Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 111 to 115 of 115

Thread: Are Dragoons "Realistic?"

  1. #111

    Default Re: Are Dragoons "Realistic?"

    Quote Originally Posted by Gradius View Post
    But infested humans were never promised in the manual. The only thing the manual said was that the Overmind was afraid of the protoss military and there are other ways to get around it. Looking for Terran psychics is just an excuse for the races to meet up.
    I have always said the determinant was an excuse for the three races to fight. That does not mean it should be treated as a red herring. I feel like you are rationalizing discarding the idea of assimilated terran armies because you feel like being contrary. If I am wrong then I apologize, but that is the impression I get from your resistance.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gradius View Post
    It could be integrated to every Zerg strain instead of making a new breed specifically.
    Why would the zerg need to integrate those genes into every breed? The zerg specialize. Even space survivability, according to a Q&A about it, is not automatic to all zerg. Not all zerg are aquatic either. I think that makes sense. By comparison, we don't design tanks to fly and swim and walk.

    Even in canon, we only had overseers with human genes deliberately added and those were not even psychic. The canon cannot decide if SC2 queens have protoss genes. The aberrations are a random mutation that makes little sense even by the standards of zerg "Science!".

    Quote Originally Posted by Gradius View Post
    It could be integrated to every Zerg strain instead of making a new breed specifically. It could be used for a battlefield commander like Kerrigan to cripple enemy morale.
    The zerg already have battlefield commanders. They are called overlords, queens and cerebrates, not to mention others that might exist that we have not seen. The reason why they need humans has nothing to do with commanding and I think that is a silly idea and should be prohibited by humans having tiny brains in comparison. As I have always speculated, I thought the reason why humans were necessary was because they had more telekinesis in their brains pound-for-pound. Power output does not translate to the computational output necessary to manage armies, as shown by the fact that batteries and CPUs are structured completely differently. I doubt a human being would be able to manage more than a handful of zerglings at the most before they lose focus.

    Morale? The Baelrog brood already specializes in terrorism and they use genuinely frightening tactics like public exhibitions of brutal violence, cannibalism, etc. A succubus with a boob-job and high-heels who talks like a cartoon character with an inferiority/superiority complex is going to inspire scorn and derision. I doubt Gorn would need Kerry for anything other than sexual fetishes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Turalyon View Post
    Thought you were invoking gameplay-story/lore segregation given that most of your grief with Sc1 is in regard to the story/setup not matching between the manual and the story in the game.



    Not really an appropriate analogy since it's such a broad generalisation you're making here. The Terrans are not at a home advantage, are exposed and have no awareness of their enemy along with their general inferiority as a fighting force and limited number compared to their alien opponents. The aliens/superior force also have no compunction in using their superweapons against the Terran either. Sure the Protoss may have an internal pressure that could mitigate the use of such weapons (eg: in the case of mutinous elements within the army like Tassadar) but that's only one element. The Protoss didn't have domestic pressure or general incompetency affecting their capabilities until that mutinous element (ie: Tassadar) reared itself. As to the Zerg, they are even less likely to be defeated by decadence or arrogance (unlike the Overmind's pursuit of its determinant in Sc1 - which was an act of hubris that ultimately contributed to its defeat) if their task was simply to wipe out the Terrans.



    Definitely my bad here.



    Thing is, we're talking about story and narratives. Unfortunately, you have to focus it on single characters if you want the narrative to have momentum and to be engaging. A story without a protagonist is not much of a story since it'll all just be about stuff in general. Sure, you can focus on smaller stories of generals/individuals in a single battle in that war (which I wouldn't mind) but then it wouldn't address appropriately address the big things the manual hints at. I dunno, it seems like you want to address the "big things" the manual hints at but not directly address/sideskirt them at the same time.



    But that's part of the issue of you wanting it to be an equal three-way war at all times. If the Terran aren't important or that the Zerg have acquired what they want from the Terrans, it's not exactly an equal three-way war anymore. It's pointless having the Terrans involved at all if they contribute nothing else but being pests (if they're even that) that can really just be ignored.
    Again, I seem to have difficulty articulating my point. I prefer to treat the setting as a sandbox for anthology stories. I believe we can have people fighting and stuff going on the background, but we should not focus on single characters who are given literal demigod power to control the narrative of the entire setting. If "big points" as you see them are addressed, they should be addressed from many different perspectives on small scales to show the proper degree of realistic complexity.

    The Insurrection campaign is my go-to example of this.

  2. #112

    Default Re: Are Dragoons "Realistic?"

    Quote Originally Posted by Gradius View Post
    - Bringing back Tassadar and then retconning that as a lie by Ouros ended up being stupid.
    tassadar returning was a logic explanation, the khala are memories coelctive too thanks to the energy of the void , Tasadar could be the first to be able to maintain personal sun instead of being only a group of memories even if he had died in the conquest of Aiur with the destruction of khala and the psionic matrix, although I liked seeing Ouros was a missed opportunity
    - Bringing back Stukov was cringeworthy. Everyone was confused by his presence.
    why? he had already been resurrected in sc 1 and it had been established that nanosuero ceased to function or be a viable cure, it was slow to reappear
    - Bringing up the Overmind and bringing back the Primals instead of making something new just pissed everyone off because the whole manual ended up getting retconned, not to mention that Dehaka ended up being a terrible character.
    I agree that it can be tackled better but the result is not a catastrophe

  3. #113

    Default Re: Are Dragoons "Realistic?"

    Quote Originally Posted by drakolobo View Post
    tassadar returning was a logic explanation, the khala are memories coelctive too thanks to the energy of the void , Tasadar could be the first to be able to maintain personal sun instead of being only a group of memories even if he had died in the conquest of Aiur with the destruction of khala and the psionic matrix, although I liked seeing Ouros was a missed opportunity
    Was that the same concept behind why there were still protoss that believed Adun was still alive?

  4. #114

    Default Re: Are Dragoons "Realistic?"

    Quote Originally Posted by drakolobo View Post
    tassadar returning was a logic explanation, the khala are memories coelctive too thanks to the energy of the void , Tasadar could be the first to be able to maintain personal sun instead of being only a group of memories even if he had died in the conquest of Aiur with the destruction of khala and the psionic matrix, although I liked seeing Ouros was a missed opportunity
    There was no obvious or reasonable in-universe explanation for Tassadar's reappearance at the time. It was a plot hole. One either had to resort to fanon explanation that can never really be objectively justified (like you have) or fallback to out-of-universe reasons (ie: the writers wanted to make what he said have weight and to have a shameless nostalgia pull/cameo) which breaks immersion and feels unsatisfactory. It being revealed to be actually Ouros resolves the plot hole/is the in-universe explanation but by then nobody really cared because they realised how contrived the story was way before then anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by drakolobo View Post
    why? he had already been resurrected in sc 1 and it had been established that nanosuero ceased to function or be a viable cure, it was slow to reappear
    That depends on whether you played the Starcraft 64 version and got to the secret mission, otherwise, most people wouldn't have known that this happened.
    Yes, that's right! That is indeed ME on the right.


    _______________________________________________

  5. #115

    Default Re: Are Dragoons "Realistic?"

    Quote Originally Posted by Turalyon View Post
    That depends on whether you played the Starcraft 64 version and got to the secret mission, otherwise, most people wouldn't have known that this happened.
    How many people you know played the SC 64 version? Because most people I asked only knew its existence and that's it.

Similar Threads

  1. Restorations of "Project Bellwood" and "Templar Census" for your viewing pleasure!
    By Mislagnissa in forum StarCraft Universe Lore Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-02-2018, 04:15 PM
  2. Grand Survey of Starcraft "results" lore and story + breakdown.
    By Undeadprotoss in forum StarCraft Universe Lore Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-01-2016, 11:34 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-01-2014, 12:40 PM
  4. What are your thoughts on being "overpowered" or "underpowered"?
    By Gifted in forum StarCraft II Discussion
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 04-02-2011, 01:22 AM
  5. Blizzard:"No plans for "specific" chatrooms, crossrealm play"
    By ArcherofAiur in forum StarCraft II Discussion
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 06-06-2010, 11:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •