|
Poll: SC 1 vs SC2: Best plot?SC1: maturer, inmersive and better characters (943) 72% SC2: Just love it, don't care much about if is better or not. (130) 10% SC1: WoL story sucks. (128) 10% SC2: improves all aspects from original. (109) 8% 1310 total votes Your vote: SC 1 vs SC2: Best plot? (Vote): SC1: maturer, inmersive and better characters
(Vote): SC2: improves all aspects from original.
(Vote): SC1: WoL story sucks.
(Vote): SC2: Just love it, don't care much about if is better or not.
Various views have been heard about how good is SC2 story so far, especially when compared with Sc Brood War. From "chillhood" to "simply amazing" are some of the comments from the community. What do you think?
Personally prefer by a far margin SC original story, simply because what i see as a better character development, an inmersive sensation for the player and a lot more groundbreaking moments.
Also i think that WoL without the Zeratul "mini campaign", the campaign will be a total crap.
|
to be fair, sc1+bw had a story that touched on all three races. here in sc2 so far, youve only got a third of the story
|
I am enjoying the plot from SC2 more so far. I think SC1 felt more developed because there were more angles to shape the story from since there were 6 different campaigns. I think SC2 is doing a great job at continuing the story and I think partly I enjoy it so much because I have been waiting so long for a continuation.
|
sc1+bw. the characters were absolutely ruthless in that game. sc2 seems kinda wishy-washy
|
SC2 WoL entire story is summed as follows.
Zeratul tells Raynor that he needs to save Kerrigan. Raynor saves Kerrigan.
Every other character was not essential to the story. In other words, it sucks.
Also, how the fuck did Kerrigan get beat by a small army when the UED, Dominion, and Artanis combined could not defeat her in the end of Broodwar?
|
Not a fair comparison. This just tells a part of the story. If all you care about is plot wait until the next 2 expansions are out. By then the choice might be obvious tho.
|
On August 01 2010 06:24 On_Slaught wrote:
Not a fair comparison. This just tells a part of the story. If all you care about is plot wait until the next 2 expansions are out. By then the choice might be obvious tho.
My thoughts exactly. While the story in WoL is indeed a bit "bad", I'm pretty sure they're just laying down the grounds for some epicness for the two expansions.
|
On August 01 2010 06:24 On_Slaught wrote:
Not a fair comparison. This just tells a part of the story. If all you care about is plot wait until the next 2 expansions are out. By then the choice might be obvious tho.
This is a full game and I expect to get a full story. SC1 cannot be summed up with 2 events, and it's likely that any one of the 3 campaigns in SC1 had more storyline than WoL.
|
On August 01 2010 06:13 mrkent wrote:
SC2 WoL entire story is summed as follows.
Zeratul tells Raynor that he needs to save Kerrigan. Raynor saves Kerrigan.
Every other character was not essential to the story. In other words, it sucks.
Also, how the fuck did Kerrigan get beat by a small army when the UED, Dominion, and Artanis combined could not defeat her in the end of Broodwar?
Totally agree.
Imao, i think campaign in sc2 is too noob-friendly. there are 4 degrees of difficulty, but in scbw, you had to go through unless you cheat.
p.s.: I hope Blizzard adds Lan-modus. It spoils fun because it forces players to use battle net which is not a guarantee for latency-free play. I wanted to play some matches with my buddy but we couldn't because he had problem with wireless card. With lan, it wouldnt happen.
|
Personally I liked SC:BW's story better. However, I feel that it may be because the WoL storyline seems very incomplete, seeing how you're only getting 1/3 of the plot. Additionally, the SC2 storyline seems rather cheesy and almost downright cliche at moments. The whole "choose your path" mission style also doesn't quite help the plot because the underlying storyline is too muddied and undeveloped as a result of a lack of a clear direction. TBH, I never really saw the appeal of the whole "your choice means everything" kinda plot philosophy for video games because while that definitely gives more control to the player, the plots will feel weaker. I mean, the best novels and stories of all time have a clear cut direction. They may throw in twists here and there, but the development of the plot is still solid. By allowing so much (too much) choice, the plot line becomes skewed. Nevertheless, the SC2 storyline is still very enjoyable for me.
|
SC2 story is ridiculous and not at all in line with the previous story. Big thumbs down from me.
|
SC2 story isn't really bad but it has lots of unnecessary filler missions to reach the 30 mission tick mark. The actual gameplay is miles ahead but the story is underwhelming, I agree. The main problem is that none of the main characters do anything crazy... Mengsk sites on Korhal and gives shitty speeches, Kerrigan is just going for the artifact and Raynor is simply gathering resources or doing random missions to undermine Kerrigan/Mengsk. Its not as directed as SC1's campaign where there were betrayals, sacrifices, epic battles, long arguments and all-around more dark and engrossing storyline.
So SC story was much better/SC2 gameplay was much better.
|
SC1 story felt much more evil.
SC2 has completely emo kerrigan; hybrids are lame; overmind as a "slave" is disregarding everything it said it SC1; zeratul is as emo as neo kerrigan.
There were some good moments, and campaign is larger in general, but not enough. The only thing that felt epic to me was first mission on char.
The news were annoying. They were meant to be, though...
Overall impression is like when the first screenshots before beta appeared, the tilesets were all greenish/WC3 style. Then it was changed to 'darker', 'more starcraft' feel...this feeling is what campaign lacks.
After reviewing SC1 campaign, it also had a looot of weak points...but everything was new. My argument is, since now it's easily seen how SC2 story line could be made better, it should've been. There was quite some time for develompent, after all.
Overall, all the villains totally sucked. With no epic foe to vanquish, heroes weren't impressive, either.
|
SC1 has way better plot.
But Sc2 has way funner missions. I am greatly dissapointed by the lack of hero missions, especially considering what the engine is capable of, but its still a brilliant campaign.
So I don't even care about the plot, it is just so much fun.
|
Let's put it this way:
What would you think of the story if SC1 + BW if you only were able to play the terran part first (and the protoss one in BW)?
It's not over yet, folks...
On August 01 2010 06:30 mrkent wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2010 06:24 On_Slaught wrote:
Not a fair comparison. This just tells a part of the story. If all you care about is plot wait until the next 2 expansions are out. By then the choice might be obvious tho. This is a full game and I expect to get a full story. SC1 cannot be summed up with 2 events, and it's likely that any one of the 3 campaigns in SC1 had more storyline than WoL.
EDIT: Was too late.
What the below poster said 
On August 01 2010 06:32 GrazerRinge wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2010 06:13 mrkent wrote:
SC2 WoL entire story is summed as follows.
Zeratul tells Raynor that he needs to save Kerrigan. Raynor saves Kerrigan.
Every other character was not essential to the story. In other words, it sucks.
Also, how the fuck did Kerrigan get beat by a small army when the UED, Dominion, and Artanis combined could not defeat her in the end of Broodwar? Totally agree. Imao, i think campaign in sc2 is too noob-friendly. there are 4 degrees of difficulty, but in scbw, you had to go through unless you cheat. p.s.: I hope Blizzard adds Lan-modus. It spoils fun because it forces players to use battle net which is not a guarantee for latency-free play. I wanted to play some matches with my buddy but we couldn't because he had problem with wireless card. With lan, it wouldnt happen.
And why do you think a single player campaign shouldn't be "noob-friendly"? I think Brutal is a very good difficulty. Perfect for me at least. Anyone here who thinks it's too easy on Brutal...?
And also, I think the SC: BW campaign was fairly easy. In SC2 you can always go Brutal and get raped a couple of times before you beat it.
|
On August 01 2010 06:30 mrkent wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2010 06:24 On_Slaught wrote:
Not a fair comparison. This just tells a part of the story. If all you care about is plot wait until the next 2 expansions are out. By then the choice might be obvious tho. This is a full game and I expect to get a full story. SC1 cannot be summed up with 2 events, and it's likely that any one of the 3 campaigns in SC1 had more storyline than WoL.
Except it's not. Blizzard has made clear that this is only part of a whole. The only reason it is sold seperately is because you would have a 90mission game that would take years longer to develop if you released it all at once. Plus that game would probably cost like 150 bucks.
This is just a reasonable way of spreading out a single story accross multiple games.
|
SC2's story reads like a bad fan fic. They've completely botched the lore in the few instances where they actually advanced the overall plot.
|
Chile4253 Posts
I can't believe this poll. SC2's story is waaaaaaay better than SC1's. I've played both the original and the expansion campaigns from Starcraft countless times, and SC2 leaves the original in the dust in terms of storytelling. There are a few parts that are somewhat contrived,
+ Show Spoiler [SC2 campaign spoiler] +The Tal'darim. Seriously, where the hell did these guys come from? It feels like they just made up a generic, unreasonable, evil Protoss tribe just so you could fight against all three races throughout the missions. I'd much rather have an Aldaris that everyone loves to hate causing mayhem and forcing you to fight him
I suppose in terms of raw plot and lore the SC1 campaign can compete, but the voice acting, the cinematics, the storytelling, the dialogue, the humor, the characterization and overall polish of the SC2 campaign simply blow its predecessor out of the water.
|
United States20661 Posts
More stuff happens in the Terran campaign of SC1 than in the entire SC2 campaign...
Turned out by the Confederacy, Raynor takes up with a terrorist outfit and meets Kerrigan. They do morally questionable things [largely lacking in sc2] in order to overthrow the Confederacy, but Mengsk betrays Kerrigan to the Zerg. Raynor then escapes Mengsk in order to start his own revolution.
There you have multiple betrayals [you cause the death of millions of innocents, also] and SHIT HAPPENS. in 10 missions.
|
Chile4253 Posts
SC + BW story summarized:
+ Show Spoiler [Story] +There are three races: Terran, Protoss and Zerg. Terrans are fighting between themselves, Zerg want to devour everything else, Protoss want to stop them.
On the Terran side, the Sons of Korhal, led by Arcturus Mengsk, overthrow the Confederacy and establish the Dominion. Later on, the United Earth Directorate overthrows the Dominion.
The Protoss kill Zerg Cerebrate Zasz, but lose their homeworld of Aiur. They then flee into the Dark Templar world of Shakuras, which is also being overrun, but they manage to cleanse it of the Zerg.
The Zerg take over a few planets and infest the Terran hero, Sarah Kerrigan. The Overmind is destroyed by Tassadar, and Kerrigan takes over the Zerg Swarm. She then proceeds to single-handedly tear through all possible opposition, annihilating the UED in the process and letting Mengsk rebuild his Dominion.
There, all the storyline of SC and BW summarized in 11 lines. It really isn't that spectacular. It's not bad, mind you- I enjoyed it. It's just that the narrative in SC2 is incomparably better, because it's fleshed out a lot better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
