed, not the giant invading army getting its ass kicked =/
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 03-25-2016, 05:05 PM
Kir the Wizard Kir the Wizard is offline

The Sun King
Kir the Wizard's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Donetsk, Occupied Ukraine
Posts: 11,115

Default

The ship has long sailed, but, of course it'd have been nice to have Illidari as a separate faction.

Although, believe it or not, I had some sort of strange feeling that its races will end up allying with the Horde long before TBC was even out.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 03-25-2016, 05:28 PM
engal engal is offline

Sentinel Queen
engal's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 904

Default

Well lorewise I'd have seen another faction, neutral, playable :

The Bloodsail Bucaneers.

- No reason to justify a race / side / faction, every race can join cause well, they're pirates !
- No class restriction, after all, everytime we fight them they have rogue mage priest and such. It's a wonderful melting pot of everything, with every race possible ( even gnolls !!! )
- Raid lore : None. They attack some dungeons and some raid for precious booty and loots. Yeaaarrrrggggg
- PvP : they fight for ressources and some loot pinata area against the horde and the Alliance, who fight against them cause they're fraking pirate.

Period.

And now you just picture a stand off in the middle of the sea with an Horde Ship Vs an Alliance one and suddenly... PIRATES !
And there you go a three sided battle xD
__________________
"The Azjol-anak resistance cell perhaps, we can always tell ourselves that the rest of the Nerubian survivors (namely the queens) practically dug their way to Plothole to escape the Scourge."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonneillon View Post
Nothing, this is Scrolls of Lore, every conversation on here slowly distills down to Sylvanas, Lorderon or Worgen. I'm pretty sure that theres a mathematical truth to this.

Last edited by engal; 03-25-2016 at 05:38 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 03-25-2016, 07:21 PM
Ethenil Ethenil is offline

Eternal
Ethenil's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,652

Default

Alternativelly, we just let GRR Martin meet JRR Tolkien and they write an awesome story full of magic and meaning and political shenanigans and characters.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 03-25-2016, 09:25 PM
JorgeAxe JorgeAxe is offline

Sentinel Queen
JorgeAxe's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 944

Default

Shouldn't it be Draenei Lost Ones rather then Draenei Broken?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Genesis
It's really been a case of Blizzard shitting on the Alliance and Horde storyline, but with the added bonus of the Alliance fanbase requesting to shit further on the Horde fanbase.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 03-26-2016, 01:52 AM
MisterCrow MisterCrow is offline

Eternal
MisterCrow's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,421

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethenil View Post
Alternativelly, we just let GRR Martin meet JRR Tolkien and they write an awesome story full of magic and meaning and political shenanigans and characters.
... I'm not really sure what Tolkien brings to that mixture other than a sense of hope and romance.

Arguably that's what Martin decided to delete from the bog standard fantasy epic when he started writing ASoI&F, but.... hey this has nothing to do with Warcraft factions!
__________________
Lore Observation, Systems Design, and other science dropped at Power Word: Remix


Expect nothing and anything will surprise you.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 03-26-2016, 02:40 AM
Kir the Wizard Kir the Wizard is offline

The Sun King
Kir the Wizard's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Donetsk, Occupied Ukraine
Posts: 11,115

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterCrow View Post
... I'm not really sure what Tolkien brings to that mixture other than a sense of hope and romance.
The Linguistics, of course.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 03-26-2016, 02:46 AM
Thornedale Thornedale is offline

Chimaera
Thornedale's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 292

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterCrow View Post
... I'm not really sure what Tolkien brings to that mixture other than a sense of hope and romance.
Heroes (destined, obliged, willing, refusing, unlikely, etc.) on a quest that will change them as they proceed. Romanticism meets "The Pilgrim's Progress".
Plus tragedy in a more classic sense of that word.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 03-26-2016, 12:27 PM
Angron was right Angron was right is offline

Demon Hunter
Angron was right's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 402

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterCrow View Post
... I'm not really sure what Tolkien brings to that mixture other than a sense of hope and romance.

Arguably that's what Martin decided to delete from the bog standard fantasy epic when he started writing ASoI&F, but.... hey this has nothing to do with Warcraft factions!
Fucking airtight worldbuilding.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 03-26-2016, 01:41 PM
Morvant Morvant is offline

Ranger
Morvant's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: World's End
Posts: 309

WarCraft 3 B.net Eyeball

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angron was right View Post
Fucking airtight worldbuilding.
How many Balrogs are there ?
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 03-26-2016, 04:30 PM
Angron was right Angron was right is offline

Demon Hunter
Angron was right's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 402

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morvant View Post
How many Balrogs are there ?
Enough to beat the shit out of Ungoliant.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 03-26-2016, 05:05 PM
Ethenil Ethenil is offline

Eternal
Ethenil's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,652

Default

Seven balrogs I believe.

Anyway, I often bring Tolkien and Martin together because Tolkien is a master in worldbuilding and insertion of meaning into his works. All his works have philosophical implications, but are somewhat lacking on character development. Martin, on the other hand, does a good worldbuilding but a masterful character development. If we took the best out of both authors I believe we could get an incredible story set with awesome characters and lore.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 03-27-2016, 12:09 PM
Angron was right Angron was right is offline

Demon Hunter
Angron was right's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 402

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethenil View Post
Seven balrogs I believe.

Anyway, I often bring Tolkien and Martin together because Tolkien is a master in worldbuilding and insertion of meaning into his works. All his works have philosophical implications, but are somewhat lacking on character development. Martin, on the other hand, does a good worldbuilding but a masterful character development. If we took the best out of both authors I believe we could get an incredible story set with awesome characters and lore.

Fight me IRL

Just because tolkien doesn't go through the mind of Sam thinking about rosie cotton's tits and vagoo, doesn't mean that Sam has bad character development.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 03-28-2016, 07:12 AM
MisterCrow MisterCrow is offline

Eternal
MisterCrow's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,421

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angron was right View Post
Fight me IRL

Just because tolkien doesn't go through the mind of Sam thinking about rosie cotton's tits and vagoo, doesn't mean that Sam has bad character development.
... this really deserves its own thread.
__________________
Lore Observation, Systems Design, and other science dropped at Power Word: Remix


Expect nothing and anything will surprise you.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 03-28-2016, 09:00 AM
Ethenil Ethenil is offline

Eternal
Ethenil's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,652

Default

XD

I don't think it's bad character development, I think it's fine. But Martin would make it in an epic scale :p
That's why I say, "the best of each author", not that the rest isn't good.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
factions, world of warcraft

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.