New Prelude Comic

[Visions of Khas]

A new online comic will be released later this month detailing Artanis' ascension to Hierarch. Includes yet ANOTHER artistic rendition of Tassadar.
(http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/10/13/starcraft-ii-legacy-of-the-void-gets-artanis-prequel-comic)




http://oyster.ignimgs.com/wordpress/stg.ign.com/2015/10/ART_Cover-1-720x1021.png

[drakolobo]

cool hierachy protoss have faces, every tribu potoss leader here

[Robear]

I do like that they're drawing him in his Wings of Liberty outfit (http://i.imgur.com/HNrzxqg.gif)— I bet the comic ends with him appearing in his new armor as Hierarch. The way Tassadar looks is a little odd.

[Robear]

The whole comic is up! (http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/media/blizzard-comics/artanis-sacrifice/#/1) It's pretty short, just Artanis' reflections on Tassadar and leadership, but it's nice.

[Visions of Khas]

I like how each of the castes appear to be from seemingly different societies and cultures, judging from the dress. Also, that's Aldaris?

[Robear]

Hard to say if it's him. The dialogue fits what he would be saying, but in SC1 he never left Aiur for Char, right?

Wait, never mind, I take it back, Queen of Blades ends with Aldaris and Artanis landing on Char together to arrest Tassadar. So yes, that is definitely Aldaris.

http://i.imgur.com/aCsbRiG.png

http://i.imgur.com/HaGmCv0.png

Guy has a much taller hat than I imagined.

Also, I like that they showed Artanis in many different outfits, including this high templar look above, but wished they'd had a shirtless scene of him in these SC1 flashbacks where he isn't fighting. No love for the BW campaign screen model.

[Undeadprotoss]

hard to say if it's him. The dialogue fits what he would be saying, but in sc1 he never left aiur for char, right?

Wait, never mind, i take it back, queen of blades ends with aldaris and artanis landing on char together to arrest tassadar. So yes, that is definitely aldaris.

http://i.imgur.com/acsbrig.png

http://i.imgur.com/hagmcv0.png

guy has a much taller hat than i imagined.

Also, i like that they showed artanis in many different outfits, including this high templar look above, but wished they'd had a shirtless scene of him in these sc1 flashbacks where he isn't fighting. No love for the bw campaign screen model.

ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh damn it, give aldaris yellow eyes, none of the protoss except the oracle and the carrier have yellow eyes and its really destroying them for me.

[Gradius]

The least they could have done is used the actual dialog from the game and not some rephrased version of it that they pulled from memory. -_-

How hard is it to copy/paste? Really?

[Undeadprotoss]

The least they could have done is used the actual dialog from the game and not some rephrased version of it that they pulled from memory. -_-

How hard is it to copy/paste? Really?

Tassadar's sacrifice quotes were actually word for word, the stuff that came after it was totally new however, as was Aldaris and Artanis talking about char I believe.

EDIT: By Tassadar's sacrifice quotes I mean the part beginning were he says 'We have sustained heavy losses ourselves"

[Gradius]

EDIT: By Tassadar's sacrifice quotes I mean the part beginning were he says 'We have sustained heavy losses ourselves"
What, the first sentence, and then the rest is improv-ed on the spot? :P

[Undeadprotoss]

What, the first sentence, and then the rest is improv-ed on the spot? :P

That and the rest of that single slide, past that, he does start making stuff up when talking to Artanis about the Conclave (go down to the very bottom of this, right before the epilogue: .http://www.samods.org/node/183 but yeah I do generally wish

[ragnarok]

cool hierachy protoss have faces, every tribu potoss leader here

I liked it, shame it proved the Hierarchy was WAY too slow at the decision making process.

[Turalyon]

Also, I like that they showed Artanis in many different outfits, including this high templar look above, but wished they'd had a shirtless scene of him in these SC1 flashbacks where he isn't fighting. No love for the BW campaign screen model.

Yeah, Artanis is hot!! There needs to be more Protoss fanservice!! :D:p

[ragnarok]

Yeah, Artanis is hot!! There needs to be more Protoss fanservice!! :D:p

There'll be plenty once LotV is out, Turalyon. Unfortunately, the beginning of the comic didn't start with a good omen, given how inefficient the Hierarchy was.

[Sheliek]

There'll be plenty once LotV is out, Turalyon. Unfortunately, the beginning of the comic didn't start with a good omen, given how inefficient the Hierarchy was.

I think that means it's going to be a good story. Efficient, well-run governments are not a thing. Except, you know, dictatorships. But many bad eggs ruined the few good ones (inb4proof (https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/176r19/were_there_any_good_dictators_at_any_point_in/)), so that won't happen any time soon.

But still, it shows Blizzard really tried to be realistic with the protoss government, at least. A good sign IMO.

[ragnarok]

I think that means it's going to be a good story. Efficient, well-run governments are not a thing. Except, you know, dictatorships. But many bad eggs ruined the few good ones, so that won't happen any time soon.

But still, it shows Blizzard really tried to be realistic with the protoss government, at least. A good sign IMO.

True. But such inefficiencies would prove problematic in the war against Amon. Sure they've got plenty of reason not to make another alliance with Kerrigan again given what happened in the BW, but arguing until you're blue in the face isn't going to solve anything.

I think that's actually something Amon is banking on: that the Protoss have spent so much time looking at the past and trying to predict the future that they completely forgot about the present.

[Sheliek]

So you're saying instead of being an unrealistically organized fighting force and species and curbstomping Amon, portraying them realistically also adds drama to the story -- realistic drama no less (not like that poorly written Tychus plot in WoL or Raynor in HotS)? Neat!

People who are overly rational write horrible stories, barring certain niche plots.

[ragnarok]

So you're saying instead of being an unrealistically organized fighting force and species and curbstomping Amon, portraying them realistically also adds drama to the story -- realistic drama no less (not like that poorly written Tychus plot in WoL or Raynor in HotS)? Neat!

People who are overly rational write horrible stories, barring certain niche plots.

Let's just say right now I'm more concerned they'd be too busy fighting amongst themselves on the next steps to take. This waste of time will basically allow Amon to accomplish what plans to accomplish.

Tychus's plot in WoL was unrealistic, not sure which part you're referring to on Raynor's end in HotS though.

[Sheliek]

Amon is not going to win. I'm not even giving a 0.1% chance of it. He will be beaten. At worst, multiple major characters will die and the factions will be crippled, but he won't be victorious, the zerg, protoss and terrans will continue, and SCIII will happen one day.

And also, everything involving Raynor in HotS. The whole thing. Horrible.

Kerrigan's personality was brilliant. Her handling of the Raynor 'execution' was abysmally stupid, even for someone as mentally unstable as a partially un-resocialized semi-former Overmind would be.

Actually, it's more the Raynor-Kerrigan superplot. The individual scenes they shared (keyword being shared) were actually really well-written IMO, especially the Moros end cinematic.

[ragnarok]

Amon is not going to win. I'm not even giving a 0.1% chance of it. He will be beaten. At worst, multiple major characters will die and the factions will be crippled, but he won't be victorious, the zerg, protoss and terrans will continue, and SCIII will happen one day.

And also, everything involving Raynor in HotS. The whole thing. Horrible.

Kerrigan's personality was brilliant. Her handling of the Raynor 'execution' was abysmally stupid, even for someone as mentally unstable as a partially un-resocialized semi-former Overmind would be.

Actually, it's more the Raynor-Kerrigan superplot. The individual scenes they shared (keyword being shared) were actually really well-written IMO, especially the Moros end cinematic.

Raynor's actions were mostly wrong in the last HotS mission. He should have at least anticipated this was just another trick like what happened in the BW when Kerrigan gave in to Valerian's request to avoid civilian centers and everything.

[Sheliek]

Speaking of HotS' ending, Kerrigan should've killed Mengsk the second she saw the artifact popping out, srsly. Like he's obviously up to something when he's chilling with his cigar, makes it blatantly obvious 1:15 in, she has exactly 16 seconds while the artifact comes out to just saunter over and cut his head off. If I'd've done it, he'd have a squad of marines keeping her busy once she caught onto what was up. They hold fire, banter, Kerrigan gets all murdery, artifact, drama. That would've made Mengsk cunning (he admittedly is for keeping that around, alongside the Odin, psi destroyer and 'executing' Raynor, even if it all failed), and make Kerrigan not look stupid.

Instead, we got two whole endings of damsel-in-distress, each more contrived than the last!

Ah well.

[The_Blade]

Speaking of HotS' ending, Kerrigan should've killed Mengsk the second she saw the artifact popping out, srsly. Like he's obviously up to something when he's chilling with his cigar, makes it blatantly obvious 1:15 in, she has exactly 16 seconds while the artifact comes out to just saunter over and cut his head off. If I'd've done it, he'd have a squad of marines keeping her busy once she caught onto what was up. They hold fire, banter, Kerrigan gets all murdery, artifact, drama. That would've made Mengsk cunning (he admittedly is for keeping that around, alongside the Odin, psi destroyer and 'executing' Raynor, even if it all failed), and make Kerrigan not look stupid.

Instead, we got two whole endings of damsel-in-distress, each more contrived than the last!

Ah well.

You could argue the very same thing about the BW plot. Kerrigan should have killed Mengsk back when the UED fell. Yet, again, she seems to underestimate every single enemy once she beats them.

She has no idea what power feels like in contrast to true vulnerability, therefore the two seem like the same thing to her. Both have been in her life A LOT. Her problem, IMO, is that she takes power for granted and therefore feels powerless all the time. This was true when she was human. This was true when she was TQOB. Still true after not being infested and after becoming primal.

Kerrigan is not reliable in power. She is one of the strongest characters in the SC universe, but she feels no merit, responsibility, or strength from being powerful. The only way she feels that way is by crushing her opponents, because this "proves" she is not the victim. However, if she can't think of herself as the victim, how can she have the foresight to see coming threats?

I can honestly see Zagara overruling her once she becomes smart enough.

[Sheliek]

That's pretty much one of the reasons I think Kerrigan is one of the best written characters in the series still, in light of HotS. It's subtle, though. I was in the 'HotS sucked and Kerrigan was horrible' camp until I watched a playthrough of Mass Recall and WoO. Can copy-paste my off-the-cuff thoughts, since it's pertinent?

EDIT: Screw it. Small text because don't wanna make a huge wall o' text.

Okay, so I was watching a playthrough of WoO while working on a thing (but that's not important right now), and I noticed something. Kerrigan was an αsshole in HotS, a lot of us agree on this (some don't, but you might change your mind after this). But then I thought about something from way back in StarCraft I: Episode II. I'll post the entire line here.

'I have been unable to access the totality of my latent powers, and as such, I would like to infiltrate a Terran science vessel and uncover the secrets of their abandoned Ghost projects. If I can learn more about their mental conditioning, I can undo the damage their tinkering scientists have done to my mind.'

That's from Amerigo, mission 5. Now, Kerrigan was resocialized by the Confederacy. This was mentioned in several different official stories. But before she was resocialized, they really messed with her head. And of course, resocializing is basically artificially turning someone into a docile, violent sociopath that follows orders well.

What if Kerrigan didn't actually completely undo it on the Amerigo? The psychological brain-scrambling that made her both incredibly violent but also incredibly docile. She just removed the parts, probably intentionally only those ones, that made her subservient and easy to order around. But she was the Queen of Blades: why we should undo the parts that made her more ruthless? Couple that with zergification...

Skip forward to Heart of the Swarm. Kerrigan is mostly human again. That means the hyper-aggressive zerg parts are mostly gone, and of course she'd already undone the subservient aspects of resocialization. But she never did undo the violence-amplifying parts, did she? We've all observe that Kerrigan is a lot more calm around Raynor in HotS, and a lot of us say that she's an inconsistent, poorly written psycho character because of it.

Except, she's actually NOT poorly written. She's subtle in her literal insanity. Compare uninfested, calm-around-Raynor Kerrigan with calm-around-Raynor-BEFORE-being-infested Kerrigan. It's completely different. She sounds on-edge even when they're alone. She's talking through gritted teeth even when most comfortable in the game.

Now compare how she acts around Raynor in Brood War, but take out the amplified aggression caused by being fully infested. She acts exactly the same in Brood War in HotS, but less roid-ragey. Raynor was literally keeping her sane, and Blizzard wrote her that way on purpose.

In WoO, even now that she's redeemed in the eyes of the Raiders (or at least Raynor, Horner and Valerian), now that she's away from Raynor, the one thing keeping her sane is out of the picture. And listen to how she reacts to Zeratul showing up. 'Oh hey, former evil monster who I helped redeem, can we rescue some of our troops and copy some files?' "No, get in my way and you die.'

tl;dr, Kerrigan was written like a psychotic loon on purpose in HotS, because she's still partially brain-scrambled thanks to the Confederates. Blizzard wrote her mental issues so subtley that we thought they just failed really, really hard at writing Kerrigan.

Rest of thread for other thoughts. (http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/19072338177#19)

[ragnarok]

Speaking of HotS' ending, Kerrigan should've killed Mengsk the second she saw the artifact popping out, srsly. Like he's obviously up to something when he's chilling with his cigar, makes it blatantly obvious 1:15 in, she has exactly 16 seconds while the artifact comes out to just saunter over and cut his head off. If I'd've done it, he'd have a squad of marines keeping her busy once she caught onto what was up. They hold fire, banter, Kerrigan gets all murdery, artifact, drama. That would've made Mengsk cunning (he admittedly is for keeping that around, alongside the Odin, psi destroyer and 'executing' Raynor, even if it all failed), and make Kerrigan not look stupid.

Instead, we got two whole endings of damsel-in-distress, each more contrived than the last!

Ah well.

It was a shame for that. She didn't anticipate the artifact, and I could understand why. After all, Narud wasn't REALLY loyal to him, so Kerrigan expected Narud to betray Mengsk. Probably would have happened if she didn't attack Skygeirr and all that.

- - - Updated - - -


You could argue the very same thing about the BW plot. Kerrigan should have killed Mengsk back when the UED fell. Yet, again, she seems to underestimate every single enemy once she beats them.

She has no idea what power feels like in contrast to true vulnerability, therefore the two seem like the same thing to her. Both have been in her life A LOT. Her problem, IMO, is that she takes power for granted and therefore feels powerless all the time. This was true when she was human. This was true when she was TQOB. Still true after not being infested and after becoming primal.

Kerrigan is not reliable in power. She is one of the strongest characters in the SC universe, but she feels no merit, responsibility, or strength from being powerful. The only way she feels that way is by crushing her opponents, because this "proves" she is not the victim. However, if she can't think of herself as the victim, how can she have the foresight to see coming threats?

I can honestly see Zagara overruling her once she becomes smart enough.

The main problem here is she lacks the ability to see the suffering she caused without Raynor's presence. After all, only on the Moros did she finally try to distance herself from the crimes, and only THERE did we finally get to see she was finally starting to see she went too far.

[Turalyon]

In full agreement with Blade's assessment there. Kerrigan's character makes a whole lot of sense if you view her as a victim of lifetime abuse. It's funny that even though I don't like how she treats my beloved Zerg or the overblown bluster she carries herself off with, she is the most interesting (dare I say my most favourite?) character because of that nuance. She reminds me of the Ur-Quan in Star Control 2 where there's this similar "sympathy for the devil" being evoked.

[ragnarok]

In full agreement with Blade's assessment there. Kerrigan's character makes a whole lot of sense if you view her as a victim of lifetime abuse. It's funny that even though I don't like how she treats my beloved Zerg or the overblown bluster she carries herself off with, she is the most interesting (dare I say my most favourite?) character because of that nuance. She reminds me of the Ur-Quan in Star Control 2 where there's this similar "sympathy for the devil" being evoked.

Actually Turalyon, a LOT of my friends have said the same time when it comes to the abuse factor. Blizzard took this concept to an extreme scale, but the concept is nothing new.

As we all know, the way you're raised determines your values, along with how you view the outside world. Except for the first 8 years of her life, Kerrigan never really had a life at all, since she was dragged kicking and screaming into the Confederate ghost program.

The problem here is that we all know humanity is capable of great things, but also terrible things. The latter is just a small part of the picture, but this is not something known to us when we're very young, and have experienced very little.

Therefore, if all you're exposed to is the absolute WORST humanity has to offer, then by all means you're going to view humanity as greedy, corrupt, and unworthy to survive. THIS was the mentality (for the most part) that Kerrigan had when Tarsonis happened.

The whole betrayal from Mengsk set her off because she had trusted the guy for years. Hell, if you had read the Queen of Blades book, when she and Raynor met up again on Char, she had asked Raynor if Mengsk was just too late in coming back to save her or something from New Gettysburg. This proved that even after the infestation, she still wasn't convinced (at that moment) that Mengsk betrayed her.

[The_Blade]

Oh I had forgotten about the confederate conditioning! Thanks, Muspelli. That is a great point.

I've always considered Kerrigan to be one of the most solid characters. I had my doubts during SC2; but out of everyone else, she is the most consistent.

Had everyone else been developed in a similar way, all kinds of theories about Kerrigan would have spawned. The problem with character analysis in SC2 is the lack of continuity between character relationships. Raynor breaks the storyline a lot. Relating such a bipolar character to anybody else breaks all reference points for logic.

[ragnarok]

Oh I had forgotten about the confederate conditioning! Thanks, Muspelli. That is a great point.

I've always considered Kerrigan to be one of the most solid characters. I had my doubts during SC2; but out of everyone else, she is the most consistent.

Had everyone else been developed in a similar way, all kinds of theories about Kerrigan would have spawned. The problem with character analysis in SC2 is the lack of continuity between character relationships. Raynor breaks the storyline a lot. Relating such a bipolar character to anybody else breaks all reference points for logic.

How is she consistent? At some points you don't see her show the slightest remorse for the killing, other times she does. And the game didn't exactly explain....

[Sheliek]

The only times she shows remorse for killing is when Raynor is present or brought up. How is that inconsistent? It is 100% consistent. You know things don't have to be spelled out to be true or likely, right?

[ragnarok]

The only times she shows remorse for killing is when Raynor is present or brought up. How is that inconsistent? It is 100% consistent. You know things don't have to be spelled out to be true or likely, right?

Actually she did also for Lassara's death. That being said however, I always did wonder if she simply made that up or not. We'll see by LotV.

[Sheliek]

Do you know body language? It's this thing where parts of your body besides your vocal chords and lungs can express intent and emotion, and in games with attention to detail in cutscenes, it comes through. Watch Kerrigan's smug smirk as she apologizes. Sarcasm.

[ragnarok]

Do you know body language? It's this thing where parts of your body besides your vocal chords and lungs can express intent and emotion, and in games with attention to detail in cutscenes, it comes through. Watch Kerrigan's smug smirk as she apologizes. Sarcasm.

I believe she DID regret Lassara's death, just not in the same way. After all, she didn't have this problem with the roach and baneling evolution missions when dealing with the Protoss. Those too could come into play in LotV.

[Sheliek]

Her body language says otherwise. Belief is irrelevant when looking at facts.

[ragnarok]

Her body language says otherwise. Belief is irrelevant when looking at facts.

To me the tone of her voice showed otherwise.

[The_Blade]

Lassara gave her the same speech Warfield did. However, Protoss are killers as much as she is. The Dominion is too. Both were killed for being hypocrites.

Everything she did before knowing Raynor was alive was done to honor his memory. The only person who can question her innocence as a war criminal is Raynor.

[Turalyon]

How is she consistent?

He said lack of continuity, not consistency. There is a difference. Something that is continuous can have select moments within that continuity be inconsistent with each other.


The only person who can question her innocence as a war criminal is Raynor.

Huh? I (or any other third party really) can do a better job of questioning Kerrigan's innocence than Raynor. Afterall, when it comes to Kerrigan, Raynor is not exactly the most impartial person around.

[ragnarok]

Lassara gave her the same speech Warfield did. However, Protoss are killers as much as she is. The Dominion is too. Both were killed for being hypocrites.

Everything she did before knowing Raynor was alive was done to honor his memory. The only person who can question her innocence as a war criminal is Raynor.

Like razing the industrial worlds? If she told Raynor that on the Moros he would have told her that she was supposed to be better than that

[Visions of Khas]

Lassara gave her the same speech Warfield did. However, Protoss are killers as much as she is. The Dominion is too. Both were killed for being hypocrites.
Not quite. The Zerg are a swarm of what essentially amounts to drones directed by a higher power bent on domination. The death of a Zerg is akin to slaying a rabid dog. Killing a Protoss or Terran is tantamount to murder. I don't see how Kerrigan doesn't understand the distinction when conversing with Lassara.

[ragnarok]

Not quite. The Zerg are a swarm of what essentially amounts to drones directed by a higher power bent on domination. The death of a Zerg is akin to slaying a rabid dog. Killing a Protoss or Terran is tantamount to murder. I don't see how Kerrigan doesn't understand the distinction when conversing with Lassara.

This is because as Kerrigan saw it, no one else has ever seen the swarm in that light. To THEM, the swarm is nothing but a bunch of animals who only understand killing (which obviously is mostly true). To Kerrigan, there's more to it than that.

Unfortunately, so far she has not yet demonstrated this. Sure we saw exceptions in "Convinction", but the Protoss wouldn't know that.

And even if they did, they would merely interpret this as Kerrigan knew Raynor was the only one left who just might still listen to her after all that's happened and she needs to use him as a pawn again.

I can easily see Artanis giving Raynor just that response if he told him about what happened on the Moros. Artanis would simply say that Kerrigan knew there was NO possible way she could give the same speech like in BW and expect Raynor to fall for that trick again, so she had to come up with a different approach, and THAT was why she gave him the chance to kill her.

[drakolobo]

Not quite. The Zerg are a swarm of what essentially amounts to drones directed by a higher power bent on domination. The death of a Zerg is akin to slaying a rabid dog. Killing a Protoss or Terran is tantamount to murder. I don't see how Kerrigan doesn't understand the distinction when conversing with Lassara.

the answer is very simple, just want to be right and take any justification, I have seen many discussions on that side obviously wrong but still cling to any pretext to maintain the aura of: I'm okay you're wrong

every zerg only has the value of each cell in a multicellular organism, they are valuable as part of a whole

[The_Blade]

Huh? I (or any other third party really) can do a better job of questioning Kerrigan's innocence than Raynor. Afterall, when it comes to Kerrigan, Raynor is not exactly the most impartial person around.

I meant this from Kerrigan's point of view. I phrased a "may" sentence with "can" like a little kid. Raynor is the only character who may question Kerrigan's innocence without being killed for it (by Kerrigan).


Like razing the industrial worlds? If she told Raynor that on the Moros he would have told her that she was supposed to be better than that

She actually did. He knew. Explicitly saying something is not the only way to say things. Watch the clip again and tell me she did not take the guilt for once again becoming the QoB (by killing of course) and that he did not think she was better than that.

IZLunZBp-vs


Not quite. The Zerg are a swarm of what essentially amounts to drones directed by a higher power bent on domination. The death of a Zerg is akin to slaying a rabid dog. Killing a Protoss or Terran is tantamount to murder. I don't see how Kerrigan doesn't understand the distinction when conversing with Lassara.

This statement is void when speaking about another's moral point of view (Zerg). Your approach is based on antagonizing the Zerg; which, by definition, places you closer to the moral grounds of Protoss or Terran. Yet, what if I believe the Zerg swarm is more just in its systems than Terrans or Protoss? What if I believe there's a better approach towards life conservation through the swarm than through civilizations grasping apocalyptic technology? I can counteract any of your moral opinion regarding individualized civilizations and so can you in return towards my arguments.

This changes nothing about the actions of the characters involved in the conflict. Lassara is a member of the colonizing Protoss, Kerrigan kills for the Zerg and Warfield is part of the Dominion. Their possition of leadership was not founded by their omniscient moral analysis but rather by how they could act in the best interest of their people.

Lassara and Warfield were killed because they played the guilt card and denied their own role as biased killers. Warfield's troops were spared, because there is sympathy for the Terrans while there's none for the Protoss.

A little more on moral distinctions:

IIRC, it was the Conclave that deemed the Terrans as an inferior race. The ethical debate that surged from the events of "first contact" lead to Tassadar's defection. Later, Selendis operated a similar directive to purify the Terran colonies once again. Therefore, Artanis still operates without a moral high ground to save his people.

Warfield is probably the character with the most exposure to corruption. Whether he pretends to be good or corrupts himself for the greater good, his acts as a Dominion general shows out the lot of moral problems. He might have taken charge of the Char operations just to get out of the Terran bloodshed, but that still killed A LOT of his troops. The best general with the best intentions is killing the Zerg to protect Mengsk's unstable dictatorship in light of a better future under Valerian. Still no moral high ground.

Some Zerg creatures were forced into the Swarm, but the Overlord volunteered. Zerus flourished biologically after the Swarm Zerg ravaged the planet.

Kerrigan believes she can kill Amon on her own. She is positive about being a monster and conscious of the lives she has taken. She will try to kill the least amount of Terrans and Protoss, but she also thinks her decisions are the best. Killing Amon also saves the two other races. So, she kills anyone who is stupid enough to confront her about her moronic missions and tactics.

Kerrigan is right. There is no moral high ground on this scale. Conflict will consume any or all of the three main factions, specially if they wish to forge war against each other with the threat of Amon so close.

[ragnarok]

She actually did. He knew. Explicitly saying something is not the only way to say things. Watch the clip again and tell me she did not take the guilt for once again becoming the QoB (by killing of course) and that he did not think she was better than that.


If you're referring to the "What I had to" part, yes Kerrigan did imply that, though I don't think Raynor knew about it. Raynor wanted to believe she was better than all this. In the Flashpoint book, Kerrigan had told him that the Zerg chose her because the only thing she seemed to understand was killing, he refused to see it that way.

Thus seeing her like this got him to think all this time his assumption about her had been based on wishful thinking and everything.


Kerrigan believes she can kill Amon on her own. She is positive about being a monster and conscious of the lives she has taken. She will try to kill the least amount of Terrans and Protoss, but she also thinks her decisions are the best. Killing Amon also saves the two other races. So, she kills anyone who is stupid enough to confront her about her moronic missions and tactics.

That's utterly stupid. A fundamental reason for high casualty lists in ANY war fought is the lack of intel on your enemy. THAT is her problem: even after her defeat at the end of WoL, she doesn't seem to understand there's limits to what the swarm can do.

Narud was right to say she knew nothing of the Xel'Naga, yet she thought the numbers alone via the swarm will bypass that.

[Turalyon]

This statement is void when speaking about another's moral point of view (Zerg). Your approach is based on antagonizing the Zerg; which, by definition, places you closer to the moral grounds of Protoss or Terran. Yet, what if I believe the Zerg swarm is more just in its systems than Terrans or Protoss? What if I believe there's a better approach towards life conservation through the swarm than through civilizations grasping apocalyptic technology? I can counteract any of your moral opinion regarding individualized civilizations and so can you in return towards my arguments.

This changes nothing about the actions of the characters involved in the conflict. Lassara is a member of the colonizing Protoss, Kerrigan kills for the Zerg and Warfield is part of the Dominion. Their possition of leadership was not founded by their omniscient moral analysis but rather by how they could act in the best interest of their people.

This would all be correct save for one thing: Kerrigan does not kill for the Zerg or seemingly hold to their ideals with any conviction. She kills purely for her own self-justifying needs, whatever they may be and is unabashed to say so. I think that this specific quality is what defines her development as a character throughout Sc1/BW. She does not hide under pretense and if she does do so, it's only for as long as necessary to get something done that serves her own purposes. It's quite ironic that it was Mengsk, who is just as selfish in his motivations but yet persists under the veil of some higher ideal/purpose, is the one who instigates that change. She is more like Mengsk than she realises.

This would be all fine and good if not for the way HotS seems to want us to believe that Kerrigan's actions seem morally better because they are put in direct contrast to Mengsk's displays of outright villainy/evilness. It's what makes this exchange between in Kerrigan and Lasarra in HotS ring hollow because although there is truth in what she says (we do stuff because we think we have to do them and that's all), the overall story itself gives a mixed message by saying that though everyone really does things on a selfish whim for whatever reason and that they're really all the same, there are some selfish whims that are more just/right than others. The climax of the whole HotS story is about the final removal of Mengsk and his supposed tyranny afterall and it just ends there with no real reflection on the consequences. All we have is a thankful Raynor who acts as a morality pet/chain to Kerrigan, who rises into the air like an angel to do some more good by going to fight an even more nastier demon/devil thing. That's just intellectual dishonesty/BS of the highest order.

[ragnarok]

This would all be correct save for one thing: Kerrigan does not kill for the Zerg or seemingly hold to their ideals with any conviction. She kills purely for her own self-justifying needs, whatever they may be and is unabashed to say so. I think that this specific quality is what defines her development as a character throughout Sc1/BW. She does not hide under pretense and if she does do so, it's only for as long as necessary to get something done that serves her own purposes. It's quite ironic that it was Mengsk, who is just as selfish in his motivations but yet persists under the veil of some higher ideal/purpose, is the one who instigates that change. She is more like Mengsk than she realises.


She was back in BW and everything. But HotS was different. It wasn't about gaining power. The ORIGINAL goal was merely to use the swarm to deal with Mengsk and then walk away. Even after the primal transformation Kerrigan was still thinking that, to some degree. It was only by the time of Skygeirr that she saw otherwise.

The main problem here is she's not willing to see any good intents in anyone else. This would be consistent with the way she acted towards Zeratul in Whispers of Oblivion. To her, everyone is just too stupid.

[Turalyon]

^ That distinction still falls under the umbrella of "self-justifying needs". Either way, by the story's own standards, "dealing with Mengsk only" is still considered a morally good thing since it depicts Mengsk myopically as bad/evil. Like I said, her "I justify nothing" rant is rendered meaningless due to that mixed message. Indeed, I think it's the reason why people deem that response to Lasarra as her justifying her actions when, ironically, it shouldn't have been.

[drakolobo]

blizzard is not intended to give a heroes Kerrigan in hots, is an anti-heroine in every step gives us a selfish hunt because the word revenge is all HOTS. any attempt to justify it's just a realistic reaction to a person who is confronted by her actions. she is honest with Abathur is just revenge. a monster, killing another monster (Alucard laments). Jim is the only thing that makes it morally thinking about what she does. at the end of Hots, Raynor stops searching happens to be rational and give it the desired revenge, perhaps hoping that Kerrigan is free after concluding it.

[ragnarok]

^ That distinction still falls under the umbrella of "self-justifying needs". Either way, by the story's own standards, "dealing with Mengsk only" is still considered a morally good thing since it depicts Mengsk myopically as bad/evil. Like I said, her "I justify nothing" rant is rendered meaningless due to that mixed message. Indeed, I think it's the reason why people deem that response to Lasarra as her justifying her actions when, ironically, it shouldn't have been.

Thus the major problem here is that for her, the ends justify the means. This is why if this concept was suddenly used against her, maybe she can see the folly of that.

[Gradius]

blizzard is not intended to give a heroes Kerrigan in hots, is an anti-heroine in every step gives us a selfish hunt because the word revenge is all HOTS. any attempt to justify it's just a realistic reaction to a person who is confronted by her actions. she is honest with Abathur is just revenge. a monster, killing another monster (Alucard laments). Jim is the only thing that makes it morally thinking about what she does. at the end of Hots, Raynor stops searching happens to be rational and give it the desired revenge, perhaps hoping that Kerrigan is free after concluding it.
The legions of fans who I argue with on battle.net that think Kerrigan was a hero would like a word with you.

She ended human experimentation, she insisted on sparing terrans, she spared Warfield's troops, she is fighting against the bad guys (Mengsk & Amon), etc. etc. A vast majority of the fanbase likely considers her a good person. Raynor's supposed to be a good guy too, yet he's fine with allying with her to kill more humans and even tells us what a pleasure it was as she flies away at the end of the game.

It's obvious Blizzard has been trying to portray her in a mostly heroic capacity, with the pretense of killing off entire worlds wholesale as being justified as "war is war".

[ragnarok]

It's obvious Blizzard has been trying to portray her in a mostly heroic capacity, with the pretense of killing off entire worlds wholesale as being justified as "war is war".

Gradius, the whole war is war concept is nothing new. It's meant to be brutal and everything. And when the war ends, whoever is the victor usually has the mentality "success carries its own justification with it." This isn't just a Zerg concept, it's been part of human history for thousands of years. In many cases, the victors show no restraint AT ALL, and didn't understand restraint several years even AFTER the war.

Therefore, the fact that Kerrigan even SAW the restraint line, well I'm sure you can see where this is going.

[The_Blade]

That's utterly stupid. A fundamental reason for high casualty lists in ANY war fought is the lack of intel on your enemy. THAT is her problem: even after her defeat at the end of WoL, she doesn't seem to understand there's limits to what the swarm can do.

I agree with the sentiment. She acts in a very stupid way, constantly. And she acts this way because she constantly feels better than everyone else, specially when becoming more powerful through *plot device*.


This would all be correct save for one thing: Kerrigan does not kill for the Zerg or seemingly hold to their ideals with any conviction. She kills purely for her own self-justifying needs, whatever they may be and is unabashed to say so.

She kills for both reasons at the same time. Primal infused Zerg are "different". Therefore, there should be a distinction between the will of the Overmind in Vanilla and the will of the new Swarm at the end of HotS. Amon's directive is no longer a priority, but the Zerg are no less slaves of their leaders. Whoever is in charge of the Swarm IS the will of the Swarm.

Killing Mengsk allows her to be free of at least a fraction of her personal agenda. Indirectly it serves the Swarm.


This would be all fine and good if not for the way HotS seems to want us to believe that Kerrigan's actions seem morally better because they are put in direct contrast to Mengsk's displays of outright villainy/evilness. It's what makes this exchange between in Kerrigan and Lasarra in HotS ring hollow because although there is truth in what she says (we do stuff because we think we have to do them and that's all), the overall story itself gives a mixed message by saying that though everyone really does things on a selfish whim for whatever reason and that they're really all the same, there are some selfish whims that are more just/right than others. The climax of the whole HotS story is about the final removal of Mengsk and his supposed tyranny afterall and it just ends there with no real reflection on the consequences. All we have is a thankful Raynor who acts as a morality pet/chain to Kerrigan, who rises into the air like an angel to do some more good by going to fight an even more nastier demon/devil thing. That's just intellectual dishonesty/BS of the highest order.

These lack of grey constant throughout the story is what shatters the whole credibility of SC2 as a serious plot. I agree with you when interpreting: "the lack of consequence", "the flaws in Raynor's character", and "the ultimate evil boss". I disagree strongly into dragging those flaws down into other story elements. I understand that as parts of plot they are linked together, but it is still possible to dissect them and see what went wrong. Every character has a personal motivation to move the story in certain directions. Of them who are selfish, there's a range from evil to good. This is fine.


She was back in BW and everything. But HotS was different. It wasn't about gaining power. The ORIGINAL goal was merely to use the swarm to deal with Mengsk and then walk away. Even after the primal transformation Kerrigan was still thinking that, to some degree. It was only by the time of Skygeirr that she saw otherwise.

You hit the nail, hard, again.


The main problem here is she's not willing to see any good intents in anyone else. This would be consistent with the way she acted towards Zeratul in Whispers of Oblivion. To her, everyone is just too stupid.

This is true. Not a problem but a character's way to be. On top of that, she trusts no one.

Her being a "hero" probably roots out of the production mistakes of HotS, but she was still intended to be an anti-hero. For basic entertainment, anti-heroes are also made likable for the audience (specially when the story comes from their POV).

Honestly, that there's a division between people in favor or against Kerrigan's character proves she was wrote well. There's enough doubt in there to question her as a character and polarize her role as shades of grey rather than black or white. Again, wanting her dead at this point is still a moral judgment.

I do not agree with her being the galactic savior or her idiotic decisions, but she is not a flawed character. At the most, she is the character you hate or love in the story.

[ragnarok]

I agree with the sentiment. She acts in a very stupid way, constantly. And she acts this way because she constantly feels better than everyone else, specially when becoming more powerful through *plot device*.


Except power is a paradox. I wouldn't be surprised if ultimately what will end up killing her is due to a lack of understand that you can only have so much power before that power ultimately consumes you and end up killing you. NO ONE can hold limitless power.


This is true. Not a problem but a character's way to be. On top of that, she trusts no one.

Her being a "hero" probably roots out of the production mistakes of HotS, but she was still intended to be an anti-hero. For basic entertainment, anti-heroes are also made likable for the audience (specially when the story comes from their POV).

Honestly, that there's a division between people in favor or against Kerrigan's character proves she was wrote well. There's enough doubt in there to question her as a character and polarize her role as shades of grey rather than black or white. Again, wanting her dead at this point is still a moral judgment.

I do not agree with her being the galactic savior or her idiotic decisions, but she is not a flawed character. At the most, she is the character you hate or love in the story.

The lack of trust is understandable because of all the betrayals she went though. Even if the events of HotS never happened, it would have taken Raynor years before he could get Kerrigan to open up to others.

Wanting her dead at this point isn't just a moral judgement, it's a matter of survival.

For the Protoss, even if their honor code prevents them from seeking revenge, Kerrigan's death is the only way to ensure their safety.

For the whole galactic savior, I doubt that very much. She doesn't know anything about what Amon is capable of, and sending the swarm in blind is pointless. This is EXACTLY what Zeratul was trying to tell her in the prologue, but she wouldn't listen.

[Turalyon]

She kills for both reasons at the same time. Primal infused Zerg are "different". Therefore, there should be a distinction between the will of the Overmind in Vanilla and the will of the new Swarm at the end of HotS. Amon's directive is no longer a priority, but the Zerg are no less slaves of their leaders. Whoever is in charge of the Swarm IS the will of the Swarm.

I somewhat disagree. Kerrigan in HotS is similar to Kerrigan in BW in that she's using the Zerg purely as a means to an end, not because she's really enamoured with the Zerg ideology/ethos nor does she seem to want to promote their dominance for their benefit specifically. Afterall, she doesn't really care much for the various Zerg characters she meets and speaks down to all of them.

The Primal Zerg, being merely a plot device of convenience than anything else, don't rely factor into this. She is reinfesting herself not to help the Zerg put to gain power for herself to fight Mengsk (Amon was only an afterthought). She could care less if the Zerg are under Amon's directive or not and if she did, she never expresses any real concern about it.


Killing Mengsk allows her to be free of at least a fraction of her personal agenda. Indirectly it serves the Swarm.

This I agree on. However, it's a fine line to say that this indirect serving of the Swarm is actually what Kerrigan intends to do (that she is doing this to directly serve and benefit the Swarm).


Every character has a personal motivation to move the story in certain directions. Of them who are selfish, there's a range from evil to good. This is fine.

Yeah, I've got no problems with that. I'm talking about the authorial intrusion being made obvious and overtaking the character's personal motivation/direction in the story leading to disconnect. Kerrigan is fine doing selfish things, but it shouldn't be gussied up as being ultimately good when it clearly is not.


Honestly, that there's a division between people in favor or against Kerrigan's character proves she was wrote well. There's enough doubt in there to question her as a character and polarize her role as shades of grey rather than black or white.

Her character is pretty clear, it's just the authorial intent for her character that is not. It muddies things quite a lot.

[ragnarok]

I somewhat disagree. Kerrigan in HotS is similar to Kerrigan in BW in that she's using the Zerg purely as a means to an end, not because she's really enamoured with the Zerg ideology/ethos nor does she seem to want to promote their dominance for their benefit specifically. Afterall, she doesn't really care much for the various Zerg characters she meets and speaks down to all of them.

The Primal Zerg, being merely a plot device of convenience than anything else, don't rely factor into this. She is reinfesting herself not to help the Zerg put to gain power for herself to fight Mengsk (Amon was only an afterthought). She could care less if the Zerg are under Amon's directive or not and if she did, she never expresses any real concern about it.


Yes but as the game went on, you can see she began to look at the swarm in a different light. The problem however is that she knows no one else will see it that way.

[Turalyon]

Yes but as the game went on, you can see she began to look at the swarm in a different light.

Please enlighten me to where in HotS this actually happens.

[ragnarok]

Please enlighten me to where in HotS this actually happens.

It's over the course of the game, you can see her tone begins to change towards the swarm and everything. Granted right before the last mission she DID admit to Abathur she merely used the swarm as a tool, but she also did tell Izsha that once the war with Mengsk ends they still have other battles to face together.

It's not like there's a way back to humanity for her anymore, so even if she survives the war against Amon she has little choice but to stay with the swarm, so it's better to see them differently.

[TheEconomist]

What if I believe there's a better approach towards life conservation through the swarm than through civilizations grasping apocalyptic technology?

I recently read one of the greatest science fiction novels I've ever encountered that dealt with this topic. VoK and I mentioned it in the "Reading" topic in the off-topic forum. The book is is called Blindsight and its by Peter watts. I highly recommend you read it if you ever get the chance. It's written by a marine biologist who raise a lot of good points about the ultimately self-destructive tendency of intelligence vs less intelligent but intelligent designed.

That being said, the problem with conservation of life through the swarm is that it's ultimately pointless as most of the Zerg ultimately lack sentience, in my opinion. The greater efficiency of less intelligent organisms to work, in the end, for better self-preservation, is also apparent within animals, not just in humans vs animals. But, if life had stayed at microbial level, or even at the insectoid level, what's the point?

[Turalyon]

It's over the course of the game, you can see her tone begins to change towards the swarm and everything. Granted right before the last mission she DID admit to Abathur she merely used the swarm as a tool, but she also did tell Izsha that once the war with Mengsk ends they still have other battles to face together.

So... in other words, it doesn't actually happen at all.

You said it (Kerrigan identifying herself with the Zerg and working for/with them rather than just using them as tools for her own ends) happens "during the game" and I asked "where in the game?" and you respond with "it's during the game". Can you see the problem there? I'm not asking for your conjecture here.

[ragnarok]

So... in other words, it doesn't actually happen at all.

You said it (Kerrigan identifying herself with the Zerg and working for/with them rather than just using them as tools for her own ends) happens "during the game" and I asked "where in the game?" and you respond with "it's during the game". Can you see the problem there? I'm not asking for your conjecture here.

It's not at a SPECIFIC part in the game. The most you can see it would be near the end, right before the last HotS mission (or right after the 2nd to last HotS mission), where she was explaining to Izsha that once the war with Mengsk ends, they'll still have plenty of battles to face together.

[Turalyon]

It's not at a SPECIFIC part in the game. The most you can see it would be near the end...

So... in other words, it doesn't actually happen at all.

Glad we got that cleared up. :D

[ragnarok]

So... in other words, it doesn't actually happen at all.

Glad we got that cleared up. :D

I don't think you're getting it. The fact that she said they would face many battles together implied she integrated herself more into the swarm to become like them. Though this is more due to the lack of choices left to her.

[TheEconomist]

Oh poor Rag

[Turalyon]

I don't think you're getting it. The fact that she said they would face many battles together implied she integrated herself more into the swarm to become like them. Though this is more due to the lack of choices left to her.

I'm not getting it? Can you be so sure yourself? You've just self-refuted the only evidence you have in this very reply.


Oh poor Rag

Gotta give him some points for being the unwitting comedian though, I got a big laugh out of his reply. :o

[ragnarok]

I'm not getting it? Can you be so sure yourself? You've just self-refuted the only evidence you have in this very reply.



The lack of choices is exactly why she was forced to do what she did. She should have recognized this right after Zerus, though she might have been hoping for something else (though I can't see what).

[Turalyon]

The lack of choices is exactly why she was forced to do what she did.

...which is why this is not proof that Kerrigan meaningfully sympathises, identifies or empathises with the Zerg at any level or any degree.

As I said twice before.... in other words, it doesn't actually happen at all.

[ragnarok]

...which is why this is not proof that Kerrigan meaningfully sympathises, identifies or empathises with the Zerg at any level or any degree.

As I said twice before.... in other words, it doesn't actually happen at all.

For MOST of HotS I agree with you. But near the end of HotS, Izsha asked that once her revenge is done, would she leave them. She said no. Unless, of course, you're suggesting that was merely her stage acting.

[Turalyon]

would she leave them. She said no.

Did she ever extrapolate on the reason behind her reply of "no"? That reason could be literally anything, including that she just wants to continue using them as expendable tools as she does in HotS - which means she don't give a crap about them. You've admitted that maybe it's because she's just forced to stay with them. This does not mean she truly sympathises with the Zerg; the very specific thing I was asking you to provide evidence for.

What you are really giving me is conjecture/your own spin on it, so therefore I have to conclude that it (Kerrigan having any true sympathy for the Zerg) doesn't actually happen at all.

[ragnarok]

Did she ever extrapolate on the reason behind her reply of "no"? That reason could be literally anything, including that she just wants to continue using them as expendable tools as she does in HotS - which means she don't give a crap about them. You've admitted that maybe it's because she's just forced to stay with them. This does not mean she truly sympathises with the Zerg; the very specific thing I was asking you to provide evidence for.

What you are really giving me is conjecture/your own spin on it, so therefore I have to conclude that it (Kerrigan having any true sympathy for the Zerg) doesn't actually happen at all.

Of course there's multiple reasons. But the fact remains she DID say she would not leave them behind. She HAS seen the swarm in a different light compared to others (though overall it's not really TOO much different, she knows there's no way anyone else would see this view).

You're right in that we don't know the reason behind it. You said she still saw them as expendable tools. If that's true she wouldn't have bothered trying to rally them in the prologue mission in attacking Moebius. In that sense there is a sense of caring, though I'm sure it can be argued she cannot see them COMPLETELY expendable.

[The_Blade]

I believe that Kerrigan's integration with the Swarm is somewhat implied, but I have to agree with Turalyon. There is no dialogue or arc that explicitly connects the Swarm to Kerrigan in a sentimental way.

After her ascension on Zerus there's this dialogue with Izsha:


Izsha: You radiate so much power. More than the old Queen of Blades ever did.

Kerrigan: Everything is different. I could always hear the Swarm. Control it. But now... I feel the Swarm. Now, I am the Swarm.

Even then, it is a dialogue on the theme of "power".

When she speaks to Zagara about vision, it is difficult to tell if she is guiding a child or training a dog. Unlike Abathur, Zagara does not has her own sentience. Which makes all the subject a lot harder.

My conclusion would be that there's still no verdict on what the Zerg are to Kerrigan at the end of HotS, when inspected on a vacum. However, there's always this Blizzard development (3:08):

7YkX4Yt4ek8

If this evidence is valid, then yes she loves the Swarm. Maybe at first like an extension of herself, but eventually as "her people". IMO, it would be the only way she would ever find peace.

[Turalyon]

But the fact remains she DID say she would not leave them behind.

So what? The reason for her saying this could just as well be for her to use the Swarm against Amon because if she doesn't, he will kill her. There is nothing there that implies she sympathises with the Zerg ideology unless you're wishing it there to be in the first place.


She HAS seen the swarm in a different light compared to others (though overall it's not really TOO much different, she knows there's no way anyone else would see this view).

This is vague and non-specific. She could be marvelling at the power the Primal Zerg has given her in contrast to her previous infestation for all we know. Like the above, it could be any other myriad reason some other person can concoct on a whim to support their notions really. So, unless one is inclined to think Kerrigan sympathises with Zerg ideology (which is the source of your bias), there actually isn't any concrete evidence that she does indeed sympathise with Zerg ideology.


If that's true she wouldn't have bothered trying to rally them in the prologue mission in attacking Moebius. In that sense there is a sense of caring, though I'm sure it can be argued she cannot see them COMPLETELY expendable.

I have no idea how that reference you provided is relevent. She is attacking Moebius because they are Amon's agents and in her way to ultimately kill Amon - there is nothing there that implies she is in love with the Zerg and their ideology


My conclusion would be that there's still no verdict on what the Zerg are to Kerrigan at the end of HotS, when inspected on a vacum.

Hallelujah! Now we're getting somewhere! Because we don't really know, all we have is the implications of what has already happened so far. In BW, she uses them for own selfish desires and vindictiveness. Then in HotS, she still seems to be doing it for selfish desires, albeit a slightly different selfish desire than in BW and with maybe less vindictiveness (the difference is academic really). Therefore, the conclusion that she sympathises only with her own agenda is stronger than the conclusion that she sympathises with Zerg ideology (which there is no concrete evidence of whatsoever).


If this evidence is valid, then yes she loves the Swarm. Maybe at first like an extension of herself, but eventually as "her people". IMO, it would be the only way she would ever find peace.

I really don't mind this development... if it were actually in HotS.

It's funny because before HotS even came out, I suggested that HotS story would be unique and different from before if Kerrigan somehow identified with the Zerg following her de-infestation in WoL. In the HotS version I purported/envisioned at the time, she would make this realisation after having killed Mengsk early on by realising that she is still a monster on the inside (in that she is not really different from Mengsk and that she's still willing to kill under any pretense) despite being made human again and then decides she might as well look like and become the monster she realises she's always been by giving herself to the Zerg and their cause. Then the rest of my HotS would have her trying to battle Amon and his Hybrids with the possible implication that she's doing this because there can be only one big bad monster and she intends to be it. Dark stuff for sure but it would've been interesting since there'd be a mix of tragedy (due to her being a broken individual, having justified angst but ultimately being unable to shake it off) and empowerment (in that she's becoming self-actualised by embracing her darkness and realising her identity is only complete when she was infested) in Kerrigan making this choice to join the Zerg again. It's better than the typical "for REVENNGGGGEE!!!!" reason we got in the HotS that eventually came out.

[ragnarok]

However, there's always this Blizzard development (3:08):

7YkX4Yt4ek8

If this evidence is valid, then yes she loves the Swarm. Maybe at first like an extension of herself, but eventually as "her people". IMO, it would be the only way she would ever find peace.

Problem is as I remember Blizzard always said such things aren't considered canon

[The_Blade]

I agree, it's not canon; but it at least gives us an idea of what Blizzard initially wanted to develop. It aligns with Browder's comments about making HotS a game about the Zerg, not a game about Kerrigan. Which is not what we got.

IMO it could have been a better story, but we all know how dangerous "It could have been..." is in this forums. ^^

[ragnarok]

I agree, it's not canon; but it at least gives us an idea of what Blizzard initially wanted to develop. It aligns with Browder's comments about making HotS a game about the Zerg, not a game about Kerrigan. Which is not what we got.

IMO it could have been a better story, but we all know how dangerous "It could have been..." is in this forums. ^^

Making the game about the Zerg and then centering it on Kerrigan is considered contradictory, I don't think Blizzard understood that.

[drakolobo]

it is not mandatory, but was disappointed with the title of Heart of the Swarm, but Abathur and zagara, calmed my pain as truly zerg in the campaign
http://www.mediapeta.com/peta/igc/starcraft-v2.jpg