I'm sure that this topic has been broached before in many individual threads regarding specific issues and various nit-picks but I was hoping to try and highlight the most important plotholes in the Starcraft story so far - the ones that shape the overall narrative, plot and progression/characterisation of the main players.
I want to discuss whether or not they really are plotholes, what steps have been taken to try and "fix" them either through transparency within the current volume (ie: with information given at hand in that installment) or via additional information given through later installments and the perceived effectiveness (and problems) brought about by either strategy.
To start things off, I propose to look at the Overmind's decision to leave Kerrigan on Char in SC1. To me, it was never a plothole because the decision to leave her behind was transparent right from the get go - it was to fight off the most powerful and newest (since the Overmind was invulnerable up to that point) threat. What better way to counter this credible threat than with your new found acquisition - one which was actually developed to fight such a threat anyway?
The generic Protoss martial and psionic prowess could harm the Zerg armies in droves but in the end, they were replaceable and ultimately proved ineffective against the Cerebrates and the Overmind itself. This changed with the introduction of the Dark Templar - a threat that could potentially bypass entire Zerg armies and yet actually cause permanent harm to the Zerg. Isn't this the precise threat that Kerrigan was made for?
Yet, some say that the Overmind's reason to leave Kerrigan behind was a plothole because she was supposed to be the final solution to the Protoss and bringing her to Aiur would've meant a complete and an assured extinction of the Protoss. So why didn't it do so? WoL seems to affirm and "fix" this notion with the Overmind "retcon" (or whatever) by possibly inferring this action was a way to protect Kerrigan from harm and to allow her to ascend as the saviour of the Zerg in case it failed or that it somehow knew it was going to die on Aiur.
The problem I have with the latter is that it potentially adds other plotholes that require later examination and "fluffery" whereas the initial explanation (Kerrigan was already fulfilling her purpose as dictated by the Overmind in fighting the most dangerous aspects of the Protoss) does not. However, in light of the "Overmind retcon" in WoL the reasonable initial explanation I mentioned actually then becomes a plothole - why would the Overmind abandon its hard-won (the Overmind was incredibly lucky to have Kerrigan gift-wrapped for it afterall given its fruitless search up until that point) and possibly only chance of "saving the Zerg" to a new and mysterious enemy that proved themselves to be the greatest threat against it?
The DTs were able to assasinate a high-ranking cerebrate on Zerg home territory with the majority of the Swarm still present on it no less. Yet the Overmind takes almost the entire bulk of his Swarm to attack Aiur, leaving Char (and Kerrigan) less defended than it was before. How is that meant to protect her given that increased vulnerability could've easily meant her being killed as well? Alternatively, does this mean that the only reason Overmind was going to Aiur was to commit suicide then because it knew (how does it know that?) Kerrigan would survive on her own and that it must die before she can become the "Zerg saviour"? Have they just replaced a plothole (one that can be justifiably perceived as non-existent in the first place) with another one? Discuss.




Reply With Quote



