Uhm, the Zeratul/Kerrigan cinematic suffers from many things, but poor transitions isn't one of them. Not until the very end, anyway...Quote:
Originally Posted by broodmywarcraft
Dialogue you don't like =! rough transition.
Printable View
Uhm, the Zeratul/Kerrigan cinematic suffers from many things, but poor transitions isn't one of them. Not until the very end, anyway...Quote:
Originally Posted by broodmywarcraft
Dialogue you don't like =! rough transition.
I've noticed a few inconsistencies in some of the cinematics, most notably the rescue of Warfield. In it, Raynor pops out the round to his left, but it sails to the right. Moreover, you can clearly see the ground deform right before it hits the dirt.
Also, in Prophecy, Kerrigan is standing on rockier terrain in the end than when she is attacked by Zeratul.
Small things, really, and trivial, but they annoyed me.
i mean how quickly the shot cut to Kerrigan after Zeratul spoke.Quote:
Originally Posted by pure.Wasted
Whoa! I just realized all those...wow, that's lazy...Quote:
Originally Posted by Visions of Khas
"HEV shells are surrounded in a highly energetic field of electromagnetism, propelled at fantastic speeds by their gauss cannons. This same field also erodes away at their environment, deforms terrains, and causes mild coughing, runny nose, rash, and explosive decompression."
That still isn't a bad transition. This is simply a cut that irked you personally that lots of people didn't or wouldn't give a second thought to, ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by broodmywarcraft
That and the genuinely questionable (albeit defensible) transition between different scenes in "Heir Apparent" are nothing alike.
You don't know anything about animation... do you?Quote:
Whoa! I just realized all those...wow, that's lazy...
Here's a page for all the goofs in The Incredibles. Pixar admitted 1 goof into The Incredibles for every 5,3/4 minutes of animation. And Pixar is an acclaimed, award-winning animation studio that has a huge team that does nothing but work on movies.
For SC2 to be ON PAR with Pixar's 'laziness', you have to find 7 goofs total (45 minute running time for the cinematics).
In other words... get over yourself.
Wow...that is pompous...Quote:
Originally Posted by pure.Wasted
The truth always has the right to be pompus.Quote:
Wow...that is pompous...
So, what did I do to deserve that 'truth'? So I made some criticisms, what of it?
There's nothing wrong with criticism. WOL has many issues that deserve to be brought to Blizzard's attention. The thing is...Quote:
Originally Posted by broodmywarcraft
1. They need to be presented constructively. (NOT: "Blizzard is lazy!")
2. They need to be valid. (NOT: "Blizz made 2 continuity gaffs over 45 minutes of animation, they need to do better!")
Look at the original post in which VoK outlined the continuity gaffs, to which you later tagged along. He admits that these are "small things" and "trivial" -- read: inconsequential, insignificant, not a valid criticism -- and then points out that HE was annoyed by them.
See the difference? "Blizzard is lazy" vs. "I am annoyed by something". The former is a knee-jerk, unwarranted, baseless reaction presented as fact. The latter is simply the expression of personal feelings; no attempts to speak for others, no attempts to judge Blizzard.
Just because we're on the internet doesn't mean it's really cool and hip to bash Blizzard from the safety of anonymity.
Okay, let's try this: I am annoyed by how the Zeratul vs Kerrigan cinematic seems crammed and rushed. It annoys me to hear the directors of the cinematic talk about how they had this 175 shot version on the storyboards that they had to wittle down to 40 shots or so because IT WAS TOO HARD:(Quote:
Originally Posted by pure.Wasted
Really? $60 and they couldn't have hired a couple more people. I'm not saying they should have done all 175 shots, but the whole process seemed bent on literally just getting everything out of the way for the Prophecy(which you criticized superbly in your review:D).
You'd think after 4 years apart, we'd get some reminiscence, perhaps goading of zeratul by kerrigan over his matriarch or inability to take up his matriarch's desire for him to be his tribe's new leader., you know something Kerrigan used to be known for before she went this:
http://files.sharenator.com/emo_kids...-13603-580.jpg
but no, all we get is
"Please, our petty conflicts mean nothing now..."
a.k.a: Closure does not equal expansion/money.
Was that a legitimate criticism?
The reason for this, I believe, is for conservation of detail. Blizzard made a conscious decision to keep their cinematics, while regular and frequent, short and to the point in order to keep the pace going and not slow the game down. While some people might like a long-drawn cinematic duel between Kerrigan and Zeratul, not everyone is willing to sit through it. At the same time, the message/point of the cinematic needs to be delivered (especially since it is vital to the plot).
This also relates to your specifc comment about Kerrigan's lack of goading of Zeratul. Mentioning the Matriarch, Zeratul's role in her death and the ensuing aftermath is not relevant in this game and would simply confuse new players who would be left wondering what they are talking about. Remember, the more obvious the continuity nods, the more it alienates newcomers if insufficient exposition is provided and is not part of the initial setting. Hence, that was not the time and place to mention it especially since it can be better used in LotV.
But it's a sequel, it's generally not suppose to have newcomers.Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. peasant
You mean, "let's make our cinematics less cool so more people will be attracted to the game"?Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. peasant
Pre-rendered cinematics are all about presentation and seeing things first hand. They could've easily revealed that plot point during an ingame cutscene, but the pre-rendered cinematics are specifically there for the player to see what a fight between Kerrigan and Zeratul would be like in real life. Making it a short one defeats the whole point of the cinematic (which is to present the events in an extra detailed and dramatic way). Besides, you seriously suggest that a fight scene would have the effect of slowing the game down?
They were suppose to fight on the ceiling!! How could that have not been the coolest thing ever!!?:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Eligor
Yes, because a game is supposed to be interactive. Therefore, cinematics need to strike a careful balance between what you just described and not taking too long. Otherwise, it'd be like watching a movie instead; not that Starcraft the Movie would not be awesome but this isn't supposed to be it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eligor
Yes, it should. Otherwise, you'd be setting yourself up for failure as you'd be dealing with an ever shrinking audience with each successive release.Quote:
Originally Posted by broodmywarcraft
So...you expect everyone who wants to make sense of the campaign to go out and buy the original game? Of course it will have newcomers. It's not like a movie or any other game where the sequel came out a couple of years later. The original game is ancient now. A lot of people will see this new game and pick it up because the gameplay looks fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by broodmywarcraft
cutting sp content for fast retail... hell I would wait longer if all what we have seen so far in artworks, cinematics and other stuff were put in the singleplayerQuote:
Originally Posted by Visions of Khas
it really looks like they were doing all this voice acting, cinematics in a rush
I don't belive that they had all SP content ready a year before beta that is just playing stupid and making fun of the audience
I think that most of you guys agree that Kerrigan in WoL is the worst character, they just screwed her personality by three key moves: Trisha (thanks for EDI in ME2 but in SC2 you just suck ass ma'am), few retarded lines about how the universe ends and skipping her part of the story in WoL to the end
why the fuck they had to split the game, sp wise it's really not worth the wait and as a stand-alone product
I agree that Kerrigan was a weak character, but I wasn't so much concerned with Tricia's portrayal of her. I'm convinced Kerrigan was supposed to be more low-key, which is what Tricia delivered. I just don't like how she was done otherwise.
It's still just strange that the writers at Blizz would make so much out of the love story, only yo totally tone it down for 90-95% of the campaign, and even make it the ending for WoL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Visions of Khas
If you were going to tone Kerrigan's role so much down (I still don't see how she couldn't have had those brilliant "You've all played like pawns min my game" lines, that Glynnis delivered so well in SC1 order to show just how great of a character Kerrigan is) why not just have Glynnis do the few needed lines for WoL? I think the mere feeling of Kerrigan sounding as good ol' Kerrigan, could've let Blizz get away with even less characterisation than there is now in WoL of Kerrigan.
I don't see where this "Kerrigan is emo" thing is coming from. As I pointed out before, you can't be emo if you don't have dialog. And Kerrigan barely speaks.Quote:
you know something Kerrigan used to be known for before she went this:
Closure? Not everything should be wrapped up neat and tight.Quote:
a.k.a: Closure does not equal expansion/money.
BS. New games should not actively ward people off.Quote:
But it's a sequel, it's generally not suppose to have newcomers.
It rather depends on how long it is. If it's 1 minute of actual content followed by 8 minutes of meaningless battle, then yes, it would have slowed the game down.Quote:
Besides, you seriously suggest that a fight scene would have the effect of slowing the game down?
But it's more that long battles are not necessarily good battles. Also, I would point out that the battle would end in a draw. In short, the whole battle was meaningless. Kerrigan was not going to kill Zeratul. Zeratul was not going to kill Kerrigan. So why have a long, drawn out fight that ends in a tie?
... it's not. It would just look stupid.Quote:
They were suppose to fight on the ceiling!! How could that have not been the coolest thing ever!!?
Who said that it was?Quote:
I don't belive that they had all SP content ready a year before beta that is just playing stupid and making fun of the audience
You're assuming that they cut it to get the game out on time.Quote:
cutting sp content for fast retail... hell I would wait longer if all what we have seen so far in artworks, cinematics and other stuff were put in the singleplayer
Content gets cut for various reasons. Most of them for the better. And most of the content that people talk about would not fix the major problems in WoL.
Bullshit.Quote:
why the fuck they had to split the game, sp wise it's really not worth the wait and as a stand-alone product
I hated the story of SC1; I thought it was stupid, poorly presented, and generally crappily written with bad cardboard cutouts instead of actual characters. I also was not particularly enamoured with SC1's singleplayer gameplay.
SC2's story is presented much better. It's still not good, but the presentation works a bit better. But SC2's gameplay is the best singleplayer RTS gameplay that I've played. If you want to bash the story, feel free. But the gameplay certainly benefited from the expansion of the game.
The fact that you spend so long with just infantry troops really makes you use and appreciate them in a way that SC1 never did. The diversity of infantry units was very good.
Indeed, the diversity of gameplay experience in the game was very, very strong. And that could only had been done by expanding the game into the current format.
The fact that the writers didn't take advantage of it is their fault and their loss. Bad writers suck, but it's a lot more noticeable when they try to write a novel than when they try to write a short story.
That would require Kerrigan to actually be important to the plot. She wasn't because the writers wrote her that way.Quote:
I still don't see how she couldn't have had those brilliant "You've all played like pawns min my game" lines, that Glynnis delivered so well in SC1 order to show just how great of a character Kerrigan is
Probably because HotS will be all about Kerrigan, and they expect her to have actual dialog.Quote:
why not just have Glynnis do the few needed lines for WoL?
The writers not writing her more in, is exactly the reason, I find it odd, that she wasn't included more, since once I agreed on the terms of WoL I could still see Kerrigan showing up all of a sudden and in dialogue (not only actions) mock Raynor and get to show that she's really badass. In stead the first thing we hear from her, is almost her talking to herself about how she underestimated Raynor. (I know she's not talking to herself, but the words are so laid back, she might as wel just talk to herself - or not even say anything.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
Yes, and I really hope so, because this is yet one more element which makes the player go "I really hope for HotS to deliver", whereas WoL seems less and less to be able to be enjoyed fully by itself. (Which again is what Blizz didn't set out to do to begin with - I'll spam this for the last time. :))Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/73/...ogyannounc.jpg
Your picture does not an argument in and of itself make.Quote:
Originally Posted by BusinessMonkey
Point 1 is irrelevant.
Point 2 -- the story of WOL is indeed undeniably epic. Whether it is good or bad is irrelevant.
Point 3 -- we are OBVIOUSLY going to get a lot more content through 3 installments than we would have otherwise. We already have more cinematics in one game than WC3+TFT+WoW+BC+WOTLK combined. We have plenty of missions -- which are, as Nicol pointed out, very, very well designed.
Do you mean barely in a relative sense, because she has alot of lines?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
Wasn't asking that things ended there, my bad on how I presented it. I just wasnted to see some deeper tension between Zeratul and Kerrigan that involves their past. She never once mentions Raszaegal or chide Zeratul for failing to take up her request, you know, what the old Kerrigan would do to her enemies, "Stukov was twice the man you were, I'm glad you saved me the trouble of killing him." Something like that would have been nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
Again, I presented it wrong. I don't mind if they change the gameplay to freshen it up or something like that, just don't water down the story. ONE THING that really annoyed me was when the Hybrids came and Zeratul says "Who could have created them?!"....wtf, how could he not have known that, besides the secret mission in Brood War, in the Dark Templar Saga, Zeratul talks about Duran and the Hybrids. I thought the Templar Saga was suppose to be the lore setup and the game didn't even follow that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
but they don't know that it would be a draw. As far as Zeratul is concerned, he's more than eager to try his hand at Kerrigan and I'm sure Kerrigan is more than eager to finish Zeratul off especially when in SHADOW HUNTERS, she's no longer tired of slaughter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
I don't want a long fight sequence either. Anakin vs Obi wan is a testament to just how boring those things can be, but something more along the lines of this pace would have been cool:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALk7qG3VqjQ
I can understand where TVTropes is coming from, but i'm not gonna base every single decision off them. I think it still could have worked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
Yeah, we're opposites on Starcraft's story, that's really all want to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
The story of WoL was about Raynor. It involved Kerrigan, but it was specifically about Raynor.Quote:
Which again is what Blizz didn't set out to do to begin with - I'll spam this for the last time.
His story was completed in WoL as well, which is as you stated what they set out to do. What the ending means for the galaxy at large is not part of Raynor's story. Blizzard did not say that there would be 3 separate stories; they did say that there would be an overarching story connecting them (ie: the hybrids). And that's what we have here.
OK, let's say you do that. You have Kerrigan bring up Raszaegal.Quote:
just wasnted to see some deeper tension between Zeratul and Kerrigan that involves their past. She never once mentions Raszaegal or chide Zeratul for failing to take up her request, you know, what the old Kerrigan would do to her enemies, "Stukov was twice the man you were, I'm glad you saved me the trouble of killing him." Something like that would have been nice.
First, why is she doing it? Is it just a random non sequitur that lets her go "Oh look at how evil I am! I referenced something evil I did in the past! Ha ha ha!" Or would it actually be something that came up in conversation? If it's the latter, then you now have to write dialog to make it come up. If it's the former, well, what have you accomplished? She's the villain; we knew that before she brought this up. Even people who never played SC1 have already accepted her as the badguy.
Second, now you have to stop the cinematic and explain what she's talking about. Otherwise, a substantial portion of the audience will have no idea what you're talking about, and the comment will mean nothing to them. It is your responsibility as the writer to make sure that your audience, all of it, will understand what you're talking about. Even those people who haven't played SC1 singleplayer in over a decade and long-since forgot some random minor character from BW.
This still doesn't change the fact that the fight, however long it is, accomplishes nothing. It doesn't show character, except for the fact that these two hate each other (which the current one does well enough). It doesn't advance the plot. It doesn't advance the theme. It would only provide spectacle.Quote:
but they don't know that it would be a draw. As far as Zeratul is concerned, he's more than eager to try his hand at Kerrigan and I'm sure Kerrigan is more than eager to finish Zeratul off especially when in SHADOW HUNTERS, she's no longer tired of slaughter.
And after hearing about some of the anime-esque crap they had planned for it, I doubt they could have done a spectacle-laden fight sequence well. And they certainly couldn't pull off any kind of martial arts Wuxia-style fight sequence.
It would deepen the relationship between the two, it would show the audience the tension between them. It shows complexity, depth, more than just 'i hate you' or 'die'. It shows continuity too, helping veterans and those familiar with both the original games and novels feel like this is a true continuation of the story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
No, no, no, wrong, wrong wrong, a writer should write! And then make changes if necessary to maybe open up the story to more people, but he should not water down/ commercialize it just please EVERYONE! That's not what writing is all about, it's about crafting stories that the writer feels are worth telling and it's up to the audience to decide whether to love it or not and if they want to understand it they can GO PLAY THE FIRST ONE!!!! Or read the novels to gain better understanding.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
It advances the plot more than you think. If both of them went one on one in a sustain fight sequence, we see both their strengths and limitations. In this case, it would have been either a draw or Kerrigan gaining the upper hand though Zeratul escapes. Either way shows the audience that no matter how hard Zeratul fought or what he threw at her, he couldn't beat her in a one on one fight, therefore, it foreshadows for the audience there is gonna have to be another way to take her down. It has to be sustained showing what Zeratul can pull off and free from interference (Hydralisks or Protoss) so the audience does not have any "oh if only they didn't get involved" thoughts, no, they have to know that Kerrigan cannot be beaten one-on-one, she's just too powerful for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
And I wasn't saying that the fight had to be martial arts-ish, only sustained and well paced like that Jet Li scene.
"Too hard" doesn't really get at the problem. There is only so much that can be added to any single game, or book, or movie. Could they make a thousand cinematics, for every scene that deserves them? Of course. But it isn't practical.Quote:
Originally Posted by broodmywarcraft
The longer they take making cinematics for WOL, the longer they have to put off cinematics for HOTS. The longer they take with HOTS, the longer they have to delay LOTV. The longer they take making each game, the more money they spend, the less money they make -- which means they'll have to cut corners in the future, won't be given so much leeway by Activision, and so on. Everything must be done within reason.
I, for instance, am a hundred times more upset with the scrapped plots than I am with the filler-esque scenes scrapped from this cinematic. Raynor was supposed to be brooding and despondent at the beginning of the story, adding to the arc he goes through in the campaign. With that cut, the impact of his arc is lessened. The crew aboard the Hyperion was supposed to lose faith in Raynor -- not during a single cinematic, and gain it before that cinematic's end, but as an entire plot arc. Instead a single "You guys don't have to tag along as I save the world" speech does all the work. Those sound like they would have added some much-needed depth to the campaign. Those scrapped ideas is what I regret. A fight scene in the campaign pales in comparison, planned or no.
Absolutely true. But... your problem here isn't with the cinematic, it's with the writing for Kerrigan, period.Quote:
You'd think after 4 years apart, we'd get some reminiscence, perhaps goading of zeratul by kerrigan over his matriarch or inability to take up his matriarch's desire for him to be his tribe's new leader., you know something Kerrigan used to be known for before she went this:
http://files.sharenator.com/emo_kids...-13603-580.jpg
but no, all we get is
"Please, our petty conflicts mean nothing now..."
Jury's still out on that... but it was constructive, and that's plenty good. :)Quote:
Was that a legitimate criticism?
I gotta side with Nicol on this one. Re-stating facts does not add depth to a character. The fact that Kerrigan was wasted and misrepresented in this campaign would not have been allayed by the addition of this single line (or any single line, for that matter).Quote:
It would deepen the relationship between the two, it would show the audience the tension between them. It shows complexity, depth, more than just 'i hate you' or 'die'. It shows continuity too, helping veterans and those familiar with both the original games and novels feel like this is a true continuation of the story.
Yes, she appears tame in WOL, but making her bark louder wouldn't change that. The problem is she never, ever bit.
Dustin Browder himselfQuote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
it wouldn't fix them, it would make them a bit smallerQuote:
You're assuming that they cut it to get the game out on time.
Content gets cut for various reasons. Most of them for the better. And most of the content that people talk about would not fix the major problems in WoL.
well you hated it, I loved it because it was easy to understand, there were no skips in plot narrationQuote:
Bullshit.
I hated the story of SC1; I thought it was stupid, poorly presented, and generally crappily written with bad cardboard cutouts instead of actual characters. I also was not particularly enamoured with SC1's singleplayer gameplay.
SC2's story is presented much better. It's still not good, but the presentation works a bit better. But SC2's gameplay is the best singleplayer RTS gameplay that I've played. If you want to bash the story, feel free. But the gameplay certainly benefited from the expansion of the game.
.
in SC2 it's also easy to understand, yet it's all messed up and for an average Joey it wouldn't make sense, add to that poor voice acting with some characters while SC1 didn't have a damn one hero which was ripped apart because of the voice acting
Oh most definitely I will agree with you about the scrapped plots.Quote:
Originally Posted by pure.Wasted
Yep, it's the writing.Quote:
Originally Posted by pure.Wasted
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by pure.Wasted
http://rlv.zcache.com/yo_adrian_i_di...54tmn7_210.jpg
Again, the writing. In fact, by lessing her in the plot, it actually made her seem less of a threat considering four years of wait and the invasion of the BULK of the Zerg forces.Quote:
Originally Posted by pure.Wasted
The campaign literally would have been 10x better if that were the case -_-.Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. peasant
Realistically their would be no way it could be 175 scenes.Quote:
Okay, let's try this: I am annoyed by how the Zeratul vs Kerrigan cinematic seems crammed and rushed. It annoys me to hear the directors of the cinematic talk about how they had this 175 shot version on the storyboards that they had to wittle down to 40 shots or so because IT WAS TOO HARD
You might be right... but as they say, be careful what you wish for.Quote:
Originally Posted by newcomplex
In the last 12 years, Blizzard have obviously forgotten how to write Kerrigan. They have not, meanwhile, forgotten how to write Mengsk; if anything, they've gotten better at that.
So, let's think through this practically. If we have the choice of losing one character while the other goes on to play a role in all 3 campaigns, would you rather they keep the one they CAN write, or the one they CAN'T?
There's an up side to everything. :)
I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by newcomplex
True. I wasn't asking for 175 shots, just pointing out the ambition for this cinematic and how flat it turned out to be, mostly due again, to the poor writing.Quote:
Originally Posted by newcomplex
LOL!! That is true:DQuote:
Originally Posted by pure.Wasted
Mengsk had some good lines, but I felt that they didn't have in game events reinforce his personality. Nothing in the game makes you want to hate him. If nothing else, I'd have like to seen Dominion marines basically just kill everyone in that newsroom, something that happened in the comics. More missions needed to actually have you liberate oppressed people and make them oppressed in meaningful ways.Quote:
They have not, meanwhile, forgotten how to write Mengsk; if anything, they've gotten better at that.
Wc3 accurately portrayed this very well with the Undead Scourge. By the start of the Undead campaign their was no doubt in anyones mind why the Scourge were basically the most evil thing in existence, yet somehow they managed to make you almost like/sympathize for Arthas and Kel'Thuzad by the time the campaign was over, without making them less complete bastards. By Frozen throne, Arthas's conflicts with the burning legion, and his "friendship" with Kel'Thuzad basically made you like him as a very strong protagonist AND antagonist, something Lucas had tried and completely failed at. (if Arthas is still thoroughly contrived and archetypical and even corny in every way). Thats top notch storytelling right there. These were definitely 2d characters, which while may be an insult in another genre, is actually praise in an RTS campaign which introduces upwards of 25+ different people.
In contrast, SC2 basically failed this in every regard. Basically only Raynor, Tychus, and Horner could be considered 2d, and every one else was just a caricature that served no more then a plot device.
Blizzard never really made well written characters, but thats ok, because they presented them surrounded by awesome events, and wrote them in accordingly. With WoL, they try and get all Dostoevsky on us and try to focus exclusively on a couple pet characters (basically just Raynor and arguably Tychus)
imo, objectively, Raynor and Tychus are probably the best written characters blizzard ever made. But the issue is that it was done at an expense of every single other aspect of the campaign, including incredibly weak supporting characters and antagonists, and lack of a meaningful plot, and the end result is a Raynor character that while somewhat better written, is still pretty contrived that he alone can't make up for all the other shortcomings of the campaign.
All the issues with the campaign can be summed up with a short tl;dr
---------
-Lack of meaningful plot development and supporting characters/antagonist undermine characters who are not strong enough to stand on their own merits.-
---------
Absolutely no argument from me. I like the WAY they're writing Mengsk, but that only counts for so much when he has 4 genuine scenes (one of which features a hologram and the other does not feature his visage at all). His presence was lacking throughout the midsection of the campaign, which could have used a lot more momentum. I mean, Tosh has FOUR missions; Tosh, the guy who we find out LOATHES Mengsk as much as, if not more than, Raynor.Quote:
Originally Posted by newcomplex
Does Mengsk come up in even a single mission? No. The closest we get is a Dominion agent who might not even be working under Mengsk's immediate purview.
It's a total waste.
Mission 1 should have been gathering Terrazine.
Mission 2 should have been staging the break out, once we find out he's a Spectre.
Mission 3 should have involved a Spectre-led assault on Korhal itself. With whatever cinematic Blizz wanted to throw at the end as resolution.
That way we would have had the secondary character development (which Blizz got), a plot tie-in with the other arcs going on (which they did not even attempt), and actual furtherment in plot. Right now those 3 missions are complete and total filler.
http://u1.ipernity.com/4/66/71/1536671.aca2d25a.560.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by pure.Wasted
And on that note: just as it makes sense to tie in Tosh's missions with Matt's (vs. Mengsk), it would have been a perfect fit to associate Ariel Hanson's with Valerian's (vs. Infestation).
I mean, she's the resident expert on infestation, isn't she? Then we get an artifact that allegedly de-infests things? Um... doesn't it make sense to let her take a look and test it? No idea what mission they could have come up with out of that, but just narratively... it's like... it's such an obvious link, the only thing I can do at this point is /facepalm.
I'm sure it all goes back to branching. Blizz walked into SC2 having absolutely no idea how to make a non-linear campaign work, and I don't really blame them. That it holds up as well as it does is a minor miracle in itself. I sincerely hope they were paying attention and took WOL as a learning experience.
Yeah. If I could change the campaign, this is what I would have done.Quote:
Originally Posted by pure.Wasted
The artifact chain should NOT have been the "driving force" behind the campaign. It was easily the worst done mission chain, had little relevance (go attack protoss randomly and steal their stuff for money), and didn't really offer any plot developments. The one it did offer was at the very end, and basically completely irrelevant to the missions themselves beyond the "Go get this, it does something".
Basically, they should have had the Media Blitz Questchain Converge with the Tosh Questchain, and the Agria Questchain converge with another one that more heavily related to Kerrigan, and tied in Xel'Naga relic, and shorter overall. Every quest chain should feature a very relevant antagonist presence, from Mengsk or Kerrigan.
This would tie into an assault on Korhal where Raynor is on the verge of victory (assisted by spectre/ghost, and a civilian rebellion), and the Kerrigan takes advantage of the situation and launches a surprise attack. Raynors forced to make a moral judgement,(not player controlled) and either use the Zerg invasion to his advantage and finally dispose of Mengsk, like Mengsk had done to his predecessor, or abandon this on the verge of his victory and fight against Kerrigan. He chose to break the "cycle of veangence", so to speak, and focus on Kerrigan, despite internal confliction, and opposition by his crew, that he is doing this out of personal sentiment for Kerrigan.
The outcome then more or less concludes the same way, but Kerrigan is retrieved from a forward hive Cluster on a ruined Korhal rather then Char.
Tychus's betrayal should have actually come from the Moebius Foundation (and hence, Dr.Narud, most likely an extension of the Dark Voice), not Mengsk. That would make overall more sense, both explaining his lack of prior action, and the mission objective itself more thoroughly. His reveal of who hired him would foreshadow events yet to come.
The end result is roughly the same outcome (Mengsk still in power, but barely), Uninfested Kerrigan, Dead Tychus after betraying Raynor, but with a 20x more coherent narrative throughout.
Also, specifically relating to the last cinematic, Tychus should show more visible hesitation before he acts. This would highlight the character development that is present but hidden very deep in that scene much better. The current dynamic shows Tychus almost learning to give two shits about someone other then himself, but not enough in the end, and Raynors ability to put to rest past bonds, "ghosts" from his past, by shooting him, (Hes always reminded by Tychus about how he "owes him") but both elements are basically too subtle for what has previously been a very "up in your face" narrative model which didn't have much subtlety in it.
this is probably pretty ot tho lol. shoulda posted this in the other thread :p.
But it doesn't make sense in that context for them to bring it up. You would have to contrive dialog for it. And there's very little I hate more than contrived dialog.Quote:
It would deepen the relationship between the two, it would show the audience the tension between them. It shows complexity, depth, more than just 'i hate you' or 'die'. It shows continuity too, helping veterans and those familiar with both the original games and novels feel like this is a true continuation of the story.
Sorry, but true art is not incomprehensible. The sole purpose of any form of artistic expression is to communicate with the audience; if you can't do that, you have failed.Quote:
No, no, no, wrong, wrong wrong, a writer should write! And then make changes if necessary to maybe open up the story to more people, but he should not water down/ commercialize it just please EVERYONE! That's not what writing is all about, it's about crafting stories that the writer feels are worth telling and it's up to the audience to decide whether to love it or not and if they want to understand it they can GO PLAY THE FIRST ONE!!!! Or read the novels to gain better understanding.
Well, there are two problems with that. First, the fight scene as it currently exists tells you that Zeratul couldn't finish her. He got a single hit in, which was healed at Kerrigan's whim.Quote:
It advances the plot more than you think. If both of them went one on one in a sustain fight sequence, we see both their strengths and limitations. In this case, it would have been either a draw or Kerrigan gaining the upper hand though Zeratul escapes. Either way shows the audience that no matter how hard Zeratul fought or what he threw at her, he couldn't beat her in a one on one fight, therefore, it foreshadows for the audience there is gonna have to be another way to take her down.
Most importantly second, this is 4 missions away from finding out that killing her is a bad idea. So even if you show the player that Zeratul actually can't kill Kerrigan, this will quickly be superseded by the fact that Zeratul won't kill Kerrigan or else something really bad will happen.
There's no point in driving home a message that will soon be meaningless.
And who is Dustin Browder? He's lead of game design. He is not the game's director or the head of writing and cinematics. He said that the gameplay was ready a year ago. And if they spent a year polishing the gameplay, it definitely shows.Quote:
Dustin Browder himself
That other parts of singleplayer may not have been ready at that time isn't Browder's fault or responsibility.
I don't necessarily buy that. They didn't write Kerrigan; that doesn't require that they couldn't have. Just that they didn't.Quote:
In the last 12 years, Blizzard have obviously forgotten how to write Kerrigan.
They deliberately choose to make Kerrigan understated in WoL. That she's more of a force and opponent than a character who's going to interact with people. That's a legitimate choice; after all, nobody's going to actually trust her or bother to hear anything she's got to say. What happened when Zeratul ran into her? They had a half-minute conversation followed by a fight. Would there have been anything she could have said to change that or to not have a fight? Or even to keep Zeratul talking for longer?
In short: Kerrigan in SC1 was defined by betrayal. That's what she did. You can't betray people who don't trust you, and nobody trusts her anymore. So what is she supposed to be exactly in SC2?
The Odin and broadcasting the signal. Those are both about Mengsk. And Nova is one of Mengsk's people, so there's that.Quote:
Does Mengsk come up in even a single mission? No. The closest we get is a Dominion agent who might not even be working under Mengsk's immediate purview.
Having a whole mission to resolve this arc is unnecessary. If the player finished the arc on Tosh's side, they could easily have added a few extra secondary objectives to the "broadcast the message" signal, where you help Tosh and some of his people get into some sensitive areas.Quote:
It's a total waste.
Mission 1 should have been gathering Terrazine.
Mission 2 should have been staging the break out, once we find out he's a Spectre.
Mission 3 should have involved a Spectre-led assault on Korhal itself. With whatever cinematic Blizz wanted to throw at the end as resolution.
That's really the kind of thing they needed to do more often: have storylines interact where reasonable.
I totally blame them. BioWare has been doing this for a decade+ now. All you have to do is play their games and you know how to do a non-linear campaign. Also, they made nifty tools you could use to practice, like NWN's editor (and NWN2's editor for a more modern version, but that's by Obsidian). They could easily have taken a few months to use these tools to make some non-linear campaigns as practice.Quote:
Blizz walked into SC2 having absolutely no idea how to make a non-linear campaign work, and I don't really blame them.
I just can't accept inexperience as a valid excuse. I certainly understand it, but it doesn't excuse the problems. Especially when, as you rightfully point out, the parallels between the arcs are achingly close to one another.
So, when do you play against the Protoss?Quote:
Every quest chain should feature a very relevant antagonist presence, from Mengsk or Kerrigan.
Which brings up another failing: the lack of effective villains.
There are almost no named badguys that you face. The Protoss badguys are as generic as possible. There's nobody among them who is their face, and their position is just nonsense. There are no mission-to-mission characters for you to fight against.
When I said that they forgot how to write Kerrigan I did not mean that they gave her bad lines. I mean that they made her incompetent. And her competence was, at least in BW, one of her defining characteristics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas
You could say that she's only competent when she has people to screw over, but, trust or no trust, arranging circumstances so that people WOULD trust her after the Overmind's defeat took competence and forethought in and of itself.
In other words, it is not a legitimate design decision to both have Kerrigan play a central role as an antagonist and not demonstrate that she is a formidable, terrifying adversary.
edit: Mengsk, on the other hand, was not misrepresented by his lack of screentime. Sure, he was not developed as much as he could have been as an antagonist (or just a character, in general), but at least when he does appear, his actions or words do not really contradict what we've seen of him in the past.
Sorry, I meant specifically in the Tosh missions. Tosh, who is vehemently anti-Mengsk, has 4 missions allotted to him, and not one of them deals in any way with Mengsk. As for Nova, her relationship with Mengsk is far too distant for the connection to be of any dramatic use. Remember, we're not simply trying to involve the Dominion in things for kicks, our over-arching goal is to involve the primary antagonists in an efficient, sensible way.Quote:
The Odin and broadcasting the signal. Those are both about Mengsk.
That's why I suggested Tosh playing a role in the invasion of Korhal. It could easily have been a two-mission deal: the first mission deals with the broadcast, and while Mengsk has a public outrage on his hands, the Spectres attempt to assassinate him in mission #2.
It's not that it is NECESSARY... it's that it is an OPPORTUNITY. It's an excuse to create yet another mission that deals primarily with Mengsk and allows the game's primary conflicts to come to center stage. Presented with the choice of two missions that further the primary conflict versus just one, why not take the two, and then pack both of those full of "side-objectives" (as you suggest next) ON TOP?Quote:
Having a whole mission to resolve this arc is unnecessary.
You touched on something else here: not only did the storylines not interact, most did not have a dramatic payoff. 90% of the time, the drama played out exclusively in pre and post mission cut-scenes, which has its advantages (better graphics), but also its drawbacks: naturally limited because it's not in-the-middle-of-things, and makes the missions themselves have a 'filler' feel as you're only doing them to get to the stuff that LATER progresses the story.Quote:
If the player finished the arc on Tosh's side, they could easily have added a few extra secondary objectives to the "broadcast the message" signal, where you help Tosh and some of his people get into some sensitive areas.
That's really the kind of thing they needed to do more often: have storylines interact where reasonable.
I've played very few BioWare titles (my loss, I know), so I defer to the judgment of those who have.Quote:
I totally blame them. BioWare has been doing this for a decade+ now. All you have to do is play their games and you know how to do a non-linear campaign. Also, they made nifty tools you could use to practice, like NWN's editor (and NWN2's editor for a more modern version, but that's by Obsidian). They could easily have taken a few months to use these tools to make some non-linear campaigns as practice.
I just can't accept inexperience as a valid excuse. I certainly understand it, but it doesn't excuse the problems. Especially when, as you rightfully point out, the parallels between the arcs are achingly close to one another.
Eh. I think the idea of involving every single race at every single opportunity (that is, going out of your way to create opportunities) is overrated. Yes, Blizz needs to come up with a legitimate reason for Terrans and Protoss to stop being BFF at some point in SC2, but if losing them in this campaign would have meant better (and MORE) content for Mengsk and Kerrigan, I'd have been A-OK with that.Quote:
So, when do you play against the Protoss?
Which brings up another failing: the lack of effective villains.
There are almost no named badguys that you face. The Protoss badguys are as generic as possible. There's nobody among them who is their face, and their position is just nonsense. There are no mission-to-mission characters for you to fight against.