|
On March 15 2013 07:33 mordk wrote:
There's one thing about all the complaints I don't really ever begin to understand. Why are people so upset that Jim loves Kerrigan and doesn't have the guts to kill her?
I seriously do not understand how anyone who played SC doesn't really know Jim was ALWAYS in love with Kerrigan. This was always as obvious as it gets. And I got that when I played SC, being like.. 14? It isn't weird at all for me that Blizzard took this course for the Raynor-Kerrigan plot line, it seems rather obvious to me that Jim wouldn't be so heartless to just kill her, since he is hopelessly in love with her and has always been.
Otherwise, I agree, the story is weak, but I still have enjoyed the campaigns immensely.
I also liked the new characters, even though I agree that they're kinda forgettable. I have my hopes up for Zeratul, main character of LotV.
I've always thought there's 2 main problems with the people complaining.
First, people have COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC expectations of this game's story, of Diablo's storyline, and of any game's storyline really. If compared to more mature storytelling media, there's only a handful of good stories throughout the ENTIRETY of gaming's history. And that's fine, because it's evolving, it's a very young media. If you want deep storylines without the cheesiness, the plotholes, etc, either pick your games really carefully, or go back to books and movies.
Second, people seem to have a nostalgia-filled vision of the original SC's storyline. While it wasn't nearly as cheesy as this one, the truth is SC's storyline was pretty basic, and just as bad as this one. Blizzard's writers weren't geniuses then, and they aren't now. That doesn't stop me from enjoying it though, you just need to look at it for what it is and get off that high flying cloud you people live in. Please remember most of us were KIDS when we played starcraft. OF COURSE IT WAS IMPRESSIVE.
this response is the best... everything I feel about this issue, you already wrote. I really enjoyed playing the campaign and
watching the story. It was not perfect and it was predictable but I don't really know what to expect.
|
i enjoyed playing the compain and watching the videos
so obv i'm a child w/o good taste
thanks for showing this to me OP
|
I honestly cannot... I *CANNOT* understand how people actually can defend the current story quality of SC2 compared to SC1 and BW. I realize the storyLINE is different and has been taken in different directions in Starcraft 2, that much is pretty obvious and logical and good. However, the quality of the story is what I'm angry about.
I understand that the plot and overall STORY of starcraft 1 and brood war could be seen as dumb, cheesey and not very complex... BUT... it's the QUALITY of how the story is TOLD, the way and style of how, that makes it truly great.
So what's the quality of storywriting and storytelling?
Well basically it requires believeability, it requires intense and engaging dialogue and it requires some twists and turns, something that will surprise the reader. Ask yourself, why are Quintin Tarentino's movies so good and respected? Because of the dialogue! Because the interaction between the characters and the setting is intense, it makes sense, and it's very engaging to the reader/watcher. It doesn't have to be the 2nd coming of shakespeares writing, but if you fail to capture your audience with your story, having nice graphics and good missions, will fall flat and feel cheap.
If the story doesn't challenge you on an intellectual level, if it doesn't try to upheave the setting and the context with dramatic langauge and actions, but falls short due to a large amount of clichés and overused thematic elements, mechanics and tools in the entertainment industry, it will fail.
Let's look at SC1 and BroodWar. Were they perfect in terms of storytelling and writing? Absolutely not, but for a video game product, they were pretty damn good, engaging AND quite intense for what it was. Filled with twists and turns, surprises, and everything didn't just get thrown into your face at fast rate and at an obvious course. You had to guess what would happen or at least wonder about the characters and factions motivations and their next move in the story.. , you knew the missions were important, because you wanted to hear the next line of dialogue between the characters, you wanted to progress. The dialogue and general writing from SC1/BW far far far surpasses both WoL and HOTS, because the narrative techniques and tools were used in an engaging and meaningful way. There's alot of expositions, long engaing dialogues and explanatory meaningful entries leading up to a battle or a confrontation between characters. You feel on the edge of your seat, and you read every word of the dialogue because you feel entitled.
That's why I feel WoL and HOTS both suffer from simplistic storytelling. There's simply not enough material there to explain, twist and turn the universe from different angles and sides, and it creates a way too narrow experience all to gether. There's too many things that doesn't quite make sense, even in a SCI-FI universe, even in Starcraft. The narrative technique and style are so different in starcraft 2, that it has completely changed (for the worse) the way in which factions and characters interact. It creates a universe in which the viewer feels alienated and not engaged in the storytelling. You lose some of your empathy for the characters, because.... YOU STOP BELIEVING IN IT. The suspension of disbelief is actually what creates the strongest case for great storytelling in entertaintment products. This goes for movies, games, heck.. even the fucking lyrics in songwriting are meaningful, and can completely turn a song around for the better if the lyrics are strong.
Yes.
The missions are a lot fun in both WoL and HOTS, and a step FORWARD compared to BW and SC1, YES... but why did the story quality had to suffer in the process? Why can't we have both?
|
I won't bother elaborating on why I liked/disliked the campaign. Everything has pretty much been covered by others.
However, I just wish the OP did a better job stimulating the discussion instead of blatantly trying to influence it. FAIL OP.
|
On March 15 2013 17:17 Discarder wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 07:33 mordk wrote:
There's one thing about all the complaints I don't really ever begin to understand. Why are people so upset that Jim loves Kerrigan and doesn't have the guts to kill her?
I seriously do not understand how anyone who played SC doesn't really know Jim was ALWAYS in love with Kerrigan. This was always as obvious as it gets. And I got that when I played SC, being like.. 14? It isn't weird at all for me that Blizzard took this course for the Raynor-Kerrigan plot line, it seems rather obvious to me that Jim wouldn't be so heartless to just kill her, since he is hopelessly in love with her and has always been.
Otherwise, I agree, the story is weak, but I still have enjoyed the campaigns immensely.
I also liked the new characters, even though I agree that they're kinda forgettable. I have my hopes up for Zeratul, main character of LotV.
I've always thought there's 2 main problems with the people complaining.
First, people have COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC expectations of this game's story, of Diablo's storyline, and of any game's storyline really. If compared to more mature storytelling media, there's only a handful of good stories throughout the ENTIRETY of gaming's history. And that's fine, because it's evolving, it's a very young media. If you want deep storylines without the cheesiness, the plotholes, etc, either pick your games really carefully, or go back to books and movies.
Second, people seem to have a nostalgia-filled vision of the original SC's storyline. While it wasn't nearly as cheesy as this one, the truth is SC's storyline was pretty basic, and just as bad as this one. Blizzard's writers weren't geniuses then, and they aren't now. That doesn't stop me from enjoying it though, you just need to look at it for what it is and get off that high flying cloud you people live in. Please remember most of us were KIDS when we played starcraft. OF COURSE IT WAS IMPRESSIVE. this response is the best... everything I feel about this issue, you already wrote. I really enjoyed playing the campaign and watching the story. It was not perfect and it was predictable but I don't really know what to expect.
Also I don't know how everyone seems to forget the fact that Zeratul directly told Raynor that Kerrigan must live.
|
I really feel like the whole one race a game campaign style detracted from the experience. To elaborate in the SC campaigns you played all the sides of the fight; the "good" guys and the "bad" guys. The game ending with all the people you played as coming into one climatic end fight. SC2's campaign story feels too reliant on foreshadowing of things to come and creating "mysteries" for the sake of having them rather than just telling an interesting story. All opinion of course.
|
Honestly, the quality of the story in HotS is about a 5/10. I still think WoL campaign was wayyyyyy better.
|
On March 15 2013 17:29 Akio00 wrote:
I won't bother elaborating on why I liked/disliked the campaign. Everything has pretty much been covered by others.
However, I just wish the OP did a better job stimulating the discussion instead of blatantly trying to influence it. FAIL OP.
Note that this thread is a continuation of another thread that already had 12 pages of discussion on this topic. I just happened to be the guy who remade it, since the HotS forum was locked. This thread has gotten over 150 replies in less than 12 hours, I think the discussion would've continued regardless of my personal influence or lack thereof.
It's not my job to be an objective mediator or arbiter, I have a personal opinion and bias and I'm going to express it.
|
On March 15 2013 17:42 DonKey_ wrote:
I really feel like the whole one race a game campaign style detracted from the experience. To elaborate in the SC campaigns you played all the sides of the fight; the "good" guys and the "bad" guys. The game ending with all the people you played as coming into one climatic end fight. SC2's campaign story feels too reliant on foreshadowing of things to come and creating "mysteries" for the sake of having them rather than just telling an interesting story. All opinion of course.
I agree. I think they should've kept the old model of storytelling, where WoL would've had 30-40 missions, and each race playable with their story intertwined like SC and BW, without it being just a rehash of concepts. And the expansion sets the same as Brood war, making for a more complete and coherent story.
|
On March 15 2013 17:22 furo wrote:
i enjoyed playing the compain and watching the videos
so obv i'm a child w/o good taste
thanks for showing this to me OP
i enjoyed the campaign and videos of wol too, i don't remember a damn thing about the story plot. i don't think the op quote said anything about the campaign being bad, on the contrary the post linked in the op said it was decent. but there are those who were invested in the story from broodwar and feel they got a punch in the balls with what blizzard 2.0 has done to sc2's story.
|
Why am I getting the same feeling from quotes like these:
On March 15 2013 17:29 Akio00 wrote:
I won't bother elaborating on why I liked/disliked the campaign. Everything has pretty much been covered by others.
However, I just wish the OP did a better job stimulating the discussion instead of blatantly trying to influence it. FAIL OP.
On March 15 2013 17:22 furo wrote:
i enjoyed playing the compain and watching the videos
so obv i'm a child w/o good taste
thanks for showing this to me OP
On March 15 2013 17:17 Discarder wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 07:33 mordk wrote:
There's one thing about all the complaints I don't really ever begin to understand. Why are people so upset that Jim loves Kerrigan and doesn't have the guts to kill her?
I seriously do not understand how anyone who played SC doesn't really know Jim was ALWAYS in love with Kerrigan. This was always as obvious as it gets. And I got that when I played SC, being like.. 14? It isn't weird at all for me that Blizzard took this course for the Raynor-Kerrigan plot line, it seems rather obvious to me that Jim wouldn't be so heartless to just kill her, since he is hopelessly in love with her and has always been.
Otherwise, I agree, the story is weak, but I still have enjoyed the campaigns immensely.
I also liked the new characters, even though I agree that they're kinda forgettable. I have my hopes up for Zeratul, main character of LotV.
I've always thought there's 2 main problems with the people complaining.
First, people have COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC expectations of this game's story, of Diablo's storyline, and of any game's storyline really. If compared to more mature storytelling media, there's only a handful of good stories throughout the ENTIRETY of gaming's history. And that's fine, because it's evolving, it's a very young media. If you want deep storylines without the cheesiness, the plotholes, etc, either pick your games really carefully, or go back to books and movies.
Second, people seem to have a nostalgia-filled vision of the original SC's storyline. While it wasn't nearly as cheesy as this one, the truth is SC's storyline was pretty basic, and just as bad as this one. Blizzard's writers weren't geniuses then, and they aren't now. That doesn't stop me from enjoying it though, you just need to look at it for what it is and get off that high flying cloud you people live in. Please remember most of us were KIDS when we played starcraft. OF COURSE IT WAS IMPRESSIVE. this response is the best... everything I feel about this issue, you already wrote. I really enjoyed playing the campaign and watching the story. It was not perfect and it was predictable but I don't really know what to expect.
That I got when a bunch of low-post users rushed out to defend Blizz in the Lings of Liberty thread?
Wierd.
|
there is not a single story conceived by humankind in all of recorded history which was praised by everyone and hated by noone.
it is very unrealistic to think SC2 would somehow be an exception.
|
On March 15 2013 18:03 Shady Sands wrote:Why am I getting the same feeling from quotes like these: Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 17:29 Akio00 wrote:
I won't bother elaborating on why I liked/disliked the campaign. Everything has pretty much been covered by others.
However, I just wish the OP did a better job stimulating the discussion instead of blatantly trying to influence it. FAIL OP. Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 17:22 furo wrote:
i enjoyed playing the compain and watching the videos
so obv i'm a child w/o good taste
thanks for showing this to me OP
Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 17:17 Discarder wrote:On March 15 2013 07:33 mordk wrote:
There's one thing about all the complaints I don't really ever begin to understand. Why are people so upset that Jim loves Kerrigan and doesn't have the guts to kill her?
I seriously do not understand how anyone who played SC doesn't really know Jim was ALWAYS in love with Kerrigan. This was always as obvious as it gets. And I got that when I played SC, being like.. 14? It isn't weird at all for me that Blizzard took this course for the Raynor-Kerrigan plot line, it seems rather obvious to me that Jim wouldn't be so heartless to just kill her, since he is hopelessly in love with her and has always been.
Otherwise, I agree, the story is weak, but I still have enjoyed the campaigns immensely.
I also liked the new characters, even though I agree that they're kinda forgettable. I have my hopes up for Zeratul, main character of LotV.
I've always thought there's 2 main problems with the people complaining.
First, people have COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC expectations of this game's story, of Diablo's storyline, and of any game's storyline really. If compared to more mature storytelling media, there's only a handful of good stories throughout the ENTIRETY of gaming's history. And that's fine, because it's evolving, it's a very young media. If you want deep storylines without the cheesiness, the plotholes, etc, either pick your games really carefully, or go back to books and movies.
Second, people seem to have a nostalgia-filled vision of the original SC's storyline. While it wasn't nearly as cheesy as this one, the truth is SC's storyline was pretty basic, and just as bad as this one. Blizzard's writers weren't geniuses then, and they aren't now. That doesn't stop me from enjoying it though, you just need to look at it for what it is and get off that high flying cloud you people live in. Please remember most of us were KIDS when we played starcraft. OF COURSE IT WAS IMPRESSIVE. this response is the best... everything I feel about this issue, you already wrote. I really enjoyed playing the campaign and watching the story. It was not perfect and it was predictable but I don't really know what to expect. That I got when a bunch of low-post users rushed out to defend Blizz in the Lings of Liberty thread? Wierd.
Did you read my posts? I got 8, and I'm quite a critic of the new campaign mode, story and setting of Starcraft 2  ... Weird huh?
|
Abathur is boss. screw starcraft ghost, we need starcraft:evolver scientist creature(or whatever his title is :p).
I actually thought the campaign was better than the wol one, it felt slightly better put together. Some parts I felt were sort of artificial was the whole massive stress on the love story..felt it could've been better slightly understated.
Pkus somethings I didnt understand.
+ Show Spoiler +
Werent the original zerg (according to the manual) just larvae who responded well to the experiments? But now the primal zerg are big powerful creatures.
Why did zeratul have to get a pounding before telling her he was he was there to give he a heads up.
That boss fight..the belial boss in diablo3, lets do it again :p
Also...dont like the fact that zergs are good guys who were made bad, and are now semi bad/good guys again. Blizzard loves this thing so I guess it will be there in every series they make.
|
I think some people should go out more often you know, take some fresh air, and not blame a game for having a stupid story line (even though this isn't my opinion). There is way worst stuff out there and which would requiere these persons attention.
|
Lalalaland34493 Posts
Petitioning Blizzard to rename Abathur to A-bro-thur
|
On March 15 2013 17:23 BurgerFreak wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I honestly cannot... I *CANNOT* understand how people actually can defend the current story quality of SC2 compared to SC1 and BW. I realize the storyLINE is different and has been taken in different directions in Starcraft 2, that much is pretty obvious and logical and good. However, the quality of the story is what I'm angry about.
I understand that the plot and overall STORY of starcraft 1 and brood war could be seen as dumb, cheesey and not very complex... BUT... it's the QUALITY of how the story is TOLD, the way and style of how, that makes it truly great.
So what's the quality of storywriting and storytelling?
Well basically it requires believeability, it requires intense and engaging dialogue and it requires some twists and turns, something that will surprise the reader. Ask yourself, why are Quintin Tarentino's movies so good and respected? Because of the dialogue! Because the interaction between the characters and the setting is intense, it makes sense, and it's very engaging to the reader/watcher. It doesn't have to be the 2nd coming of shakespeares writing, but if you fail to capture your audience with your story, having nice graphics and good missions, will fall flat and feel cheap.
If the story doesn't challenge you on an intellectual level, if it doesn't try to upheave the setting and the context with dramatic langauge and actions, but falls short due to a large amount of clichés and overused thematic elements, mechanics and tools in the entertainment industry, it will fail.
Let's look at SC1 and BroodWar. Were they perfect in terms of storytelling and writing? Absolutely not, but for a video game product, they were pretty damn good, engaging AND quite intense for what it was. Filled with twists and turns, surprises, and everything didn't just get thrown into your face at fast rate and at an obvious course. You had to guess what would happen or at least wonder about the characters and factions motivations and their next move in the story.. , you knew the missions were important, because you wanted to hear the next line of dialogue between the characters, you wanted to progress. The dialogue and general writing from SC1/BW far far far surpasses both WoL and HOTS, because the narrative techniques and tools were used in an engaging and meaningful way. There's alot of expositions, long engaing dialogues and explanatory meaningful entries leading up to a battle or a confrontation between characters. You feel on the edge of your seat, and you read every word of the dialogue because you feel entitled.
That's why I feel WoL and HOTS both suffer from simplistic storytelling. There's simply not enough material there to explain, twist and turn the universe from different angles and sides, and it creates a way too narrow experience all to gether. There's too many things that doesn't quite make sense, even in a SCI-FI universe, even in Starcraft. The narrative technique and style are so different in starcraft 2, that it has completely changed (for the worse) the way in which factions and characters interact. It creates a universe in which the viewer feels alienated and not engaged in the storytelling. You lose some of your empathy for the characters, because.... YOU STOP BELIEVING IN IT. The suspension of disbelief is actually what creates the strongest case for great storytelling in entertaintment products. This goes for movies, games, heck.. even the fucking lyrics in songwriting are meaningful, and can completely turn a song around for the better if the lyrics are strong.
Yes.
The missions are a lot fun in both WoL and HOTS, and a step FORWARD compared to BW and SC1, YES... but why did the story quality had to suffer in the process? Why can't we have both?
While I completely agree with your points, I think that a lot of the feeled quality of the SC/BW storyline was that its way of telling stuff, that is, mission briefings or in-game talk with just portraits, and in-game proceedings (like Kerrigan arriving in some Overlord and killing Protoss guys at the end of, I think the second to last Zerg mission in BW), left a lot of free space to the imagination of the player. Basically, the few cutscenes/videos gave you a rough outline of how the universe in SC/BW is supposed to look like, and briefings/in-game happenings gave you kind of an abstract idea of each character and how the story progresses. The rest was filled by your head and imagination. For instance, remember that each character had exactly one portrait which was shown, no matter if that character was supposed to be angry, nervous, amused or whatever. It came back to your imagination and impressions to fill the character with "life".
SC2 on the other hand tries to explicitly show every interaction and emotion. This is obviously a way harder task, but also probably expected from a project of SC2's size by (most of) nowaday's audience. I can see how Blizzard does not live up to the highest of expectations here, yeah, and I'm okay with that - it's "just" a video game after all and no movie by Tarantino or Fincher or whatever your favorite director is. This, however, is not an excuse for the very "cheap" storyline with randomly revived dudes whose death was a major point in the plot of SC/BW, not introducing properly and then just killing off the one guy who was built up as a mystery already in SC/BW+bonus missions (not to mention that he happens be a shapeshifter, something which was also never ever mentioned in the SC/BW universe so far), or just creating some kind of new supervillain along the way who never even appeared or was mentioned until now, as far as I see (the first quoted post in the OP sums up my confusion here pretty well). Of course, also SC/BW's storyline had a few cheap points (UED appearing out of nowwhere, for instance), but the major points seemed much less "random". This probably also has to do with the SC2 storyline drifting much more into the "mysterious" section with old and powerful artifacts with weird abilitys (de-infestation.. really?).
|
On March 15 2013 18:05 Roblin wrote:
there is not a single story conceived by humankind in all of recorded history which was praised by everyone and hated by noone.
it is very unrealistic to think SC2 would somehow be an exception.
If I had a penny for every time someone has pulled out this terrible argument to defend a story, I would have enough money to hire a team of writers and programmers to make an alternate version of Starcraft II that doesn't suck. Then I could play that game, forget this one ever existed, and live happily ever after.
Too bad nobody actually has that much money to go and make a game like that. Well, except for mega profitable video game companies like Activision Blizzard, which has a revenue in the billions. But of course that's terribly "unrealistic" of me to expect a company like that to produce a good story in a video game.
|
On March 15 2013 18:19 Gatesleeper wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 18:05 Roblin wrote:
there is not a single story conceived by humankind in all of recorded history which was praised by everyone and hated by noone.
it is very unrealistic to think SC2 would somehow be an exception. If I had a penny for every time someone has pulled out this terrible argument to defend a story, I would have enough money to hire a team of writers and programmers to make an alternate version of Starcraft II that doesn't suck. Then I could play that game, forget this one ever existed, and live happily ever after. Too bad nobody actually has that much money to go and make a game like that. Well, except for mega profitable video game companies like Activision Blizzard, which has a revenue in the billions. But of course that's terribly "unrealistic" of me to expect a company like that to produce a good story in a video game.
maybe, but this guy is still right.
it's like Star Wars, some people just are like EWOKS WTF ARE THESE THINGS DOING HERE?
some people hate them, some don't, what can you change about it?
|
On March 15 2013 18:10 Rachnar wrote:
I think some people should go out more often you know, take some fresh air, and not blame a game for having a stupid story line (even though this isn't my opinion). There is way worst stuff out there and which would requiere these persons attention.
That's a defense of the game I haven't read in this thread yet. Literally: Don't even think about how bad the game is, why not write a letter to your congressman about the war in Afghanistan, think up solutions for Europe's credit crisis, go volunteer at a soup kitchen, work on that screenplay you've been thinking of, update your resume, talk to that girl you have a crush on, there are so many more things worthy of your attention than complaining about the plot of a video game.
Says the guy with 1400 posts on a forum dedicated to said video game. Obviously in the large scheme of things, whether or not the story in HotS is swamp donkey excrement is unimportant, but it's important to me, and to a lot of others, who have been playing Starcraft for a decade. Since I finished Wings of Liberty, I immediately started looking forward to HotS, and when it turned out to be even a bigger disappointment, that made me sad/mad.
To say that there are things in this world that are more worthy of my attention is absolutely true, but that doesn't take anything away from the value of this discussion. So don't tell me to go out more often, I'll do what I damn please. And right now that is sitting inside my house complaining on the internet about the story of a video game. If you think that's petty, by all means, delete your TL account, never watch or play Starcraft (or really any video game or sport) again and go save the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
