Video: On Character Interaction in SC1 vs SC2

[Visions of Khas]

I came across this video in r/starcraft, and think it makes a very good point on the characters in StarCraft I and how their interactions made them more believable than in StarCraft II. It's such a simple solution to the problem, addressing a problem I hadn't realized. I suppose it goes a long way to explain why the cutscene between Raynor, Tosh and Horner is my favorite to date.

hZcsGEntsTg

[Drake Clawfang]

I was expecting a vid complaining about the story. But, I admit, this is a very good point. Throughout the trilogy so far, all conversations are one-on-one, and that limits how you can explore these characters. This is also despite the fact Blizzard apparently designed the casts of the two games so far to pull Raynor and Kerrigan in different moral directions, or to contrast each other. Guy makes a very good, valid point.

[Sheliek]

I like that, in the favourite conversations part at the end, he included the New Folsom ending. It was, in my opinion, the best cutscene in WoL.

You know, I remember when the WoL cutscenes leaked a week before the game came out, there was no indication what order they were in. We all thought that Hansen's good ending came BEFORE the infested one, or that the infested one was a dream. She'd go to Haven, join up again later and then the Char invasion goes to shit and she got infested, I remember a few people thought that.

[Jconant]

That sequence would have been better than "choose a mission". Go colonize, combating protoss over control of the area, check up on it later to see that the infestation worsened. The one thing that hots made more tolerable is removing that conundrum

[Nissa]

While this is a very important distinction, I don't know if it's the prime culprit. Another issue is that the SC2 conversations seem more about saying necessary information, rather than demonstrating character. Hm, but that's probably tied into the conversation thing, what with having to give each person in a group a real reason to be there.

Interesting vid, anyway.

[Sheliek]

While this is a very important distinction, I don't know if it's the prime culprit. Another issue is that the SC2 conversations seem more about saying necessary information, rather than demonstrating character. Hm, but that's probably tied into the conversation thing, what with having to give each person in a group a real reason to be there.

Interesting vid, anyway.

The exposition is definitely at least partly caused by the isolation of each character in most scenes. If characters don't ever interact with anyone, they'll have little to no fleshing-out, and they'll pretty much end being vessels for jargon and technobabble, albeit ones with their own flavour of info-dump.

[Turalyon]

Another issue is that the SC2 conversations seem more about saying necessary information, rather than demonstrating character.

Necessary information like Dehaka reminding us of his obsession for essence every time he has a chance to talk in HotS? :p

[DonnyZeDoof]

Necessary information like Dehaka reminding us of his obsession for essence every time he has a chance to talk in HotS? :p

I never wanted to hear the word 'essence' again after hearing Dehaka harping on about it throughout the entire campaign. :eek:

Seriously it's like one of the writers let a 5 year old write Dehaka's lines.

I hope that Blizzard doesn't pull something similar in LotV. If they have a Protoss go on about form every second, I might throw my computer out of the window.

[drakolobo]

haahaha, primal zerg was not very smart or complex, only obsessive

[The_Blade]

Great video! Thanks for sharing. We've known that the characters look shallow and mindless, but this is some great evidence of why it also comes from design and not only writing. They had the best tools at their hand and they designed a rigged "decision-based" campaign. IMO that was the mistake. SC was not the universe created to aim for Skyrim on the sequels.

What do you guys think about playing as the leader of a faction? Do you actually think that character is free to make non-player oriented decisions? Grow? Speak it's mind? Wasn't it easier to play someone with no name?

On a side note, I always found it funny how everyone had a chat before engaging in combat in SC. They all seem like lawyers backstabbing each other.

[Turalyon]

What do you guys think about playing as the leader of a faction? Do you actually think that character is free to make non-player oriented decisions? Grow? Speak it's mind?

I think this is fine as long as they characterise the good and bad of what it takes to be a leader and that the portrayal feels honest. As to the freedom of making decisions, it doesn't really matter what other decisions/options exist (and which option is taken really) as long as it's portrayed it as if the decision (and no-decisions as the case maybe) the character makes was the only/most reasonable one to make for that particular character at that place and time - this is something that was never felt consistently in Sc2's characters (ie: why doesn't/can't Raynor help Tychus out of the suit in WoL? Why does Kerrigan massacre Protoss on Kaldir?).


Wasn't it easier to play someone with no name?

We're already doing that in Sc2 since it's kinda hazy whether the player is actually supposed to be Raynor in WoL/Kerrigan in HotS at all times (which makes swallowing some of their reasoning for action at times an insult to the players intelligence) or that we, the player, is just some non-entity watching and only really contributing/being involved in the gameplay/missions.

[Undeadprotoss]

I think this is fine as long as they characterise the good and bad of what it takes to be a leader and that the portrayal feels honest. As to the freedom of making decisions, it doesn't really matter what other decisions/options exist (and which option is taken really) as long as it's portrayed it as if the decision (and no-decisions as the case maybe) the character makes was the only/most reasonable one to make for that particular character at that place and time - this is something that was never felt consistently in Sc2's characters (ie: why doesn't/can't Raynor help Tychus out of the suit in WoL? Why does Kerrigan massacre Protoss on Kaldir?).



We're already doing that in Sc2 since it's kinda hazy whether the player is actually supposed to be Raynor in WoL/Kerrigan in HotS at all times (which makes swallowing some of their reasoning for action at times an insult to the players intelligence) or that we, the player, is just some non-entity watching and only really contributing/being involved in the gameplay/missions.

I think the development team misjudges to a degree how much people want to be a hero, it definitely can suck to feel insignificant, but you don't need to literally be the driving force behind everything.