How did they screw up the single player that bad?

[phazonjunkie]

Personally I do get the feeling the Mengsk and Raynor are very similar in the fact that it does not appear that they have any real idea what their revolutions are actually going to accomplish.

I'm pretty sure Mengsk knew more or less exactly what he was hoping to accomplish. That's kind of the difference between the two; Mengsk actually had an agenda. Regarding Raynor, I think one of the Joker's quotes from 'The Dark Knight' says it best:
"I don't have a...plan. You know what I am? I'm a dog chasing cars, I wouldn't know what to do with one if I caught it, I just DO things."

I think Raynor probably has more in common with Tosh than Mengsk. Tosh at least has no delusions that he's actually doing anything positive or that his actions; 'Killing Mengsk and Burning his Dominion to the ground,' will eventually work out for the greater good. He is motivated by his Hatred of Mengsk and nothing else. But he's at least honest about it. In the cutscene after prison break, Raynor even seems to agree with him somewhat.

[Laurentian]

I'm pretty sure Mengsk knew more or less exactly what he was hoping to accomplish.

That was creating a dictatorship with him in charge. Doesn't appear he has any idea about how to solve the ills that the Confederacy was supposed to be overthrown for. Just like most revolutionaries!

[Romla]

I agree with mr. peasant in that it wasn't black and white in SC1, but everything was grey and I liked that aspect more than anything else - just good against evil is pretty shitty boring for me. Yes, even the zergs were grey, because they were made up with the necessity to assimilate other races. Saying zergs are like nazis is like saying lions are like nazis - yes, for zebras lions are evil, but we know lions are not evil, because they need zebras to survive. That doesn't mean zebras should forgive the lions, but it doesn't make lions evil only because zebras are murdered by them every day. Also saying lions could be vegetarian is pretty lame because they simply cannot. For me the zergs are (or were before SC2) the force of nature, they were threat to all sentient life like Tassadar said, but that doesn't make them evil. They could be considered evil by protoss and terran, but they doesn't need to be considered evil from Gods or Xel'Naga perspective (if God isn't a racist), just like lions and sharks are not considered evil from our perspective. Mengsk was also grey, he made bad things, but he also made good things, now (in SC2) he is dictator and is completely black like Hitler, but he was grey at the start of SC1 and wasn't completely black until the end. Confederacy killed his family, Kerrigan killed his father, it is easy to say Mengsk is bad just like Confederacy was, but you must see also why is that. And Raynor wasn't completely white either, he tried to do the right thing all the time, but he wasn't right all the time and that's completely all right, because there is nothing so much boring like completely black or white characters.

Yeah and majority of people know what is good and what is bad, it is often pretty easy to say what was good and what was bad when you see all the consequences, but it is another story when you are in the situation where you don't exactly know like characters in a war or in the middle of a good story. That is appealing to me in games, when characters have good and bad qualities at the same time and they do good and bad things even if they don't want to, just like ordinary people would do in extreme situations.

[Aldrius]

Uh, the Zerg were most definitely not grey in StarCraft. They were pretty despicably evil.

The difference was, that the game didn't have a problem with that. The Zerg taking everything over was not a big problem for the UNIVERSE, it was a big problem for the Terrans and Protoss.

But in Wings of Liberty, it's given this significance that the universe is doomed if the Zerg win. Everything is given this boring gravitas that homogenizes everything to keep things simple.

There was black and white morality in StarCraft 1, it's just that nobody cared, nobody talked about it. Raynor didn't have a problem with Mengsk because Mengsk was evil, Raynor has a problem with Mengsk because Mengsk had betrayed Raynor. It was a personal story, not a moralistic crusade.

[Romla]

The difference was, that the game didn't have a problem with that. The Zerg taking everything over was not a big problem for the UNIVERSE, it was a big problem for the Terrans and Protoss.

This is the sentence, they were evil only for terrans and protoss and many people consider them evil, because we are terrans. I don't consider zergs to be evil, I like them. If they were real I would try to stop them and kill them just like I would try to stop and kill lion which is going to eat me. But I know that lion is not evil, because he is only doing what he needs to do just like SC1 zergs - that is another reason why I don't like SC2 story, because they destroyed the zergs which I liked.

EDIT: Good reading in that regard is The Ender's Game by O. S. Card. Evil is relative, something like black and white morale doesn't exist at all.

[Wankey]

Yeah this is why Sc2 fails as storytelling and why game of thrones is such an amazing series.

People need to realize evil morality is only in the eye of the beholder, and the reality is that the victor will make the loser evil and itself good.

I don't see HOTS single player to be that much entertaining other than the missions themselves. It's unfortunate since SC1 had such good storyline and shitty missions but SC2 and TERRIBLE storyline and fun missions.

[Aldrius]

This is the sentence, they were evil only for terrans and protoss and many people consider them evil, because we are terrans.

Well in general they weren't all that great for everything else in the universe.

It was just never TALKED about. And I preferred it that way.

Yeah this is why Sc2 fails as storytelling and why game of thrones is such an amazing series.

...StarCraft 2 and Game of Thrones have next to nothing in common. And besides that, Game of Thrones has a pretty strong sense of morality. It just screws over it's heroic characters more often than not.

The Lannisters for example are incredibly evil people for the most part. Cersei and Tywin in particular are pretty despicable. Tyrion and Jaime are all right, though.

It's got nothing to do with morality. It's that the series doesn't concern itself with morality too much. SC2 concerns itself too much with the morality of it's characters.

[mr. peasant]

Uh, the Zerg were most definitely not grey in StarCraft. They were pretty despicably evil.

Why do you say that? What do the Zerg do that is so 'despicably evil'? Of all the factions, the Overmind's swarm was the one group that never lied, never backstab and never committed war crime (not even genocide; which was mainly the Protoss' doing). Yes, they infested and assimilated other species but that is how they survive - by constantly adapting. Their ultimate goal of assimilating the Protoss into the Swarm was to achieve perfection; a state where they no longer needed to continue adapting. As such, their actions throughout the entire game was not borne of malice, hatred or fear (I don't even think they were capable of such emotions) but of survival.

There was black and white morality in StarCraft 1, it's just that nobody cared, nobody talked about it. Raynor didn't have a problem with Mengsk because Mengsk was evil, Raynor has a problem with Mengsk because Mengsk had betrayed Raynor. It was a personal story, not a moralistic crusade.

Even if this is true, it would by its very nature make the setting morally grey since the 'heroes' are willing to compromise their values and work with evil whilst they shared a common goal. That said, based on what we see and what is revealed within SC1, I still don't see Mengsk as being 'evil' per se since his actions - while undoubtedly extreme and potentially unnecessarily over-the-top - can be interpreted as still serving the interests of the Terran population as a whole (e.g. a unified Terran government unplagued by internal conflict would provide more protection than a fractured collection of warring factions).

[Aldrius]

As such, their actions throughout the entire game was not borne of malice, hatred or fear (I don't even think they were capable of such emotions) but of survival.

No, not survival. They're not motivated by survival. Their motivation was personal growth and development. At the expense of thousands of lives and star systems and anyone who dared stand in their way. They're ravenous killers.

If anything the Terrans and Protoss are more motivated by survival, the Zerg are the aggressors intent on wiping them out and manifesting what they like about them into their own species.

Even if this is true, it would by its very nature make the setting morally grey since the 'heroes' are willing to compromise their values and work with evil whilst they shared a common goal.

That doesn't make him morally grey. It means he's not always perfectly righteous, but that hardly makes him 'grey'. And even if he did, as I previously mentioned, that's not something the game's storyline concerned itself with. That's what made it more interesting than Wings of Liberty.

That said, based on what we see and what is revealed within SC1, I still don't see Mengsk as being 'evil' per se since his actions - while undoubtedly extreme and potentially unnecessarily over-the-top - can be interpreted as still serving the interests of the Terran population as a whole (e.g. a unified Terran government unplagued by internal conflict would provide more protection than a fractured collection of warring factions).

Mengsk is motivated by revenge and aspirations of personal power. He has little interest in the common man. Whether or not he's 'evil' I suppose you could debate, but he's universally portrayed as ambitious, cruel, opportunistic and selfish more than anything else.

[Gradius]

That said, based on what we see and what is revealed within SC1, I still don't see Mengsk as being 'evil' per se since his actions - while undoubtedly extreme and potentially unnecessarily over-the-top - can be interpreted as still serving the interests of the Terran population as a whole (e.g. a unified Terran government unplagued by internal conflict would provide more protection than a fractured collection of warring factions).

How is mass genocide not evil? He's the Stalin of the SC universe. I didn't know this was debatable. =/