Could We Ask Them To Just Defeat, Not Kill?

[Obipets]

I pretty much got my head taken off when I complained about this in the Blizzard forums but I spend so much time checking out the pets here that I thought I would try fellow pet lovers. At first I found the concept of sending animals into the arena to fight each other for sport just horrifying, game or not it is just too close to rl dogfighting or cockfighting for me. However so many people including my own beloved guildies love it so much I have come around on it but I just wish they would have the animals defeated, not killed. The idea of sending even a virtual pet into an arena to fight to the death while people stand around cheering is just awful. Do you think if enough of us asked Blizzard they might consider changing it so the animals don't die?

[Kingdms]

This is a game where we slaughter other beings, sentient or otherwise, in the thousands. Often for reasons that make little or no sense. It seems silly to ask that the Pet Battles minigame be treated any differently than the rest of the game.

[Lysi]

I don't know if I'll ever try the pet battles because of this. Luckily there are a lot of other things I want to do, I love the expansion. I guess Blizzard thought it would be "too much like pokemon" if the pets couldn't die. Personally, I don't think it would stop people from playing the pet battles if they made this small change. But there is an older thread on this forum on this topic, and those of us posting at the time agreed to disagree. So I won't go back into everything.

[Zoros]

Its actually simpler than that. The battle system uses a lot of the animation that where already in WOW. It would take a lot of work to recreate 'faint' animation when most creatures already have a death animation. I think it just comes down to the easiest path for development.

[Myrikenes]

I think it just belongs to the world of warcraft.
I guess you can start complaining about the deaths the moment you can prove me, you have leveled your character without ever killing any "living" being in the game.
Otherwise doing pet battles is just the same as every other interaction in the game.

[Blessaidlee]

I dont think enough people are bothered by it to spend money, time and labor to change it. Even if the animals faint they are still being harmed. If you dont like pet fighting, dont do it is what Id recommend.

[Thralla]

It bothers me a lot. I'm not too bothered by the fact my pets "die", because its just like if I go into a BG, right? I can rezz them. But I truly hate the sound effects when I wipe out the opposing team. I actually was very shocked that it didn't end like a dual with a smidgen of health left and then they despawn. Didn't know I was really going to kill them.

I would be completely on board with a change to how they end.

And yeah . . . . the Wow forums are full of some not very nice people, whom I can't figure out. = )

[Subjectv]

Unfortunately you're playing a game where the primary mission in almost every playstyle is to kill enemies. You have likely killed tens of thousands of "sentient beings" within the World of Warcraft since you started playing... did you have a problem with that?

I do find it a bit odd that people would take issue with you killing enemy mini pets, but you have no issue with killing other players, mobs, opposing faction members, etc. Isn't that just as bad, if not worse?

Just food for thought.

[Lysi]

How is a neutral critter an enemy? And putting a pet under my care in pain, for no reason, not to hunt or to fight a war, is just cockfighting or dog fighting. I could see that happening in a mideval fantasy environment, but it would only make sense if it was like a real cockfight with people gathered around, betting on the outcome. I don't see Blizzard going there, and yet that's really what it is. I was trying not to get into this again, but since other people are it's hard to just let it go.. The bottom line is people do disagree on this, and everyone has a right to their feelings, either way. There's no point arguing, because, as we all know, since we all use the internet, you won't convince other people to agree with your view (unless maybe those who were already 80% in agreement with you).

[Vell]

Since I doubt Blizzard will ever change that aspect of the game, I think it best to change the way you look at the battles.

Thinking logically, you are defeating the other pets, not killing. If it was killing, bandaging your pet would not heal them back to full life. You are not simply replacing a dead 'Fluffy' the cat and giving it the same name like so many cruel parents. Also, when you talk to a a stable master they sometimes mention that they are busy mending the bones of other pets so they cant work on yours at the moment.

[Neofox]

Firstly, as many have pointed out, you have already killed thousands of living things in the game, both humanoid and animal. The difference here is that at least they are facing something their own size. The game is filled with grinding quests where you have to kill unsuspecting wildlife. At least in this setting, it's a fair animal vs animal match, instead of a poor beast vs magic-blasting/blade-swinging humanoid. Which leads me to my next point.

I find it ridiculous how people keep comparing this to cockfighting. *ehem*POKEMON*cough*cough*!!! Seriously, that's (fictional) animals fighting animals too. Are you up in arms against the Pokemon franchise as well? I do know that in Pokemon, we're only causing the enemies to "faint" whereas here we're killing them, but the difference is that in WoW, dead things come back--not just as undead. This is just my opinion, which comes from my trying to make sense of everything, but the only way to logically explain respawns is to assume that NPCs (humanoid, beast, and critter) find their way back to their corpses in spirit form and return to life, just as we do. Of course, the real answer is that it's just a game, but thinking about that breaks the immersion factor for me.

I hate killing cute little creatures as much as the next animal lover (especially frogs, omg their death animation), but thinking that they can come back after dying just like I do makes it feel much less serious.

[Myrikenes]

THat is a good point.
I think in this world it is not possible to die, exept for special situations and probably old age.
Same rules for everyone, even NPCs and Animals.

[Obipets]

Thank you everyone for your thoughtful and respectful responses. I also respect your opinions on the matter. It is nice to know I am not the only one who feels this way but yes I totally get how it might be difficult to use just "fainting" in the programming. You know what really bothered me? I was questing out in that area just north of Surwhich where all the little creatures are being marched from their homes by the mean old Naga-like enemies and there in the middle of all that is a couple of them being forced to fight in a pit like slaves. So obviously someone at Blizzard found this to be an "evil" sort of sport that your enemy might force you to do, yet they thought it was cool to do this with pets with no free will. Considering how many people love it, obviously it was a brilliant idea from a marketing point of view. I won't bring this up again but I am glad to know others feel as I do. For those of you who don't get how we could level up killing thousands of creatures and then be upset about sending pets into an arena to fight to the death for sport, well the argument for us is: when fighting an enemy in self defense or in battle there is an equal ground. I personally hate when innocent creatures run into the middle of it and squeal and die, why on earth did they program that in there? I hate hunting "yellow' creatures for quests etc, I won't go on and on. I have never played Pokemon so I can't speak to those comments but the idea of sending your loyal pet into an arena to fight to the death for entertainment just reminds me so much of that ugly sport in RL, it just bothers me.
I only brought it up here to get other's perspectives and I thank you for responding. Happing hunting everyone and please have a wonderful day.

[Kingdms]

I'm not going to try refuting your opinion, Obi, but I do want to point out something in regard to the naga gladiatorial mini-matches you mention.

Both factions in this franchise have a history of taking slaves and using them in gladiatorial combat for their own amusement. PvP Arenas are an example of this concept, though the fact that the participants choose to take part in these death matches may make the moral implications of Arenas even worse than slavery.

It is a theme that constantly appears in the lore, and though it causes waves in the fan community each time it does, it always appears again. Depictions of this nature serve to illustrate the grim nature of the setting, which is rarely apparent due to the game's art style and humor, both intended in part to secure a more favorable game rating. Azeroth is a dark and brutal world, regardless of race, gender, or faction. It's one of those things you cannot apply modern, real-world morality to, because those morals do not exist within the setting. The nature of the world does not allow those morals to exist. In light of this, things like animal cruelty are not concepts anyone in the setting ever truly considers.

[Imthedci]

I'm not one to choose sides. I consider them to be not real and therefore it doesn't bother me. "Defeated" sounds more generic and would therefore be better, but it's not on the top of the list of things that I'd like to change...

The nature of the world does not allow those morals to exist. In light of this, things like animal cruelty are not concepts anyone in the setting ever truly considers.

I will, however, offer something to refute this point... DEHTA. I know it's a parody (and the GEHTA [Gun for the Ethical and Humane Treatment of Animals] still makes me laugh when I do their questline), but still they do exist. I'd imagine they'd be against Pet Battles in the first place... (One reason why I, personally, aren't going to inform them of it)

[Marzipan]

The writing in the game requires the killing of creatures that either deserve it or is necessary for survival or to acquire something. Any gratuitous killing of things has always been up to the player. But the game creators did bother to be careful enough to not include children as targets, so why not extend it further to defenseless critters? They knew involving children would be irresponsible. Well, cruelty to small animals is a serious issue in the real world, too. This is something that has always bugged me about the game.

The battle-ready critters certainly aren't defenseless, but many of them are realistic creatures with realistic sounds. It's insensitive to the very real problems in our society to take lightly the death of innocents, even if it is virtual.

The game would only be better -- not worse -- if the game designers had been a bit more considerate. The death decision just seems lazy, anyhow. I don't think there's anything wrong with people speaking up on this. What do the players who are against this idea possibly have to gain by winning the argument? Satisfaction for successfully holding back progress in the gaming world? More bunny deaths to look forward to? Neither of those things deserve any respect.

[Kingdms]

I will, however, offer something to refute this point... DEHTA. I know it's a parody (and the GEHTA [Gun for the Ethical and Humane Treatment of Animals] still makes me laugh when I do their questline), but still they do exist. I'd imagine they'd be against Pet Battles in the first place... (One reason why I, personally, aren't going to inform them of it)

That's an example of the humor that I mention, and it's not a canonical part of the Warcraft setting. It was simply added as a pun in WoW for the community to get a kick out of. Like the Mohawk Grenade, it officially does not exist on Azeroth.

[Marzipan]

whereas here we're killing them, but the difference is that in WoW, dead things come back--not just as undead.

If dead things (other than ourselves) come back in the WoW universe, then why hasn't Mankrik gotten his wife back yet? Why isn't Cairne Bloodhoof alive again and leading the Tauren? And on and on and on ...

Just because the game mechanics require respawning for other players to have their turn at the story, doesn't mean things don't die in the moment you've witnessed it. This is a key concept that MMORPG developers assume players understand.

[Ebil]

I don't see a problem with killing them to be honest. In my time playing wow I have killed thousands of critters thanks to my AoE and that of my pet. Now that is one thing I would like to changed because I don't like killing them in the course of doing my "job" but that is another topic. And if you have the Armadilo Pup in your collection I don't feel that you can complain too much about the pet battles because think about all the critters that had to die for you to get that pet.

But back to the issue at hand I think the real reason why the pets are killed and not defeated is because they would have to find away to remove the pet in question from combat. It is not that hard with the last pet you have to battle but what about the first two? The only thing I can think of that may please is to give the option of killing the pet or letting the pet flee by adding a flee button next to the capture button.

[Lysi]

That's an example of the humor that I mention, and it's not a canonical part of the Warcraft setting. It was simply added as a pun in WoW for the community to get a kick out of. Like the Mohawk Grenade, it officially does not exist on Azeroth.

There are NPCs all over the game who talk about things like restoring the balance of nature, good and evil. Morals come up constantly, it's a big part of the game. As outsiders we may see some aren't as virtuous as they think they are, but that doesn't change the fact many NPCs are motivated by the idea they're doing the right thing. Some NPCs say they only use violence as a last resort, and it's pretty easy to play your own character this way, since most of the things you are asked to kill, will kill you on sight. But my big problem with pet battles isn't about killing creatures in general, it's because they are my pets, creatures I care for and have for companionship. Sending them in to fight for no reason is betrayal, it's like grouping with someone and then hiding behind a rock as they die. Over and over and over again. The pet battles could have been designed as duels, harmless practice fights. It wouldn't make any more or less sense than the way it is now, pointless fighting with no story line.