Titles Tell Stories: How "Mists of Pandaria" breaks the mold

While I was drafting The Queue a few days ago, one particular vein of questioning stood out among the rest. Blizzard has recently filed for a peculiar trademark, Mists of Pandaria, under the classification of computer software (among other things). Many people believe that Mists of Pandaria will be the name of the next expansion, heralding in an age of World of Warcraft in which the fan-favorite pandaren finally make their emergence out of the shadows and into our hearts. Others hope that the pandas stay as the joke they originated from and WoW keeps only its other 50 bipedal, anthropomorphized races and rejects the pandaren concept. Either way, it is cause for discussion.
The title is an art form in the games industry. A title has to tell you everything you need to know right up front, on the box, to give players new and old alike an understanding of what the game is going to focus on, set the theme, set a tone, and even clue us in to the major plot points. The title Mists of Pandaria could or could not do those things. I've taken the liberty of writing up some words on the subject of this potential title. I could be right and could certainly be wrong, but here's some food for thought.
The Queue question that got this all started for me:
Zayd asked:
'The Mists of Pandaria'
Sounds like the name of a patch rather than an expansion to me.
The Mists of Pandaria does kind of sound like a patch title, but it could very well also be the name of an expansion. For all we know, it could even be the name of the first digital version of the WoW TCG. That's a big maybe. There are many factors to consider about the title, which holds great weight in the nature of games.
Past expansion titles
Let's start off with a little bit of history. World of Warcraft and its previous expansions all told the entire story of their representative games in the title alone. Even the original game, World of Warcraft, instantly acknowledged what the game was and what players were to expect from it. This was, quite literally, the world of Warcraft, the beloved strategy game that had captured the hearts and minds of gamers for years.
The Burning Crusade was named as such because of its villains, the Burning Legion, crusading across the galaxy killing or converting anything that crossed their path. Interestingly enough, while Illidan was the de facto spokesperson for the expansion in his infamous "You are not prepared!" patch opener, the real enemy was the Burning Legion -- Kil'jaeden in particular, who tried to use blood elf leader Kael'thas Sunstrider to bring him to Azeroth through the Sunwell. The title told us everything we needed to know. The Burning Crusade: It was burning, and it was a crusade.

Cataclysm was named for the event that shook up the world, essentially creating WoW 2 and changing the political and physical landscape of Azeroth. The word cataclysm has many connotations, most of them destructive, and reflected the world coming undone. It was simple, to the point, and put the breaking of the world at the forefront. This was an expansion about change. The expansion's trademark filing was even filed in a similar way back in 2009 before it was announced at BlizzCon. The procedure takes about three months, so Blizzard will want to have the trademark secure before running around with the name hanging on banners and being all over the internet.

What does Mists of Pandaria tell us just from the words? What are the WoW associations with each of these words that would lead us to believe that it is a title for a WoW expansion? Well, as Anne Stickney pointed out with my over AIM, the "mists" in World of Warcraft are usually tied together with the Kvaldir, sea-faring vrykul who attack ships, disrupt coastlines, and are generally mean in disposition. The vrykul made their reappearance in Cataclysm in the Vashj'ir zone, fighting against Azshara's naga forces in the Battlemaiden quest lines.
If Azshara is the next big bad guy coming to World of Warcraft, it makes sense to bring the mist and one of her enemies into the picture, potentially as allies to the player races of Azeroth. The only problem with the word mist in the title is that the word carries none of this meaning outside of the game world or having a basic understanding of the lore. You stick Mists of Pandaria on a box with some pandas and that's all people have to go on -- a foggy town with some pandas living in it. The concept of the mists in WoW is a bit esoteric, even if it's spelled out for you in quests and environments.
Pandaria
The second part of the title (we will skip "of") is the pandaren homeland of Pandaria, what many people believe will be the setting of the new expansion, giving us a new continent and islands (as opposed to a new world) to explore. Pandaria as an island works because, again, Anne Stickney is correct in assuming if we are getting a seafaring expansion (or at least going to new islands and continents), major island nations will come into play. But again, the title feels exclusionary.
Pandaria has never come up as a real, honest thing in the game world other than jokes or minor lore references. The antithesis to that statement would be Uldum, which just sort of appeared out of nowhere when Cataclysm launched; at least there were the actual gates of Uldum in Tanaris and a simiarly built Ahn'Qiraj that hinted at its existence. Pandaria exists only in Chen's Empty Keg and some other random references. When a player picks up the box for Mists of Pandaria, he does not innately know what the mists are or what Pandaria is.
Titles tell a story
If you've had any exposure to the Warcraft universe in the last 10 years, you know what the Burning Legion is, who the Lich King is, and what the word cataclysm means. You might not, however, understand the significance of mists or what Pandaria even is. I'm not saying it shouldn't be the name of the next expansion because of these factors, but it does give me pause to think about the words in front of me. It just seems a better fit for the card game in digital form, if the trademark filing is to be believed (it is). Is this the first Blizzard expansion that will truly be a World of Warcraft expansion and not a Warcraft expansion, if that makes any sense?
Titles are meant to tell me a story in as few words as possible to ramp up my expectations. Blizzard's titles have worked in a very similar manner since the beginning, and Mists of Pandaria would break a mold. I don't know. It's a little fishy -- but at the same time, can you argue with trademark applications?
Will I be upset if it's the new expansion? Certainly not. I have begun to like the pandaren more ever since this whole rumor started. Maybe this break in the mold is needed for the new era of WoW.
We're slowly running out of the original stories that the World of Warcraft we know has been built on. Maybe, just maybe, the story that lives in the next expansion's title -- be it belonging to the pandaren, Azshara, kvaldir, or anything in between -- is a clean slate approach. Maybe the title will be as foreign to us as it is to everyone else -- a great equalizer, a title that makes us all into fresh faces. So now we just have to wait and see if the title, Mists of Pandaria, will be telling any stories.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion
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 4 of 8)
Ronin Aug 9th 2011 12:28PM
Well, which is it? Is it a joke, a "middle-finger"? Or is it "something they intend to use"? It can't be both.
Daedalus Aug 9th 2011 12:56PM
@Aranyszin:
It's not an announcement, but after Cataclysm, Blizzard had to know that people would pick up on it right away, so it is tantamount to leaking a tiny piece of information.
As far as trying to control the information that's getting out there, there are a lot of better ways to do that. First and foremost: just not saying anything. Then, there are the ones Blizzard has been known to use in the past: serious sanctions for employees leaking information, cease and desist letters, etc.
Plus, if they did want to leak false information, there are a lot better ways to do it. A few anonymous words to a blogger, some leaked concept art, something like that. If they really wanted to see how people would react, wouldn't they leak something that actually told us more about it than just a title? What kind of market research is that? "We didn't let them try it, we didn't tell them anything about it, we didn't give them any information about the product at all, but we gave them the name and they hated it, so obviously the whole idea is flawed."
Besides, there's still the big question of the gaming press, and keeping up good will with them. Deliberately putting a false lead out there for them to follow, then refusing to say anything about it pretty much guarantees that when the real story comes out, every article is going to have a paragraph about the deception. Why would they want that distraction at a time they want all the focus on their new features?
No, I can believe that it's not the next expansion; it could easily be something else. (In fact, Pandaria seems like the kind of thing they'd want to explore in a smaller environment, like a Facebook game...) However, I absolutely cannot accept that it might be a deliberate fake that they don't intend to do anything with. It just has so many ways to blow up in their faces, and the benefits of it are nonexistent.
Aranyszin Aug 9th 2011 12:57PM
@ Ronin
Why can't it be both? It could be a joke ("middle-finger" to the
data-miners would be in the same vein) that they know will generate
press for the game at a time with SWTOR is being ramped up while at
the same time giving them a plausible out to say that they never
"intended" to announce anything (the actual anticipated effect does
not have to be the same as the official "intended" effect). And no
matter WHAT it is (whether a complex joke or something that actually
is a step toward the real name of the next expansion) you can be
certain that Blizzard's PR and marketing departments are observing
every comment made on any website they can locate because, all press
is good press (whether intended or not).
There is absolutely nothing that prevents them from intentionally
planting something that they know will (or likely will) be interpreted
a certain way with the intention of throwing us off the trail,
breaking the market's habit of trying to peek under the wrapper or
just safely testing the concept in such a way that they can completely
back away from it later.
It would not surprise me at all if they wanted to set up a false lead
(intended) and chose Panderans as the false lead to set up just
because they thought it might be funny. And anyone who is putting out
opinions that "they couldn't / wouldn't / shouldn't do that" has
absolutely no way of knowing it, even if they turn out to be right.
They are, at the moment, the #1 MMO in the world, and have billions in
the bank to prove it. Trust me. They have a better idea of what they
are doing than we do.
Aranyszin Aug 9th 2011 1:03PM
@Daedalus
Yes, there are better ways of controlling information. However, there are certain things they cannot control. A big one is what someone else pointed out on this forum: they have to trademark the names of their expansions, and trademark apps are public information. As such, it's very difficult to keep such things a secret. What you CAN do is set up a few false leads to throw the market off (like movie makers who film "Captain America" under a secret name like "A Day by the Lake"). If "Mists of Panderia" turns out to not be the next expansion's name, the playerbase will take future "scoops" about trademark applications with suspicion, and Blizzard has more control over how much buzz they can generate on their upcoming titles. Is this 100% accurate or effective? No. Is it risky? Not terribly. It would even be a little clever. All I'm saying here is, that's another explanation for what this could be. And anyone saying "Nope, this is how they did it before, so now we know 100% that this is the name of the next expansion - let the speculation begin!" is not as sure as they think they are. If Blizzard plants a false lead or two, those uncertanties widen.
Daedalus Aug 9th 2011 1:44PM
@Aranyszin:
"Is it risky? Not terribly."
Couldn't disagree with you more on that. There are just so many ways this could blow up in their faces, as I've already mentioned. Fomenting rabid hate about something they don't intend to do, enraging Pandaren fans who feel like they were lead on, the press making sure every future leak or whisper is qualified with "but of course, Blizzard has been known to lie about this stuff," the real announcement getting overshadowed by reporting on the fan reaction to being fooled; the list goes on.
And to what end? If they are truly worried about people picking out the real info from trademarks and want to control when the buzz starts, why not just wait and file the trademark when they're ready for people to start talking about it? I can't think of a single thing they'd get by having a fake filing that they couldn't accomplish better through a far less risky means.
I'm 100% with you on this not meaning anything about the next expansion; all I'm saying is that the false lead idea makes zero sense. Blizzard filed it because they intend to do something with it; the only question is what.
Aranyszin Aug 9th 2011 2:23PM
@Daedalus
"Fomenting rabid hate about something they don't intend to do, enraging Pandaren fans who feel like they were lead on, the press making sure every future leak or whisper is qualified with 'but of course, Blizzard has been known to lie about this stuff,' the real announcement getting overshadowed by reporting on the fan reaction to being fooled; the list goes on."
I respect your input on this. You've kept it intelligent and thoughtful. I just disagree with you on this concept. I don't think its (that) risky because, although we (really, all of us in the player base, as well as the editors of the various major fansites) are treating it as one, this ISN'T an announcement. Of anything. Blizzard could perfectly plausibly and with 100% (okay, 87%) sincerity point out 100% accurately that they didn't announce, hint or infer ANYTHING. They filed a trademark application. What that means, could mean, should mean or has meant in the past is irrelevant; they didn't *say* it meant anything. If we get angry, they can rightfully disclaim any responsibility. "Panderans? Who said Panderans? We never said Panderans. We never even said Panderia. We just reserved it because .. we [insert plausible explanation here: "heard someone was writing a book / video game / documentary" "were kicking around the idea for a kid's console game" etc]. Of course we'll suspect it's bunk. Some people will INSIST it's bunk. But it will get no traction. No more traction than any other conspiracy theory about Blizzard (see, i.e., "favors the Horde" "caters to casuals" "caves to qq" ad nausium).
The fansites would *never* use a caveat about "Blizzard has been known to lie about this stuff" because... they wouldn't have lied. What they *would* have to say is "But we've been known to misinterpret this stuff / been wrong about speculating based on this kind of information in the past" which may... emphasis on may ... be exactly what Blizzard wants them to have to say. Just my $.02.
Ronin Aug 9th 2011 4:14PM
Aranyszin, it could be _either_ a joke _or_ something they registered because they intend to use it. It cannot be both things at the same time.
Support for it being a joke is extremely weak, so you back-pedaled on that only enough to take some pressure off. But that's the only option you've actually presented an argument for. Fine. I just happen to think you're wrong, and that the evidence doesn't support your position. But only time will tell.
Aranyszin Aug 10th 2011 1:41AM
@Ronin
Ronin. First, you misinterpreted my comment about "who said they don't intend to use it?" That was intended to point out that the notion of it being "illegal" to register a trademark they don't intend to use is rather funny; all Blizzard would have to say is "who said we don't intend to use it?" then slap it on a comic or something. My point - there - was that I doubt seriously that Blizzard would be _remotely_ concerned about "breaking the law" by registering a trademark they don't intend to use... immediately.
Second. I didn't backpedal off anything. I *suppose* I should have opened with "I think it could easily be a joke" instead of saying "I think it's a joke" to avoid being held to the card by overly literal trollish types. For you to say it has to be a joke OR have a purpose is myopic to a laughable degree. To further clarify my point - Blizzard is sophisticated enough to do something with a very specific purpose and still have it be a joke (note all the easter eggs they include in their game - both a joke and serious business). The intended purpose could be to throw off "dataminers" and the joke could be choosing to use a panderan reference instead of something more plausible (i.e. "The Emerald Dream"). For you to say my "joke" theory is "extremely weak" is equally laughable, considering that half the fansites covering WoW have written multiple articles on how Mists of Panderia is the next expansion based on nothing more than a trademark filing. I don't view my theory as being any "weaker" than that. Nor do I view the fact you disagree as particularly compelling.
chuparex Aug 9th 2011 9:54AM
Totally agree with your analysis. And although, after giving it some thought, I could get behind a completely new culture/land with such sparse in-game precedent, theming a whole expansion after it at this point in the story seems unlikely. Everything in Cataclysm is pointing toward a full-scale emergence of the Old Gods, including a final war with the temporarily contained Emerald Nightmare, likely leading to traveling to the depths of the sea to deal with N'Zoth itself and Azshara. I will be surprised if Mists of Pandaria is not either a red herring, or some new piece of software/app/TCG incarnation.
Scuac Aug 9th 2011 9:56AM
I started playing WoW during 3.2. I had never playedthe RTS games. I had no idea who the LK was, or Arthas, or the burning legion... dark portal, wtf is that? So, to me this new title sounds as good as any of the previous. I suspect that to many casual players it would be similar. And Pandas? Yay!
Monato Aug 9th 2011 9:57AM
Since China is the only part of the subscriber base still growing and since China is particularly sensitive to the portrayal of Pandas, how would they react to this?
Muskie Aug 9th 2011 10:11AM
FAIL. there's absolutely NOTHING about sensitivity to pandas in china. Frack, the reason they're almost extinct is cause they were CHOPPED UP FOR MEDICINES.
The original backlash against blizzard about the pandaren was the original image which showed the pandaren wearing JAPANESE WEAPONS AND ARMOR. China haaaaaates Japan.
Samwise rectified this in later artwork, and now the standard aesthetic for the Pandaren is ancient Chinese, rather than ancient Japanese.
Noselacri Aug 9th 2011 10:26AM
Kung Fu Panda was a blockbuster release in China and made over 100m yuan, or 15 million dollars (they consider anything that makes over 15m a huge success due to ticket prices being about 4$ each, and rampant piracy).
The China debacle was about the original art showing them in Samurai gear, which was a Japanese warrior. The art was redrawn before Warcraft 3 was even released, and the tension was quashed.
There is no law or problem with the use of Pandas in cartoon violence in the country of China.
AudreyR Aug 9th 2011 10:32AM
I'm not sure it's hate towards Japan rather than it's fairly racially insensitive. The same thing would have happened had Pandaren had been in traditional Vietnamese, Cambodian, or Korean clothing.
Although I'm fairly certain that in the original art work, no offense was intended. From some that I've seen, there was an homage to Lone Wolf and Cub.
Daedalus Aug 9th 2011 10:57AM
@AudreyR:
Not even close to the same thing.
There's been antagonism between Japan and China for centuries, but with World War II, things got really ugly. (Just check the wikipedia page on "the rape of Nanking" if you don't understand why and weren't feeling sufficiently depressed today.)
I'm not trying to say anything bad about Japan; lots of countries have very nasty pasts, but we shouldn't let that reflect on their modern incarnation. However, I'm willing to guess that for a lot of Chinese people, seeing a panda in Japanese armor would be like Americans seeing a bald eagle in an Osama bin Laden t-shirt.
Ronin Aug 9th 2011 10:57AM
Not to argue, AubreyR, but there is a LOT of bad blood between China and Japan. Atrocities on both sides; each country trying to conquer the other multiple times; and Japan even succeeding temporarily in the 20th century (when the might of China had failed to conquer Japan in earlier attempts); these two countries are not friends with each other. It's a lot more personal than simple Xenophobia.
AudreyR Aug 9th 2011 11:09AM
No, I realize there is bad blood. But to take an animal that is found in one country and to dress it in the manner of another country that happens to be close by is bad form no matter the countries history.
loop_not_defined Aug 9th 2011 11:25AM
Y'know, I've looked into these "Chinese Panda Laws" a couple of times over the years (pretty much every time a new expansion is about to be released and Pandarens always get brought up), and I think you guys are taking your conclusions just a tad too far.
There has, in fact, been one confirmed proposed law in Chengdu that would ban certain uses of panda imagery, basically along the lines of "cheap entertainment". It didn't pass as far as I can tell, but I put the link for it on the first page.
I've also come across numerous news articles where people were upset because some panda image wasn't being used in a fun/cute manner. It's somewhere between mildly uncomfortable and Depicting Muhammad, depending on who you talk to. All-in-all, I don't think World of Warcraft's depiction is going to breach most Chinese people's comfort level. I also don't think the Chinese government will censor too much, considering blood and skeletons aren't currently depicted for *any* race.
Daedalus Aug 9th 2011 1:51PM
@AudreyR:
I understand what you're saying, but the point I'm making is that for the Chinese, dressing up one of their cultural symbols in Japanese garb is significantly worse than dressing it in stuff from most other countries.
To compare, I go back to the idea of the eagle. Yeah, showing a bald eagle in a t-shirt with the Canadian or Mexican flag on it would upset some people in the U.S. However, that is nothing compared to the uproar you'd see if it was an I Al Qaeda shirt.
Thomas Higgins Aug 10th 2011 10:04AM
It seems to me this whole " All China hates Japan" stuff is a lot of hooey at times.
Case in point, if they did despise Japan and the Japanese people as much as folks here seem to think, there is absolutely no way in Hell that this next thing would have occurred.
Namely, the filming of one of the "Four Great Classical Novels", (the masterpieces of early Chinese literature) - what we in the West know as "The Water Margin", the Chinese know as "Shui Hu Zhuan" (All Men Are Brothers) and the Japanese know as Suikoden In China. By the Japanese t.v. network, NHK, using a mainly Japanese cast and crew, using the Japanese language and having a Japanese theme song.
During the time of Chairman Mao Tse Tung!
(I despise Pinyin, so I do not use it when transliterating Chinese names etc, so that is the spelling I chose)
Some Chinese people do detest the Japanese for what they did to their country before and during World War 2. Most, however, prefer to do business with them and see personal grudges as an impediment to doing that business.