Page 12 of 22 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 220

Thread: How did they screw up the single player that bad?

  1. #111
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    110

    Default Re: How did they screw up the single player that bad?

    Personally I think that many of WOL's critics are using their nostalgia for the first game to criticize WOL and act like the first game had no flaws and that WOL somehow betrayed everything. You know acting like SC1 was some sort of paragon of originality and such. However none of this makes WOL's story actually good.

    Edit: I agree that the super high expectations didn't help either. It was going to be really difficult to not feel letdown after all of the hype and 12 year wait. Especially considering the hole the writers wrote themselves in with BW.
    Last edited by Laurentian; 08-16-2011 at 02:34 AM.

  2. #112

    Default Re: How did they screw up the single player that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by Laurentian View Post
    Personally I think that many of WOL's critics are using their nostalgia for the first game to criticize WOL and act like the first game had no flaws and that WOL somehow betrayed everything. You know acting like SC1 was some sort of paragon of originality and such. However none of this makes WOL's story actually good.

    Edit: I agree that the super high expectations didn't help either. It was going to be really difficult to not feel letdown after all of the hype and 12 year wait. Especially considering the hole the writers wrote themselves in with BW.
    Good story doesn't mean "flawless" or "original" (you could have one that logically answers to both of the criteria but still ends up being extremely boring and sterile). The first StarCraft had a lot of power in it (for lack of a better way to put it), it got certain archetypes right and it hit certain notes right, and a lot of it comes down to more than just writing (which wasn't bad to begin with), it was the music, the mood created, the voice acting, images, art direction, vistas evoked and imagination sparked. It created a universe with horizons. WoL did the very opposite of that, creating a very "shut in" story which got a lot of things wrong and lost much of the appeal StarCraft had. There are glimpses here and there of the sequel that could've and should've been, but they are very faint.

    And by the way, just how exactly did the writers "write themselves into a hole" with BW? It created a setup for one hell of a sequel.

    P.S. Going out on a limb here, but "flawlessness" and "perfection" are really stupid terms to judge a story by. Shakespeare wasn't perfect (downright stupid and vulgar at times in fact), nor were "Beowulf", "Moby Dick" or "Crime and Punishment". A good story is one that sticks with you and makes a good impression, rough spots, plot holes and all.
    Last edited by Eligor; 08-16-2011 at 06:56 AM. Reason: Thanks to Turalyon for pointing out a hole in reasoning, since corrected. *g*

  3. #113

    Default Re: How did they screw up the single player that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eligor View Post
    And by the way, just how exactly did the writers "write themselves into a hole" with BW? It created a setup for one hell of a sequel.
    He does have a point, here. By the end of BW, it is heavily intimated that the Zerg and Kerrigan are a force that cannot be reckoned with. Both Protoss homeworlds are all but destroyed and the Terran Dominion had been upended with Mengsk being humiliated and crushed by both the UED and Kerrigan. It seemed inevitable that Kerrigan would soon destroy them in their entirety before they could get a chance to effectively resist her.

    I think the massive power imbalance in BW is partially to blame for how the story has progressed into WoL. What could've stopped Kerrigan from steam-rolling everyone? It surely wasn't Kerrigan having a change of heart by the end of BW since WoL still clearly paints her as "Grrr, I'm evil and I'm going to kill you all!" Hmmm, I know an Easter Egg hunt! One that takes 4 years but somehow yields no results.....

    They needed a 'rabbit out of the hat' and that's what WoL appears to be.


    Quote Originally Posted by Eligor View Post
    A good story is one that sticks with you and makes a good impression, rough spots, plot holes and all.
    I took the liberty of adding 'good' to your above statement. Otherwise, WoL is a good story because it sure made an impression on me. (It was a bad one if you haven't noticed by now )
    Yes, that's right! That is indeed ME on the right.


    _______________________________________________

  4. #114

    Default Re: How did they screw up the single player that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by Turalyon View Post
    He does have a point, here. By the end of BW, it is heavily intimated that the Zerg and Kerrigan are a force that cannot be reckoned with. Both Protoss homeworlds are all but destroyed and the Terran Dominion had been upended with Mengsk being humiliated and crushed by both the UED and Kerrigan. It seemed inevitable that Kerrigan would soon destroy them in their entirety before they could get a chance to effectively resist her.
    Things always become the most interesting when the heroes are facing impossible odds, and BW seemed to set up just the situation. Imagine, the Korpulu Sector 5 years after the battle of Omega, the Protoss while still formidable are a shadow of their former might, the Dominion somehow manages to hold itself together mainly due to formidable bureaucracy and Mengsk's tyrannical rule so humanity's not at its best either. Everyone lives under the constant threat of the Swarm, which may not have materialized yet but would be unleashed with an apocalyptic force once it does (actually a situation in essence not too different from the one at the beginning of George R.R. Martin's Ice and Fire books if you substitute the Others for the Zerg, and look what he did with it!). And then there are the Hybrids and Duran's machinations to shake things up (and unanswered questions about the nature and purpose of the Xel'Naga, as well as the Umojan Protectorate and Kel-Morian Combine as potential players in the game of which we have heretofore seen very little). Frankly it's a set-up that would take deliberately bad writing and plotting to screw up, and WoL pretty much did.

    Quote Originally Posted by Turalyon View Post
    I think the massive power imbalance in BW is partially to blame for how the story has progressed into WoL. What could've stopped Kerrigan from steam-rolling everyone? It surely wasn't Kerrigan having a change of heart by the end of BW since WoL still clearly paints her as "Grrr, I'm evil and I'm going to kill you all!" Hmmm, I know an Easter Egg hunt! One that takes 4 years but somehow yields no results.....

    They needed a 'rabbit out of the hat' and that's what WoL appears to be.
    Not necessarily, it was pretty clear that she wasn't interested in completely wiping out the Terran and Protoss almost out of apathy and security in her own position as ruler of the Swarm and one could write a story in which she loses her power littlle by little due to a combination of several factors. It was interesting when Infested Kerrigan with her alien (though perhaps not entirely inhuman) motives worked towards achieving a sentience in the Zerg. Had she succeeded it could've led to a rebellion against her by a part of the nascently conscious Swarm (think less Brood War/regaining control of the Zerg and rather more as a riff on the Frankenstein story). Some of the newly sentient Zerg could stay loyal to her (why? another question that begs for a good explanation and provides potentially interesting story threads), some could defect and form a new Zerg faction (with all the inherent potential for more worldbuilding and riffing on the idea of the Zerg). And that's just one idea that builds on previous events. And besides, the Hybrids could've been a VERY interesting "rabbit" had Blizzard decided to give them a more thorough and thought out treatment and focused on them rather than deciding to de-infest Kerrigan and make her the "star of the show" (the "superhero team" approach to writing that WoL adopted, where a few individual heroes take all the canvas and start deciding the fate of the universe).


    Quote Originally Posted by Turalyon View Post
    I took the liberty of adding 'good' to your above statement. Otherwise, WoL is a good story because it sure made an impression on me. (It was a bad one if you haven't noticed by now )
    Thanks! Duly noted and corrected.
    Last edited by Eligor; 08-16-2011 at 07:00 AM.

  5. #115
    Romla's Avatar Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    54

    Default Re: How did they screw up the single player that bad?

    Eligor, I like your approach, you should write at least synopsis for Blizzard. :-)

    To TychusFindlay: Fair point, but just NO would be better in that case than LOL NO.

    To Aldrius: This is exactly what I was talking about when I was speaking about bad performance from Kerrigan in WoL.

    To Gradius: You are pessimist or realist, I hope the first, but think the latter. :-(

    About story: What I do not understand, is why is anyone's goal to utterly destroy everything (Dark Voice)? I would understand he wants to utterly destroy something (Protoss or others), but by destroying everything what could you gain from it? Maybe because Xel'Naga are almost just like gods, they can start anew? - I don't like these prophecies in sci-fi, I think they are much better in fantasy settings. Sci-fi should be more real world and technological, gods are better for fantasy in my eyes.

    What I liked so much on Starcraft story was the feeling that the main protagonists are just like ordinary people, they were fallible and mortal. But in WoL this feeling is gone, they are more like superheroes from cartoons - I don't have anything against superheroes or cartoons but I want something different from Starcraft and it was much more in SC1 and it is much less in SC2 IMO.

    And about the nostalgia, I don't think it plays huge role, only many people from both camps are talking about it so much. But if you'll see what majority of people are thinking about mission design, you'll see the difference, while mission design in SC2 is praised and almost everyone is talking about much better design than in SC1 the story is on the opposite side - majority of people, at least from what I can say from my observation, think the story was much better in SC1. So it is not because of nostalgia IMO, but because there is big difference between the quality of the story and the quality of mission design in SC2. It is not only SC2 which went down with the quality of story, it can be observed in majority of movie series as well and especially in remakes (Predators, Clash of the Titans and so on - these movies are just for special effects, but the story is crap, much worse than in their predecessors, and it is not nostalgia). EDIT: And I know the story of Predator and original Clash of the Titans wasn't anything special, but it was functional, logical, it made sense and it was fun to watch, contrary to these remakes, where the characters are barely caricatures of those from the original movies - because the new story doesn't make sense, also these new characters cannot make sense. I don't know how to write it clearly in English, almost so in Czech, but I hope it is clear what I mean.
    Last edited by Romla; 08-16-2011 at 08:22 AM.

    ZASZ to Kerrigan: "You dare threaten a Cerebrate? You will be the doom of us all!"
    ARTANIS to Kerrigan: "Savor this victory, Kerrigan! For the Protoss will never forget your treachery. We shall be watching you."
    RAYNOR to Kerrigan: "It may not be tomorrow, darlin'. It may not even happen with an army at my back. But rest assured: I'm the man who's going to kill you some day. I'll be seein' you."

  6. #116

    Default Re: How did they screw up the single player that bad?

    Prophecy can be a deduction out from previously held data. An inevitability either through force or natural progression(induction) of the defined universe in the story. In WoL's case, supposedly, manipulation by a greater race, which is only slightly hinted at through the artifact. The artifact is still a mystery though, and so only hints at this, but what it actually hints at with regards to how prophecy is defined in this story is largely uncertain.

    If the Xel'Naga is later presented as beings who are also merely believers of this Prophecy, then this type of Prophecy is much like supernatural. To have a known source of such an inevitability, or cause of, would give it a "Sci-fi stamp". This is true IF the Xel'Naga are the uber-est of uber in this story's universe.

    But if they made a distinction that only Zeratul calls this Prophecy, and later reveal that this messages were "plans and promises" of the Xel'Naga, or even what they see would most likely or eventually happen because of their actions, then that would make a difference.

    Gods can be uber beings that have qualities which are unknown to other beings. It's impossible to not be able to comprehend something when data is given.

    So, Gods in sci-fi are eventually made apparent, and so become just uber. Their deification relies in their being hidden (so to speak) and whose effects or actions extend beyond what is accepted as normal or even uber in the eyes of the other characters or the world presented to the audience.

    This however, hasn't been hinted at or discussed by the characters in WoL, therefore, we the audience don't get an idea of how Gods are understood or perceived by the characters in this story's universe.

    At least, if there had been a character that interacted with Zeratul and argued his beliefs regarding Gods and Prophecy, making it an argument between fact vs fantasy, then we the audience would have gained a solid footing of what the this story's universe stand for with respect to these issues.

    The Cave mission is ripe for this. Zeratul could have argued with himself in that mission regarding this subject as he interacted with things Xel'Naga in that moon/planet.
    Last edited by GnaReffotsirk; 08-16-2011 at 10:52 AM.

  7. #117

    Default Re: How did they screw up the single player that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eligor View Post
    Imagine, the Korpulu Sector 5 years after the battle of Omega, the Protoss while still formidable are a shadow of their former might, the Dominion somehow manages to hold itself together mainly due to formidable bureaucracy and Mengsk's tyrannical rule so humanity's not at its best either. Everyone lives under the constant threat of the Swarm, which may not have materialized yet but would be unleashed with an apocalyptic force once it does (actually a situation in essence not too different from the one at the beginning of George R.R. Martin's Ice and Fire books if you substitute the Others for the Zerg, and look what he did with it!). And then there are the Hybrids and Duran's machinations to shake things up (and unanswered questions about the nature and purpose of the Xel'Naga,
    Um, isn't that kinda already the situation that exists in WOL?

    As well as the Umojan Protectorate and Kel-Morian Combine as potential players in the game of which we have heretofore seen very little).
    Good point. One of my main gripes with the SP campaign thus far.

    Frankly it's a set-up that would take deliberately bad writing and plotting to screw up, and WoL pretty much did.
    That's a bit much isn't it? I'm fairly sure they didn't deliberately set out to screw up the story. In any case, whether they actually 'screwed up' or not is still debatable.

  8. #118

    Default Re: How did they screw up the single player that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by phazonjunkie View Post
    That's a bit much isn't it? I'm fairly sure they didn't deliberately set out to screw up the story. In any case, whether they actually 'screwed up' or not is still debatable.
    But that's the real problem, isn't it? While perhaps not deliberate, Blizzard did mess up in the execution of a number of themes they themselves specified as intending to deliver. For instance:

    1. Kerrigan is the key to saving the universe
    On paper, this is an interesting development/twist. However, Blizzard went about revealing it in the worst way possible - as a prophecy that is presented in a vision of a vision of a vision; making it more convoluted than it needed to. Honestly, I'm surprised people aren't referring to those missions as the Inception missions.

    2. They say Arcturus Mengsk is a vicious tyrant and an imposing threat to Raynor
    Yet, he proves unable to make so much as a dent against Raynor's rebellion and is even unable to defend his own capital against the rebel leader. Any credibility he had went out the window thanks to Kate Lockwell's continued ability to poke holes at the obvious propaganda (even though Mengsk is specified by Blizzard as a master manipulator of the media). Lastly, we don't actually see Mengsk and the Dominion do anything bad. Consolidating his forces at major production and population centres instead of spreading them thin during a massive enemy invasion is a logical and reasonable decision. Meanwhile, Raynor and seeks to destabilise the one authority that is keeping the Terran population unified in the midst of said alien invasion and is involved in terrorist-like activities (attacking support facilities and launching a surprise attack in the middle of a city). As such, Mengsk's villainy feels a lot like an informed attribute.

    3. Kerrigan had a reason for not destroying everyone in the last 4 years
    Blizzard highlighted this multiple times throughout SC2's development. However, if there was one in WoL, it wasn't obvious unless it was simply because the Dark Voice didn't want her to (which is a lousy excuse). And given the major restructuring of the Zerg hierarchy following WoL's ending, it's unlikely the subject will be brought up in sequels as its past the point of its importance/relevance.


    Now, on the subject of the humour and cheesiness:

    I think many people's problems about it stems from two main reasons. Firstly, one liners such as "Bout time we kicked this revolution into overdrive!", "James Raynor, I bring tidings of doom..." (along with the rest of that speech) and "She's come to finish the job." were written with advertising/promotion and trailers in mind. While making good sound bites on their own, they often feel awkward, silly and unrealistic when put into context. Or, in the case of the third example, needlessly misleading - especially since we find out shortly after (I think it's possibly in the very next mission if you play Findlay's one) that she's after the Artifacts rather than simply trying to massacre everyone.

    The second is about who's involved in the humour. Back in SC1, while the Terran cinematics frequently featured silly hijinks, this mainly involved nameless, one-off characters. So, while they do make the Terrans look like idiots as a whole, the main characters remain uninvolved and thus are able to still appear serious and respectable. In SC2, the stuff are now being performed by the game's named characters themselves; making them look foolish and causing them to lose credibility in the process.

  9. #119

    Default Re: How did they screw up the single player that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. peasant View Post
    2. They say Arcturus Mengsk is a vicious tyrant and an imposing threat to Raynor
    This could have been executed better like this:

    1. Arcturus gains ground against Raynor, and finally corners the Raiders.

    2. The Zerg attack begins, allowing Raynor to escape Mar Sara, and leave Arcturus stuck fighting the broods sent there.

    3. Tychus arrives as the execution of Mengk's plan B, while he deals with the Zerg. A plan to keep tag of the Raiders.

    Or,

    1. Show that Raynor and his Raiders are celebrated, and so would make it hard for Arcturus to just destroy them physically, and so must politically destroy Raynor.

    I think this was what the writers intended to imply with the opening news cast. All the news cast needed was to show that Arcturus' reign is somewhat unstable after Broodwar, and through the 4 years, Raynor have been gaining huge public support. Or in a way have caused the people to further doubt Arcturus' credibility to some extent.

    In the mission where you go for the first artifact, the civilians there actually knows the Raiders and welcome them.

    I think a boo from the crowd in that TV speech would have sufficed to point this out, then amplified through the following missions.

    The adjutant could have then prompted Raynor to receive a distress call from a channel, telling us that supporters are being rallied, and Raynor would say the "Let's kick this..." thing.

  10. #120

    Default Re: How did they screw up the single player that bad?



    The people who wrote dialogue for Blizzard clearly left the company a long time ago

Similar Threads

  1. Some single player commentary
    By flak4321 in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 09-11-2010, 11:27 AM
  2. Custom mods in single player?
    By Altair4 in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-01-2010, 06:23 PM
  3. July 27th: Multi Player or Single Player
    By Randobob in forum StarCraft Discussion
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 07-23-2010, 09:02 AM

Posting Permissions

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