EPTFirst mission of StarCraft 2: Legacy of the Void - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
gumshoe
Canada3602 Posts
| ||
|
Wrath
3174 Posts
On October 18 2015 03:26 Cricketer12 wrote: Artanis idolized Tassa and Zera, he has only the deepest respect for them, and would listen well to what they had to say. Artanis helped Kerri in BW as much as Zera did, and I have no doubt would have agreed with killing the Overmind if it meant bringing Razagal back. If Tassadar was willing to forgive Zera for Zasz the rest of the protoss have no right to be angry. Furthermore how could Zera help Arty v Kerri on the Space Platform? He was lost and he and Arty had no idea where each other where. The only thing that Zera can be even a little blamed for is killing Raza but I have no doubt Mohandar will prevent the Nerazim from killing Zera in revenge. The only person I am unsure of is Vorazun, her opinion on the matter is paramount (but I digress). Selendis is clearly aware of the event of the Invasion of Aiur (her deep respect for Raynor) therefore she should know better than to hate Zera. I think they can understand that Kerri is twisted enough to let Zera live for the reasons she mentioned in The Reckoning, and therefore they can only maybe blame Zera for Primal Kerri but they shouldn't know about that. Not to mention the similarities between Zera and Tassa right now are way too insane. FFs pronounce their full names... Tassadar willing to forgive Zeratul? FFS IN THE ORIGINAL STARCRAFT IT WAS COORDINATED PLAN BETWEEN BOTH OF THEM. THEY BOTH SHARE THE SAME RESPONSIBILITY THAT IF WE GIVE IN IT WAS A MISTAKE TO BEGIN WITH! Edit: Sorry for the caps... | ||
|
YyapSsap
New Zealand1511 Posts
| ||
|
LongShot27
United States2084 Posts
On October 17 2015 16:09 WrathSCII wrote: I still do not understand why they accuse Zeratul for treason.... He killed the Matriarch, He Killed The Matriarch, HE KILLED THE MATRIARCH, HE! KILLED! THE! MATRIARCH!. it doesn't matter the circumstance and some of them don't even know that. | ||
|
YyapSsap
New Zealand1511 Posts
On October 18 2015 06:09 LongShot27 wrote: He killed the Matriarch, He Killed The Matriarch, HE KILLED THE MATRIARCH, HE! KILLED! THE! MATRIARCH!. it doesn't matter the circumstance and some of them don't even know that. She was possessed or infected wasnt she? I thought the ending of the protoss missions in BW somewhat re united the two protoss groups together from their split aeons ago? | ||
|
LongShot27
United States2084 Posts
| ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
Unless we're talking "the only person to see was a Khalai Protoss who was watching through a spyglass and didn't overhear any of the conversation and also he only tuned in after Raszagal's prison was broken so he can't put 2+2 together and realize that she was Kerrigan's prisoner and there may be perfectly valid reasons for killing her" levels of coincidence. | ||
|
LongShot27
United States2084 Posts
On October 18 2015 07:35 pure.Wasted wrote: It doesn't explain how they know he killed the Matriarch, though. If someone was there to witness the deed, they would have also witnessed the context of Zeratul's actions. Unless we're talking "the only person to see was a Khalai Protoss who was watching through a spyglass and didn't overhear any of the conversation and also he only tuned in after Raszagal's prison was broken so he can't put 2+2 together and realize that she was Kerrigan's prisoner and there may be perfectly valid reasons for killing her" levels of coincidence. The Khalai arent the ones who hate him, think. | ||
|
Jenia6109
Russian Federation1612 Posts
| ||
|
Apoteosis
Chile820 Posts
Well played sir ! | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On October 18 2015 06:50 LongShot27 wrote: Read the second line of the post... And your post doesn't actually back your assumption up. There's simply no clear reason for Zeratul's "need" to atone for anything, and no clear reason for the Protoss to be mad at him in the first place. The fact that we have to have a thread to try and hash out why the hell they're so mad at him demonstrates the fact that it's just bad writing, regardless of whether they come up with a reason for it in LotV or not. | ||
|
LongShot27
United States2084 Posts
On October 18 2015 11:00 Stratos_speAr wrote: And your post doesn't actually back your assumption up. There's simply no clear reason for Zeratul's "need" to atone for anything, and no clear reason for the Protoss to be mad at him in the first place. The fact that we have to have a thread to try and hash out why the hell they're so mad at him demonstrates the fact that it's just bad writing, regardless of whether they come up with a reason for it in LotV or not. "I fucked up, I was unable to do my job, I killed the matriarch, I'm going into exile, I'm going to fix this" He literally said this in game, holy shit you can't be this dense. | ||
|
todespolka
221 Posts
On October 17 2015 19:25 Scrubwave wrote: Spare me this excuse. Many games have good stories and just because they're video games doesn't mean devs shouldn't even try. BW had good story, HOTS had terrible. Thats right but comparable to books? Not in the slightest. But it is more a question of media than bad writing. Every media has diffrent advantages. | ||
|
zodijackyl1
18 Posts
On October 17 2015 16:37 hymn wrote: Guys, guys, games have crappy stories, game story makers are not good writers. If you want a good story, read a book. If you want good gameplay, you play games. It's that simple. I've never stumbled upon a game with a story that's engaging like a good book. If someone says he has, tell them to read a novel like The great Gatsby and to tell again if the game story is better. Warcraft 3 had a great story. For that matter the entire Warcraft franchise is a great story. What pisses me off about the prologue campaign is that when Zeratul and friends are fleeing the temple, there is no reason they could not all escape. In Warcraft 3 TFT Maiev Shadowsong could use blink to escape the Tomb of Sargeras by blinking over the fissures blocking her warriors path. Other than her though, everyone else died. That makes sense. Not to mention her warriors said, "May the goddess light our path to their hereaftere." EPIC. Compared to, "FOR AIUR!!!" Which is overused to the point of being cliche. The writing of Warcraft was amazing, and so far SC2 has had an underwhelming storytelling experience, in my opinion. | ||
|
Loanshark
China3094 Posts
Let's use Warcraft 3 as an example. There are individual events in the storyline that don't make much sense, or aren't explained that well. But nobody cared because the story-telling was magnificent. We had scenes like Arthas climbing the Frozen Throne while Uther and Muradin's voices played in the background. Maiev losing all of her friends in the Shadow Temple. The fight between Grom, Thrall, and Mannoroth. Even if you write off games as having inferior stories, it doesn't change the fact that SC2's story-telling is also lacking. No more of these epic scenes from WC3, we get cheesy and cliched dialogue. | ||
|
BEARDiaguz
Australia2362 Posts
On October 18 2015 16:03 zodijackyl1 wrote: Warcraft 3 had a great story. For that matter the entire Warcraft franchise is a great story. What pisses me off about the prologue campaign is that when Zeratul and friends are fleeing the temple, there is no reason they could not all escape. In Warcraft 3 TFT Maiev Shadowsong could use blink to escape the Tomb of Sargeras by blinking over the fissures blocking her warriors path. Other than her though, everyone else died. That makes sense. Not to mention her warriors said, "May the goddess light our path to their hereaftere." EPIC. Compared to, "FOR AIUR!!!" Which is overused to the point of being cliche. The writing of Warcraft was amazing, and so far SC2 has had an underwhelming storytelling experience, in my opinion. I'm not sure if I'd call the writing of Warcraft 3 amazing, I feel you might have your nostalgia goggles on. Though I do consider Arthas's character arc in the RoC Human campaign a rather competent bit of story telling and far and away Blizzard's best attempt at a proper character arc. | ||
|
Jenia6109
Russian Federation1612 Posts
On October 18 2015 22:48 Loanshark wrote: Personally I'd like to draw a distinction between "story" and "story-telling". Story would be just the raw plot, events happening in sequence on a timeline. Story-telling is how the designers let those events unfold before the player, whether it's by using cinematics or gameplay missions. A game can have a weaker story but make up for it in story-telling. Let's use Warcraft 3 as an example. There are individual events in the storyline that don't make much sense, or aren't explained that well. But nobody cared because the story-telling was magnificent. We had scenes like Arthas climbing the Frozen Throne while Uther and Muradin's voices played in the background. Maiev losing all of her friends in the Shadow Temple. The fight between Grom, Thrall, and Mannoroth. Even if you write off games as having inferior stories, it doesn't change the fact that SC2's story-telling is also lacking. No more of these epic scenes from WC3, we get cheesy and cliched dialogue. 1. Actually the story of the SC2 is simplier than story in SC1. But story-telling in SC2 is levels above SC1's story-telling. Personally i think the Heart of the Swarm story-telling is epic and i don't even know the game of this epicness (maybe LotV  ).2. Story-telling always means some technical work. So, the more work the harder to tell the story. For example, the book is the easiest way to tell the story because all you do is write words and reader imagine everything else you wrote. Comics is the next level where you must draw pictures. Story-telling of SC1 and WC3 (and WC2) seems great because of it's simpleness and you can imagine some things by yourself while in SC2 we see a very detailed scenes and have between-missions and therefore have many criticism about these details because they are not always what we imagined to see. And by the way movies have the same problem when people often say that the book was much better than the actual movie. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 18 2015 23:50 Jenia6109 wrote: 1. Actually the story of the SC2 is simplier than story in SC1. But story-telling in SC2 is levels above SC1's story-telling. Personally i think the Heart of the Swarm story-telling is epic and i don't even know the game of this epicness (maybe LotV ).2. Story-telling always means some technical work. So, the more work the harder to tell the story. For example, the book is the easiest way to tell the story because all you do is write words and reader imagine everything else you wrote. Comics is the next level where you must draw pictures. Story-telling of SC1 and WC3 (and WC2) seems great because of it's simpleness and you can imagine some things by yourself while in SC2 we see a very detailed scenes and have between-missions and therefore have many criticism about these details because they are not always what we imagined to see. And by the way movies have the same problem when people often say that the book was much better than the actual movie. So much agreement here. I hate when different mediums gets compared with the same metrics. The books vs movies one especially. Imagine telling someone to write a book. Except each page cost $1,000-$100,000 and each time he rewrites any part of it that it will cost him another $1000-$100,000 to do it. Then tell him he has 6-10 weeks to complete it start to finish. Now tell him that unless his book makes at least double the cost to make it--that he will not only be in debt, but he will not be allowed to write again. Most book writers would be absolutely horrible in those circumstances because they don't work with that type of medium, with those types of deadlines, and with that much at stake. Movies have so much more technical limitations, costs, and deadlines than books. Books are some of the laziest storytelling there is out there mechanically and yet its what elitists go to the most to showcase talent. Its really absurd. Its no different than someone saying that Tetris takes more micro than Broodwar. Well of course it would, if that was the only metric you cared about. Every piece of art has to be understood in the medium its in and peers it has. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On October 18 2015 11:13 LongShot27 wrote: "I fucked up, I was unable to do my job, I killed the matriarch, I'm going into exile, I'm going to fix this" He literally said this in game, holy shit you can't be this dense. How did he fuck up? He killed the Matriarch, but she was infested. Meanwhile, he cleansed Shakuras of Zerg and united the Protoss. What job did he not do? Again, he saved the Protoss by getting rid of the Zerg and uniting the Dark templar and the Protoss from Aiur. The matriarch was infested/mind controlled, so this is a weak reason. Why was he forced into exile? There's nothing to indicate that he was going into exile after the events of BW; the only indications pointed to him going out alone and trying to investigate what the hybrids were about, which makes sense since he's kind of a loner in the first place. What is he going to fix? We have a major threat in the galaxy, but by all accounts, BW ended relatively well for the Protoss civilization (even if Artanis got his ass handed to him). Just because he said it in SC2's absolutely trash writing doesn't mean it's a good reason. One of the biggest problems with SC2's writing is that there's no continuity with BW overall. And no, the books aren't an excuse. If you can't make a logical and consistent story within your video games, then you're a bad writer. 1. Actually the story of the SC2 is simplier than story in SC1. But story-telling in SC2 is levels above SC1's story-telling. Personally i think the Heart of the Swarm story-telling is epic and i don't even know the game of this epicness (maybe LotV ). 2. Story-telling always means some technical work. So, the more work the harder to tell the story. For example, the book is the easiest way to tell the story because all you do is write words and reader imagine everything else you wrote. Comics is the next level where you must draw pictures. Story-telling of SC1 and WC3 (and WC2) seems great because of it's simpleness and you can imagine some things by yourself while in SC2 we see a very detailed scenes and have between-missions and therefore have many criticism about these details because they are not always what we imagined to see. And by the way movies have the same problem when people often say that the book was much better than the actual movie. The way that the story is presented in SC2 is much more sophisticated than in BW, but it doesn't mean it's better. Not only is the writing something a 12-year-old would think up, but the presentation is still bad. I just played through both WoL and HotS again, and it's awful; the cut scenes and cinematics are trashy, action-movie-esque pieces of useless filler, the missions are only marginally more fun and engaging than the BW missions, and the places in between missions where you have all of your dialogue are stale, repetitive, and plagued with the God-awful script that bogs down the entirety of SC2. BW's presentation, while being ridiculously simple, was still done better. the script and VA'ing was very well done, and the mission briefing screens gave you the feeling of being in a conference with some of the most powerful individuals in the sector discussing what was going on, while at the same time leaving enough room for your imagination to fill in the gaps. This isn't to say that games like BW or WC3 had great stories, but they were at least good; they were respectable and could draw you into appreciating it. WoL and HotS (and D3 for that matter) are so incredibly awful that you can't help but thinking "this is fucking ridiculous" at pretty much every turn. Just go out there and read any of the countless story reviews and they cover it so thoroughly that it's barely worth mentioning anymore. | ||
|
Scrubwave
Poland1786 Posts
| ||
| ||
