|
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=399392¤tpage=23
edit: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=402194 - HotS datamine.
The HotS forum closed today! I know they were telling us it was gonna happen for a while, but I didn't know it would be so soon. This topic in discussion is still alive, indeed it was the most recently discussed topic in the HotS forum before it closed.
So where we stand is that you have people like me, who thought the story was garbage, and other people, who say it was great clean fun, and people somewhere in the middle, apologists and shruggists.
A lot of great posts in that thread that you should read, including:
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.
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.
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? 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? 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 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?
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?
Why do the game's antagonists have no speaking lines that say anything other than "you suck and you'll never beat me?"
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?
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.
And then you have posts like these...
Xizore wrote:
This thread is a great example of how good the story was because it has inspired us to come and share our feelings and opinions. Art should inspire these feelings and opinions and I say bravo to you, Blizzard!
iLikeRain wrote:You may find that a good story requires plot twists, lots of deep meaningful conversations, while others prefer simpleness, a predictable story with stereotypical characters. But does that make it any less good simply because they have a different opinion and taste?
P.S. Just out of curiosity, I've created a poll in an effort to gauge peoples' feelings on the story of HotS. Remember, this poll is just for the story of the game. Characters, themes, plotlines, writing and dialogue. This is not about the gameplay itself, which even the direst of haters will admit was good.
Poll: Was the HotS story good?It was decent, better than WoL. I enjoyed the story, in spite of its flaws. (537) 34% It was pretty bad, worse than WoL. It was cheesy, predictable, poorly written, and scarcely bearable (418) 26% It was consistent with WoL, semi-adequate storytelling but it was not memorable or special. (261) 17% Yes! It had strong, believable characters, an enjoyable narrative arc, and solid writing. (213) 13% Worst story/writing Blizz has ever produced. A hot mess of bad writing and poor narrative decisions. (149) 9% 1578 total votes Your vote: Was the HotS story good? (Vote): Yes! It had strong, believable characters, an enjoyable narrative arc, and solid writing.
(Vote): It was decent, better than WoL. I enjoyed the story, in spite of its flaws.
(Vote): It was consistent with WoL, semi-adequate storytelling but it was not memorable or special.
(Vote): It was pretty bad, worse than WoL. It was cheesy, predictable, poorly written, and scarcely bearable
(Vote): Worst story/writing Blizz has ever produced. A hot mess of bad writing and poor narrative decisions.
|
#Zoomacroom
absolutely cringeworthy story as i already said in the other thread
|
I just wanted to respod to that 3rd quotation because it was directed at me:
iLikeRain wrote:This is some of the worst logic I have ever read on a forum. So you're basically comparing whether someone finds a story good with someone who genuinely believes in flying spaghetti monsters?
One of those is the belief of supernatural beings without any tangible evidence, while the other is valuing different parameters in what constitutes "good". You may find that a good story requires plot twists, lots of deep meaningful conversations, while others prefer simpleness, a predictable story with stereotypical characters. But does that make it any less good simply because they have a different opinion and taste?
If you really judge people negatively merely because their opinion of enjoyment is vastly different than yours, I feel sorry for you and those around you.
"while others prefer simpleness, a predictable story with stereotypical characters. But does that make it any less good simply because they have a different opinion and taste?"
No, it's absolutely fine, if the people we're talking about are infants and the media we're discussing is designed for them. But when human beings grow up to be adults, they have a civic duty to promote good taste. It is morally unethical for people to like bad things. Corruption, torture, murder, child pornography, The Jersey Shore, The Heart of the Swarm storyline, all these things should be shunned by humanity and to do otherwise is hurtful to everyone.
I'm being facetious here, but the point I'm trying to make is that there is more at stake than just "personal preferences" when talking about good and bad art.
If you really don't judge anything on its merit and regard trite garbage as meaningful and worthwhile as anything else, then I feel sorry for you, those around you, for me, those around me, children of the future, my cat, my dog, the sidewalk, trees, destructible rocks, dignity, literary canon,...
|
Well I'm just going to say I disagree. I think the story was much better than WoL and D3, and the characters were, for the most part, written well.
|
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.
|
in my humble opinion the story was absolutely terrible... if not total trash.
when nowadays you have cool storylines and plots like uncharted, deus ex etc. it's just sad to think that's the best blizzard has done for SC2, considering BW story was actually good.
but i am not surprised as i was expecting it - i lost interest in the single-player aspect of SC2 pretty much with WoL - i thought that was pretty awful too, and since then had super low expectations..
whoever handled story and the b.net design at blizzard should make everyone a favor and get a job somewhere else -,-
|
Kerrigan: A drone? Do you know what could happen if I take control of a Zerg??
Valerian: I know, I know, but we are in a very controlled environment.
Now, build a hatchery
Now, build a spawning pool!
<facepalm>
|
I've never been a fan of trilogies, 2 out of 3 are usually just cash grabs. In Blizzards case, the audience has matured and they should adjust to this. It seems like they wants to be accessible by more people so ops for an easy to follow storyline without growing too complex in this universe for anyone to pick up and go, obvious villans and heros with fairly obvious intentions. So accidental discovery of the game is another thing they have to address, at any point it has to seems understandable so the friend walking in is like oh cool I can follow this.
The magic of blizzard stories wore off a long time ago, I don't play bother with it anymore because the quality of the game is high so yea that's why I buy their games although it would be nice to have a kick ass stories that blew my mind from start to finish like the origional Deus Ex
|
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.
Well, one of the climactic moments of BW is Jim's anger after Fenix is killed:
I'll see you dead for this, Kerrigan! For Fenix, and all the others who got caught between you and your mad quest for power! It may not be tomorow, darlin', it may not even happen with an army at my back. But rest assured; I'm the man who's gonna kill you one day. I'll be seeing you.
Basically all off the SC2 plot is subverting this, which sucks because it was such a cool scene.
|
I think biggest thing for me story wise is it seems like the writers didn't understand what was so appealing about the story in SC. Each campaign reflected upon and detailed the race it was focused on, not just the characters. The amazing thing is this somehow led to better character development in SC than SC2 because the writers for SC2 seem to have tunnel vision for Kerrigan/Raynor. Even in the Zerg/Terran campaigns of SC there was a ton about Tassadar/Zeratul. There were also lots of interesting characters on the side with their own agendas - Mengsk, the cerebrates, Duke, Fenix. In SC2 these characters are relegated to guys you buy stuff from on the ship and barely do anything else. In SC these characters had agency and often did stuff you didn't necessarily agree with, which created some actual depth and moral ambiguity, as well as giving the player a better understanding of what makes a Zerg a Zerg, or what Terran culture is like, or the political battles being waged by Protoss. There's almost none of that in SC2 and it's disappointing.
|
On March 15 2013 07:35 Phay wrote:
Kerrigan: A drone? Do you know what could happen if I take control of a Zerg??
Valerian: I know, I know, but we are in a very controlled environment.
Now, build a hatchery
Now, build a spawning pool!
<facepalm>
Valerian is written as arrogant for the entire series, is it surprsing that he gets in over his head?
|
Jesus tittyfucking christ I can't follow the train of thought that leads people to call others idiots and telling them they should be ashamed of themselves for having different tastes or enjoying things you didn't.
Do the people who're actually getting aggressive about this really feel they're so intellectually superior? Bloody hell
I can understand if people didn't like it, but some people are taking it waaaaaaay too far. I remember some youtube video that was something like "It's OK to not like things, but don't be a dick about it"
That pretty much sums this up.
|
On March 15 2013 07:41 Alzadar 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. Well, one of the climactic moments of BW is Jim's anger after Fenix is killed: I'll see you dead for this, Kerrigan! For Fenix, and all the others who got caught between you and your mad quest for power! It may not be tomorow, darlin', it may not even happen with an army at my back. But rest assured; I'm the man who's gonna kill you one day. I'll be seeing you. Basically all off the SC2 plot is subverting this, which sucks because it was such a cool scene.
Yeah well, it's a different deal with the gun in his hand, about to kill the woman he loves, even if she/it is actually zerg. He always loved her, I don't know, I don't see it as retarded as most people here seem to do. I wouldn't have minded the other way, but this one also makes sense to me.
|
On March 15 2013 07:47 SgtCoDFish wrote:
Jesus tittyfucking christ I can't follow the train of thought that leads people to call others idiots and telling them they should be ashamed of themselves for having different tastes or enjoying things you didn't.
Do the people who're actually getting aggressive about this really feel they're so intellectually superior? Bloody hell
I can understand if people didn't like it, but some people are taking it waaaaaaay too far. I remember some youtube video that was something like "It's OK to not like things, but don't be a dick about it"
That pretty much sums this up.
The story was just that fucking bad. It was so bad it elicited this kind of emotional response from people.
|
On March 15 2013 07:48 GreyKnight wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 07:47 SgtCoDFish wrote:
Jesus tittyfucking christ I can't follow the train of thought that leads people to call others idiots and telling them they should be ashamed of themselves for having different tastes or enjoying things you didn't.
Do the people who're actually getting aggressive about this really feel they're so intellectually superior? Bloody hell
I can understand if people didn't like it, but some people are taking it waaaaaaay too far. I remember some youtube video that was something like "It's OK to not like things, but don't be a dick about it"
That pretty much sums this up. The story was just that fucking bad. It was so bad it elicited this kind of emotional response from people.
Nah, bitching is fine. Insulting people for liking something is unjustifiable. If you're so adult you think this story is retarded and blah blah blah, you're adult enough to control your response to something.
|
On March 15 2013 07:49 mordk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 07:48 GreyKnight wrote:On March 15 2013 07:47 SgtCoDFish wrote:
Jesus tittyfucking christ I can't follow the train of thought that leads people to call others idiots and telling them they should be ashamed of themselves for having different tastes or enjoying things you didn't.
Do the people who're actually getting aggressive about this really feel they're so intellectually superior? Bloody hell
I can understand if people didn't like it, but some people are taking it waaaaaaay too far. I remember some youtube video that was something like "It's OK to not like things, but don't be a dick about it"
That pretty much sums this up. The story was just that fucking bad. It was so bad it elicited this kind of emotional response from people. Nah, bitching is fine. Insulting people for liking something is unjustifiable.
Justifiable or not, the story is horrible and if you think something is bad you spend your time to make sure nobody supports it so things change.
|
On March 15 2013 07:48 GreyKnight wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 07:47 SgtCoDFish wrote:
Jesus tittyfucking christ I can't follow the train of thought that leads people to call others idiots and telling them they should be ashamed of themselves for having different tastes or enjoying things you didn't.
Do the people who're actually getting aggressive about this really feel they're so intellectually superior? Bloody hell
I can understand if people didn't like it, but some people are taking it waaaaaaay too far. I remember some youtube video that was something like "It's OK to not like things, but don't be a dick about it"
That pretty much sums this up. The story was just that fucking bad. It was so bad it elicited this kind of emotional response from people.
If the story was Kerigan fucking dressing up zerglings in skirts and throwing them at Mengsk's palace it still wouldn't be necessary to call other people idiots for having a different opinion of it.
|
On March 15 2013 07:50 GreyKnight wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 07:49 mordk wrote:On March 15 2013 07:48 GreyKnight wrote:On March 15 2013 07:47 SgtCoDFish wrote:
Jesus tittyfucking christ I can't follow the train of thought that leads people to call others idiots and telling them they should be ashamed of themselves for having different tastes or enjoying things you didn't.
Do the people who're actually getting aggressive about this really feel they're so intellectually superior? Bloody hell
I can understand if people didn't like it, but some people are taking it waaaaaaay too far. I remember some youtube video that was something like "It's OK to not like things, but don't be a dick about it"
That pretty much sums this up. The story was just that fucking bad. It was so bad it elicited this kind of emotional response from people. Nah, bitching is fine. Insulting people for liking something is unjustifiable. Justifiable or not, the story is horrible and if you think something is bad you spend your time to make sure nobody supports it so things change.
Still no need to insult people who liked it. No matter how you want to dress it up.
|
video game story != book/movie story
I play games for fun and the campaign was fun.
|
On March 15 2013 07:51 mordk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 07:50 GreyKnight wrote:On March 15 2013 07:49 mordk wrote:On March 15 2013 07:48 GreyKnight wrote:On March 15 2013 07:47 SgtCoDFish wrote:
Jesus tittyfucking christ I can't follow the train of thought that leads people to call others idiots and telling them they should be ashamed of themselves for having different tastes or enjoying things you didn't.
Do the people who're actually getting aggressive about this really feel they're so intellectually superior? Bloody hell
I can understand if people didn't like it, but some people are taking it waaaaaaay too far. I remember some youtube video that was something like "It's OK to not like things, but don't be a dick about it"
That pretty much sums this up. The story was just that fucking bad. It was so bad it elicited this kind of emotional response from people. Nah, bitching is fine. Insulting people for liking something is unjustifiable. Justifiable or not, the story is horrible and if you think something is bad you spend your time to make sure nobody supports it so things change. Still no need to insult people who liked it. No matter how you want to dress it up.
It is if you think it can stop things. People insult racists don't they?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
