|
On March 15 2013 08:00 Pheon wrote:
People should make an effort to be less critical of damn near every story written in the gaming genre. Ought to learn to enjoy things for what they are; I have no qualms with the story. It was really simple and predictable, but I still enjoyed it.
Being such a cynic doesn't help and telling people they have elementary understandings of 'basic prose' is just being plain rude. If you enjoy it, you enjoy it. You don't have to have an English major's understanding of writing either way, and insinuating such is stupid.
Everyone says that the story is predictable.
This is bullshit. If it's so predictable, then where are the threads where the story was predicted. And predicting that Mengsk gets killed because of the leaked ending doesn't count.
|
On March 15 2013 08:15 AztecTemplar wrote:
I think there's alot of tunnel vision on BOTH sides.
People who complain think that feelings and emotions within characters are linear and don't change in the 4 years since BW.
In 4 years you have time to think, mourn, repent, etc... In 4 years the Dominion had the time to upgrade their weapons, make experiments on Zerg and Toss and create better more deadly weapons against easch that force Kerrigan to spend more power and resources to kill them (Mengsk). What Mengsk did in 4 years is pretty much what Abathur does in a few missions I guess. Evolve the swarm to better kill their opponents.
Love is hard to forget and hard to kill. Even if they killed your best friend. We all know people who would still love their wife/girlfriend even if they did something horrific. Not to mention she became human, which psychologically for Raynor makes her different and remembers him of the old Sarah. Gives him hope. So he doesn't have the heart to kill her (WoL).
When she becomes deinfested she retains part of her humanity and Raynor is again unable to see the enemy that killed Fenix in cold blood.
Sarah and Raynor had a fling going on, this is explained in the books.
The Tal'Darim are easily corrupted and are fanatics. It is entirely plausible Narud got them to work for him by telling them he was an emissary of the Xel'Naga or something.
Also, Kerrigan didn't know where Raynor was or what Mengsk did with him. She thought him dead. If you see Raynor pop out from the shadows, even if you know its not him, the shock of seeing him again and the mere possibility he is real could cause confusion, again this is just psychological responses to being in love.
Queen of Blades is a title. Just like Mengsk keeps calling himself the "Emperor" and everyone calls Raynor "Commander".
Thus why the brood mothers call her a Queen. Its a hierarchy system.
Duran died "easily" because Kerrigan, as opposed to WoL and BW, consumed the essence of powerful Zerg organisms, plus she got rid of the "influence" of the Dark Voice, which would free her true powers and personality.
Really, the complains are not that good since all this has to do with story understanding.
--
However, the story telling is kinda weak indeed. There is not much dialogue that would help you understand everything unless you know the lore. The missions seem more personal to Kerrigan, not really concerning the Swarm or Raynor, heck not even the Xel'Naga prophecy is really explained. The characters ARE introduced haphazardly, I mean the feral Zerg aboard the Leviathan, I need more explanation as to why he is there aside from essence or what hell do with it and such. Abathur seems to have his own agenda and influence too, I need more about him too. Obviously Stukov returning for no real reason is kind of disturbing. I wish he had an evil agenda or explanation or something. Maybe a spy. IDK.
And I need more explanation as to how Kerrigan pretty much KOd Zeratul without him even lifting a finger. This is a Dark Templar, who taught Tassadar and a prelate... Really?
So yeah I think both sides have merits to their opinions.
Mainly as to how it was explained and missing chunks, there seems to be a void of atmosphere. Too much jumping around.
Yet anything lore related is easily explained.
So, the conclusion I'd say is that this is not really WoL, HotS and LoV. It's more like Raynor's story, Kerrigan's story and (hopefully it changes) Zeratul's story; WITHIN the SC universe.
So it's a personal view and game focused on each of the 3 main characters. All 3 are intricately wound to their races, so what they do affects the whole, but it doesnt serve to explain the whole or create a true immersion to the race. We see an entirety of the character, but only pieces of the race we are exploring.
I love SC, and I loved the story, I already paid for it and will ladder now that I finished it. So I dont complain much.
People always complain about the story, no matter who wrote it. I think the people who love the game outweigh the ones who didnt.
Agree with this post
Also was shocked at how easily Kerri manhandled Zeratul hahah I mean WTF, Zeratul is supposed to be rather powerful
|
On March 15 2013 07:52 terriBean wrote:
video game story != book/movie story
I play games for fun and the campaign was fun.
And the story is godawful and doesn't have to be. There are games with better stories than books. What is your point?
|
On March 15 2013 08:18 Dfgj wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 07:52 terriBean wrote:
video game story != book/movie story
I play games for fun and the campaign was fun. And the story is godawful and doesn't have to be. There are games with better stories than books. What is your point?
Very, very, VERY few games have actually good stories. My problem with this statement is not the statement itself, I mean, yeah, the story is bad. The problem is the sense of entitlement some fans seem to have, and the liberty they give themselves to insult other people for enjoying something.
If you think the original Starcraft's story is actually good, you have very low standards, it's better than this, but it's in no way astoundingly good. That doesn't stop both games' campaigns from being excellent and fun.
|
On March 15 2013 08:17 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 08:00 Pheon wrote:
People should make an effort to be less critical of damn near every story written in the gaming genre. Ought to learn to enjoy things for what they are; I have no qualms with the story. It was really simple and predictable, but I still enjoyed it.
Being such a cynic doesn't help and telling people they have elementary understandings of 'basic prose' is just being plain rude. If you enjoy it, you enjoy it. You don't have to have an English major's understanding of writing either way, and insinuating such is stupid. Everyone says that the story is predictable. This is bullshit. If it's so predictable, then where are the threads where the story was predicted. And predicting that Mengsk gets killed because of the leaked ending doesn't count.
The only part that I didn't predict was Stukov coming back. I thought Duran had killed him in BW, never knew he became infested.
You knew that Kerrigan was going to go back to the Swarm and spend most of her time rebuilding to kill Mengsk, and that probably meant a falling out with Raynor of some sort. And since she's mostly human now, she has to get back to her Zergy roots to control stuff, I thought it meant going back to her original birthplace, but Zerus is the birthplace of the zerg so it was practically the same thing. You also knew that Blizzard had to mix in hybrids somehow, so Kerrigan would probably go on some tangent to go kill hybrids and figure out who the guy behind the whole hybrid project is.
Seriously though, when you realize that Raynor didn't die, everything else is easily predicted. Rescue mission, Raynor gets pissed at Kerrigan for turning zerg again, Kerrigan attacks Korhal, Raynor comes in for the last mission like the original SC, and Mengsk dies.
|
Lot of mad in this thread.
I personally had fun playing the campaign. I went into it expecting a light-hearted over the top silly story line with some terribly cheezey lines but some interesting scenario's to play the game and thats what i got.
Tl:dr Story lines terrible, but it's still fun to play.
|
On March 15 2013 08:21 mordk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 08:18 Dfgj wrote:On March 15 2013 07:52 terriBean wrote:
video game story != book/movie story
I play games for fun and the campaign was fun. And the story is godawful and doesn't have to be. There are games with better stories than books. What is your point? Very, very, VERY few games have actually good stories. My problem with this statement is not the statement itself, I mean, yeah, the story is bad. The problem is the sense of entitlement some fans seem to have, and the liberty they give themselves to insult other people for enjoying something. If you think the original Starcraft's story is actually good, you have very low standards, it's better than this, but it's in no way astoundingly good. That doesn't stop both games' campaigns from being excellent and fun.
To be fair it is much harder to have a good immersive story and build a game around it, it just doesn't work very well in general. The only genre that seems to do decent in this is RPGs, and even within the RPG genre the trash stories by far outweigh the good ones. Games tend to do good for storytelling when the story can be really simple and yet effective enough to serve the videogame, but for complexer games such as Starcraft some suspend of disbelief will always have to be required to make the games lengthy and enjoyable.
|
I think the biggest problem with the story is no continuity from SC1. Everything from zerg lore to raynors claim he would kill kerrigan was ret conned/ ignored. SC2 is art the way a three year olds hand painting is art. If you are the mother and biased you might think its good. To everyone with any sense its a mess a kid made. Some art critic could easily be fooled if you put a pretentious name over a kids painting or took an established artist and called it their new creation. Its still rubbish.
Art is supposed to be a beautiful work/display that inspires and impresses people. Great art are works that very few can replicate. What blizzard produced was not ART. It was a hand painting by a messy child.
What blizzard produced was an rpg labeled as an rts with the main focus being showing off what its map editor could do rather than focusing on the story/lore. Hence why people like myself who care about lore and story are pissed off. If you don't care about story or lore then enjoy the mechanics of the missions. BUT IT WAS NOT A WELL WRITTEN STORY!
|
On March 15 2013 08:12 bbfg wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Zoomacroom wrote:
If you're actually anywhere past middle school and this story doesn't make you embarrassed for everyone involved, you should be ashamed of yourself.
If you think you are some sort of authority on wether someone should be ashamed of themselves or not based on a videogame story they like or not, you clearly are an idiot. I'm going to read on though because I hate myself.
OP is right. If ever there could be said to be an objectively terrible story, this is it. I was honestly completely unable to enjoy an otherwise decent campaign because the writing was so insufferable.
Yeah please don't say the same thing 2x. Who are all of these ridiculous Zerg characters coming out of the woodwork and why should I care about them? Is this Chris Metzen's idea of characterization? I liked them and didn't find it weird that they were suddenly there. There is a very big gap between BW and SC2 where we hear nothing about Kerrigan, is it really that hard to believe that she did some shit we don't know about during that period? Not that we know everything she did in SC/BW either fwiw. If you do not want new characters to be introduced I'd be curious to hear why you don't like that.
Why is Stukov back from the dead? We literally saw him explode into a pool of blood in BW with a tragic death scene, and he does nothing of significance here. Did someone in the office just suggest that it would be cool and then everyone realized they hadn't retconned a dead character in this game yet?
There could be significance to his character that was set up for future expansions. Anyway his significance here was to give us some more insight and emotional investment into what Duran was doing. Oh and it was fun to see him again.
How could Duran be resolved so terribly? I just run into him randomly in a space station, he tells me that I suck and can never win, and then I have to blow up temples so Kerrigan can win in a battle of psychic hadokens? And then we get fantasy scene #9001 where a shapeshifter turns into the form of someone important to you and you fall for it even though you know they're a shapeshifter, twice in the same scene? what the !@#$ is this %^-*
How was it random that we run into him? It was a significant part of the story for Kerrigan to go there, was it not? And she didn't fall for it twice obviously, she was just surprised. She had a human and emotional reaction to what she saw, as would fucking everyone if we were confronted with a shapeshifter that was messing with us. That was really obvious and that you'd assume that she was falling for it twice in a row makes me think you are really shitty in interpreting the little things that aren't shoved in your mouth. Which is quite important for Starcraft since for some reason Blizzard tries to give the gamer only the essence and what is required of the story during the games, which is a very valid criticism to the Starcraft games fwiw. How freaking cowardly is it to retcon the Tal'Darim to be servants of the Dark Voice once everyone points out that Jim Raynor was basically an imperialist supervillain in WoL? Like, "Oh by the way, you shouldn't feel bad about invading their world and violently robbing them of the objects of their faith because surprise, they were possessed by Satan! the whole time!" And for that matter, how does it make any sense at all that the Tal'Darim were working for Narud if Narud repeatedly commissioned Raynor to steal Xel'Naga artifacts *from* the Tal'Darim in WoL? I really don't think that was what Blizzard had in mind when they chose to do that since well in this game you play a very bad character once again, don't you? And it's not like she's unlikable? Most people like her from what I've heard even though she's being a total bitch through most of the campaign. The whole Narud plotline is indeed a bit weird, though we don't have all the facts to make thorough conclusions.
Why does Kerrigan need so much power to kill Mengsk? He is JUST A GUY. She got the better of him several times in BW with her regular "power level." Everything we see in both the story and game mechanics suggests she could just take her brood, attack Korhal, and kill him. She was able to kill billions within a few hours in her initial invasion in WoL. Why does killing Mengsk demand that she reinfest herself, undoing the only thing of significance that happened in WoL? Why are they so insistent on pushing this theme that she'll do anything for power that she doesn't appear to need to accomplish her goals?
Well the assumption here was that once Mengsk realised he was going to be targetted, the whole dominion would come after her which would be challenging to even her brood. He's also obviously on the best defended Terran planet there is. And she had more reasons for reinfesting herself than just killing Mengsk. Why do the game's antagonists have no speaking lines that say anything other than "you suck and you'll never beat me?" I didn't really notice this, but I can't point to things contradicting this either. I'll keep this in mind when I replay the game  . Why are Jim and Kerrigan so hot for each other all of a sudden in SC2? I don't think we ever got anything more than a debatable implication that they were an item in the BW story. But they're exchanging sloppy makeouts within the first twenty minutes of this story. Is it just like, there is an attractive man and an attractive woman on screen, of course they have to be all over each other?
Why do the writers have such an elementary school command of prose? what am i reading? Uhm if you didn't get it from the games that they were a thing you certainly should have gotten it from the books. But really, you should have gotten it from the games, too. god, this is barely even scratching the surface. the story is childish, trite and doesn't make any sense. characters are introduced for no reason whatsoever. It doesn't succeed on the conventional level, on a deliberately broad-strokes sci-fi epic level, on a B movie level, on a "so bad it's good" level. It just completely, unequivocally sucks.
Oh, and could we ditch the name "Queen of Blades" already? It sounds freaking idiotic and doesn't signify anything about the character except that hurr durr blades are pretty cool and so is Kerrigan I guess. I didn't find the story childish at all, heck I thought the way they portrayed Kerrigan being human again but still being so immensely powerful pretty impressive. That wasn't childish at all. I didn't have problems with the characters either. I don't know what your problem is tbh, I can understand if you don't like this story but being so immensely negative about it has to be about more than just the story.
This. With the bad guy dialogue, I don't agree with that except maybe for Duran and the no-name villians like whoever ran the broods on the zerg homeworld. Mengsk's dialogue was good, full of lines that try to tug on kerrigan's guilt, as well as showing how much of a crazy megalomaniac he is. That 'Old One' thing also had some good dialogue, and it felt natural to fight him at the end (I actually think he tells you that when you initially meet him.
|
On March 15 2013 08:29 Bobgrimly wrote:
I think the biggest problem with the story is no continuity from SC1. Everything from zerg lore to raynors claim he would kill kerrigan was ret conned/ ignored. SC2 is art the way a three year olds hand painting is art. If you are the mother and biased you might think its good. To everyone with any sense its a mess a kid made. Some art critic could easily be fooled if you put a pretentious name over a kids painting or took an established artist and called it their new creation. Its still rubbish.
Art is supposed to be a beautiful work/display that inspires and impresses people. Great art are works that very few can replicate. What blizzard produced was not ART. It was a hand painting by a messy child.
What blizzard produced was an rpg labeled as an rts with the main focus being showing off what its map editor could do rather than focusing on the story/lore. Hence why people like myself who care about lore and story are pissed off. If you don't care about story or lore then enjoy the mechanics of the missions. BUT IT WAS NOT A WELL WRITTEN STORY!
I don't think there's a single post out there saying the story is good
But many posts saying the game is still enjoyable regardless.
|
On March 15 2013 08:29 Bobgrimly wrote:
I think the biggest problem with the story is no continuity from SC1. Everything from zerg lore to raynors claim he would kill kerrigan was ret conned/ ignored. SC2 is art the way a three year olds hand painting is art. If you are the mother and biased you might think its good. To everyone with any sense its a mess a kid made. Some art critic could easily be fooled if you put a pretentious name over a kids painting or took an established artist and called it their new creation. Its still rubbish.
Art is supposed to be a beautiful work/display that inspires and impresses people. Great art are works that very few can replicate. What blizzard produced was not ART. It was a hand painting by a messy child.
What blizzard produced was an rpg labeled as an rts with the main focus being showing off what its map editor could do rather than focusing on the story/lore. Hence why people like myself who care about lore and story are pissed off. If you don't care about story or lore then enjoy the mechanics of the missions. BUT IT WAS NOT A WELL WRITTEN STORY!
I really don't want to get into an art discussion on this forum but fwiw if you seriously think that "raynor said he was going to kill kerrigan but he like totally doesn't!!!!!" is a valid criticism to the story you are clearly in over your head. A valid criticism would be why was it not addressed? Doesn't such a large shift in someone's intentions deserve a scene where it is explained? THAT is a valid criticism, but as I have mentioned Blizzard doesn't seem to like explaining stuff in the Starcraft games for some reason, and take a minimalistic approach in giving information to the player.
|
On March 15 2013 08:21 mordk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 08:18 Dfgj wrote:On March 15 2013 07:52 terriBean wrote:
video game story != book/movie story
I play games for fun and the campaign was fun. And the story is godawful and doesn't have to be. There are games with better stories than books. What is your point? Very, very, VERY few games have actually good stories. My problem with this statement is not the statement itself, I mean, yeah, the story is bad. The problem is the sense of entitlement some fans seem to have, and the liberty they give themselves to insult other people for enjoying something. If you think the original Starcraft's story is actually good, you have very low standards, it's better than this, but it's in no way astoundingly good. That doesn't stop both games' campaigns from being excellent and fun.
That's true.
The number of games that have the story of let's say a decent novel is astonishingly low, or at least I have rarely seen one.
that being said I believe video games are not doomed to have bad stories, on the contrary the genre is very interesting in term of storytelling. Nevertheless given the expectations of the average gamer, I guess things won't change much.
|
On March 15 2013 08:33 corumjhaelen wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 08:21 mordk wrote:On March 15 2013 08:18 Dfgj wrote:On March 15 2013 07:52 terriBean wrote:
video game story != book/movie story
I play games for fun and the campaign was fun. And the story is godawful and doesn't have to be. There are games with better stories than books. What is your point? Very, very, VERY few games have actually good stories. My problem with this statement is not the statement itself, I mean, yeah, the story is bad. The problem is the sense of entitlement some fans seem to have, and the liberty they give themselves to insult other people for enjoying something. If you think the original Starcraft's story is actually good, you have very low standards, it's better than this, but it's in no way astoundingly good. That doesn't stop both games' campaigns from being excellent and fun. That's true. The number of games that have the story of let's say a decent novel is astonishingly low, or at least I have rarely seen one. that being said I believe video games are not doomed to have bad stories, on the contrary the genre is very interesting in term of storytelling. Nevertheless given the expectations of the average gamer, I guess things won't change much.
I think videogames are almost an ideal platform for storytelling. The problem is that, with the way the industry works, it isn't worth it to spend the money it takes to get the talent that would make good storylines. Storylines don't sell a game, action sequences, mechanics, graphics, cinematics, multiplayer, social features, those things sell games.
Which is why, Kickstarter classic RPGs, I'm looking at you. Out of you I really expect good stories.
|
On March 15 2013 08:36 mordk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 08:33 corumjhaelen wrote:On March 15 2013 08:21 mordk wrote:On March 15 2013 08:18 Dfgj wrote:On March 15 2013 07:52 terriBean wrote:
video game story != book/movie story
I play games for fun and the campaign was fun. And the story is godawful and doesn't have to be. There are games with better stories than books. What is your point? Very, very, VERY few games have actually good stories. My problem with this statement is not the statement itself, I mean, yeah, the story is bad. The problem is the sense of entitlement some fans seem to have, and the liberty they give themselves to insult other people for enjoying something. If you think the original Starcraft's story is actually good, you have very low standards, it's better than this, but it's in no way astoundingly good. That doesn't stop both games' campaigns from being excellent and fun. That's true. The number of games that have the story of let's say a decent novel is astonishingly low, or at least I have rarely seen one. that being said I believe video games are not doomed to have bad stories, on the contrary the genre is very interesting in term of storytelling. Nevertheless given the expectations of the average gamer, I guess things won't change much. I think videogames are almost an ideal platform for storytelling. The problem is that, with the way the industry works, it isn't worth it to spend the money it takes to get the talent that would make good storylines. Storylines don't sell a game, action sequences, mechanics, graphics, cinematics, multiplayer, social features, those things sell games. Which is why, Kickstarter classic RPGs, I'm looking at you. Out of you I really expect good stories.
Let's say that I understand the reasonning that gameplay is more important than story. But one day, we will have both !
And yeah, thank god for BG and PS:T. I mean, it's not perfect, but those are on the level of a good fantasy novel, and are much more interesting from a storytelling perspective than people give them credit for.
|
On March 15 2013 08:26 Whatson wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 08:17 paralleluniverse wrote:On March 15 2013 08:00 Pheon wrote:
People should make an effort to be less critical of damn near every story written in the gaming genre. Ought to learn to enjoy things for what they are; I have no qualms with the story. It was really simple and predictable, but I still enjoyed it.
Being such a cynic doesn't help and telling people they have elementary understandings of 'basic prose' is just being plain rude. If you enjoy it, you enjoy it. You don't have to have an English major's understanding of writing either way, and insinuating such is stupid. Everyone says that the story is predictable. This is bullshit. If it's so predictable, then where are the threads where the story was predicted. And predicting that Mengsk gets killed because of the leaked ending doesn't count. The only part that I didn't predict was Stukov coming back. I thought Duran had killed him in BW, never knew he became infested. You knew that Kerrigan was going to go back to the Swarm and spend most of her time rebuilding to kill Mengsk, and that probably meant a falling out with Raynor of some sort. And since she's mostly human now, she has to get back to her Zergy roots to control stuff, I thought it meant going back to her original birthplace, but Zerus is the birthplace of the zerg so it was practically the same thing. You also knew that Blizzard had to mix in hybrids somehow, so Kerrigan would probably go on some tangent to go kill hybrids and figure out who the guy behind the whole hybrid project is. Seriously though, when you realize that Raynor didn't die, everything else is easily predicted. Rescue mission, Raynor gets pissed at Kerrigan for turning zerg again, Kerrigan attacks Korhal, Raynor comes in for the last mission like the original SC, and Mengsk dies.
So where are the threads before March 12 2013 where the following was predicted?
-Raynor was presumed dead.
-That Kerrigan's motivation for remaking the swarm was to get revenge on Mengsk because she thought Raynor was dead.
-That Kerrigan transforms to a zerg via the power of the primal zerg on Zerus.
-Narud was working with the Dominion to make hybrids.
-Narud was going to be kill by Kerrigan.
And there are other story points that you haven't mentioned.
But until I see predictions by several people, there is no convincing evidence that the story was predictable, just after-the-fact rationalization.
|
On March 15 2013 08:18 mordk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 08:15 AztecTemplar wrote:
I think there's alot of tunnel vision on BOTH sides.
People who complain think that feelings and emotions within characters are linear and don't change in the 4 years since BW.
In 4 years you have time to think, mourn, repent, etc... In 4 years the Dominion had the time to upgrade their weapons, make experiments on Zerg and Toss and create better more deadly weapons against easch that force Kerrigan to spend more power and resources to kill them (Mengsk). What Mengsk did in 4 years is pretty much what Abathur does in a few missions I guess. Evolve the swarm to better kill their opponents.
Love is hard to forget and hard to kill. Even if they killed your best friend. We all know people who would still love their wife/girlfriend even if they did something horrific. Not to mention she became human, which psychologically for Raynor makes her different and remembers him of the old Sarah. Gives him hope. So he doesn't have the heart to kill her (WoL).
When she becomes deinfested she retains part of her humanity and Raynor is again unable to see the enemy that killed Fenix in cold blood.
Sarah and Raynor had a fling going on, this is explained in the books.
The Tal'Darim are easily corrupted and are fanatics. It is entirely plausible Narud got them to work for him by telling them he was an emissary of the Xel'Naga or something.
Also, Kerrigan didn't know where Raynor was or what Mengsk did with him. She thought him dead. If you see Raynor pop out from the shadows, even if you know its not him, the shock of seeing him again and the mere possibility he is real could cause confusion, again this is just psychological responses to being in love.
Queen of Blades is a title. Just like Mengsk keeps calling himself the "Emperor" and everyone calls Raynor "Commander".
Thus why the brood mothers call her a Queen. Its a hierarchy system.
Duran died "easily" because Kerrigan, as opposed to WoL and BW, consumed the essence of powerful Zerg organisms, plus she got rid of the "influence" of the Dark Voice, which would free her true powers and personality.
Really, the complains are not that good since all this has to do with story understanding.
--
However, the story telling is kinda weak indeed. There is not much dialogue that would help you understand everything unless you know the lore. The missions seem more personal to Kerrigan, not really concerning the Swarm or Raynor, heck not even the Xel'Naga prophecy is really explained. The characters ARE introduced haphazardly, I mean the feral Zerg aboard the Leviathan, I need more explanation as to why he is there aside from essence or what hell do with it and such. Abathur seems to have his own agenda and influence too, I need more about him too. Obviously Stukov returning for no real reason is kind of disturbing. I wish he had an evil agenda or explanation or something. Maybe a spy. IDK.
And I need more explanation as to how Kerrigan pretty much KOd Zeratul without him even lifting a finger. This is a Dark Templar, who taught Tassadar and a prelate... Really?
So yeah I think both sides have merits to their opinions.
Mainly as to how it was explained and missing chunks, there seems to be a void of atmosphere. Too much jumping around.
Yet anything lore related is easily explained.
So, the conclusion I'd say is that this is not really WoL, HotS and LoV. It's more like Raynor's story, Kerrigan's story and (hopefully it changes) Zeratul's story; WITHIN the SC universe.
So it's a personal view and game focused on each of the 3 main characters. All 3 are intricately wound to their races, so what they do affects the whole, but it doesnt serve to explain the whole or create a true immersion to the race. We see an entirety of the character, but only pieces of the race we are exploring.
I love SC, and I loved the story, I already paid for it and will ladder now that I finished it. So I dont complain much.
People always complain about the story, no matter who wrote it. I think the people who love the game outweigh the ones who didnt.
Agree with this post Also was shocked at how easily Kerri manhandled Zeratul hahah I mean WTF, Zeratul is supposed to be rather powerful
Zeratul wasnt there to fight. Rewatch it, he hardly even tries to block attacks until he is able to force the vision onto kerrigan
|
The more I read these forums, the more I realise how full of shit most of you are. Hating/Being disappointed/Making stupid jokes about Blizzard and it's games is like a fashion on TL now (and in god forbidden places like reddit and b.net forums). You are NEVER satisfied about anything. Making hundreds of hate posts about WoL campaign during first two months, crying about no LAN existence since launch of WoL till now and pointing it in every god damn fucking tournament thread when someone gets a lagg (and it's pretty clear to non-stupid people why lan doesn't exist), whining about balance and game design (early WoL- pressure builds and timing attacks ruins the game, late WoL- turtle fest kills the game), crying about maps being too small and with too many harass options in early months of WoL, then crying about maps being too big and very turtlish during last 7 months of WoL. Whenever Blizzard made a U.I or B.net changes, there were hundreds of post yelling that they should have done that looooong time ago (most of the times they were late, but making mass whining threads (and pretending that it's a feedback thread for a Blizzard, or a dissccusion) about such a thing ? Really ?). Then Diablo 3 came. Oh dear god. The shit I have read from stupid and raging people... The game was not perfect, far from it. But it was nowhere as bad as people made it seem to. Everything was bad to them. Same happened with GW2. But that's not the most annoying part. What annoys me the most, is that people like to shit on blizzards games so much, while praising games like Torchlight 2 and PoE (Diablo 3 Killers !) as it was a miracle. I saw tens of these miracles games like PoE/TL2 in TL: hyped, praised and etc. And of course when I saw such 'reviews' of these games I always tried them out and boy I was so fucking disappointed. Disappointment came from both: medium-quality games and stupid people, who hyped them up for no particular reason.
Some people are hating because they got an impression that Blizzard has became an evil e.sport corporation. Which is bad for e.sports (Duh!). People like this word around here. Sadly, not many realise how e.sports actually work and develop. But it's like this in many things, people who know very little, tries to speak very loud.
Some are hating because Blizzard games no longer meet their expectations. Which is mostly due to a fact that they grew up (to some point). Everyone talks how amazing BW/Wc3 story lines were. About Diablo 1/2 and etc. These games left such a strong impression because they were very little/young when they played it. I had a similar feelings, till I tried to replay some of the games (those mentioned above). And I was kinda disappointed. Story lines were not bad by any means, but they were far less amazing than when I played them 5-8 years ago.
Some people are hating because they think that disliking many things makes their 'taste' somehow superior to others. Not being admired by anything, always finding ways to criticise everything, finding ways how to put other's work down and etc. All are signs of great taste, right ? Err, not really.
And the most stupid part of the community are just hating... because it's popular thing to do. People do a lot of stupid shit just because it's popular, and this is not an exception.
About HotS campaign: I actually kinda liked it. It was an improvement from WoL campaign. Some things were kinda dull, but overall I was pleased to a certain degree. Not the best story line I have experienced, but It was nowhere as bad as raging gamers are making it to be.
During long time I have been proven, that taking most of the community's feedback/'reviews'/opinions- is a very shitty idea.
|
I didn't like WoL campaign that much (it was decent at best) and I don't even recall the BW campaigns very well. Having said that, HOTS was the best RTS campaign I've played since War3 days. I really enjoyed playing the game and while I'm not super well versed in StarCraft lore, I thought it was really fun and I look forward to fighting the revived god in legacy of the void. HOTS campaign is the only thing blizzard has done well in a longgggggg time.
My only gripe would be that brutal seemed a bit too easy. I rarely had to replay a mission. I'm not sure if the setting was too easy or that the zerg evolutions were so ridiculously OP (as was kerrigan) that it made the missions easy if you had a brain.
Anyway, this was an awesome campaign and I had a lot of fun. kerrigan is awesome.
|
On March 15 2013 08:46 Warpath wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 08:18 mordk wrote:On March 15 2013 08:15 AztecTemplar wrote:
I think there's alot of tunnel vision on BOTH sides.
People who complain think that feelings and emotions within characters are linear and don't change in the 4 years since BW.
In 4 years you have time to think, mourn, repent, etc... In 4 years the Dominion had the time to upgrade their weapons, make experiments on Zerg and Toss and create better more deadly weapons against easch that force Kerrigan to spend more power and resources to kill them (Mengsk). What Mengsk did in 4 years is pretty much what Abathur does in a few missions I guess. Evolve the swarm to better kill their opponents.
Love is hard to forget and hard to kill. Even if they killed your best friend. We all know people who would still love their wife/girlfriend even if they did something horrific. Not to mention she became human, which psychologically for Raynor makes her different and remembers him of the old Sarah. Gives him hope. So he doesn't have the heart to kill her (WoL).
When she becomes deinfested she retains part of her humanity and Raynor is again unable to see the enemy that killed Fenix in cold blood.
Sarah and Raynor had a fling going on, this is explained in the books.
The Tal'Darim are easily corrupted and are fanatics. It is entirely plausible Narud got them to work for him by telling them he was an emissary of the Xel'Naga or something.
Also, Kerrigan didn't know where Raynor was or what Mengsk did with him. She thought him dead. If you see Raynor pop out from the shadows, even if you know its not him, the shock of seeing him again and the mere possibility he is real could cause confusion, again this is just psychological responses to being in love.
Queen of Blades is a title. Just like Mengsk keeps calling himself the "Emperor" and everyone calls Raynor "Commander".
Thus why the brood mothers call her a Queen. Its a hierarchy system.
Duran died "easily" because Kerrigan, as opposed to WoL and BW, consumed the essence of powerful Zerg organisms, plus she got rid of the "influence" of the Dark Voice, which would free her true powers and personality.
Really, the complains are not that good since all this has to do with story understanding.
--
However, the story telling is kinda weak indeed. There is not much dialogue that would help you understand everything unless you know the lore. The missions seem more personal to Kerrigan, not really concerning the Swarm or Raynor, heck not even the Xel'Naga prophecy is really explained. The characters ARE introduced haphazardly, I mean the feral Zerg aboard the Leviathan, I need more explanation as to why he is there aside from essence or what hell do with it and such. Abathur seems to have his own agenda and influence too, I need more about him too. Obviously Stukov returning for no real reason is kind of disturbing. I wish he had an evil agenda or explanation or something. Maybe a spy. IDK.
And I need more explanation as to how Kerrigan pretty much KOd Zeratul without him even lifting a finger. This is a Dark Templar, who taught Tassadar and a prelate... Really?
So yeah I think both sides have merits to their opinions.
Mainly as to how it was explained and missing chunks, there seems to be a void of atmosphere. Too much jumping around.
Yet anything lore related is easily explained.
So, the conclusion I'd say is that this is not really WoL, HotS and LoV. It's more like Raynor's story, Kerrigan's story and (hopefully it changes) Zeratul's story; WITHIN the SC universe.
So it's a personal view and game focused on each of the 3 main characters. All 3 are intricately wound to their races, so what they do affects the whole, but it doesnt serve to explain the whole or create a true immersion to the race. We see an entirety of the character, but only pieces of the race we are exploring.
I love SC, and I loved the story, I already paid for it and will ladder now that I finished it. So I dont complain much.
People always complain about the story, no matter who wrote it. I think the people who love the game outweigh the ones who didnt.
Agree with this post Also was shocked at how easily Kerri manhandled Zeratul hahah I mean WTF, Zeratul is supposed to be rather powerful Zeratul wasnt there to fight. Rewatch it, he hardly even tries to block attacks until he is able to force the vision onto kerrigan
I see that and I it's true, but honestly, getting yourself beaten just to force a vision... He can cloak himself, he has powers of the void. I'm sure he has a way of doing the same way without cracking a few ribs you know? Raynor may have "forgiven" Kerrigan because he loves her, but Zeratul HATES Kerrigan and getting himself beat by it, to me, doesn't seem as something he'd do. But oh well.. lol maybe I just wanted a fight XD
|
Also, this:
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/7713050
Brian Kindregan, co-lead writer of StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty and lead writer of Heart of the Swarm, answers more of the community’s most burning lore questions:
Question: Raynor's attitude in StarCraft II was surprising, considering where we left off in Brood War. After Kerrigan backstabbed him and killed Fenix, Raynor gave up on her and was hell-bent on getting rid of her. He explicitly promised he would kill her. What led him to change his mind, killing Tychus so he could save her?
Answer: I answered most of this question previously, but I want to follow up with this one for two reasons, which I'll take in reverse order.
About Tychus: By the time Jim and Tychus are in the cave with Kerrigan, I think Jim is all-in. He's made his choice. There's no going back, and no shrinking from what has to be done.
The bigger reason I wanted to address this issue was your good point that Jim's attitudes and actions at the beginning of Wings are surprising. I want to have a discussion with the community about this, and hear your thoughts. At the start of Wings of Liberty, it had been four years since Brood War, and Jim had been through a lot. He'd had time to reflect on the past—perhaps too much time. Additionally, the Queen of Blades was in seclusion for most of that time, so she was not continually stoking his hatred. If Jim felt the same exact emotions at that point, if his thoughts had not evolved at all, that would be very strange. It would be as if the intervening four years hadn't happened, and he was just a two dimensional automaton sitting in purgatory, waiting for the story to resume. So Jim slipped into an alcoholic haze, and focused on the things he'd lost—including the red-headed ghost, Sarah Kerrigan.
That's the reasoning for Jim's surprising actions. Now, the counterargument would be, players didn't go through those four years with Jim. They didn't experience that—so they experienced a disconnect. Jim went from one attitude straight into another. This is a completely valid argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
