SC:L Reviews Wings of Liberty - Page 4

No, the reason for my offendedness is that you talked about what the story should have been, rather than "perhaps it could have worked this way or that way in order to avoid this issue." Apparently, it's supposed to go your way. It reeks of arrogance and it's off-putting. There is little humor, positivity, or humility. It's not a pleasant read.

As I said, I agree begrudgingly with many of your points. But why would I want to agree with you? You don't need to be an "asskisser" in order to not come off as so arrogant.

However, some people feel that if there is something negative to say, it shouldn’t be said at all. This is simply not true. SCLegacy especially consists of some of Blizzard’s most loyal fans. We have been enjoying this game for over a decade, and will never stop loving this franchise or trying to help improve it.

You can't make your criticism any clearer than that? So you can't articulate any issue you had with her voice acting whatsoever? Sheesh. Once again I question why you are commenting on it at all. It is in stark contrast to everything else in the article which is much more thought-out.

The Overmind's goal is still the same as the true Xel'Naga, which sounds fine and dandy to me. I dunno, I have to think about that for a bit.

So do you think the true Xel'Naga will make an appearance in any of the expansions?

On April 19 2012 12:08 SixtusTheFifth wrote:
I agree with every critism of how it was done in WoL and what the problems were. But there is a 'live in hope' part of me that thinks that if it was done properly then it could really add to HotS. Inside a mission you make choices on which part of a map to attack first, why not the mission order itself if two valid options present themselves?

I would say "There is no value in pursuing this approach in the expansions at all if Blizzard does it the same way as WoL." There would be value if all the pitfalls were avoided (choices have profound effect, sense of cohesion maintained, etc). I'm kinda doing a high level look rather than detail because I don't want to derail the thread but maybe an example from another game which exhibited both success and failure.

Mission order in Skyrim makes little difference and can even detract from immersion. Throughout every story arc characters say they'll sod off and wait for you indefinitely at some godforsaken location just in case you have better things to do. But then the Civil War plot and Dragonborn plot have profound effects on each other. I went through one way and then found other people talking about a treaty settlement which I'd never experienced.

So both pitfalls and triumphs of choosing mission order exist in Skyrim. WoL problem, imho, is that only pitfalls exist and there is not a single redeeming feature.

On April 20 2012 07:05 Avean wrote:
Honestly you guys are analyzing the singleplayer too much. Ive played many RTS games and Starcraft 2 is the first RTS to have you interessted in completing the story. If its cheezy or hollywoodish i really dont care. I remember almost having a tear down my eye at the ending and goosebumps saving the general. For a RTS to do that ....thats perfection which ofcourse is to be expected by Blizzard.

On April 20 2012 07:10 nerak wrote:
Gradius, I just thought on something. Why Val couldn't be WoL's protagonist.

We obviously can't agree on how that hythetical campaign should be, but follow me here: you'd be Valerian Mengsk, 23 yo son of the Emperor. You'd engange on major battles, alright. Maybe could try to stop Media Blitz from happening and lose - that would be the best part of the campaign.

So a lot of potential. But it would have a major flaw... maybe not a flaw, but a disadvantage in comparison to way it was done.

You'd be the young, courageous, but something naïve prince/hero-to-be. You would have to deal with the presence of your father - probably run apart from it, alegorically or not -, quest for a magical item, have Warfield, the older warrior, as your advisor...

That would be the Journey of the Hero! We complain how un-gritty WoL got. Imagine how bright that would get it it was the story of a hero growing up. Of course, we could twist things here, there, or everywhere. But we seemed something like it right? The story of a aborted hero - Arthas. I personally think that Arthas' story is the best in War3: RoC, but this isn't Starcraft.

Starcraft is about this guy who could be a character from a Bukowski novel. He's old; he may be just 30-something, but his face tells you, he's broken already, he've seem too much, and also he's an old dog, and he won't learn any new tricks, nor get any bigger than he is. He's in a dead end. He's in a position that we, human beings, personally experience in life. But IN SPACE. And with aliens and apocalipses.

Spider Man showed us how to make a hero human by making him to have to deal with sick relatives, mad girlfriends, and lack of money. Jim Raynor is a human hero, but not because anything in physical life is like ours; he is like us in the inside. He is an everyman. He may have his "super powers" - his wit, his unrealistic prodigy, his luck - but he is someone he can't be happy because the only thing he wants is something unachieveable. When we screw up badly (and he believes he's guilty somehow), so badly that it ruin our own and a lot of people's lifes, we have two things to do: accept that and become a better person, or fight with it and break. What Raynor did? He broke. That's what most people do.

And when Valerian shows up and tells him, "I have a magical way of making this thing you want achieveble", all the things he've been telling himself and others about liberty, about fighting opression, about keeping his crew alive, he forgets about everything. There are two interesting things here. First: it is obviously dark, and it fits the Starcraft theme. Because as LordOfAscencions points out in his review, Raynor is a little like Mengsk, he will "see Sarah back to normal or burn the sector to ashes trying to do it".

Second: it fits that, contrary to what Raynor says in Char, "it is Science Fiction" we're talking about. And good science fiction, above the average science fiction. Because in average Sci-Fi, we're asked, "what if science/magic could create artificial humans?" An then investigates what happens in human society in such scenario. WoL asks: "what if science/magic could somehow fix one of the deepest existencial problems?". And then investigates (ok, for just some minutes) what happens with an individual.


How could any of that be told with Valerian as a protagonist?
The only thing I agree with you here is that I missed the macro-scale of Starcraft/BW. Not the macro-scale exactly... it could go just as fine with the micro-scale they used. The real problem was the world building. They failed so much with world-building that even when you do a macro-scale thing - in Media Blitz, and arguably in New Folson - it is still like the Hyperion travels in a paralel universe.

1) The criticisms offered here are not geek cherrypicking and overanalyzing. These are things that occur to most customers as they play the game and think about it rationally. Game developers should never assume that what they have written is “good enough” to curb the player’s suspension of disbelief so that he will will gloss over a plothole.

In StarCraft and Brood War, you played with the de-facto leaders for each race. You influenced galactic events, and that is what a game like StarCraft is supposed to be about.

yet Raynor’s stubborn dismissal of obvious warnings ruins the entire thing

Raynor has more reason to be angry at Kerrigan than he does at Mengsk

Imagine for a second your wife going on a murder spree as well as killing your best friend by stabbing him in the back with a steak knife, and then divorcing you. It would be unthinkable to forgive her just because four years went by. Even if you could remove her serial-killer tendencies, would you still pine over her picture and attempt to forgive her for the atrocities she has committed?

Though Hanson calls Stetmann's science expertise "nonexistent," he still singlehandedly manages to create technologies that even the Dominion doesn't appear to have

Mengsk freed him to spy on Raynor.

Mengsk largely takes the role of a cartoon villain in Wings of Liberty. “Curses, foiled again!” is his battle cry every time Raynor bests him. As one of the main antagonists in the game, it is a serious problem when he is portrayed as an incompetent opponent

"Our Observers detected zerg hive spores infesting the colonists. They must be purified.

This is only true if you side with the Protoss. If you side with Hanson then no colonists are actually infested in-game, and Selendis is made to look like a fool for overreacting so much.

"The only cure for zerg infestation is purification by fire. You know this to be true, James Raynor."

Now the Protoss look like fools because a Terran invented a cure during the course of several hours on some "medieval" lab on a battlecruiser.

1) When Zeratul linked minds with him in StarCraft, the Overmind conveniently hid all the information about his enslavement by the Dark Voice even though Zeratul looked like right at the Overmind’s origins, where you would expect that information to be.

It is reminiscent of the old Alien films. Are the Zerg no longer brutal and terrifying? Are they only evil because the Dark Voice is evil?

On April 20 2012 11:00 Forikorder wrote:


ugh i hate when people say this "well when you think about it rationally" its like straight out saying "im right your wrong if you disagree your simply wrong so jsut agree with me"

except in the terran campaign of vanilla where you were a small rebel force taking out armies far larger then you with "resourcefulness" including attacking the main world of the confederacy, fighting off the fleet of the executor and... hold up that sounds familiar with what you said was the problem with WoL...

ive yet to actually find someone who can give me a good reason why Raynor doesnt just believe that Tychus was boosted by Moebius and the suit would be taken off after Char

only if he treats Kerrigan and the Queen of blades as the same person, in his mind the Queen of Blades is a false personality forced on her by the Zerg its not really Kerrigan jsut a Zerg thats like her

a better comparison would be if our wife had split personality and she asked you to pick up some pills for her but you didnt and as a result she went insane and murdered people

at that point you wouldnt consider the second personality your wife and would blame yourself for the deaths since you didnt get the pills she needed

it always annoys me when people make this assumption, Mengsk did not free Tychus and make hims a spy, he made a deal with Tychus so make contact with raynor and get in touch with moebius and to kill Kerrigan if he gets a shot, Tychus was never a spy, there is no evidence he would ahve been willing to be a spy and no proof he would actually have been able to gather and transmit any effective information safely if he had been a spy

So, It’s not that Mengsk had a constant knowledge of everything that Raynor’s Raiders was up to. What Mengsk had was a gun to Tychus’ head. And so, he would get regular reports, but the idea was that when the key moment came, when Tychus was able to do, you know, what he had to do.

there is no evidence he would ahve been willing to be a spy and no proof he would actually have been able to gather and transmit any effective information safely if he had been a spy

except Raynor did nothing to hurt mengsk, he stole his shiny new weapon and made some civvies angry at him big freaking deal its not like Raynor actually did anything to really damage mengsks control of the secter in any way

Zeratul didnt have much time and he wasnt expecting it at all hes lucky to ahve gotten ANY information its not like he had the time to take a deep long look

if your in a dark alley, and someone apears in front of you with an axe and tries to kill you, and another person comes up and kills him then kills you, is he good or evil?

TBH i had high hopes that maybe this review would be different, but i dont see any difference to all the other people condemning WoL without actually paying attention to SC and BW and without actually thinking deeply on the story and just saying there first impression

Let's not make a mountain out of a molehill here, as that's a pretty unsubstantiated jump from what the paragraph says. The paragraph is simply saying that plotholes can't be ignored with the excuse that "you're just nitpicking".

1) The size of the Sons of Korhal was not specified. They are a faction just like the Confederacy and the Fleet of the Executor. WoL on the other hand lists the size of the raiders as a capital ship plus a handful of volunteers and does not go on to elaborate after that.

2) The Sons of Korhal military strength was constantly growing and was a threat to the Confederacy. From acquiring a Confederate General and his squadron, to psi emitters which can indirectly destroy planets.

3) As such, the Sons of Korhal never defeated armies that were larger than them. Mengsk manipulated the zerg into killing his enemies.

They already found all the artifacts and handed them over, so that should have been it. And that's not the point. The point is that Tosh gives Raynor obvious warnings which he ignores.

Except that analogy is not what happened in Brood War. Brood War made it clear that Raynor thinks Kerrigan is responsible for her own actions. That's why he promised to kill her. Wings of Liberty has decided that no, she's the victim now and needs rescuing.

...did you read the rest of the paragraph? That explanation makes no sense either. How is Mengsk supposed to know Raynor would get close to the Queen of Blades, let alone go along with Moebius/Tychus's plan? Did Mengsk know what the artifacts did? If yes, just how the heck would he know that, and why didn't he work with his son or try to assemble them himself? Can Mengsk see the future like the Overmind can?

So what? Mengsk was still made to look like a fool for letting Raynor pierce Korhal's orbital defenses and wrecked havok on the streets of the capital city itself. Mengsk's "devious" plan to kill the Queen of Blades was foiled by Raynor as well.

This is truly grasping right here. How do you know he didn't he take a good long look? He found out everything else but the information that would have validated the new retcon.

What point are you making?

On April 20 2012 11:00 Forikorder wrote:
ugh i hate when people say this "well when you think about it rationally" its like straight out saying "im right your wrong if you disagree your simply wrong so jsut agree with me"

On April 20 2012 11:00 Forikorder wrote:
but i dont see any difference to all the other people condemning WoL without actually paying attention to SC and BW and without actually thinking deeply on the story and just saying there first impression

Ahh, you like spot the difference? Well, guess what difference I can't spot.

On April 20 2012 12:06 Forikorder wrote:

im accusing him of not looking deeply into the story and jsut palying through once and going onto the interwebs to rage

hes accusing me of not being able to think rationally

On April 20 2012 12:15 SixtusTheFifth wrote:


Your accusations as they stand:

• Gradius has played the game once.
  
• Gradius' review is the product of rage.
  
• Gradius' review does not involve deep looks at the story.
  

Obviously you typed that very quickly so I'm going to be sporting to someone who is clearly having an emotional reponse. Consider this the written equivilent of "I'm sorry, can you just say that again?"

On April 20 2012 12:16 Forikorder wrote:

i dont think Gradius actually looked deeply into the story and is just wining about misconceived problems

On April 20 2012 19:02 Telenil wrote:
That is your right, however, a vast majority of the people who read the review believe otherwise. On this subject, I for one think he looked more deeply than you did (and than I did, for that matters); I also believe you are unwilling to admit the story could be flawed in any major way, and that you will dismiss any such claim as "hating" or "whining" no matter the actual work the author put in his review.

However, I am aware that this overly simple view is probably unfair, and that it sounds a lot less pertinent when you are on receiving side of it. Therefore, I suggest we go back to the lore rather than debating which one of you thought deeply enough before posting. Such personal attacks bring nothing to the discussion; even if Gardius had raged, which he didn't, this would still be an argument about the form and not the content.

Whatever buddy. You must have missed this part at the very beginning where I make it patently obvious what the point of my suggestions and criticisms is:


Sorry if you got the impression that things are supposed to go my way or whatever, but there is nothing I can do about that. People say that this review is not relevant now, yet when Blizzard goes around in interviews saying how much the fans loved the story and how great it was, then clearly the things in this review have not been iterated enough, which makes this review alot more relevant in April of 2012 than you would think.

Alright, for the last time, "the “subtle nuances” that Tricia Helfer apparently added to the voice are inconspicuously missing". This is the voice acting criticism. Just because it is one sentence and not giant paragraphs like the rest of the review does not mean there is no criticism. "Subtle nuances" is the thing that she was supposed to add to the voice acting, yet did not. If you don't understand what this voice-acting term means, then please for gods sake don't comment on it. x)

On April 21 2012 00:19 Forikorder wrote:
kinda funny how your saying we should stop the personal attacks when you were the only one making them

On April 20 2012 19:02 Telenil wrote:
I am aware that this overly simple view is probably unfair, and that it sounds a lot less pertinent when you are on receiving side of it.

On April 21 2012 02:01 DoubleReed wrote:
All I have to say to counter you is "Well, I did in fact hear Tricia's subtle nuances in her voice" and we're left at a standstill.

But I do hope that, in reality, you could possibly change your minds if some perfect argument was presented to you.

On April 21 2012 02:23 Telenil wrote:
As long as you *do* hear the subtle nuances, and can quote a few lines that illustrate your point, yeah, that's a standstill. Why is that bad though? This would be a constructive discussion, as opposed to the "oh come on, I can't believe you didn't realise the error of your ways".
If you have any examples of your own to illustrate your points, be my guest.