EPTThe criticism of the WoL story is (mostly) wrong - Page 6
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
latan
740 Posts
| ||
GMarshal
United States22154 Posts
On February 03 2011 15:23 latan wrote: while playing it for the first time i had a sense of deja vu the whole time, i still can't put my finger on it but wasn't the warcraft 3 story very similar to this? isn't the last protoss mission identical to something else out there? i'm guessing war3 but i don't really remember much about warcraft3 i didn't like it so much. Blizzard loves last stand missions so its not surprising that the protoss last stand reminds you of mount Hyjal in WC3, they are very similar (even in the ascending map design). What I have major issues with is that this is looking more and more like WC3 minus arthas or the undead, if they do to zerg what they did to undead in TFT Im going to be majorly upset. I want my marines to be able to mow down the faceless hordes of evil that is zerg without worrying about weather or not that hydralisk had feelings or a family. Also for the record, prophecies are a halmark of poor storytelling I can see the blizard developers sitting there thinking "oh we dont know how to talk about the threat of the xelnaga or give any expositon on it, so lets just have a prophecy in there, that can explain everything" | ||
|
Bacillus
Finland1934 Posts
On February 02 2011 00:43 [F_]aths wrote: This is the backside of a non-linear campaign. Most plot holes can be filled with assuming some untold parts of the story. If you want to have a deep story, you can Planescape Torment, a story-driven RPG. WoL is a mission-driven RTS. Considering this, I consider the story ok. The somewhat lose story elements with lack of continuity even help to let you experience the uncertain fate of the revolution. If RTS plotline isn't supposed to be fun, interesting, engaging or anything, why does it have to be everywhere? Part of why SC1 plotline worked because it didn't treat itself like some biggest thing ever that needs attention at every turn. I thought Serious Sam had a good plot in a way. The main objective of it is to take you into interesting arenas with crazy fights and all that. It doesn't try to be anything else. It ends up being a loose set of texts I actually enjoyed reading because they were voluntary, occassionally funny and suited the overall theme and all that. Not once the story screamed "LOOK AT ME, ZOOM IN AT ME". Meanwhile SC2 storyline acts like a attention addicted teenage celeb. So much noise and fuzz, so little content or value. | ||
|
Krehlmar
Sweden1149 Posts
What was it, they promised 60 campaign maps in the original release? We got a story that (even has an achievement for it) can be played in less than 8 hours. And this is a strategy game. The gameplay is the best I've ever seen. But the story is a huge fucking subpar in comparisson to what Blizzard CAN do: We all know this, stop defending them they don't need defending because they're probably 100% aware they're selling out to appeal to a bigger audience. They're being capitalists and smart albiet soulless. Story gets a 2/10 from me Gameplay 9.5/10 TLDR: Why was SC2 advertised as a huge interstaller war, but all we did was be Space Pirates with a fucking Emo as captain whining about a woman. A universe at stake and he can't stop being a fucking crybaby. | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On February 03 2011 06:11 Tony Campolo wrote: It is not my intention to mark the story as perfect or even nearly perfect. But I think it serves its purpose well.[F_]aths - you've obviously dug yourself a hole and decided fuck it, I'll just keep digging. Your replies to every single post in this thread are just getting desperate. Basically your position is - the story is 100% perfect and anyone who points out 1% of its crappiness must be rebutted until the storyline is viewed at 100% again. On February 03 2011 06:11 Tony Campolo wrote: The WC3 cinematics are great, yes. They are may be even greater than the WoL cutscenes. But the cutscenes in WoL (both rendered and pre-rendered) create a very good atmosphere. At least it worked for me – and still works.The story is shit. When the cutscenes were leaked on YouTube I struggled to sit through them without getting so bored that I had half my attention diverted to other windows that were open. You could watch the Warcraft III cutscenes and not want to be doing anything else. They were fucking epic. SCII was just gayass Western cowboy cliche. And the side missions... Just makes you think - siiigh when can I get this part over and done with. SCII story sucks. I can wander around the ship and talk with Ariel if I keep her (procrastinate the Haven mission) and get some new info bits about this or that. Yes, I also see the sometimes inconsistent storyline because I have chosen a weird mission path. For example the mission where I transmit the broadcast to compromize Mensk was the last mission before I went to char – how can the story explain that Warfield was then a puppet of Arcturus Mensk and now works for his son and sides with me? But this is the price to pay for a flexible path through the mission tree. I can live with that and still enjoy the story. On February 04 2011 01:54 Krehlmar wrote: In my first playthrough I rushed through the last missions to get to the finale. As Jim Raynor carried Sarah in his arms, I had tears in my eyes. (At this moment I did not care about the fate of the universe, I only wanted them to kiss.)TLDR: Why was SC2 advertised as a huge interstaller war, but all we did was be Space Pirates with a fucking Emo as captain whining about a woman. A universe at stake and he can't stop being a fucking crybaby. | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On February 03 2011 09:01 Fumi wrote: If I play Starcraft (any installment of it) I always need much energy to maintain the suspension of disbelieve. There is much stuff which is physically impossible. On the top of that we get some weird plot developments. But I still consider the plot not to be worse than the SC1 or BW story even if it deviates from some things established in the previous games.No one is asking for a ridiculously deep story. SC was never supposed to be a huge explainable universe like Warcraft is, and I'm pretty sure everyone here knows it. From what I can understand, your point is basically "SC is supposed to be focused on the missions, so who cares about the story", and if that's the case, I'm sorry. I dare to say this is the sacrifice we have to accept so that Starcraft can get into mainstream. I also hope that Blizzard uses the first SC2 episode as a vehicle to get more guys into the franchise and offer us more real story with the expansions. I also take into account that this is the first Blizzard RTS with a non-linear campaign. They need to get accustomed to it. One cannot compare it with a novel or insisting that anything in the old manual is literally true. It could be the lore to commonly believed true at that time while it now turned out it is not exactly so. On February 03 2011 09:01 Fumi wrote: Yes, I also think that it was no smart move by Blizzard to revive Tassadar. I still hope that they somehow explain it without having Tassadar survived.Even a minor story used to give the player random missions can be charming and make sense. And as you can see here, a lot of us didn't like the silly story and that's going to be disappointing for us. And even with such a simple plot, a lot of us grew attached to certain icon characters, and waiting 12 years to see their personality and design being butchered, as well as ruining some of their deeds (Tassadar comes to mind) is simply not acceptable. On February 03 2011 09:01 Fumi wrote:I'm not gonna accept any stuff they throw at me just because story isn't the focus. In our opinion, they didn't put enough effort into the story. We gave our reasons why, you just don't seem to accept them. You should really just stop camping this thread as we're never gonna agree with each other. I am convinced that they actually put alot of effort into the story (as I followed the Blizzcon story panels) but they did so without consulting the fanbase.I had, no I still have a hard time to accept the WoL story to be canon in SC. My complaints mostly evolve about Tychus. For me, he does not feel right. The Tychus story line feels so forced for me. But on the other hand, I also never liked "here is Jimmy" in SC1. Oh yeah this 'cool' guy. Now we are cool, too? And yeees, we are nonconformists, we mutiny! And ... oops, it turned out that the rebel leader is an asshole, too. | ||
|
latan
740 Posts
| ||
|
InsaneElite
United States1 Post
BW was awful. Every character except Kerrigan spent their time bashing their heads off a wall between SC1 and BW so they could be dumb enough for Kerrigan to 'manipulate'. The crystals in the Protoss campaign were nothing but another Artifact, but apparently that's okay because it's SC1. As soon as Duran talked you knew he was going to be a traitor, no suspense or anything. The UED steamrolls the Dominion in a few missions, and suddenly they enslave the Overmind (wait, where'd it come from? Oh, a sentence explanation explaining why. Cool) with.. medics. The Zerg campaign is just Kerrigan going, "You have to help me and my army of mutated monstrosities who wish to end all life in this sector stop the.. human organization from taking over!' "okay" "lol i trick u, wanna team up again" "lol k" "LOL TRICK U AGAIN" "KERRIGAN Y U DO THAT". At least TFT didn't have to force the "it's an RTS expansion, bad guys win" thing Blizzard loves. | ||
|
mutantmagnet
United States3789 Posts
On January 23 2011 07:45 [F_]aths wrote: I read the long, multi-posting contribution of a user in the Battlenet forums. I read many postings on TL which criticize Blizzard for a poorly written story. Blizzard must be proud of having fans who pay so much attention. But some fans forget to consider some important things. You underestimate the intelligence level of us critics. 1) The story serves as a hub to get into the missions. Not the other way round. SC2 is still an RTS game, not a Warhammer 40000 RPG. Blizzard intentionally allowed some logical inconsistencies like the mechanics of the mission archive. True Blizzard allowed those logical inconsistencies to happen but that's because the writing team has lost their way. The story elements in SC and Broodwar played a great deal into enhancing the gameplay experience. Warcraft's Tides of Darkness and Beyond the Dark Portal were very much the same way. (I haven't played WC3) A portion of that team that did Starcraft back then are doing the story now which is why I'm saying they lost their touch instead of saying this team is terrible. Companies like Bioware, and Bethesda have shown writing teams can handle making storylines that account for the random order in which hub style missions can be played. 2) Often, some official books are quoted to proof that some figure in the game acted wrong. But the games speak for them self and can be understood without reading any novel or even the short stories on the official SC2 page. Many franchises have a much deeper and complex story in their expanded universe. Yes the games speak for themselves and the current game spits on the higher quality of its predecessor. Blizzard in 10 missions was able to weave a better storyline for the Terran faction twice than when they had around 30 missions available for them in SC2. Not only was the quality was higher SC2 greatly contradicts the sentiments of the main protagonist as exhibited at the conclusion of Brood War. 3) If someone cite a quote of a character of a previous game, they assume that the character spoke the truth. But the character could have been misinformed, or he could try to deceive you. May be the character forgot some things he said a long time ago. Cut him some slack, please! For me It's more about setting standards about what the story is about. If you want to make a story about fate and prophecy then do so from the start. Don't shoe horn it in the sequel to a story that wasn't about anything but logical consequences of deliberate actions. Characters can lie but there exists too much substantive evidence to say they weren't or even couldn't such as the protagonist I just mentioned. 4) There will always be some small errors and some greater plot holes. This is true for almost any franchise. To be honest, I am really annoyed about many contradictions in the Star Trek universe, because I will never know what “truly” happened. But it is still an inspiring franchise. True and everyone has their limits to how much their willing to ignore errors. Blizzard's writing team hasn't just made small errors. They rewrote thematic points and character motivations. They made artistic changes viewed as unnecessary or obnoxious. They've written their story in an apparently lazy fashion. The issue isn't small mistakes but Blizzard's writing team becoming hacks. 5) SC2 fails to explain why the Taldarim, a protoss tribe of a traditional faith, imprison Dark Templars, but use Dark Dragoons (aka Stalkers.) SC1 fails to explain why every terran faction has access to the same array of unit types. Some things are dictated by the demand of the gameplay and limits in the budget. Yes, Blizzard should have payed some more attention to those things. But one have to compare what they made wrong with the things they did right. The number of things they did right storywise is very very small. The mission design is excellent. <blah blah blah> Blah blah blah. Very few are criticizing the missions themselves. We are smart enough to remove our displeasure with the story with our enjoyment of the campaign. We have so fond memories of this stuff because we played it a long time ago. Not because it was actually so good. We just got used to it. Actually it was good. Play the game again if you haven't done so in the last decade to five years you played it. The prophecy branch also brings some fantasy / mystery / Warcraft feeling in the story. A good change from the all-metal environment on the Hyperion. If you don’t like it, just ignore it. Zeratul missions can be completely skipped. Blizzard gave you the mission freedom by a reason: Within some borders, you can create your own WoL story line. You also don’t have to decide to team with or kill Ariel or Gabriel. (Both have name of Angels … a coincidence?) You really don't get what it means for a storyline to be ignorable. I brought SC2 because of BW and I brought BW because of SC. Because of SC2 WoL I have a good idea where HoTS is going and I won't purchase the game because of it. If my theory is confirmed by youtube (and it has been preemptively been confirmed by the leak that the writing team is borrowing too much from their experience in making the Warcraft storyline instead of trying to make distinct products) I won't by LoV either. | ||
|
Aknazer
United States7 Posts
While I don't think WoL was the best of storytelling (too many cheesy 1-liners among other things. A few 1-liners is alright, but they were over-used imo) Raynor's actions seem plausible given the storyline. | ||
|
Mulletarian
Norway101 Posts
I'm guessing a lot of people who waited 10 years for the sequel hyped it up in their minds and expected it to be some sort of divine fruit from the heavens, got a bit disappointed when they finally got their hands on it. It was one of, if not the best, game of 2010. Expecting no less from HotS. | ||
|
imJealous
United States1382 Posts
I doubt Raynor just forgot that he swore an oath to kill Kerrigan after witnessing her betray and murder Fenix. I know I haven't. To me that was the defining moment of the whole story of Brood War - that Kerrigan was truly beyond all redemption no matter how much we wanted to believe she could still have a shred of good left in her. The sad thing is this personal conflict would have led in so well to the over-arcing WoL plot that Raynor has to prevent her death to save the galaxy. The interaction of that plot mechanic with the state of their relationship at the end of Brood War would have been such a rich and complex story but instead they redirected Raynor's oath of vengeance toward Mengst to create a clear villain and gutted all of Kerrigan's character development from Brood War to get back to the love interest angle that was already resolved between the two characters when Raynor realized she had been manipulating them all along. | ||
|
Retrogamer
Canada1 Post
| ||
|
mutantmagnet
United States3789 Posts
On February 06 2011 23:21 Retrogamer wrote: Not sure why everyone is so up-in-arms about the story, I found it to be enjoyable if taken with a grain of salt. Then again, I bought the game for the online multi-player, so I didn't get too hung up on the story-line (though I thought Tychus was really fun to watch). That's the point. We all have different purchasing decisions. My primary motivations was the storyline and the modscene. Getting something you enjoy from the modscene requires patience and isn't the direct responsiblity of Blizzard so they get a pass on most of the stuff they can't control there. The story otoh was trash and made the game into an inferior product. Bnet 2.0 at launch up until two weeks ago was another kick in crotch because it was and in many ways still is inferior to bnet 1.0 but at least signs of improvement are showing. OTOH signs of the storyline are that it is getting worse than even WoL and becoming a poorer rehash of World of Warcraft themes and plot points. | ||
|
DennizR
Sweden653 Posts
On February 06 2011 18:38 Aknazer wrote: I think Raynor had a change of heart in regards to Kerrigan (compared to his view at the end of BW) due to the prophecy missions. Remember that the whole prophecy timeline is what would happen should Raynor follow through with his emotions at the end of BW and kill Kerrigan (or allow her to be killed by Tychus). So now he's torn. The person he seemed to of fallen for in SC, then completely hated due to her actions in BW, now can potentially be saved AND that person is somehow the savior of the universe. While I don't think WoL was the best of storytelling (too many cheesy 1-liners among other things. A few 1-liners is alright, but they were over-used imo) Raynor's actions seem plausible given the storyline. Raynor has a picture of Kerrigan in the beginning of the story, making some lame remark when you press on it. Way before the whole prophecy story-arc. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On February 06 2011 21:34 Mulletarian wrote: I loved WoL and had a lot of fun playing it. I'm guessing a lot of people who waited 10 years for the sequel hyped it up in their minds and expected it to be some sort of divine fruit from the heavens, got a bit disappointed when they finally got their hands on it. It was one of, if not the best, game of 2010. Expecting no less from HotS. Not really that hyped, tho yes I did expect it to be A LOT better than what we got... Not just better, I expected it to be a bit .... I m really struggling for words here, because I dont want to just write "a bit less terrible", but thats how I feel =/ I just felt like it occupied that terrible middleground where its taking itself seriously enough to not be something you go "oh, haha, sci/fi cliche making fun of itself", but also not good enough to actually do that... Blah. I think a lot of it was the way you could choose mission order, but also how they choose to treat so many of the SC1 loose ends, that I was really looking forward to... But instead of getting something kinda dark/sci-fi:i everything felt like playing the WC3 campaign. And you know what? I loved the WC3 campaign, but its a fantasy setting, it just does not fit SC. The #1 thing that bothers me tho, is when grown men in important positions act like retarded teenagers. Which was pretty much prevalent throughout the entire game -_- Also, the fight scene between Raynor and Tychus... It was embarassing man :/ That, and how they discover he has a fucking bomb strapped to him and then dont mention it again and just let him continue going on missions - man that was ridiculous. | ||
|
tar
Germany991 Posts
On February 06 2011 21:56 imJealous wrote: Regarding point number 3 - I doubt Raynor just forgot that he swore an oath to kill Kerrigan after witnessing her betray and murder Fenix. I know I haven't. To me that was the defining moment of the whole story of Brood War - that Kerrigan was truly beyond all redemption no matter how much we wanted to believe she could still have a shred of good left in her. The sad thing is this personal conflict would have led in so well to the over-arcing WoL plot that Raynor has to prevent her death to save the galaxy. The interaction of that plot mechanic with the state of their relationship at the end of Brood War would have been such a rich and complex story but instead they redirected Raynor's oath of vengeance toward Mengst to create a clear villain and gutted all of Kerrigan's character development from Brood War to get back to the love interest angle that was already resolved between the two characters when Raynor realized she had been manipulating them all along. This! Also, the very end confused me big time (apart from the cheesy walk into the sunset thing): As far as I understood the story, Sarah was important to the zerg as she gave them a free will, thus killing her would throw them back being simple tools of destruction as the Xel Naga had planned for them to be. How is turning her back into a human being any better than killing her (apart from Raynor having a girl friend that way)?! I'm really afraid that the next part ends with her being transformed back (poor Raynor has to let her go for the greater good) and then in the final chapter T,P&Z can fight (happily) united against the Xel Naga... | ||
|
DocSnyder
Germany137 Posts
Anyway,i wholeheartedly agree with the attitude of the OP,if not with his perspective.Its so annoying to read post after post of "I'm smarter,than the story" opinions,by people who missed half the character development of WoL and keep making assumptions about things the game just hints at. Regardless,without antagonizing anyone(I've been in plenty of discussions on B-net over the plot and you cant convince anyone of anything,no more then you can change their very experience),i'll just present my own impressions. After waiting half my adult life for the sequel,overall is was slightly disappointed.I mean after 12 years,you cant help,but to have different expectations,from what the final product presented. 1)I wanted the Breakout of the second interstellar galactic war,basically world war 3.And i wanted to experience that with all 3 sides and their respective protagonists.I do believe,that was the highlight of the original game,not the predictable and sometimes unbelievable story(of BW in particular),that however did make for some very dramatic if far-fetched moments. The experiences of viewing events through the eyes of races,no beings,that couldn't be more different form one another,in every aspect of they existence.Their racial leaders had motives,in some cases so alien from those of ordinary humans. That racial dynamic,that was complemented very well with the gameplay,over the fate of the known galaxy is what WOL unfortunately lacked significantly in. 2)And that led to my next disappointment.WOL was to much about the people and not about the races.Now,i normally dont mind character driven narrative,but thats not what i was expecting after 12 years.The original starcraft use characters as a platform,to explore each race.They were vessels,motivators for the interracial conflict.But the plot never stayed with any single character for to long.Instead it switched between different perspectives,in order to best illustrate the driving force behind each race. In WoL were stuck behind the eyes of Raynor.And while he and Tychus do get a respectable character development,major Figures like Arcturus and Kerrigan are reduced to just passing,bland villains,that never get center stage. Arcturus could have been doing a 1000 things in Wol,for all i know,but we were always stuck on the Hyperion. 3)Naturally the SCALE also suffers from this.The original encompassed the fates of trillions of beings across dozens of worlds.From the beginning,the player was placed in control of massive fleets and armies.From the Sons of Korhal(witch at the time was an interplanetary rebellion,with considerable resources),to the entirety of the Zerg Swarm,to Executor of the Protoss Fleet,to the massive Directorate Expeditionary force. Outside of the Char assault,witch was half the Dominion fleet,constructed over the past 4 years,skirmishes in SC felt very tame,covert,basically insignificant.Even the conflict on Haven,was against a small protoss fleet and more a test of will,then a war.People keep saying they were pleased with the missions,is something that just cant help but to disagree with.They were to short and kept emphasizing the insignificant scale of the conflict.(plus i didnt find the gameplay that original anyway) In the end,i was disappointed at the plot direction,although i honestly enjoyed the story itself.(for what it is,its good) Its just,well,after so long,you want more of the same,just presented in top of the line graphics and CGI.I would have nothing against the character-driven story,if it came out 3 years after its predecessor.Thats why i liked ME2,i guess.It wasnt just more ME1. One doesnt wait 12 years for a one sided personal perspective.I knew SC2 would be lacking the day they announced the racial split.75% of the experience is missing -no protoss,no zerg,not even the view point of rest of the Terran race.Sad thing is,you will never get that perspective back,for events will always be one-sided.Unless the have retroactive explanation in the sequels. | ||
|
DocSnyder
Germany137 Posts
| ||
|
Spitfire
South Africa442 Posts
That said, a lot of the arguments made in its defense remind me of the arguments made for the Star Wars prequels IE. he's trying to attract a new audience, they only seem bad cause you're older now etc etc. | ||
| ||
