Skip to Content
11-20-2011 @ 8:42PM
To be fair, I'd normally be fine with something like Theramore being razed. Storywise, it's interesting because something that big raises the stakes. However, it's a problem when taken with the rest of the Alliance storyline.It's not even that the Alliance loses so often. That could even be excused if done well. The problem is that the Alliance is reactive, even passive. If (not when, if) they do anything, it is always reacting to something.And this is not just a problem from WoW. It's existed from the very beginning. Warcraft 1 has the humans defending against the orcs. Warcraft 2 has the humans defending, then pushing back, the orcs.Warcraft 3, when the Horde starts to become the non-evil faction, has the humans flee to Kalimdor because the Scourge wiped out Lordaeron, while the orcs set sail for Kalimdor in order to build a new life. Notice how even here, the Horde was proactive while the Alliance was reactive.So that's my problem with Theramore. It just compounds the problem that the only way the writers seem to be able to include the Alliance in the story is by having them reacting to an outside force.That is why they cannot come up with a good war cry for the Alliance. It's because the Alliance feels so insubstantial. It only exists as a reflection of something else.
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.