Unit Pictures

[Shadow Archon]

So you're OK with the Zerg's Blatant lubricantess buttrape of all 4 laws of thermodynamics by their mere EXISTENCE, but you just don't buy Raynor & his merry band of 'Expendables in Space' roflpwning Selendis' fleet with a surgical strike?

Yup. One Super Carrier handled an entire squadron of battlecruisers in the past. They have shields and weapons rated in the teratons. Normal battlecruisers don't have nuclear level armor. The Hyperion should get flattened out of the sky with one blast.

To explain. I'm fine if they break the physical laws of the universe at least if its done in a way that doesn't interrupt the story. If they don't follow their own rules that they made, well, that's when I get mad.

[phazonjunkie]

Yup. One Super Carrier handled an entire squadron of battlecruisers in the past. They have shields and weapons rated in the teratons. Normal battlecruisers don't have nuclear level armor. The Hyperion should get flattened out of the sky with one blast.

And yet during the SC1 vanilla's ending cinematic we see the Gantrithor, one of the largest, most advanced, & most powerful warships the Protoss ever built receiving massive structural damage from 2 piddling mutalisks, whereas in SC2's 'escape from mar sara' cinematic, we see the Hyperion, a clunky, outdated (even by Terran standards) frankenstein of a vessel showing obvious wear & tear plowing through a massive swarm of them while receiving little, if any structural damage.

Precedent's already been set dude.

If they don't follow their own rules that they made, well, that's when I get mad.

Which they've already shown they'll readily do whenever it suits the specific story their telling or their own notion of what's cool at the time.

You realize the same universe which has zerglings tearing through armored marines like tissue paper & flinging them around like ragdolls also has unarmored, untrained dirt farmers holding off waves of them with little more than common farm implements?
Or the same universe which has terran marines laying out hydralisks with one punch also has hydralisks swallowing marines whole in one gulp, like a double shot of burbon?

[solidsamurai]

So you're OK with the Zerg's Blatant lubricantess buttrape of all 4 laws of thermodynamics by their mere EXISTENCE, but you just don't buy Raynor & his merry band of 'Expendables in Space' roflpwning Selendis' fleet with a surgical strike?

Yeah anyway, are we done commenting on how blizz and associated partners for associative works of fiction have butchered starcraft?

Can I at least say that we are all allowed to interpret the universe in our own way? Use our imaginations? That's the original message - there's no way that anything starcraft could hold together as a movie or television series, so why depend on others to do the filling in for you? Especially if they're only in it for the money?

Think about it. You're an artist and you're given creative freedom to do what you will with a universe for a specific assigned plot.

You can draw whatever you like, as long as it takes inspiration from the universe and portrays items that would effectively familiarize the reader with the setting. These are the exact words the employer gives to said artist. Hence, what gets drawn is whatever the artist feels like.

So we have serenity/firefly knock off nonsensical plot and characters that are impossible to sympathize because they talk too damn fast to get any grasp on their psyches (and they sure as hell aren't heroic in any way) because the writer thinks its a movie and not a comic, so it's basically just stuff that happens and causes pictures and words to appear rather than a narrative that is actually effective or entertains or makes you think in any particular manner simply because violence is cool and it's kind of like the 90s where people have to be ridiculously bad ass and look like Bruce Willis (warpigs comics), and then fuckin' starcraft: the manga. If someone were told starcraft is a story, they'd say 'wtf are you talking about?'. There's no continuous narrative, and no continuous art. Face it, starcraft is a label, fitted with themes. The only constant is theme.

It may be because I have aspergers, but I really hate change - especially change to things that are supposed to entertain me and make me happy. I'll admit I'm not much of a gamer - I don't take pleasure (at least, not always; it isn't routine for me) in constantly slogging away at something until I win. However, I do enjoy things for the story. And I enjoyed starcraft for what little gaming fun it did provide me, because I was (after all) yet another person that played through the campaign at a young age and enjoyed the cut scenes, and it has since, given me an enthralling sort of inspiration about how fantasy and sci fi can really well... inspire us, I guess. Inspire is the only word that comes to mind... :l

Okay, my point is: Pretty much everyone I've talked to on the internet has said that starcraft is a space game where you command soldiers in space as an RTS, and they would express confusion at the notion of any semblance of story. To them, it's not worth checking into - and they are 100% correct. If you are into stories, read books (I read books, so this doesn't apply to me); but it's unfortunate that media has to the power to give us entertainment, but not provide enjoyable narratives as well. Story telling, at least in America, it seems, has lost its touch. Hence, fans and nerds tend to hold onto the same things they know and love already.

It's as butchered as star wars. So, it's really up to the fans to interpret it how we will.

Hence, I will interpet it how I will. I will do so logically.

So yeah, if I ever happen to write anything on here, feel free to agree with me. Or even disagree! But give an intelligent, (at least semi) constructive argument why. For the sake of, if not great justice, world building.

Don't say 'that's not how happened in X', because fuck, that's not how it happened. That's a published artist's opinion of what happened (for the record 'published' isn't a badge of honor, it just means they made money doing their gig). If you are arguing with me, then that means you enjoy that change, and that it also tells me that you don't read a lot of stories. Sorry, but that just tells me that you are worth ignoring. So please don't do it. :P

*gasp*

No. Its not nearly as bad as 40k or Star Trek.

Oh so, really, that just tells me there's less shit to sort through. Truth be told, it's another thing that's gonna get milked dry - like star trek or warhammer 40k.

How many fans does WH40k have anyway? Getting into that is so much more expensive than starcraft. I just don't understand how things originate - unless it was like the first brand ever to feature 'sci fi' (it's no where close to sci fi - in this case, sci fi only implies 'space and lasers'), in customizable figurines and a war game. Which might make sense, but how was it in the 80s.

Hell, I should really write my own interpretation of starcraft and then give it a different name to avoid copyright.

[Pr0nogo]

40k is pretty interesting on a fluff level. You can get some quality entertainment by buying the second Dawn of War + expansion packs, a total of something like sixty dollars on Steam if I remember correctly. I'm certainly not as familiar with that universe as I am with StarCraft, but 40k has way more potential. The way it handles gods and godlikes leaves a near-infinite amount of creativity at your disposal for making your own.

[solidsamurai]

60 dollars is too much for my game budget, unfortunately. :P

But what I don't understand with 40k is that it was originally a wargame. How many people were into it? Why did so many buy into the hand-made figurines, which really just represented some obscure fantasy (granted a lot of it was probably themed on other slightly pop culture such as aliens and lotr, but besides - actually even then, I don't think the first alien was explosively popular when it was first released; though, I could be wrong, again)?

Something tells me many of them were grown men that used it to play other games like D&D. It's rocketed to fame to be ripped off countlessly, but its origins probably paint an even more interesting story than its lore. IMO anyway.

[Sarov]

Why did so many buy into the hand-made figurines, which really just represented some obscure fantasy (granted a lot of it was probably themed on other slightly pop culture such as aliens and lotr, but besides - actually even then, I don't think the first alien was explosively popular when it was first released; though, I could be wrong, again)?

Some people liked the amount of variations for armies, options for individual units, and the tactical decisions. For others, it was the creative aspect whether it was the lore or painting models and making props. In that way, it's a lot like D&D. Some people like role-playing, others liked world building and creating elaborate stories but others just like the tactical side (making a character, combat, etc).

Models were too expensive and I wasn't very interested in the games. Although, it was the closest I could get to having a swarm of vicious, nightmarish aliens under my command. Tyranids FTW.

But Pr0nongo is right. Compared to StarCraft, there's more creative opportunity in Warhammer 40k, especially from a role-playing standpoint.

[solidsamurai]

But Pr0nongo is right. Compared to StarCraft, there's more creative opportunity in Warhammer 40k, especially from a role-playing standpoint.

So assuming you have no imagination to delve into a universe and make something up for yourself, is their any other reason why you are justifying liking warhammer 40k to the point of actually roleplaying - or because everyone wants to roleplay a space marine and cry 'for the emperor', or be a tyranid and basically just tell the GM that you eat the first thing you see... I don't get it? Would be painful to listen to or read, or GM for anyone experienced at the role, just saying.

I mean, sometimes it isn't about the lore - and the 'lore' requires decent writing to work into a plot any given writer wants to dream up. There's only a few known books for referance out there and many actual fantasy novels are 400+ pages in length (not to mention fantasy doesn't necessarily occupy 'pop culture' - the only movie consumed by the masses is LotR and harry potter - one is pretty boring of a read and the other is the same old children's black and white underdog story). Other than that, 'lore' also belongs to well established series such as well... popular video games or comics, etc.

I think it'd be a productive excercise to delve into the less covered settings, such as starcraft. Alas, the abundance of fans crushes my roleplaying spirit by relegating it to D&D and overindulged settings such as warhammer and startrek.

I seriously have no real grudge with warhammer or star trek or star wars, etc. It's just again, and again and again and jesus christ... how much of that shit can you get before it gives you a head ache? It can be difficult for the GM to feel entertained when roleplaying in an established setting. I think it falls to the players to therefor, just accept whatever happens, regarding story and nitty gritty details about character, setting, etc. I actually recall GMing a D&D game online with an instant messenger (the only time I ever did GM), and I forgot character names that I'd made for NPCs myself, and so the players had to remind me - breaking realism. In some ways, plot holes and other inevitable continuity errors (such as forgetting names) can be equally comparably bad to one another.

I could try running a warhammer 40k game, but it'd have to be up to your guys to teach me the rules or show me a book of whatever system you'd want to use and then explain all the specifics of what should be involved. Sound difficult? It is! No wonder nobody roleplays except obscure sites like myth-weavers.

making a character, combat, etc

The characters already have names and their figurines already represent what they're all about. Well... much of the time, from what I gather. So there isn't much that can be done to make a character.

[Sarov]

@solidsamurai
I have never role-played in the 40k universe in any form so I wouldn't even know what the system was for the pen & paper game. Or if there is one. A talented GM can make amazing campaigns out of boring settings. An experienced player can make a compelling character even when limited.

I've done many forms of RP: free-form chat-based, play-by-post (email or IM), with a consistent group, and one on one for those who can't find a group. And yet I've only found StarCraft and Warhammer 40k in free-form. Most free-form players want to play powerful characters. In StarCraft, this is usually someone playing a PI 9 Ghost or a Terran with Protoss technology. In 40K, there are significant risks no matter how powerful you are. Therefore it's easier for someone to play something powerful without horribly ruining the RP. Since "Rock Falls, Everyone Dies" can't quite be used in free-form, Warhammer can be better.

Also, holy crap derailing. Oh well, this seems to be normal when there's less activity. Lol.

[Pr0nogo]

I don't think I've ever come across a group of people who play Warhammer again and again and again, be it role-playing or otherwise.

Also, why do we have to justify liking something? We can argue about its quality (like I do with SCII at times), but at the end of the day, that argument isn't going to change whether or not you enjoy spending time with that particular product or setting. If you feel like having a debate based around how creative people can get with Warhammer vs. with StarCraft, by all means have it, but that's not what I got from your post.

[solidsamurai]

Also, why do we have to justify liking something?

You don't. Just ranting is all.