Review: The Warcraft Chronicle, Volume Two

Continuing their efforts to provide a unified record of the vast Warcraft lore, Blizzard has now released the second installment of the Warcraft Chronicle.

Cover art for the Warcraft Chronicle, volume twoThis time, focus shifts away from Azeroth to cover the history of Draenor, before jumping back to Azeroth and reciting the history of the First and Second Wars, up to and including the events of Beyond the Dark Portal.

The first installment was for the most part of a fascinating dive into a lot of mostly unknown lore, but perhaps inevitably, volume two is less impressive.

My favourite part was learning about Draenor’s pre-history. This was for the most part totally new lore, and while it may not have been quite as thrilling as learning of Azeroth’s origins and the days of the Black Empire, it was nonetheless an interesting read. I particularly enjoyed learning the history of the Arrakoa civilization.

However, once it got around to more familiar history, it became much less impressive.

This is perhaps to be expected, as it’s all stuff I’m already familiar with, but the familiarity wasn’t the thing that bothered me most. Quite the opposite, actually.

When this whole Chronicle business started, I had the vague worry this might be another excuse to start retconning everything willy-nilly. Seems I was right to worry.

Much of the history of Draenor leading up to the First War has now been changed. It’s mostly smaller changes more than total rewrites, but when you add up all the little changes, it starts to become a rather different story.

A mighty Sporemound as depicted in the Warcraft Chronicle, volume twoThe intention seems to have been to unify history by incorporating elements of the alternate versions of Draenor seen in Warlords of Draenor and the film, but I’m not sure why they felt the need to do that. Both of those were pretty clearly alternate realities, and attempting to combine all the different versions of Draenor causes more confusion than it solves.

It’s doubly confusing when you consider that neither WoD nor the movie were terribly well-received. I really don’t think any Warcraft lore fan was like, “You know what we need? For Warlords of Draenor to be more canon!”

Hilariously, Garona’s origin story has been retconned yet again. I believe this is the fourth backstory she’s been given now? It’s getting hard to keep count. I think she officially takes the crown as the most heavily retconned part of the Warcraft universe now.

To be fair, most of these retcons don’t make the story any worse. Some even make it better. There’s finally a clear explanation of how the Twilight’s Hammer went from being a Draenic Orc clan to a multi-racial cult of Azerothian Old God worshippers, and it actually makes pretty good sense. I’m glad of that.

But sadly they do invalidate a good chunk of Warcraft literature, including a lot of Christie Golden’s work. And that’s a real shame. Rise of the Horde was one of the better novels.

Where it all began...In the end, volume two of the Warcraft Chronicle occupies an uncomfortable middle ground where the people who are most likely to read it are hardcore lore fans, but the people who are most likely to enjoy it are those with only minimal experience of the lore to date.

Overall rating: 6.2/10

Explaining my Review Scores

This is something I perhaps should have done when I first started the blog… six years ago… but it occurs to me that I’ve never really explained my thought process when scoring my reviews.

Worst. Episode. Ever.Better late than never.

First, I will be honest and say that they are pretty arbitrary. There’s no particular math or codified logic behind them. It’s as much about feelings as rationality.

That said, I do still put a fair bit of thought into them. I often change a score several times before a post’s publication as I go back and forth on my opinions.

The scoring system is identical regardless of whether I’m reviewing books, games, movies, or TV. Since I’m measuring the total quality of the finished product and how it left me feeling, the medium doesn’t really change the process.

I also have a pretty consistent idea of what each number range represents, which I will now outline:

10: Perfect in every way. A score I have never given and likely never will.

9-9.9: Brilliant. The item I am reviewing may have a few minor flaws but is otherwise exemplary in concept and execution. Something that everyone should experience, regardless of taste.

Examples: Lord of the Rings, Warcraft III, X-Men: Days of Future Past, Greatshadow, many Continuum episodes.

8-8.9: Excellent. Strongly above average, with strengths that significantly outweigh any weaknesses. Recommended to most people, unless it’s a genre or franchise you strongly dislike.

Examples: Mass Effect: Andromeda, The Summonstone, Remember Me, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.

7-7.9: Good. Either items with significant flaws but also impressive strengths to compensate or all-arounders that do everything decently but don’t excel at much. Recommended to all fans of the genre or franchise, and may appeal to others as well.

Examples: The Incredible Adventures of Van Helsing, a lot of Defiance episodes, most books by Lawrence Watt-Evans, X-Men: Apocalypse.

6-6.9: Imperfect. Not bad, but struggling to rise above the pack. Recommended to devoted fans of the genre or franchise, but not the general populace.

Examples: Mass Effect 2, Logan.

5-5.9: Mediocre. May have some things going for it, but usually not enough to make it worth spending time on in a world so awash in entertainment. Possibly worth it for ardent fans of the genre/franchise, but even they’re likely to come away underwhelmed.

Examples: Dungeon Siege II, Honor Amongst Thieves, Diablo: Legacy of Blood.

0-4.9: Bad to terrible. Severely flawed with few if any redeeming qualities. Entries in this range are not worth it for anyone.

Examples: Immortals, Battlestar Galactica: Blood and Chrome, Warlords of Draenor.

I realize that having such exact numbers for what I will freely admit to be an inexact science may seem a bit strange, but I think the granularity is important. There’s a difference between a 6.9, which fell just barely short, versus a flat 6, which is much closer to total mediocrity.

I do not agree with the viewpoint that numbered reviews don’t serve a purpose. It provides a helpful, at-a-glance way to organize things, and it helps provide clarity in cases where it’s difficult to fully articulate the feel of a certain product — cases where something is more or less than the sum of its parts.

The climax of the Shadowmoon Valley storyline in World of Warcraft: Warlords of DraenorMMORPGs are a special case, as they are constantly evolving. That makes giving them a specific numbered rating less helpful, though it can still work if you’re reviewing a specific snapshot of an MMO’s lifespan (like my reviews of WoW expansions).

I have never been paid or otherwise compensated for any of my reviews. I’m not opposed to the idea, but no one has offered. If I did accept compensation for a review, I would offer disclosure of the fact in the review. I’m greedy, but I’m honest.