It looks to me like the whole story was written by some WoW story writers. They can make anyone come back to life whenever they choose and completely disregard how characters acted in the past. After playing too many years of WoW myself the story was complete and utter crap after maybe the original game, but who payed any attention to the WoW story anyway...
[Spoilers] Disappointed with the campaign... - Page 11
Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
bertolo
United States133 Posts
It looks to me like the whole story was written by some WoW story writers. They can make anyone come back to life whenever they choose and completely disregard how characters acted in the past. After playing too many years of WoW myself the story was complete and utter crap after maybe the original game, but who payed any attention to the WoW story anyway... | ||
Fanatic-Templar
Canada5811 Posts
And hell, while I say that StarCraft's storyline was great, it's not in any objective term. It had a simple and effective storyline, but all the crimes that Wings of Liberty has been accused of having were also present in StarCraft. No, I loved that game's story for the charm I've always found in sci-fi, the thrill of discovery. Back in StarCraft, everything was new, we slowly embarked on a journey of discovery for the world and its people. That was its great quality, and something that really can never be replicated again. It's also why I enjoy starting a lot of sci-fi series, even outright awful ones, but never end them, or even really follow them for more than a season. So yeah, from what I've seen it's not that most of the criticisms about Wings of Liberty are unfounded - though some are - it's that people have convinced themselves that these don't apply to the previous instalments. | ||
hitthat
Poland2203 Posts
On August 11 2010 02:51 bertolo wrote: I agree with most of the points of the OP. Although actually playing some of the missions were fun, the plot was a big let down, especially at the end. It looks to me like the whole story was written by some WoW story writers. They can make anyone come back to life whenever they choose and completely disregard how characters acted in the past. After playing too many years of WoW myself the story was complete and utter crap after maybe the original game, but who payed any attention to the WoW story anyway... Yeah, f.e. you can like all the "Overmind quest to free zerg race" as long as you like orcs. Becouse that's what zergs are already becoming ("but we are becoming much much more...orcish"). This plot is the same shity stuff as all the quests to realese orcs from Manaroth's control or whatever that fat mofo's name was. | ||
ericfordh
United States8 Posts
On August 11 2010 03:09 hitthat wrote: Yeah, f.e. you can like all the "Overmind quest to free zerg race" as long as you like orcs. Becouse that's what zergs are already becoming ("but we are becoming much much more...orcish"). This plot is the same shity stuff as all the quests to realese orcs from Manaroth's control or whatever that fat mofo's name was. Exactly. Between Broodwar and SC2, the Zerg and Protoss had their cajones removed and turned into these touchy-feely "spiritual" races with feelings. Zeratul's voice rose a couple octaves, and the Overmind became the good-guy who didn't really want to conquer and assimilate the Protoss. Heck, he could've fooled me back in SC1! The idea of the Zerg being "slaves" makes me cringe. Most of the Zerg strains are just wild beasts. Without their overriding purpose, none of them is going to start writing treatises on political philosophy. In fact, as I recall in Broodwar, without the Overmind and before Kerrigan took over, the Zerg were basically just killing each other. What I would love to see in the expansions is for Zeratul's vision of the future to turn out to be a lie designed to mislead him. I doubt that will happen, though. I was really digging WoL until I hit the Prophecy missions, which felt like WarCraft 3 with StarCraft units. I'm hoping the expansions won't expand on that trend. I feel like the core problem Blizzard has is with bringing back the xel'naga and making the Zerg-Protoss hybrid. It was obvious from the start that once the Zerg assimilated the Protoss, it was game-over, that was the doomsday scenario. That's what everyone wants to see, but once it happens that's the end. So Blizzard has to do this third-way deal where there are hybrids, but the races are still distinct, but since none of them can be as evil as the hybrids, the Zerg have to become good, or at least sort of good. Which isn't fun. And the Protoss have to become these victims fighting for survival, which isn't fun either, because in SC1 they were these bad-a$$ authority figures, full of confidence, who were merely caught off-guard by the power of the Zerg and had to adjust to a new situation. | ||
Vimsey
United Kingdom2235 Posts
Its a thing you can fall into too much reading fantasy and sci fi. People often ignore the fact that someone can use magic or that warp drives work and start quibbling about how more basic things are "not realistic". Either stop reading or listening to this material or embrace it for what it is. | ||
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
We know that Mengsk and Duran are working together. We know that Duran is working for the Dark Voice and that he is behind the Hybrids. We also know that Hybrids need the Queen of Blades dead to rule the Zerg and defeat all the rest. So Tycus reporting on Raynor's movements is not an issue. Once Hybrids get control of Zerg Terrans will be wiped out anyways. Only thing important is killing Kerrigan. That is why Tycus tries to talk to Raynor multiple times about killing her and in the end tries to do it himself. We are not sure how he was planning to celebrate his freedom after he killed her there as there was no way to come out of that alive. As for Raynor not doing something about Tycus before the last scene that is a bit strange but can be explained by him being a big softy (which he is :D) and waiting for signs of betrayal. As for Raynor boarding the Dominion fleet flagship, that was a stupid move but we know Valerian didn't really want him dead so they probably let him board. Assault on Char is not that strange, they didn't come there to defeat the Zerg, and many of the Zerg forces are attacking the Terran planets. They also probably came as a surprise for Kerrigan and then in a bold move sabotaged a huge part of her swarm in that area. In the last mission we still see that they cannot survive, but only hold on for a while (until the artifact fully charges). Mengsk being like that in the game is not much different then Mengsk after he comes into power in SC1 and in BW. He basically gives proclamations and does nothing of import (Raynor and Protoss does the most). For those wanting a really serious game those news casts kind of stand out. For me personally they were as funny as any good trash movie (I guess you need to know how to appreciate a good trash movie). As for not getting to finish Mengsk off, well I guess we need Mengsk for the next two parts of the story. The ending with Kerrigan being saved is what is needed to stop what Overmind saw. If they killed her then the next two parts of the story would have been pointless. The only question that stand is how is Valerian connected with Duran as we know Duran is pretending to be the head scientist of Moebius Foundation while Valerian is the owner/leader. | ||
s[O]rry
Canada398 Posts
i.e. A dropship full of hellions dropped into your drone line while you are out there expanding and spreading creep? While the success of the mission, I didn't totally agree with, since I was a fan of the whole "Bad guys win" ending to StarCraft, as everyone has said, this is just part 1. Blizzard hasn't let me down before, I can wait and see what happens. And on a side note... The Mengsk wanting Kerrigan dead, and not Raynor, is the best way to rebuild his reputation. If Kerrigan dies, there is not much of a way even the news can spin it other than "Humanity wins. Zerg loses. Mengsk is doing SOMETHING right, saving what he can and all." The mind control is certainly possible, but I am personally of the idea Mengsk will come out with some semblance of a plan. He may not be as sharp as he once was, but there are clear indications that he is still capable. All in all, it always ends up a personal opinion. Like it or don't until we all have the full story. Until then, take from it what you will. | ||
hack41
21 Posts
Alright, let's get into it. A lot of people seem to have mixed feelings about the campaign, and many excellent explanations have been given in this and in the other threads. But lots of people can't quite seem to put their finger on what's wrong, and even more people seem to rise up in defense of the game, and they appear, more often than not, very annoyed at the criticism. First I'd like to clarify what it is that people are really criticising, and why the almost aggressively defensive stance of some people is not really justified. Major points of defense are: "you have to wait until all three games are out", "SC1/BW had just as bad a story", "SC1/BW were just as unrealistic", "you remember the past incorrectly", "read the expanded universe, it'll all make sense", "it's just a video game". Well, all of those retorts are missing the point. Why? Because (I claim) the big problem with Wings of Liberty, which causes people to feel unimpressed by the campaign, is not a problem of story, of plot holes, of realism or of unresolved questions. It is first and foremost a problem of execution. The story is really not bad - what is terrible is the way the story was executed. The story that you are trying to tell is really not necessarily all that important, but what is hugely important is how you tell the story. Perhaps SC1/BW didn't have the most ingenious and mind-boggling story, but it was brilliantly executed. The pacing was just right, and there was always something happening that kept the plot moving forward. In Wings of Liberty, people complain that the narrative isn't tight and that there is no focus. Even though the backstory may well make perfect sense, the narrative is terribly paced. Too short, yet too long Blizzard claimed that the campaign would consist of 26-30 Terran-only missions, because that many missions were needed for an "epic tale". But this is total nonsense! Out of the 26 playable missions, only five or six matter for the final resolution! The rest are nothing but glorified filler missions. People say "it's too short" because very little happens that ultimately matters, but at the same time it's very long because there are lots of ultimately boring missions. Don't get me wrong - each single mission is perfectly designed gameplay-wise. Just in the overarching narrative most of those missions end up as needless padding. Too many choices, yet too few choices Another complaint is the choice system. We are given several choices, the order in which to play the missions and even two minor story choices. But those choices have no implications, none whatsoever! So why did we get to make them in the first place? And the choice of order in which to play the missions seriously undermines the pacing of the plot. Finally, as a personal point of taste, I always thought that the way in which you stayed in orbit of one planet for a couple of missions in SC1 and then moved on to another planet gave the universe a certain sense of depth. But now we're randomly jumping around between worlds, and no two missions actually happen on the same world (apart from beginning and end) and there's no sense of travelling. So the entire midsection of the campaign just feels like we're visiting a couple of different towns in the same metropolitan area. Why we are disappointed Now let's come to the reason why lots of people are not just disappointed, but also feel the urge to speak up. It is not because we "just like to whine" or "bash Blizzard", and I daresay that it is not "because some people always complain". The point here is that it would have been very well possible, and rather easy, too, to make the campaign a lot better. And I don't mean that the story would need any changing. Whether or not you like the story is a different matter, and indeed that is a subjective matter. The main complaint people have (at least I allege that that's their main complaint) is not about a design choice which required a compromise and would only satisfy half the people. The main complaint is about the quality of the writing and the execution of the plot. You could have the exact same story, but told it differently so that the campaign would be tightly paced, strongly focused and have a rewarding pay-off. You want an alliance with half the imperial fleet? Make Raynor work for it and deserve it! You want to bring Kerrigan back? Make it a challenge that we know and fight for! You want a traitor in our midst? Don't give it away in the introduction! If you had made the writing better, then people who already love the game would still love it, but those of us who expected a bit more would have been a lot more impressed. Please don't be annoyed at our criticism - we are not threatening you! Let me just make this point again, so that nobody comes up and tells me to wait for Episodes 2 and 3 or read the books. I don't have a problem with possible plot holes. I don't need everything resolved. I don't even care if Mutalisks flap their wings in space. All I want is a story which rewards my investment in the main characters. The drama comes from our support for the main characters against opposition, and the reward from their eventual overcoming of said opposition. The way Wings of Liberty was told, most of the game time I spent on it did nothing to bring about the eventual resolution. (For that matter, indulge me for a little thought experiment: Couldn't the entire campaign as it currently stands have been told from Valerian's perspective? He knows where the artifacts are, he knows what to do with them, and he could get Raynor in as a cameo for the final Char assault. Six missions, done.) The fact that this is just one game in a series is no excuse not to have a tight, rewarding narrative. If you compare this to the original games, you will see the difference. People who complain that they didn't get three campaigns are (in my opinion) confused about what bothered them. It wasn't the fact that they didn't get to play three campaigns. It was because the campaign they got left them unsatisfied. It's because after ploughing through 20 missions, the end result is just handed to you and there is no pay-off. Maybe the creators realised that playing through the plot didn't feel rewarding to the player, and they decided to bolt on a reward in the form of "achievements"... (The cynic would say that this is analogous to how the campaign was bolted on to the main game.) Rather than having 20 missions build up and lead up to the final mission, 20 missions lead up to shiny pixels on your profile page. Some comparison and random bits Now how does this compare to the original games? In SC1/BW, we had a total of about 56 missions, but they were told from many different perspectives: The Confederacy's magistrate, the Son's of Korhal, Raynor's group, the Overmind, the Protoss conclave, the UED, the Queen of Blades, and Zeratul. Nobody outstayed their welcome, and everything that happened moved the plot forward. Oftentimes, people were caught up in events larger than themselves, swept along and confused - just like real life. A lot was happening, but there was no one single grand master plan and no ultimate goal. Nonetheless, the narration was extremely tight and gripping. By contrast, Wings of Liberty has a single goal, foreshadowed after Mission 1 and dragging on until Mission 26. We have one single, boring perspective on a single, boring man doing boring stuff that has no relevance, until he's visited by the plot and taken by the hand to finish the game. Let's run another quick comparison. A typical SC1/BW mission would take, say, one hour? One and a half? Assuming a 'normal', random customer, not an RTS expert. Some Broodwar missions may even take more than that. By comparison, the typical Wings of Liberty mission is maybe 20 minutes, with a few ones taking 30 or 40 minutes. So, very roughly, the ~30 missions of Wings of Liberty take just as long as 10 typical missions taken from SC1/BW! But while those ten missions would keep you intensely engaged, often on the same world for several missions, and all the while leading up to the finale, where the entire weight of the past is brought to bear on the player, the WoL missions jerk you from location to location every 20 minutes, with no time to really start caring about any one of them. In more cynical words, rather than maturing with the audience and building more complex missions and narratives, Blizzard chose to target the current generation of teenagers and cater for a dramatically reduced attention span. At the end of the WoL campaign, a lot of time has passed on the clock, but we don't really remember how and why, and thus we helplessly ask for more. Art from adversity Let me close this with an observation that has been made elsewhere and many times before: The concept of "art from adversity" - difficult circumstances make for good art. At the time of SC1/BW, technology was limited, so we got talking heads for briefings and extra story development during the missions. And that turned out great! It kept the pace up and the missions interesting (without requiring every mission to have a special kind of gimmick). Now, with infinite computing power, we get long briefing scenes on the ship, but do those really improve the narrative? The little ingame story events have disappeared, in any case. Also, the original game had to break into a non-existent market, so they had to put all the campaigns into it. As a result, we have 10 well-paced, tightly focused missions for each faction, and again the result was great. Now, with the laurels from millions of fans and the guaranteed sales, Blizzard didn't have any pressure to convince or please anyone. I honestly believe that the statement "We need 26 missions for the full epicness of the Terran campaign" was an outright fabrication! As I said above, 6-10 missions would have been totally sufficient for the Terrans, and none of the other missions matter! So again, the temptation to be able to sell three games rather than one, and the liberty to be able to do so, made the result worse. Perhaps the opening cutscene of Wings of Liberty was a good giveaway of what to expect: We spend long, drawn-out minutes on watching in the greatest detail some technical design, but in the end the entire cutscene only had one very small point of content. Very polished, with massive attention to detail, and no content. Just like the entire game. Let's just end this in a quick test: What do you feel when you think about StarCraft and Broodwar? If the answer is "nothing in particular", the by all means disregard what people have to say here, close this window and enjoy the game. If the answer was something to the extent of a warm tingling with great memories and epic moments, then please answer question 2: Which was your most memorable moment in Wings of Liberty? | ||
RedSword
Canada53 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On August 12 2010 01:23 hack41 wrote: I was fascinated by this thread, which discusses a lot of the reactions I felt when going through and completing the campaign. I admit that I haven't read this thread in full yet, but I did read cover-to-cover the corresponding threads on the EU and Battle.net forums, which are arguably the longest threads there! In fact, let me preface this by giving the relevant links, lest I appear to claim originality here.
Alright, let's get into it. A lot of people seem to have mixed feelings about the campaign, and many excellent explanations have been given in this and in the other threads. But lots of people can't quite seem to put their finger on what's wrong, and even more people seem to rise up in defense of the game, and they appear, more often than not, very annoyed at the criticism. First I'd like to clarify what it is that people are really criticising, and why the almost aggressively defensive stance of some people is not really justified. Major points of defense are: "you have to wait until all three games are out", "SC1/BW had just as bad a story", "SC1/BW were just as unrealistic", "you remember the past incorrectly", "read the expanded universe, it'll all make sense", "it's just a video game". Well, all of those retorts are missing the point. Why? Because (I claim) the big problem with Wings of Liberty, which causes people to feel unimpressed by the campaign, is not a problem of story, of plot holes, of realism or of unresolved questions. It is first and foremost a problem of execution. The story is really not bad - what is terrible is the way the story was executed. The story that you are trying to tell is really not necessarily all that important, but what is hugely important is how you tell the story. Perhaps SC1/BW didn't have the most ingenious and mind-boggling story, but it was brilliantly executed. The pacing was just right, and there was always something happening that kept the plot moving forward. In Wings of Liberty, people complain that the narrative isn't tight and that there is no focus. Even though the backstory may well make perfect sense, the narrative is terribly paced. Too short, yet too long Blizzard claimed that the campaign would consist of 26-30 Terran-only missions, because that many missions were needed for an "epic tale". But this is total nonsense! Out of the 26 playable missions, only five or six matter for the final resolution! The rest are nothing but glorified filler missions. People say "it's too short" because very little happens that ultimately matters, but at the same time it's very long because there are lots of ultimately boring missions. Don't get me wrong - each single mission is perfectly designed gameplay-wise. Just in the overarching narrative most of those missions end up as needless padding. Too many choices, yet too few choices Another complaint is the choice system. We are given several choices, the order in which to play the missions and even two minor story choices. But those choices have no implications, none whatsoever! So why did we get to make them in the first place? And the choice of order in which to play the missions seriously undermines the pacing of the plot. Finally, as a personal point of taste, I always thought that the way in which you stayed in orbit of one planet for a couple of missions in SC1 and then moved on to another planet gave the universe a certain sense of depth. But now we're randomly jumping around between worlds, and no two missions actually happen on the same world (apart from beginning and end) and there's no sense of travelling. So the entire midsection of the campaign just feels like we're visiting a couple of different towns in the same metropolitan area. Why we are disappointed Now let's come to the reason why lots of people are not just disappointed, but also feel the urge to speak up. It is not because we "just like to whine" or "bash Blizzard", and I daresay that it is not "because some people always complain". The point here is that it would have been very well possible, and rather easy, too, to make the campaign a lot better. And I don't mean that the story would need any changing. Whether or not you like the story is a different matter, and indeed that is a subjective matter. The main complaint people have (at least I allege that that's their main complaint) is not about a design choice which required a compromise and would only satisfy half the people. The main complaint is about the quality of the writing and the execution of the plot. You could have the exact same story, but told it differently so that the campaign would be tightly paced, strongly focused and have a rewarding pay-off. You want an alliance with half the imperial fleet? Make Raynor work for it and deserve it! You want to bring Kerrigan back? Make it a challenge that we know and fight for! You want a traitor in our midst? Don't give it away in the introduction! Let me just make this point again, so that nobody comes up and tells me to wait for Episodes 2 and 3 or read the books. I don't have a problem with possible plot holes. I don't need everything resolved. I don't even care if Mutalisks flap their wings in space. All I want is a story which rewards my investment in the main characters. The drama comes from our support for the main characters against opposition, and the reward from their eventual overcoming of said opposition. The way Wings of Liberty was told, most of the game time I spent on it did nothing to bring about the eventual resolution. (For that matter, indulge me for a little thought experiment: Couldn't the entire campaign as it currently stands have been told from Valerian's perspective? He knows where the artifacts are, he knows what to do with them, and he could get Raynor in as a cameo for the final Char assault. Six missions, done.) The fact that this is just one game in a series is no excuse not to have a tight, rewarding narrative. If you compare this to the original games, you will see the difference. Some comparison and random bits Now how does this compare to the original games? In SC1/BW, we had a total of about 56 missions, but they were told from many different perspectives: The Confederacy's magistrate, the Son's of Korhal, Raynor's group, the Overmind, the Protoss conclave, the UED, the Queen of Blades, and Zeratul. Nobody outstayed their welcome, and everything that happened moved the plot forward. Oftentimes, people were caught up in events larger than themselves, swept along and confused - just like real life. A lot was happening, but there was no one single grand master plan and no ultimate goal. Nonetheless, the narration was extremely tight and gripping. By contrast, Wings of Liberty has a single goal, foreshadowed after Mission 1 and dragging on until Mission 26. We have one single, boring perspective on a single, boring man doing boring stuff that has no relevance, until he's visited by the plot and taken by the hand to finish the game. Art from adversity Let me close this with an observation that has been made elsewhere and many times before: The concept of "art from adversity" - difficult circumstances make for good art. At the time of SC1/BW, technology was limited, so we got talking heads for briefings and extra story development during the missions. And that turned out great! It kept the pace up and the missions interesting (without requiring every mission to have a special kind of gimmick). Now, with infinite computing power, we get long briefing scenes on the ship, but do those really improve the narrative? The little ingame story events have disappeared, in any case. Also, the original game had to break into a non-existent market, so they had to put all the campaigns into it. As a result, we have 10 well-paced, tightly focused missions for each faction, and again the result was great. Now, with the laurels from millions of fans and the guaranteed sales, Blizzard didn't have any pressure to convince or please anyone. I honestly believe that the statement "We need 26 missions for the full epicness of the Terran campaign" was an outright fabrication! As I said above, 6-10 missions would have been totally sufficient for the Terrans, and none of the other missions matter! So again, the temptation to be able to sell three games rather than one, and the liberty to be able to do so, made the result worse. Perhaps the opening cutscene of Wings of Liberty was a good giveaway of what to expect: We spend long, drawn-out minutes on watching in the greatest detail some technical design, but in the end the entire cutscene only had one very small point of content. Very polished, with massive attention to detail, and no content. Just like the entire game. Let's just end this in a quick test: What do you feel when you think about StarCraft and Broodwar? If the answer is "nothing in particular", the by all means disregard what people have to say here, close this window and enjoy the game. If the answer was something to the extent of a warm tingling with great memories and epic moments, then please answer question 2: Which was your most memorable moment in Wings of Liberty? Totally agree. Mission needs something more. New POV too; Jimmy + ~Zeratul in 29 missions is too few. I have to say I didn't realised Mutas are wooshing their wings in space :#. I also think the faces could be more expressive, like in dragon age (not THAT much, but still... the scientist girl is zzzzzz). | ||
Madkipz
Norway1643 Posts
Which was your most memorable moment in Wings of Liberty? + Show Spoiler + Raynor: you don't have to do this Kerrigan... Kerrigan: Jim, stop the knight in shining armor act, it suits you sometimes but I have to do this... The full flashback movie left an nice impression on me and maybe just maybe the protoss part of wings of liberty but still nothing as memorable as sc1 ;P but by all accounts the most memorable in entire starcraft universe: to be at the antagonist side, to heed the overminds every command and then realise you where guarding kerrigan. It was my first "Im on the dark side" experience so naturally its still there in the back of my head. | ||
ericfordh
United States8 Posts
| ||
nemanja1503
Serbia49 Posts
Such is the scale of Wings of Liberty's storyline that Chris Metzen believes that it would take at least three novels to tell it were it in written form, though nine would be the preferred number. Lol? Another of their mistakes as some have pointed out is overmarketing their game (as seen above), they raised our standards and then had little to show for it. | ||
hack41
21 Posts
If you think that to be fabrication hack41 read this: [...] Lol? Another of their mistakes as some have pointed out is overmarketing their game (as seen above), they raised our standards and then had little to show for it. Haha - pity the poor soul who would have to read those nine novels! Does anyone remember Wing Commander? Poor Chris Roberts. He made one of the best video game series in the universe, but he was such a total, utter, miserable failure as a screenwriter and director for the film. Just because you create a universe does not make you master of all media, alas. Re: overmarketing -- Not sure if that's what you meant, but this forum post is in my opinion an excellent analysis. I'm bringing it up because it ties in with my "art from adversity" statement: In the original SC1/BW, the visual style (i.e. sprites) was a result of the technical limitations. But lo! and behold, it works great for televising. In the new world of 2010 where "everything is possible", we get a new, soft, 3D aesthetic, which - according to that fine post - is not well suited for TV broadcasting. Now I don't know how true that is, but it would constitute another example where greater freedom is used for greater fuckupery. Likewise, tacking on the achievement system shows how everything is the wrong way round. In SC/BW, we played and were rewarded for our investment in the plot by the plot's resolution. In WoL, the rewards are physically tacked on as arbitrary achievements that have to be fulfilled literally and for their own sake. This is perfectly analogous to how SC/BW was sold as a good game and became an esport, and how WoL is sold as an esport because... damn you, it's an esport, get it? You may have noticed that much of my post was inspired by Mr Plinkett's Phantom Menace review, but the parallels between Phantom Menace/A New Hope and Wings of Liberty/StarCraft+Broodwar are just striking. Down to the comparison of the intro sequences: SC: Stuff blows up (2:19) BW: More stuff blows up (3:46). WoL: A guy gets dressed (4:30). | ||
ghostunit
61 Posts
The story's garbage, period. You can't get around it with presentation, though that was terrible too. Briefly, the story is bad because: 0.- There's actually barely any story to tell. The only things that happen are: ...a) Introduction of new "big bad". --lame ...b) Kerrigan goes back to human form. --incredibly lame ...c) Raynor sorta weakens Mengsk's rule with a broadcast. --boring and hardly believable ...d) Raynor loves Kerrigan --lazy, lame and kind of a retcon too 1.- Kerrigan getting "cured" back to human form is an incredibly lame concept. 2.- Prophecies are boring and lazy plot devices. Just don't use them ffs! 3.- Being prohibited from killing Kerrigan by said prophecy is very, very hamfisted. 4.- The Kerrigan/Raynor love story is lame, out of place and kind of a retcon. 5.- The Overmind turning out to be "courageous" and the zerg being "maybe not so evil after all" is incredibly lame 6.- Tassadar being alive and jesus-like is extremely lame. 7.- Kerrigan had no role whatsoever, other than getting pwned by the Xel'Naga thingy. In fact, that may qualify her as just another MacGuffin herself. Neither prancing around talking emo nor her minimal search for artifacts counts as "role". 8.- Which also means the Zerg did NOTHING during those 4 years they ominously retreated and hid. What were they up to? doesn't matter now. 9.- Mengsk has no role either. 10.- Raynor's always right whatever he does. No mission ever goes wrong and he always turns out right in the end, even the two missions that require a choice. He also has a severe case of "main character powers" that allow him to do whatever the plot requires. 11.- Hybrids and new big bad are boring and pointless. 12.- Having a terrible new big bad is only a way to try to hide the fact they couldn't think of anything interesting plot between the protoss/zerg/terrans. 13.- Retcons. No consistency means you can't involve your audience. If anything can change at the whim of the writer, there's no point for the audience to wonder about what the characters think/feel or what will happen next, since it's just random. 14.-Characters are flat and don't really think, feel nor do anything interesting. 15.-Huge story-gaps and plot-holes that inevitably make the audience question what's going on. Indisputable example is the boarding of Valerian's battlecruiser, but the successful invasion of Char and betrayal of Tychus are good runner-ups. | ||
hack41
21 Posts
On August 12 2010 08:49 ghostunit wrote: Of course I would never stop you from criticising the story, which in my personal opinion has many terrible, terrible weaknesses, but I maintain that that is a separate type of criticism, and it is far more subjective. For example, the question of Kerrigan gets a) killed, b) rehumanised, c) neither, is a question of subjective preference, and there will always be people who prefer one over the other. Which choice makes for good literature is a good question, but it is a different type of discussion, and I don't want it mixed in with the criticism of the execution. The story is questionable, but people may have different opinions on it and not like yours, there may not be an easy fix, and people may get angry if you're too assertive about what kind of story you want.I disagree with hack41 about the story being ok but the problem being one of execution. The story's garbage, period. You can't get around it with presentation, though that was terrible too. [...] By contrast, the execution is just blatantly terrible and could have been done better, and that's what I'd like to criticise first. Imagine, if the same story had been perfectly told, with good pacing and rewarding pay-off, the criticism of the story would probably have been quite a bit less. I totally agree that "ancient prophecy", "alien artifacts", "return from the dead" and (my personal favourite) actual voodoo magic are a kiss of death, but I don't want that to be part of the current discussion, and I feel that it hurts the current debate by opening the topic up to people who do like voodoo dolls and will dismiss all other criticism out of hand. Just to reply to your 15 points: All of them perfectly valid points, full ack. Just this: 5,6: I wouldn't quite call the Overmind and Tassadar part of the story just yet. For now, they're just gimmicks. (Of course they will become part of the story if they appear again in the next episodes.) 7,8,9 are matters of execution I think. 12 and 14 are kind of meta-arguments. 15 (Valerian) is execution: the story just says, "Raynor and Valerian meet and talk". The writer just thought, oh, let's make Raynor board the ship for no reason and shoot some guys. (Oops, forward reply.) On August 12 2010 09:01 Stratos_speAr wrote: Hm, not quite, the execution is the writing. The story is the idea in the writer's mind, the execution is the ink on the paper, if you will.Well said. We've focused a lot on execution in this thread, but I think the writing itself isn't being criticized enough. By all means, do start a discussion of the story, but I think it would be very useful if we could keep that in a separate topic from this one. Basically, I really don't believe that the bad backstory alone is the reason that the campaign is not memorable, derivative and boring. The game could have been memorable and iconic even with a dreadful story, if done right. The bad story is not something that could obviously have been done better and that someone (i.e. a literate adult) at Blizzard should have spotted.* I would really like to give Blizzard as much benefit of the doubt as possible here. And do expect much heavier backlash from people who disagree when you discuss the story. :-) (Also, discussing the story will inevitably have to deal with the fact that we don't know the entire story yet. You can fault any part of a narrative for bad execution at that point, but it's harder to fault a story that you only know partially.) *) I want to admit the possibility that a story has got itself "written into a corner". If that happens (e.g. to The Matrix), then it is very difficult to make a sequel with a great story. I don't say that's the case here, but it might be, and so I don't want to fault a sequel for a bad story. | ||
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On August 12 2010 08:49 ghostunit wrote: I disagree with hack41 about the story being ok but the problem being one of execution. The story's garbage, period. You can't get around it with presentation, though that was terrible too. Briefly, the story is bad because: 0.- There's actually barely any story to tell. The only things that happen are: ...a) Introduction of new "big bad". --lame ...b) Kerrigan goes back to human form. --incredibly lame ...c) Raynor sorta weakens Mengsk's rule with a broadcast. --boring 1.- Kerrigan getting "cured" back to human form is an incredibly lame concept. 2.- Prophecies are boring and lazy plot devices. Just don't use them ffs! 3.- Being prohibited from killing Kerrigan by said prophecy is very, very hamfisted. 4.- The Kerrigan/Raynor love story is lame, out of place and kind of a retcon. 5.- The Overmind turning out to be "courageous" and the zerg being "maybe not so evil after all" is incredibly lame 6.- Tassadar being alive and jesus-like is extremely lame. 7.- Kerrigan had no role whatsoever, other than getting pwned by the Xel'Naga thingy. In fact, that may qualify her as just another MacGuffin herself. Neither prancing around talking emo nor her minimal search for artifacts counts as "role". 8.- Which also means the Zerg did NOTHING during those 4 years they ominously retreated and hid. What were they up to? doesn't matter now. 9.- Mengsk has no role either. 10.- Raynor's always right whatever he does. No mission ever goes wrong and he always turns out right in the end, even the two missions that require a choice. He also has a severe case of "main character powers" that allow him to do whatever the plot requires. 11.- Hybrids and new big bad are boring and pointless. 12.- Having a terrible new big bad is only a way to try to hide the fact they couldn't think of anything interesting plot between the protoss/zerg/terrans. 13.- Retcons. No consistency means you can't involve your audience. If anything can change at the whim of the writer, there's no point for the audience to wonder about what the characters think/feel or what will happen next, since it's just random. Well said. We've focused a lot on execution in this thread, but I think the writing itself isn't being criticized enough. | ||
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
| ||
ArC_man
United States2798 Posts
I agree with most people about the flow and logic of the campaign. I remember I finished all the Mobieus missions first and then Raynor's like "Kay, we're gonna go save Kerrigan!" and his whole crew is bitching at him. Then I played the Odin mission and suddenly his crew is like "Yay Raynor you're awesome!". The whole Tychus story wasn't convincing at all, I can't see how Raynor is that dumb after all of those hints. | ||
Ownos
United States2147 Posts
On August 12 2010 01:23 hack41 wrote: I was fascinated by this thread, which discusses a lot of the reactions I felt when going through and completing the campaign. I admit that I haven't read this thread in full yet, but I did read cover-to-cover the corresponding threads on the EU and US Battle.net forums, which are arguably the longest threads there! In fact, let me preface this by giving the relevant links, lest I appear to claim originality here.
Alright, let's get into it. A lot of people seem to have mixed feelings about the campaign, and many excellent explanations have been given in this and in the other threads. But lots of people can't quite seem to put their finger on what's wrong, and even more people seem to rise up in defense of the game, and they appear, more often than not, very annoyed at the criticism. First I'd like to clarify what it is that people are really criticising, and why the almost aggressively defensive stance of some people is not really justified. Major points of defense are: "you have to wait until all three games are out", "SC1/BW had just as bad a story", "SC1/BW were just as unrealistic", "you remember the past incorrectly", "read the expanded universe, it'll all make sense", "it's just a video game". Well, all of those retorts are missing the point. Why? Because (I claim) the big problem with Wings of Liberty, which causes people to feel unimpressed by the campaign, is not a problem of story, of plot holes, of realism or of unresolved questions. It is first and foremost a problem of execution. The story is really not bad - what is terrible is the way the story was executed. The story that you are trying to tell is really not necessarily all that important, but what is hugely important is how you tell the story. Perhaps SC1/BW didn't have the most ingenious and mind-boggling story, but it was brilliantly executed. The pacing was just right, and there was always something happening that kept the plot moving forward. In Wings of Liberty, people complain that the narrative isn't tight and that there is no focus. Even though the backstory may well make perfect sense, the narrative is terribly paced. Too short, yet too long Blizzard claimed that the campaign would consist of 26-30 Terran-only missions, because that many missions were needed for an "epic tale". But this is total nonsense! Out of the 26 playable missions, only five or six matter for the final resolution! The rest are nothing but glorified filler missions. People say "it's too short" because very little happens that ultimately matters, but at the same time it's very long because there are lots of ultimately boring missions. Don't get me wrong - each single mission is perfectly designed gameplay-wise. Just in the overarching narrative most of those missions end up as needless padding. Too many choices, yet too few choices Another complaint is the choice system. We are given several choices, the order in which to play the missions and even two minor story choices. But those choices have no implications, none whatsoever! So why did we get to make them in the first place? And the choice of order in which to play the missions seriously undermines the pacing of the plot. Finally, as a personal point of taste, I always thought that the way in which you stayed in orbit of one planet for a couple of missions in SC1 and then moved on to another planet gave the universe a certain sense of depth. But now we're randomly jumping around between worlds, and no two missions actually happen on the same world (apart from beginning and end) and there's no sense of travelling. So the entire midsection of the campaign just feels like we're visiting a couple of different towns in the same metropolitan area. Why we are disappointed Now let's come to the reason why lots of people are not just disappointed, but also feel the urge to speak up. It is not because we "just like to whine" or "bash Blizzard", and I daresay that it is not "because some people always complain". The point here is that it would have been very well possible, and rather easy, too, to make the campaign a lot better. And I don't mean that the story would need any changing. Whether or not you like the story is a different matter, and indeed that is a subjective matter. The main complaint people have (at least I allege that that's their main complaint) is not about a design choice which required a compromise and would only satisfy half the people. The main complaint is about the quality of the writing and the execution of the plot. You could have the exact same story, but told it differently so that the campaign would be tightly paced, strongly focused and have a rewarding pay-off. You want an alliance with half the imperial fleet? Make Raynor work for it and deserve it! You want to bring Kerrigan back? Make it a challenge that we know and fight for! You want a traitor in our midst? Don't give it away in the introduction! If you had made the writing better, then people who already love the game would still love it, but those of us who expected a bit more would have been a lot more impressed. Please don't be annoyed at our criticism - we are not threatening you! Let me just make this point again, so that nobody comes up and tells me to wait for Episodes 2 and 3 or read the books. I don't have a problem with possible plot holes. I don't need everything resolved. I don't even care if Mutalisks flap their wings in space. All I want is a story which rewards my investment in the main characters. The drama comes from our support for the main characters against opposition, and the reward from their eventual overcoming of said opposition. The way Wings of Liberty was told, most of the game time I spent on it did nothing to bring about the eventual resolution. (For that matter, indulge me for a little thought experiment: Couldn't the entire campaign as it currently stands have been told from Valerian's perspective? He knows where the artifacts are, he knows what to do with them, and he could get Raynor in as a cameo for the final Char assault. Six missions, done.) The fact that this is just one game in a series is no excuse not to have a tight, rewarding narrative. If you compare this to the original games, you will see the difference. People who complain that they didn't get three campaigns are (in my opinion) confused about what bothered them. It wasn't the fact that they didn't get to play three campaigns. It was because the campaign they got left them unsatisfied. It's because after ploughing through 20 missions, the end result is just handed to you and there is no pay-off. Maybe the creators realised that playing through the plot didn't feel rewarding to the player, and they decided to bolt on a reward in the form of "achievements"... (The cynic would say that this is analogous to how the campaign was bolted on to the main game.) Rather than having 20 missions build up and lead up to the final mission, 20 missions lead up to shiny pixels on your profile page. Some comparison and random bits Now how does this compare to the original games? In SC1/BW, we had a total of about 56 missions, but they were told from many different perspectives: The Confederacy's magistrate, the Son's of Korhal, Raynor's group, the Overmind, the Protoss conclave, the UED, the Queen of Blades, and Zeratul. Nobody outstayed their welcome, and everything that happened moved the plot forward. Oftentimes, people were caught up in events larger than themselves, swept along and confused - just like real life. A lot was happening, but there was no one single grand master plan and no ultimate goal. Nonetheless, the narration was extremely tight and gripping. By contrast, Wings of Liberty has a single goal, foreshadowed after Mission 1 and dragging on until Mission 26. We have one single, boring perspective on a single, boring man doing boring stuff that has no relevance, until he's visited by the plot and taken by the hand to finish the game. Let's run another quick comparison. A typical SC1/BW mission would take, say, one hour? One and a half? Assuming a 'normal', random customer, not an RTS expert. Some Broodwar missions may even take more than that. By comparison, the typical Wings of Liberty mission is maybe 20 minutes, with a few ones taking 30 or 40 minutes. So, very roughly, the ~30 missions of Wings of Liberty take just as long as 10 typical missions taken from SC1/BW! But while those ten missions would keep you intensely engaged, often on the same world for several missions, and all the while leading up to the finale, where the entire weight of the past is brought to bear on the player, the WoL missions jerk you from location to location every 20 minutes, with no time to really start caring about any one of them. In more cynical words, rather than maturing with the audience and building more complex missions and narratives, Blizzard chose to target the current generation of teenagers and cater for a dramatically reduced attention span. At the end of the WoL campaign, a lot of time has passed on the clock, but we don't really remember how and why, and thus we helplessly ask for more. Art from adversity Let me close this with an observation that has been made elsewhere and many times before: The concept of "art from adversity" - difficult circumstances make for good art. At the time of SC1/BW, technology was limited, so we got talking heads for briefings and extra story development during the missions. And that turned out great! It kept the pace up and the missions interesting (without requiring every mission to have a special kind of gimmick). Now, with infinite computing power, we get long briefing scenes on the ship, but do those really improve the narrative? The little ingame story events have disappeared, in any case. Also, the original game had to break into a non-existent market, so they had to put all the campaigns into it. As a result, we have 10 well-paced, tightly focused missions for each faction, and again the result was great. Now, with the laurels from millions of fans and the guaranteed sales, Blizzard didn't have any pressure to convince or please anyone. I honestly believe that the statement "We need 26 missions for the full epicness of the Terran campaign" was an outright fabrication! As I said above, 6-10 missions would have been totally sufficient for the Terrans, and none of the other missions matter! So again, the temptation to be able to sell three games rather than one, and the liberty to be able to do so, made the result worse. Perhaps the opening cutscene of Wings of Liberty was a good giveaway of what to expect: We spend long, drawn-out minutes on watching in the greatest detail some technical design, but in the end the entire cutscene only had one very small point of content. Very polished, with massive attention to detail, and no content. Just like the entire game. Let's just end this in a quick test: What do you feel when you think about StarCraft and Broodwar? If the answer is "nothing in particular", the by all means disregard what people have to say here, close this window and enjoy the game. If the answer was something to the extent of a warm tingling with great memories and epic moments, then please answer question 2: Which was your most memorable moment in Wings of Liberty? 10/10 Would read again! I still believe there are some problems with the story. But as you said, if they executed better it might have not been an issue. And I will answer your question: most memorable was in the mission In Utter Darkness. It felt suitably epic to me and Artanis' sudden appearance and little speech punctuated that mission. It was really nice to see that noob again and got himself a brand new ride and some armor, no more loincloth! | ||
latan
740 Posts
i hate that they made it all warcrafty and about profecies that don't make sense and magical relics that somehow nobody knew about before and it gave me deja vu's constantly specially on the protoss part, I hardly remember the w3 story but can anyone confirm to me that the final battle on the protoss part is identical to something in warcraft3? because it really did fell like i had seen something exactly like that. | ||
| ||