Waging the war against "lorelol"

And I'm gonna be straight with you, WoW community. You guys are incredibly fickle when it comes to lore, and it breaks my two-sizes-too-big heart to read your ramblings about how Blizzard "doesn't care" about it.
I examined the sitch in detail and I'm ready for you to apologize and mend the error of your ways once you've perused my summary of why you mean well, wrong though you are, when you use the phrase "lorelol". I've made charts and graphs that should finally make it clear--I've prepared a lecture.
There is a hard-and-fast rule, and while you may not specifically fall under this umbrella, it's safe to say that many of the players you play with do and it accurately describes WoW's community on the whole:
WoW players are passionate about lore.
Passion is a really powerful thing. There's a reason why single people say they want passion in their lives, and also a reason that the phrase "crime of passion" exists. Passion is usually the driving force of fandom, and it shows every day in the WoW community--arts and crafts, forum posts, spreadsheets, even complaints are all based on passion for the game, a desire to see it grow and thrive and, most of all, exist. The developers have stated a few times that the reason why they tend not to get upset over angry forum posts or player opinions is that they know that they stem from a desire to make the game better. Even if your action is angry or misguided, the heart of it is likely pure.
There are topics that tend to bring out the most frenzied side of WoW fandom--role-playing, for example, or game mechanics and class balance, but we're here to talk about the L-word.
WoW is gifted with a rich and expansive lore and it's understandable that people would be eager to embrace or defend it, as even those who complain about its changes are doing. I'm right there with you, in fact! I spend a lot of time reading and discussing it with goons (definitely consider platinum membership, it's worth the cost) and a phrase I read far too much there is "lorelol," or the phrase that really grinds my gears, "Blizzard doesn't care about lore." They're everywhere, too--infecting forum posts and reasonable discussion all the time. Lest you think I'm embellishing, it really is as serious a problem as I say it is. Where did this perspective come from, though?
It turns out that these phrases really only came into existence after information about Burning Crusade started trickling out. The two main culprits?
- Blood Elf paladins.
- Draenei, period.
What matters is their fit in their faction. They fill the "exotic" role that's sorely missing in a faction whose most exotic race is another kind of elf, and they're big! Those Alliance players who wanted a large male character who didn't have a hare lip were in luck.
For the paladins, at least, the complaints felt sort of ridiculous, especially (though how could anyone have known at the time of release) given the neatly wrapped-up Blood Knights storyline that played out with the birth of the Shattered Sun Offensive. It's not really as ridiculous, though, once you examine what paladins meant to the game and get into the head of the community. Let's do just that.
Prior to Burning Crusade, the paladin was a shining example of the Alliance, a symbol of what the Horde would never have--purity of heart, a second plate class and, most importantly, the bubble. When it was announced that paladins would be coming to the Horde and shaman would be coming to the Alliance, it was an all-out identity crisis. What would tell the factions apart, people mused? Why don't we all just drop our Arcanite Reapers, hold hands, and go on a man-date with our green-skinned buddies? WORLD OF PEACECRAFT, ANYONE? And what's this business about taking the Light by force? Lorelol?
Of course the point that they were missing amidst the gnashing of teeth and empty threats of recurring subscription cancellation was that this was a necessary change for the game's growth. And that's what the lorelolers either don't know, don't understand, or refuse to accept:
Gameplay dictates lore and not the other way around.
Yes, there are a few exceptions to this rule, but there are also a ton of proofs of it. Gutterspeak is a great example--why don't citizens of Lordaeron, though deceased, speak Common? Because it's important to gameplay that they don't. And the reason for the shaman/paladin change was to prevent parallelism and analogous changes every time a nerf or buff was made to one side or the other.
I try not to blame people for ignorance, purposeful or not, of this fact, because it's really a design thing and not everyone is interested in that. But! It still has to be said.
Post-BC and now, during Wrath, we come upon a whole new series of complaints, of lorelols, of not-caring-about-lores. They cry out to uncaring ears, prostrate, WHY ARE YOU MAKING US KILL THESE LORE CHARACTERS, BLIZZ?!
There was a lot of this when people found out you could kill Kael, or Vashj, or even Zul'Jin. (I need to take a moment to clarify that Zul'Jin was a coward who deserted the Horde at the first sign of trouble and ran away with his tail between his legs, and that Zul'Jin is a title of honor in the Troll language, thus the "For Zul'Jin!" battlecry of the Darkspears, but this is really unrelated to the current discussion.) They were and are upset that former heroes or at the very least honorable characters are being turned into bosses. This is not an unreasonable stance, but one must eventually let go of it or risk wishing the game to stagnate, as I'll describe in a moment.
Here are three truisms about WoW lore and how players relate to it, my final lecture and plea to lorelolers.
1. There is a finite, and ergo limited, number of established characters in pre-WoW Warcraft lore.
This is a pretty basic idea. There are only so many "old" characters that can be used in lore progression before, eventually, new characters start taking up the torch.
2. Misguided lore nerds complain when anything unrelated to or deviating from WC1-3 lore is introduced to the game.
Yes, there are large and vocal segments of the playerbase who hate "new" lore. Burning Crusade is a prime example of this. Any bit of BC that didn't deal with established characters (Illidan, Vashj, Kael) was ill-received by a portion of lore purists because it "had no bearing on the lore as a whole". "WHY ARE WE TAKING A SPACE VACATION?" Who cared about Auchindoun (though this is a valid complaint)? And what was their favorite dungeon? Of course--the one that had us replaying WC3 moments.
Bear in mind that these aren't bad things in themselves--it's great to have respect for established lore, and it's even better to see that lore fleshed out, but sometimes they can't even deal with that. These are the very same people who confuse the term "character progression" for "character remains exactly the same each and every time they appear in the game, in behavior, appearance, and motivation". They have an impossible desire for WoW to expand only within their own ill-conceived constraints, not realizing that they're dooming the game to eventually deforming and collapsing in on itself like a souflée in a bottle.
And that's why they have such an issue with the next truism.
3. Players need bad guys.
A game like WoW cannot progress or provide new content without bigger and bigger bads. However, this creates a conflict with the hardcore lore nerds--players that want new content, players that don't want established characters making a 180 and becoming big bads, players that don't care about newly-introduced big bads. It's impossible to cater to this demographic.
If this demographic is you, the only way to avoid another few years of hemming and hawing about how Blizzard is "ruining the lore" is by realizing that Warcraft, and especially World of Warcraft, is a living, breathing organism that requires progression, expansion, and periodic outright change of existing lore to serve gameplay purposes. This will not change. Don't act as if a fallen hero is a new concept to Warcraft, games, or even literature as a whole. Save yourself from expecting Blizzard to create lore just for you within impossible bounds. Embrace and experience lore expansions or additions, and know that every time something gets added or changes, it's because Blizzard loves its game, loves its lore, and truly loves creating the best experience for you, whether you're fickle and misguided or not.
Goodnight, and good luck.
Knowledge is power, so arm yourself to the teeth by reading up on all the latest lore discussion in Alex Ziebart's Know Your Lore and Ask a Lore Nerd. And read your quest text, dangit!Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, The Burning Crusade, Lore, RP, Wrath of the Lich King
Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria news





Reader Comments (Page 3 of 5)
Amaxe Jan 18th 2009 9:39PM
Ah, I see it was a joke from the guild.
I was wondering they didn't get hit by the ban hammer if they were charging
Matthew Jan 18th 2009 4:30PM
This is definitely one of the better articles I've read here. You've made some excellent points about lore and about how Blizzard is forced to deal with the storyline of Warcraft.
One rebuttal to your point, however, is Blizzard's quote unquote abandonment of some lore.
Varian Wrynn's kidnap, imprisonment, and enslavement are all things that were promised quests that were never delivered; all of the crap about the Ashbringer involving Dire Maul and Outland; etc.
Blizzard has abandoned some lore and forgotten about others, but I like to think they do so for a reason.
Amaxe Jan 18th 2009 9:50PM
Probably 1) didn't fit with the needs of the LK expansion or
2) Decided LK couldn't work with Lady Prestor behind the scenes what with the whole dragon flight thing in LK.
Wouldn't be the first time a Blizzard quest chain ended with a WTF? ending. Did they ever fix the Erinikus quest? I recall it left you at a shack on a side of a mountain in Winterspring with nothing more to do.
SheenyMcMc Jan 18th 2009 4:32PM
If you think Warcraft fans are bad you ain't seen nuthin'. Elder Scrolls fans all think the game's after their particular entry into the franchise is all "lorelol" and ruining the franchise.
Darggerfall fans hate Morrowind and Oblivion
Morrowind fans (legitimatly) hate Oblivion
Oblivion fans... barely exist within the fanbase.
Eternauta Jan 18th 2009 4:37PM
Excellent article.
Though I still think the BC was too Sci-Fi, I'll have to accept it as it is. Anyway since WotLK was released, I almost never come back to Outland.
The "new" lore added to Northrend is great, though. It's based on Norse mythology and very interesting, as it gives more information and details of the mysterious Titans and the origin of some of the most important races of Azeroth (Dwarves, Gnomes... Humans?)
Besides, Vikings in WoW = WIN.
Shardrell Jan 18th 2009 5:06PM
Personally, I don't mind that we're dealing with Arthas in this expansion and that future expansions will need to present new lore and new bad guys to fight. I also think it's possible for players to care about new lore, but that Blizzard needs to improve its in-game storytelling before that's going to be possible.
This whole nonsense of expecting players who care about lore to read the Warcraft novels/manga in order to understand what's going on in-game needs to end, now. There is no reason why we couldn't have at least learned the basics of Varian Wrynn's story in-game. There's no excuse for the lazy way that the Wrathgate questline ended, with NO further interaction between Varian and Jaina after what happened (I'm being vague to avoid posting spoilers, but you know what I'm talking about if you did the questline).
For players to care about characters and lore in-game, they need to feel involved in the stories of the good guys and they need to be confronted with memorable bad guys. An example of doing this well in-game is the Thassarian questline. We're invested in Thassarian's questline because we have been helping his sister look for him, and we're doubly invested if we met him in our earlier history as a Deathknight and remember that he was one of the DKs who retained a shread of humanity even while under the Lich King's control. We like Thassarian because he has character, and because he kicks ass in that very Deathknightish way. The Thassarian questline has a coherent narrative, a strong reason for the player want to be involved, and a satisfying ending. I believe it's one of the more memorable questlines in Wrath because of all of these qualities.
An example of doing this poorly is with the character of Abbendis. She could and should have been an interesting and memorable character, but Blizzard never did anything interesting with her in-game. I was disappointed in this, especially since powerful and interesting female leaders are fairly sparse in the WoW universe. She could have been a way to truly invest players in what was going on with the Scarlet Onslaught, either as an interesting bad guy or as a character who could be redeemed. Instead, she was just a vaguely confusing footnote tacked bizarrely onto the Dragonblight, where the Alliance (I don't know about the Horde) has nothing else to do with the Scarlet Onslaught.
TLDR: Players will be happy to care about new characters and lore if Blizzard makes more questlines like Thassarian's and follows the basic rules of good narrative.
Suzaku Jan 18th 2009 6:11PM
"This whole nonsense of expecting players who care about lore to read the Warcraft novels/manga in order to understand what's going on in-game needs to end, now."
That's simply not true. Most of the major lore events covered by the novels have been summarized not only in the instruction manuals, but on Blizzard's official website and in books which can be found all over the place in-game, to say nothing of quests and NPC speech. A hefty chunk of the novels serve only to recount the events of earlier games, which people may never have played, in detail.
Sure, they might provide more details or introduce various side characters and events, but there's really nothing in the books and comics that you need to read before you can understand the plot of the game.
If you're really confused about something, a quick perusal of wowwiki will easily inform you.
Shardrell Jan 18th 2009 7:34PM
What I'm saying is that nobody should need to look up lore on Wikipedia. That's bad storytelling. I'd also like to see Blizzard start to minimize the amount of simply reading or hearing about events that players do in the game. I don't mind having history books around, that's a neat extra. But if it's something important that's happening now, the players should be as involved as possible in seeing it happen.
I do think Blizz is moving in this direction, especially with the phasing technology they have. I *loved* watching Storm Peaks and Icecrown change as I completed quests, and I hope they will continue to expand this kind of technology in order to continue to improve storytelling.
mitch Jan 18th 2009 6:13PM
I don't agree entirely with the article.
I'm a fairly strong believer and follower in the lore, and the more I played WoW the more appreciation I had for the whole story.
BC just felt retconned. Like Blizzard just made it up as they went with no thought before or after any of the ideas.
While they have had to carefully manipulate some parts and have done so reasonably well, the move that made me lose a whole lot of hope for the Lore was Horde Paladins. Not just Horde Paladins, but Blood Elf Paladins. I know that the game needed them for the sake of balance and tuning encounters evenly (even though the idea of one class being inaccessible by each faction is really great) it feels too much like they just "decided" that Blood Elves would get the Paladins and they just "decided" that all of a sudden they could "wield the light". The implementation was a massive joke and disappoints me a lot.
For me and a lot of others, Forsaken becoming Paladins would have fit better than Blood Elves.
Karakkan Jan 18th 2009 6:45PM
Funny. Last I checked, they didn't just go "Lol I can haz bubble?". They enslaved a Naaru, and forced the light from its body, into theirs. Only until the Sunwell patch (I think) did they get legitamate Holy power.
Of course, people don't bother reading up on this stuff.
Coupdegras Jan 18th 2009 6:17PM
Very good points made here...
Seasons Jan 18th 2009 6:40PM
Thank you.
RJ Jan 18th 2009 6:51PM
I've been saying these things about the Draenei since TBC came out. I'd like to add though that mages have been happily teleporting around for hundreds of years with no complaints there either. I just always thought that if mages can teleport themselves, and even whole groups of people, teleporting a building would be something simple as well. It might require more mages though. I pictured a group of mages standing around and doing a mass teleport of The Exodar to a new place.
Mr42 Jan 18th 2009 6:56PM
well written, but i still don't like the way draenei invaded the lore :)
...and cartographic changes, but those can be justified way too easily
Llany Jan 18th 2009 7:06PM
I dont have too much hassle with the lore, but with TBC the one thing that really got to me was the blood elves and their reason for being paladins and having priests.
This is one of the two parts of the lore that blizzard screwed up big time. the reason why it was so bad was because blizzard didnt even bother to go back and check their past games.
In warcraft 3, the healer units for the alliance were high elves...high elf priests that used holy magic. In TFT the blood elves had Holy Priests as their healer unit BEFORE they had even entered outlands. Because blizzard didnt go back and check their earlier work we ended with the whole "lol we gotta go vampire on this wind chime thing inorder to use holy energy"
The other Big screw up was with the Draenei Lore where the established lore in all the games..even scattered around in the many books in WoW. Saying that Serageas corrupted the draenei rather than what was establish canon of the Eredar ( draenei) were the ones along with the dreadlords for corrupting Serageas.
The uproar on this change was so great that Chris Metzens posted on the forums and appologised for it
Crys Jan 22nd 2009 2:45PM
Yes, this! What always got me about the Blood Elf Paladin lore in BC was that it was so manufactured - if you can have priests who wield the holy light (as, say, Liadrin was), then you can have paladins. Not that the storyline wasn't interesting all in all, and I did like it, but clearly there were members of the Horde who could access the Holy Light before BC.
mitch Jan 18th 2009 7:14PM
@ Karakkan
I know what the official back story is, it's so artificial that it comes across as they just "decided" to make it like that and made up some silly little reason on the spot for it. Llany has summed it up pretty well.
FoxOfWar Jan 18th 2009 7:22PM
Just did a caverns of time Escape from Durnholde, which besides having probably one of the best lore of dungeons, is a fun instance alltogether.
No one of us had been there on their current chars before, so we had to do the "tour" that is before you can get in Durnholde.
Two guys of our group whined how the "wall of text" was too "boring" to read and how the quest was boring. Should've gotten the clue and left the group at that point, but that's another story...
Read the damn quest text. I can't understand people who wont; I'd find the game pretty boring if I didn't know the motivation behind things I do.
That said, awesome article. Lore and game mechanics intervene at times - it's just a fact. It happens. "lorelol" whiners need to get over it and realize that the storyline continues with each passing content patch. Embrace the continuation :D
Relkion Jan 19th 2009 4:06AM
The absolute fanaticism about lore has always astonished me with warcraft. In order for the game to be playable, the story has to be malleable. That means retconning, new ideas which may clash with old ones, and so forth. If you want a great, immersive story... read a book? A good one. There are millions of the darn things, and I can guarantee you that you'll get a more satisfying storyline than you will from Warcraft.
Warcraft's -byzantine- universe is pretty brilliantly put together considering the huge game it has to match up with. For the game to be good, lore has to be a secondary consideration, and because of that, the lore will only ever be so good.
chris Jan 18th 2009 7:50PM
What the lore keepers(aka BV's with every concievable copy of warcraft) need to realise is that all the games, books, rpg lit, fan stories etc only touches on a small part of WoW. All the lore to date covers only what is covered, that leaves a hell of alot of lore that can be introduced at any time. Like what ever happened to Arthas's school buddy, did he even have one, did his school buddy become a failed mage??? priest??? music teacher??. Did arthas go back and kill his P.E. teacher, did he fail Alchemy 101, did his first GF survive the first war??? why haven't we heard from "Where are they now???" on Arthas. and whatever happened to his patented voice changer 1300??
Fantasy, like Sci-Fi is only limited by the authors imagination.