| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Nachtwind
Germany1130 Posts
On March 26 2013 04:50 Stratos_speAr wrote: The problem is this; if Kerrigan can fly, why the fuck hasn't she flown in the three other SC games we've seen her in? It'd be a huge tool for a lot of challenges she's faced. Because she´s a lady and know how good her zerg high heels looks when she walkz. | ||
|
THM
Bulgaria1131 Posts
On a more positive note, the single player, despite the bad story, was A LOT of fun for me even though brutal was a bit too easy. Overall heart of the swarm is a big success, could've been even more awesome with a better story. | ||
|
CloudMage
Canada221 Posts
 | ||
|
Pax
United States175 Posts
| ||
|
TheLetterQ
United States65 Posts
On March 26 2013 04:50 Stratos_speAr wrote: Yes, the standard is incredibly high. Consistency and a script that's better than some trashy fan fiction plot is a very high standard. In all seriousness, the standards are quite low. Consistency, cohesiveness, and a none-horrific script are not high standards. I don't know about your standards, but the author of this topic wrote a very long essay that is basically a moment-by-moment breakdown of the campaign, that touches on such topics as how the game deals with PTSD, gender relations, and the game being too kid friendly. It is pretty clear that the author of this article at least sets very high standards. I don't particularly want to act as an apologist for the HOTS campaign story, as I believe too that it wasn't really that good, but I will say that I will take the fun gameplay and crappy story of the two SC2 campaigns over the passable story and subpar gameplay of SC1/BW any day. | ||
|
redstranger7
United States1 Post
Each of these characters had an opportunity to represent different aspects of Kerrigan's development as leader of the zerg. Zagarra represented strategy and patience versus blind ferocity. Izsha represented heritage and sense of identity conflicting with altering fundamental aspects of who and what the Queen of Blades is and who she could be, and the same for the Swarm. Abathur is an example of cruelty for the sake of efficiency, and all Kerrigan does is complain about his methods. I only started playing SC with WoL, and even I thought Jim had some hardcore rose colored tint on his glasses. Also, I'm almost 30 and would appreciate matured characters. This story had so much potential. | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5217 Posts
On March 26 2013 04:50 Stratos_speAr wrote: The problem is this; if Kerrigan can fly, why the fuck hasn't she flown in the three other SC games we've seen her in? It'd be a huge tool for a lot of challenges she's faced. She couldn't fly while she was the Queen of Blades. She gained the ability when he went to Zerus and was remade by the primal Zerg. Then she didn't use it until she saw Raynor, and she did so to impress him and try to win him back, because she knew he'd be upset with her and her new Zerg body. It worked, as we saw. | ||
|
Torpedo.Vegas
United States1890 Posts
On March 26 2013 13:00 BronzeKnee wrote: She couldn't fly while she was the Queen of Blades. She gained the ability when he went to Zerus and was remade by the primal Zerg. Then she didn't use it until she saw Raynor, and she did so to impress him and try to win him back, because she knew he'd be upset with her and her new Zerg body. It worked, as we saw. Maybe she was on a thin zerg string from the leviathan, pulling her like a spiders thread. | ||
|
Zyl
Cuba15 Posts
An anecdote I think was funny: I watched some of the Day9 playthrough vids of the first few missions when my flat mate walked in during a cut scene and asked me how the campaign looks so far. Me: "Up till now Raynor's contribution basically is condensed down to just saying 'Sarah!'." -*Scene of Dominion drop ships impacting. Cut to Raynor*- Raynor: "Sarah!" Felt like a satire of their own story..^^ | ||
|
ShotgunMike
Sweden241 Posts
On March 25 2013 00:41 BronzeKnee wrote: Right. God Forbid the people who wrote the story for HOTS have any regard for previous SC history. God Forbid they read anything that Blizzard had ever written before, and instead let them go ahead willy nilly and write whatever they want, and we if we dig "too" deep, then that is our problem. Seriously, is that the argument? Now I enjoyed the campaign, it would just be better without the plot issues, which aren't hard to fix. It just takes some effort, which Blizzard didn't put in based on the story. It isn't that hard to write a story based on another story without having a lack of continuity, and without disregarding the previous story. I learned how way back in high school writing and film class. Not God Forbid at all! I agree, there could have been more done to the story. But nonetheless, I do enjoy the game so I guess I was not bothered enough by it to write a whole wall of text trying to pick it apart. That seems like wasting time in my eyes. But hey, we can all chose to spend our time differently. My point was that I'm sure that there are holes in there, I just did not find them that bothersome and I still enjoy the game - money well spent! | ||
|
Spyfire242
United States715 Posts
That out of the way here is what I disagree with. First and probably the biggest thing, is as apposed to OP I think the love story between Sarah and Jim is very very believable. I have played SC1/BW at least a good half dozen times all the way through and I always felt there was sexual/romantic tension between these two characters, even from the little dialog that was spoken. Because there was so little dialog we are left to fill in allot of the blanks ourselves. And what each character feels about what they say is also largely open to interpretation. (I like to think Sarah rather enjoyed Jim's lewd thoughts and was berating him more so because they had a job to do/and or to tease him but that's beside the point) Perhaps the strongest evidence of Jim's love for her is his determination to kill what she had become, the queen of blades. (Arguably in Wings he succeeded and managed to avenge Fenix and other fallen comrades if you consider the queen of blades and Sarah Kerrigan to be two separate characters which I, and clearly Jim do.) In conclusion, I feel that the love story in of itself is fine. (They didn't tell it well at all, but I do easily feel these characters love each other.) On to the second disagreement., and that is OP's interpretation of Jim Raynor as a character and the decisions that he makes given the context. I'm gonna drive straight into the deep end and talk about the scene that he is reunited with Sarah in the prison cell and try to address all the OP's "problems" with it. OP's first problem is the "nonexistent love story." if you read my post so far, it will be easy to understand that I don't feel this is a problem at all. OPs second problem/s (I'm gonna lump a few of them together.) is that the Queen of blades killed billions of people and several named characters that we(And Jim.) are supposed to (and in the case of Fenix absolutely) feel angry about. Jim is clearly angry, both at seeing all he efforts being thwarted seeing Sarah as the queen of blades once more and at the reignited memories of the murders she committed. So I see no problem here. OP brings up that Jim swore he would kill Kerrigan if its the last thing he does, and that all her actions as queen of blades would remove any kind of connection he feels to this woman. Again I counter point by saying Jim feels the Queen of blades and Sarah Kerrigan are two completely different people. And now he has a gun pointed at her head. (Ignoring how he has a gun, Yeah I do agree with OP's final 'wrong' about this scene.) So why doesn't he kill her? Two reasons, the most important reason is Jim trusts Zeratul and knows about the prophecy. Jim is a good guy but he is also a guy for the greater good. This alone is enough for me to justify Jim putting his own feelings aside and not killing her. Secondly, and this one is more subjective, is that I think Jim see's the old Sarah in this new queen of blades, despite her appearance. But he has mixed feelings, of anger, love regret/pity/what ever else is going on this mans brain, so it makes sense that he would just say "Fuck it we're done." And storm out, leaving her alive because he trusts Zeratul and doesn't know what to make of his own feelings. All that said, I think this scene was actually one of the few they did well, and makes sense to me given the context and my interpretation of the characters. Of course all of that is shat on in the final scene where he says "My pleasure darlin, always was." Jim's character is allot more complex than that bullshit. But what ever lol.(Maybe he is just saying that cause he wants some Queen of Blades pussy.) Well if you managed to read my crappy run on post thanks, just to note again. Don't think I am defending Blizzard or this games writing, overall I agree, its horrible. I'll be back for legacy of the void though to see how things all come together. (And ultimately destroy one of my favorite franchises.) Some TL;DR and random thoughts/notes. -Jim and Sarah do love each other and this is believable -Jim's actions during the "prison scene" make sense in context. -Sarah being able to fly isn't so far fetched, her psionic power alone is enough to levitate and throw things great distances, why is it unreasonable that she can do this to herself? -I didn't know about the extra BW campaigns where Alexi is revived, I hated him in Swarm, why the hell did they bring him back. Complete disrespect for an awesome character, fuck you Blizzard, even if he was brought back, why the hell does he side with the Queen of blades of all people, it would make more sense if he offed himself like DuGalle given what he has become and his history. (Or perhaps try to return to earth despite his appearance.) -How do mutalisks fly in space by flapping their wings. -If I wrote the story Jim Raynor would have ended up a part of Kerrigan's swarm. Forever fighting by her side as a powerful general. What better happy ending can you ask for? -lol primal zerg, I thought the zerg and protoss were completely engineered by the Xel'naga not altered from existing organisms. -Nova's appearance and character continues to disappoint me on several levels. Its like she exists just to remind us of the failure of Starcraft:Ghost. She has no character development, no purpose and where the hell did she go after capturing Jim? Why isn't she defending Mengsk? She is such a wasted opportunity. (Oh I get it, just like Ghost, haha! Good one Blizzard) -End Transmission. | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On March 26 2013 12:29 TheLetterQ wrote: ... I will take the fun gameplay and crappy story of the two SC2 campaigns over the passable story and subpar gameplay of SC1/BW any day. You're using the word "subpar" incorrectly. See, the context you used that word in implies that the subject has somehow slipped beneath a predetermined standard or "par" that has been established through a renowned work in the genre. SC1/BW became the new standard for years. Its fine to prefer SC2, but don't use words you don't understand to put down BW because it will just make you look less credible due to the implication of the existence of an intellectual deficiency on your part. BW had far superior gameplay. The proof is in the fact that SC2 tries hard to base itself in BW's engine while somehow being its own thing. They wouldn't stick so closely to the original template of the interface if it wasn't something incredibly solid to begin with. | ||
|
Gogo1
Norway43 Posts
On March 26 2013 23:48 sCCrooked wrote: BW had far superior gameplay. The proof is in the fact that SC2 tries hard to base itself in BW's engine while somehow being its own thing. They wouldn't stick so closely to the original template of the interface if it wasn't something incredibly solid to begin with. Or maybe they're trying not to completely alienate their old fans. | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On March 27 2013 00:06 Gogo1 wrote: Or maybe they're trying not to completely alienate their old fans. Considering the topic of the OP, I laugh at the notion of this being a possibility. | ||
|
Gogo1
Norway43 Posts
On March 27 2013 00:41 sCCrooked wrote: Considering the topic of the OP, I laugh at the notion of this being a possibility. Yet you don't address the argument at all. You said that BW had far superior gameplay because SC2 tries to stick close to how that game played, by referencing the interface (which by the way, is completely disconnected from your premise, but never mind). The reason they don't radically change how the game feels (or, for that matter, how the interface looks) is so that people still feel like they're playing Starcraft. Can you imagine the uproar if the interface and all the mechanics were completely changed? | ||
|
reapsen
Germany559 Posts
1. Gameplay: I kind of liked the missions for the most part. Except they were waaaay too easy, even on brutal. And i felt they get even easier as the game went on. IMHO that is because of 3 main flaws: - A spell that permanently gives you enemy units, without any supply cost is just plain stupid. The Hive-Mind-Controller was stupid in WoL and the Infestor in the campaign is stupid too. Almost every mission, i had like 5 Thors, 2 BCs and a couple of Viking/Banshee which almost did the job by themselves. - WHY did they remove the inject mechanic from the campaign? WHY don't have the hatcheries the usual larva-limit of 3. I am a gold/plat player, so my Macro is pretty shitty, but without the inject mechanic, you just need to spam some five or so Hatcheries and you have plenty of larvae ready at every point. - Some units get incredibly imba and other are just plain useless. Why have units like the Abberation? They were "good" in that one mission, the rest of the time they are completly useless. I found the swarmling, the vile roach and the zombie ultralisk to be incredibly imba. Just massing these, throw in 3 infestors to take over every shit that comes near and run over each mission. The way Blizzard tries to tackle this problem is pathetic. They try to layout the missions so that the unit you get new in this mission, is the one unit you need to win. With that they want to make us (the players) use all the units in the game. Its like they think we are apes or something: Here is a a new tool, USE IT! HURR DURR. For me that invokes a rebelling feel inside, to AVOID those units at all cost, so i end up going roach/ling/ultra/queen every mission. 2. Story I don't want to kick a dead horse here, but the story is a mess: - Love Story between Raynor / Kerrigan is just bad. - Dialog is cringeworthy alot (Raynor: "My hair got more gray" Kerrigan: "Yes, and mine got more zerg.") - The whole plot is a revenge plot for something that is so obviously a fake and not established. it makes no sense. - Why all the Bullshit with getting stronger and gathering the swarm, when you just want to kill ONE MAN? Kerrigan even spares most of the innocent terrans. Kerringan tells over and over again, it will be sooo hard to kill Mengsk. WHY? He is just a normal dude. Just assassinate that fucker and move on. - What in the name of fuck drives Kerrigan to go back to the Queen of Blades-Outfit? I thought she was happy to be kind of human again. What are her long-term goals after Mengsk is dead. I imagine her looking at here body and be all like "how am i getting rid of this shit again?" - Who is Stukov? Why is here there? He is a half-dead infested terran and he seems to be totally cool with that. That makes no sense. He also serves no purpose whatsoever. - The whole Broodmother thing makes no sense. Why is Zagara so supportive all of a sudden? She says MULTIPLE TIMES, she wants to take over the swarm someday, yet she never even tries to backstab Kerrigan. - The Zerg as a race made much more sense (and were a lot cooler) when they were controlled by one mysterious entity "THE OVERMIND". The idea of a collective conscience controlling these uncountable masses suit the concept of the race a lot better (just like the Borg), than some nameless and boring "Broodmothers" and their "tribes" or whatever. - Finally and most important: What made the SC1/Broodwar-Story so awesome is the fact that you felt, the FATE OF THE UNIVERSE is at stake and every race is trying to backstab each other, to survive. In both WoL and HotS your perspective is limited to one person, which is essentially a maniac going ape shit for his/her own personal goals. | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On March 27 2013 00:48 Gogo1 wrote: Yet you don't address the argument at all. You said that BW had far superior gameplay because SC2 tries to stick close to how that game played, by referencing the interface (which by the way, is completely disconnected from your premise, but never mind). The reason they don't radically change how the game feels (or, for that matter, how the interface looks) is so that people still feel like they're playing Starcraft. Can you imagine the uproar if the interface and all the mechanics were completely changed? You seem to be completely missing my point of the irony in that you're asking these sorts of hypothetical questions when the reality that they alienated a significant portion of their old base by demolishing the old storyline and characters is right before us. The truth is the introduction of so many key elements in the BW interface is what led to the evolution of what we consider "standards" for RTS interfaces and games in general today. You're attempting to make the incorrect assumption that comparing SC2's features to BW's is somehow Blizzard's attempt to keep the players feeling like they're playing Starcraft when in reality more players felt SC2's playstyle was closer to WC3's. I could go on, but if you don't already know why BW was so revolutionary in its timeframe and why these sorts of wild story arcs kill the feeling of "still being in Starcraft" then you're quite frankly too far behind for me to take the time to catch you up. Don't be lazy, just research if you weren't personally a part of it. **Edit** Rather than bump the whole thread for a ridiculous response, I'll just state that after this: On March 27 2013 01:09 Gogo1 wrote: What, exactly, is your point? I'll admit that I have yet to play SC1 (and Brood War), so I don't know the storyline before WoL. You have lost all credibility. You're posting in a thread griping about the incongruities we see between the original story arc and this weird off-pattern love story we're suddenly being forced to watch for HotS and you haven't even played BW. You can't imagine the difference it makes having experienced the game and even if you did that, you can't imagine the difference it makes having that game be a pillar for what you believed was the standard for a "good" rts game since childhood and then in your adult years having that completely scrapped for some BS that isn't plausible and didn't exist. You're 2 entire worlds away from even understanding where we're coming from much less being on a level to discuss it. Everything other than this part in your response is utter nonsense and isn't even a concern to anyone but you apparently. | ||
|
Gogo1
Norway43 Posts
On March 27 2013 00:58 sCCrooked wrote: You seem to be completely missing my point of the irony in that you're asking these sorts of hypothetical questions when the reality that they alienated a significant portion of their old base by demolishing the old storyline and characters is right before us. The truth is the introduction of so many key elements in the BW interface is what led to the evolution of what we consider "standards" for RTS interfaces and games in general today. You're attempting to make the incorrect assumption that comparing SC2's features to BW's is somehow Blizzard's attempt to keep the players feeling like they're playing Starcraft when in reality more players felt SC2's playstyle was closer to WC3's. I could go on, but if you don't already know why BW was so revolutionary in its timeframe and why these sorts of wild story arcs kill the feeling of "still being in Starcraft" then you're quite frankly too far behind for me to take the time to catch you up. Don't be lazy, just research if you weren't personally a part of it. What, exactly, is your point? I'll admit that I have yet to play SC1 (and Brood War), so I don't know the storyline before WoL. But anyway, from what I've read I can understand that the story alienated people, but you are talking about the interface, and somehow make the connection that interface = gameplay. And though my assumption may be incorrect (and let me just state that it was a suggestion, not a rhetorical question), you still don't show how it is so. You just say "many people say it feels like WC3", but how? Also, if you're gonna go with the argument that the masses are right, then I am sorry to tell you that the majority posts I've read on these forums say that from a gameplay standpoint HotS beats Brood War hands down, but it's in the story department the game's lacking. | ||
|
Silvang
Netherlands7 Posts
It is a damned shame. I did "enjoy" (big brackets here) in part the HotS campaign (as in i didn't regret playing it, nor was i offered something to be enthusiastic about) but as a story of something else entirely, not connected to the Starcraft universe i know and love. Thank you for taking the time and effort to write this down, it was a pleasure to read such a well informed and accurate review. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On March 27 2013 00:55 reapsen wrote: - The whole plot is a revenge plot for something that is so obviously a fake and not established. it makes no sense. The main story is about defining who / what Kerrigan is. Her revenge against Mengsk is just a vehicle for exploring that. | ||
| ||
|
|
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Replay Cast
The PondCast
OSC
WardiTV European League
Replay Cast
Epic.LAN
CranKy Ducklings
Epic.LAN
CSO Contender
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
