Blizzard replies to campaign criticism

[mr. peasant]

Blizzard lost the spirit of StarCraft and is unlikely to capture it again. At least not with the approach they've been taking to writing for quite some time (outsourcing major plot elements into tie in novels written by hired tie-in writers, trying to follow trends and imitate "what's hot" in the gaming and "geek" communities (such as Mass Effect, Serenity et cetera), putting in too many extraneous pop culture references, sacking established voice actors for the sake of (relatively) more famous stars to the detriment of the continuity and so on). They've forgotten what they do best when it comes to story, and since they're popular enough with the purely gameplay oriented majority (which includes both casual and hardcore players, those who care for the story usually fall squarely in between), being self-critical or perfectionist in that department isn't such a great priority for them anymore. Metzen is a great writer and designer, but his standards concerning others' work are rather lax to put it mildly (if they weren't, we wouldn't have had "Shadow of the Xel'Naga" or most of the other tie-in novels either for that matter).

I disagree with the parts in bold.

Regarding the 'sacking of established voice actors', I'm assuming you're referring to Glynnis Talken being replaced by Tricia Helfer. To say that Talken is an established voice actor would be inaccurate. If you look at her IMDb page, she has been credited with five voice-acting roles. Helfer, meanwhile, has been credited with more voice-acting roles (with more of them being high profile ones), in addition to more acting roles in general, in a shorter period of time. Therefore, objectively, Tricia Helfer is a stronger and more experienced performer. If anything, the main 'problem' with Blizzard's decision is that they essentially discarded a long-time associate (four of Talken's five credits are in Blizzard games) in favour of something new and shiny.

As for Metzen being a good writer, again, I disagree. Metzen himself has admitted to being somewhat of a one trick pony. He (or the entire writing team) frequently reuses the same plot elements - such as prophetic warnings (WC3, SC2), separate forces uniting against a common enemy (WC2, SC1, WC3, WoW, SC2) and heroes succumbing to the dark side (SC1, WC3) - in his stories. And that's before getting into his frequent use of convenient, poorly explained despite being established plot devices that spontaneously bring about the desired ending and willingness to rewrite/reinterprate previously established events to support the current story. Yes, Blizzard has traditionally crafted engaging stories. However, I believe it's more in spite of the writing rather than being because of.

[Eligor]

I disagree with the parts in bold.

Regarding the 'sacking of established voice actors', I'm assuming you're referring to Glynnis Talken being replaced by Tricia Helfer. To say that Talken is an established voice actor would be inaccurate. If you look at her IMDb page, she has been credited with five voice-acting roles. Helfer, meanwhile, has been credited with more voice-acting roles (with more of them being high profile ones), in addition to more acting roles in general, in a shorter period of time. Therefore, objectively, Tricia Helfer is a stronger and more experienced performer. If anything, the main 'problem' with Blizzard's decision is that they essentially discarded a long-time associate (four of Talken's five credits are in Blizzard games) in favour of something new and shiny.

Established as acting the character. Not in the sense of "established in the industry". I probably should've used clearer wording there.

Anyway. What I mean is that an actor's experience or fame shouldn't have any bearing on a story's integrity. I don't care how "stronger" obectively Tricia Helfer is but whether she's right as Kerrigan (she may be a stellar actress, and still not fit that particular role).

As for Metzen being a good writer, again, I disagree. Metzen himself has admitted to being somewhat of a one trick pony. He (or the entire writing team) frequently reuses the same plot elements - such as prophetic warnings (WC3, SC2), separate forces uniting against a common enemy (WC2, SC1, WC3, WoW, SC2) and heroes succumbing to the dark side (SC1, WC3) - in his stories. And that's before getting into his frequent use of convenient, poorly explained despite being established plot devices that spontaneously bring about the desired ending and willingness to rewrite/reinterprate previously established events to support the current story. Yes, Blizzard has traditionally crafted engaging stories. However, I believe it's more in spite of the writing rather than being because of.

Didn't we have this argument before?

OK, let me rephrase it: Metzen's writing gave a unique vibe and flavour to the story which (at least in my humble opinion) contributed much to its appeal (there's a reason why Of Blood and Honor feels like the only book set in the same universe as the WarCraft games, and that's because it was written by Metzen instead of Knaak or Golden). Fantasy (and Sci-Fi Fantasy) is as much about style and flavour as it's about story. It delivers a world with a unique feel and texture. Something Metzen's game scripts did exceedingly well.

And the aptitude for style and rhythm of dialogue shown in them would be difficult to find in the writings of many more famous and successful fantasy authors. Which makes it pretty good (if not Perfect) writing by my reckoning (and anyway, the recurring use of themes and plot elements in successive stories is a long established literary tradition, ask Shakespeare). In short: Metzen's writing style (with whatever quirks and faults it may possess) IS the Blizzard writing style that I know and love, most attempts by others start introducing false notes into the narrative.

[mr. peasant]

Established as acting the character. Not in the sense of "established in the industry". I probably should've used clearer wording there.

Anyway. What I mean is that an actor's experience or fame shouldn't have any bearing on a story's integrity. I don't care how "stronger" obectively Tricia Helfer is but whether she's right as Kerrigan (she may be a stellar actress, and still not fit that particular role).

However, changing of actors is par the course in voice acting; especially after a long period of time. Also, bear in mind that we don't know exactly why Talken was not brought back. There might be inter-personal issues going on behind the scenes or even legal issues (maybe SC2 is a SAG project where as Talken isn't a member?). What we do know is that Blizzard went out of their way and brought back Robert Clotworthy (Raynor) and Paul Eiding (Aldaris/Executor).

And since we're on the topic, I don't really like how people keep demanding Blizzard to bring back the original voice actors. One incident that comes to mind was how the fans managed to pressure Blizzard to get Clotworthy back as Raynor despite having already cast someone else for the role. In other words, we, the fans, cost someone their job! And purely out of resistance to change in any form. In my opinion, that's extremely uncool on our part.

<end rant>

Didn't we have this argument before?

OK, let me rephrase it: Metzen's writing gave a unique vibe and flavour to the story which (at least in my humble opinion) contributed much to its appeal (there's a reason why Of Blood and Honor feels like the only book set in the same universe as the WarCraft games, and that's because it was written by Metzen instead of Knaak or Golden). Fantasy (and Sci-Fi Fantasy) is as much about style and flavour as it's about story. It delivers a world with a unique feel and texture. Something Metzen's game scripts did exceedingly well.

And the aptitude for style and rhythm of dialogue shown in them would be difficult to find in the writings of many more famous and successful fantasy authors. Which makes it pretty good (if not Perfect) writing by my reckoning (and anyway, the recurring use of themes and plot elements in successive stories is a long established literary tradition, ask Shakespeare). In short: Metzen's writing style (with whatever quirks and faults it may possess) IS the Blizzard writing style that I know and love, most attempts by others start introducing false notes into the narrative.

Fair enough. Everyone's mileage vary.

[Gradius]

I thought Metzen's Revelations short story was actually pretty good. It's the one piece of literature that came closest to replicating the SC1 atmosphere IMO.

[broodmywarcraft]

Actually Peasant, they did bring Talken back, but then dropped her. She had lines recorded, even cinematics voiced. Metzen said she sounded killer. They never gave a reason why they dropped her, even she never said why.

But I can flip your argument around by saying that we cost someone a job, but got someone else a job.

[phazonjunkie]

Please explain your reasoning.

The limited attention span, relatively short/highly selective memory of those growing up in the digital age. Then there's the fact that a significant percent (if not the majority of people who originally got into SC & BW were likely in their teens or in pre-teens if not younger; an age when their realm of experience was, to say the least, limited. And their sense of taste/quality were still evolving. This combined with the general tendancy to form opinions on entertainment mediums based on initial feelings invoked rather than objectively.

when t I doubt the original game's story had this much venom spewed (not just general dislike, mind you) against it such that I doubt that people would give SC2's story praise even after another 12 years has passed.

A small, highly vocal segment of the gaming community does not (necessarily) constitute general consensus.

I think Peasants reference to "First Installment Wins" is a better explanation.

Good point. I'll grant you that.

[Turalyon]

The limited attention span, relatively short/highly selective memory of those growing up in the digital age. Then there's the fact that a significant percent (if not the majority of people who originally got into SC & BW were likely in their teens or in pre-teens if not younger; an age when their realm of experience was, to say the least, limited. And their sense of taste/quality were still evolving. This combined with the general tendancy to form opinions on entertainment mediums based on initial feelings invoked rather than objectively.

I fail to see how this would make one feel nostalgic about Sc2's story in the future if people are as memory impaired as you imply
Also, consider that people who do like the story still admit that it is overtly cheesy, cliche and simplistic. I don't know about you or anyone else, but I wouldn't be too nostalgic about things like that. Granted that is all rather subjective but even if you try to apply some objectivity (to use established conventions/standards of story-telling is the best we can do here since it is largely subjective there, too), WoL is still glaringly lacking in some areas.

A small, highly vocal segment of the gaming community does not (necessarily) constitute general consensus.

Watch out that you don't mix your generalisations

[mr. peasant]

Actually Peasant, they did bring Talken back, but then dropped her. She had lines recorded, even cinematics voiced. Metzen said she sounded killer. They never gave a reason why they dropped her, even she never said why.

Which leads me to believe that there is something going on behind the scenes rather than Talken being simply snubbed by Blizzard.

But I can flip your argument around by saying that we cost someone a job, but got someone else a job.

Irrespective of who gained from it, I still don't feel nice about costing a person his/her job over something that was no fault of his own. For instance, how would you feel if you got fired just so your employer could hire his son/brother instead? In those few months, he could have auditioned for other projects (meaning, he's missed out on job opportunities whilst attached to SC2) and it's a permanent black mark on his resume (getting fired/replaced after just a few months on the job).

[phazonjunkie]

I fail to see how this would make one feel nostalgic about Sc2's story in the future if people are as memory impaired as you imply
Also, consider that people who do like the story still admit that it is overtly cheesy, cliche and simplistic. I don't know about you or anyone else, but I wouldn't be too nostalgic about things like that.

Quality doesn't have to equate nostalgic potential. I don't even consider myself above this. Hell, I still at times find myself waxing nostalgic over old 80's action TV & cop shows like CHIPS, Airwolf, and A-team, even though I'll admit that, at least by today's standards they were of dubious quality at best.
And many I can't even bring myself to watch anymore.

Aww, see what you've done?! I feel old now....

[Zero]

Irrespective of who gained from it, I still don't feel nice about costing a person his/her job over something that was no fault of his own. For instance, how would you feel if you got fired just so your employer could hire his son/brother instead? In those few months, he could have auditioned for other projects (meaning, he's missed out on job opportunities whilst attached to SC2) and it's a permanent black mark on his resume (getting fired/replaced after just a few months on the job).

Although I preferred Clotworthy as Raynor by far, I wasn't on the more vocal side of the fight. But I don't think your analogy was correct. This isn't like an employer dropping a new employee for a relative, it's like an employer who felt that rehiring a past employee would work out better, because the past employee would require minimal training and already knows your system and how to work with your staff. And it's not a black mark on a resume. It's not like the voice actor was fired, he was laid off, and with the economy the way it is/was, that's not a rare case for many people.