Also on AOL
- Autos
- Technology
- Lifestyle
- Gaming
- Finance
- Entertainment on AOL
- Lifestyle on AOL
- Sports on AOL
- Travel on AOL
- More on AOL
Featured Galleries
Joystiq
© 2013 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | About Our Ads

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
11-09-2008 @ 10:59PM
Amaxe said...
I thought the spoilers were well handled via links. It was common knowledge that there was going to be a confrontation. However all the hype thus far was the horde side of the quest.
One hopes that they give the Alliance side excellent motivations and not give the whole thing a pro-horde slant to it. (The commentaries I read from most sites was very anti-Alliance).
The stories to the quests seem to hint at some good things. That is a positive compared to BC where it seemed to be written for the Horde at several places with a token Alliance version that seemed to make no sense (Old Hillsbrad for example) for them to even be involved.
Reply
11-11-2008 @ 3:14AM
Mr42 said...
@OH: well, i agree Old Hillsbrad is generally horde-related, but you cannot say alliance would have no interest in preserving the timeline knowing what Aedelas Blackmore was up to.
11-11-2008 @ 7:59AM
Amaxe said...
Well, I am only going by the lore on the WoW website of course (http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/info/story/chapter4.html#22), but from *that* perspective, it does seem that because the Legion created the orc bloodlust and led Medivh to open the portal and the orcs later were responsible for half of the Scourge menace, it seems that if the portal had been thwarted, the scourge would not have happened.
Perhaps there are other places that tell the story more accurately of course. But someone who only had access to the online history could find the whole scenario rather contradictory