Q&A #10

[Turalyon]

I'm afraid they'll do this, actually. And yes, I choose the word "afraid" for a reason. Why? Because it means that every foreshadowing of Tassadar's return and leaves us with the same unanswered questions concerning Adun and the Twilight Messiah concept (which I'd argue actually goes back to Khas, but whatever), but it's a deviation from what I feel was the original intent. "Fans want x, so we give it to them." To use your above example, I wouldn't have minded the indoc theory as being true if that was Bioware's original intent, but I wouldn't have wanted them to make it true to 'please the fans' if it wasn't.

I'm not exactly sure if this is exactly what you're trying to say here, but I take it that you felt that there was some precedence (foreshadowing) for Tassadar's return somewhere in SC leading up to WoL and that by not keeping Tassadar's appearance in WoL as being genuine (as opposed to fake as Gradius would want it), it will ruin the eventual reveal/revelation of the source of Protoss mysticism (this Tassadar, Adun and Khas thing), right?

As the games are primarily my source for SC lore, there is nothing in there to suggest that Tassdar would or should come back in any form later on. As far as I can see, the "original intent" there was to keep the dead as being dead and to move on. In that light, Tassadar actually coming back in WoL for real can be seen as a response to the "Fans want x (x being more Tassadar action), so we give it to them" itself. At the least, it's very comic-booky and totally unprecedented unless you look at the EU. I maybe in the minority, but I don't think the unanswered question regarding the nature of Khas, Adun and the Twilight Messiah is really that important to answer. Your assumptions seem to be based off of the EU (which, if you think about it, are really a product of "Fans want x, so we give it to them" anyway but then again, so is the concept of a sequel released 12 years after the fact....), which we have both admitted is somewhat detrimental to the overall experience of WoL because it necessitates (especially when considering your current assumptions) knowledge of it in order to properly understand and appreciate the current story.

Besides, I wouldn't think it fair to blame Blizz caving into "what fans wanted" because let's face it, the whole thing is an exercise in fan appeasement in general (I seem to be the only "fan" that was OK with the prospect of Sc potentially not having a sequel at all at the time) because otherwise, there wouldn't be a sequel.

I'm miffed at the lack of direct answers, but what miffs me more is that there seems to be a lack of foresight on them. The whole "is Tassadar really there? Wait and see!" or "well, there's prophecy and there's prophecy...wait and see!" are such examples. Why? Because it feels like the elements are still up in the air due to the negative reaction, and I think altering them will cause more problems than it solves.

I somehow doubt that the majority of the elements in SC2 story are still "up in the air" awaiting fan reaction to be changed given the timing of these QAs and the imminent release of HotS and therefore, two-thirds of the story being actually set in stone. I think Kindregan's hesitance for straight responses for those plot related questions are more to do with not wanting to reveal spoilers than anything else and/or not potentially closing off avenues that he or someone else might want to expand on even later.

As to the lack of foresight on Blizz's part, they have already clearly demonstrated it before. Kerrigan being infested in Sc1 was made-up on the spot/ wasn't planned. Likewise with their approach to including Tassadar in WoL. They freely admitted that they only put Tassadar in there was because they couldn't find any other way to vet the importance of his exposition to Zeratul and nothing to do with him being potentially being a plot device/point or whatever in the future. The ad hoc nature of the story has worked for them in the past, as long as it's melded/implemented properly no-one is worse off.

So yeah, I'm iffy about Kindragen's responses, but not for the same reasons. It's like he's hovering between his instincts (liking the story) and the need to please people, hence why he haven't got many clear-cut answers on controversial topics. As if, for instance, "I like the idea of Tassadar coming back, but fans don't, so I guess I better cave in." It's what concerns me more than the lack of answers on certain questions that should have easy answers (e.g. the nanites. Just say they don't work anymore. There's no need to dance around the question). If a writer believes in what (s)he is writing, then I'd like to think they have the conviction to follow through with it. Choosing what feedback to implement is their porogative. Not the fans'. They can make the changes fans want, but if they do, I expect them to honestly believe it will make the story better. Not to write something they don't want to write, but feel they have to because it's what the majority wants.

Maybe we can all agree then that Kindregan just isn't a good writer then?

This makes me how you would feel when HotS came out, it coincidentally had elements which you feel was influenced by fan reaction but were in fact, really Kindregan's ideas. Would you believe him if he said otherwise? If you don't, this could easily start getting into the ugly "you don't like it because it's not what you wanted" territory that all the WoL naysayers are intimately aware, and been accused, of before.

[Hawki]

I'm not exactly sure if this is exactly what you're trying to say here, but I take it that you felt that there was some precedence (foreshadowing) for Tassadar's return somewhere in SC leading up to WoL and that by not keeping Tassadar's appearance in WoL as being genuine (as opposed to fake as Gradius would want it), it will ruin the eventual reveal/revelation of the source of Protoss mysticism (this Tassadar, Adun and Khas thing), right?

I'll specify that the Tassadar/Adun/Khas thing is more my own interpretation, something I realized when editing protoss history on the wiki. But if Tassadar's appearence in WoL isn't genuine, then it makes me wonder why it was brought up in the first place. Unless it does a 180 or something, the DV saying "yeah, that whole Anak'Sun thing? Load of bull. You're doomed." Which can work also. Just the thing is, it was outright stated that "we brought Tassadar back because of x," so any change feels like a change made during the trilogy itself rather than something planned.

As the games are primarily my source for SC lore, there is nothing in there to suggest that Tassdar would or should come back in any form later on. As far as I can see, the "original intent" there was to keep the dead as being dead and to move on. In that light, Tassadar actually coming back in WoL for real can be seen as a response to the "Fans want x (x being more Tassadar action), so we give it to them" itself.

Have you ever seen fans clamour for more Tassadar? Heck, I've seen more fans asking for Fenix to return. Again.

At the least, it's very comic-booky and totally unprecedented unless you look at the EU. I maybe in the minority, but I don't think the unanswered question regarding the nature of Khas, Adun and the Twilight Messiah is really that important to answer. Your assumptions seem to be based off of the EU (which, if you think about it, are really a product of "Fans want x, so we give it to them" anyway but then again, so is the concept of a sequel released 12 years after the fact....), which we have both admitted is somewhat detrimental to the overall experience of WoL because it necessitates (especially when considering your current assumptions) knowledge of it in order to properly understand and appreciate the current story.

Bring this up again after LotV and I'll see if I agree. If Tassadar is the real deal, then I expect explanation in the game. Not necessarily in WoL though. And if fans always got what they wanted, I'd have got to play Ghost ages ago. Fact is, with some exceptions, fans clamouring for something is only part of it. The real world is just that. If BW had been a flop, if it hadn't become an e-sport, we'd have been lucky to get a sequel...ever. Even if the story called for continuation (IMO), the real world comes first.

I somehow doubt that the majority of the elements in SC2 story are still "up in the air" awaiting fan reaction to be changed given the timing of these QAs and the imminent release of HotS and therefore, two-thirds of the story being actually set in stone. I think Kindregan's hesitance for straight responses for those plot related questions are more to do with not wanting to reveal spoilers than anything else and/or not potentially closing off avenues that he or someone else might want to expand on even later.

I dunno. Just look at the questions being answered. Many of them are questions that should have been obvious wouldn't be answered, such as, "what's the Dark Voice" or "why does the story suck?" It strikes me in part as bringing them up, seeing fan reaction, and making changes if necessary. He gets to choose which questions to answer, so it strikes me as iffy that so many are being chosen that aren't being answered at all really.

Maybe we can all agree then that Kindregan just isn't a good writer then?

No, I wouldn't say that actually. Looking at his resume, even if I didn't like WoL's story(telling), that still leaves stuff of his he's written (parts of) that I do like, such as Mass Effect 2 and his site short-stories. It's his reactions to criticism that irk me. Partly because they feel too reactionary, partly because they come across as narcicistic, partly because it's a M.O. that shouldn't be used when it comes to feedback IMO.

This makes me how you would feel when HotS came out, it coincidentally had elements which you feel was influenced by fan reaction but were in fact, really Kindregan's ideas. Would you believe him if he said otherwise? If you don't, this could easily start getting into the ugly "you don't like it because it's not what you wanted" territory that all the WoL naysayers are intimately aware, and been accused, of before.

I probably wouldn't believe him entirely, similar to how I don't entirely believe Ian Flynn when he says that Sega never mandated that there be more Segaverse elements in the STH Archieverse, that he has creative control in that regard (OT I know, but first example that came to mind). But if HotS defies my (positive) expectations? Based on past defiances of positive expectations, you'll probably get a rant that dies off quickly. And if it's the case where I end up liking it while everyone else hates it? Um...well, let's just say I hope that doesn't happen. It's been a long three years for WoL. I don't want to spend another three in debate as he wait for LotV.

[Turalyon]

But if Tassadar's appearence in WoL isn't genuine, then it makes me wonder why it was brought up in the first place. Unless it does a 180 or something, the DV saying "yeah, that whole Anak'Sun thing? Load of bull. You're doomed." Which can work also. Just the thing is, it was outright stated that "we brought Tassadar back because of x," so any change feels like a change made during the trilogy itself rather than something planned.

I don't think we would really ever know since it could be just as likely that the whole point was to manipulate expectation of his return without him really returning for real. Sure, it's a very rat-faced writing technique but it wouldn't be beyond them to do it considering that they've used the same technique with the Overmind where we expected one thing that was/is quite definite at the time (the Overmind being metaphysically free in SC) but in reality it really wasn't (the Overmind was not metaphysically free as shown in WoL). The one thing I've learnt from WoL and the SC unvierse in general now is that all sorts of shenanigans are possible.

From the position of limited lore information that I hold, I still can't find any evidence to suggest Tassadar's eventual return at all anywhere within the SC games until WoL. I wouldn't take much stock in someone stating outright something as if it was set in stone, because some writers don't actually have everything planned out in advance or are prone to changing their minds later - hell, it's how reimagined works spring up. I wouldn't get too fussed about whether the change was really influenced by fans or is a genuine change of heart as long as it is implemented properly and cohesively.

Have you ever seen fans clamour for more Tassadar? Heck, I've seen more fans asking for Fenix to return. Again.

Just because you don't hear of them doesn't mean there aren't any. I tend to think that the Fenix 'thing' is more about Raynor's continuity of characterisation than anything else.

I don't really care for either to return, honestly. They're both yesterday's news. Why try relying on nostalgia for these characters to move forward? They should be remembered sure for what they did but they shouldn't be used as a crutch to support things that should have moved on without their presence. Well, that's my take on why Tassadar shouldn't return at the moment (hey, I could change my mind).

I dunno. Just look at the questions being answered. Many of them are questions that should have been obvious wouldn't be answered, such as, "what's the Dark Voice" or "why does the story suck?" It strikes me in part as bringing them up, seeing fan reaction, and making changes if necessary. He gets to choose which questions to answer, so it strikes me as iffy that so many are being chosen that aren't being answered at all really.

You have to look at the flip side. The questions that are chosen are what, I suspect, reflective of a certain fan sentiment that has gained traction. To not answer such questions, when they are probably at the forefront of a great many number of "fans", at all by ignoring them would then be deemed by the fans as them "dodging" of the worst kind and that they're not really doing these QAs for the fans at all. Half-hearted answers are better than not at all. Some of the questions are about specific plot points that are yet to be revealed (like the DV one) so I actually expect them to be evasive purely because of going into spoiler territory.

Hrm, it seems like I'm doing a lot of PR work for Blizz lately. Maybe I should ask them to pay me.

No, I wouldn't say that actually.

It was a joke. I don't really have that strong (negative or otherwise) of an opinion on him at all really.

Partly because they feel too reactionary, partly because they come across as narcicistic, partly because it's a M.O. that shouldn't be used when it comes to feedback IMO.

I didn't know there was a standard protocol in merely answering questions... Either way, I can understand why he's reactionary given that some of the questions are pretty aggressive and seem to be really more about wanting to be appeased than to be genuinely answered. Being narcissistic is certainly within his right at some level given that he's writing the story and has the choice of whether or not to spoil his own story or not by answering these questions. Even then, he doesn't come across overly so - if he was, there would be no Q&A at all and he'd simply just ask us to trust him (oh wait, I think I've heard Blizz say this before, too).

I probably wouldn't believe him entirely, similar to how I don't entirely believe Ian Flynn when he says that Sega never mandated that there be more Segaverse elements in the STH Archieverse, that he has creative control in that regard (OT I know, but first example that came to mind). But if HotS defies my (positive) expectations? Based on past defiances of positive expectations, you'll probably get a rant that dies off quickly. And if it's the case where I end up liking it while everyone else hates it? Um...well, let's just say I hope that doesn't happen. It's been a long three years for WoL. I don't want to spend another three in debate as he wait for LotV.

As I've mentioned before, your reaction to HotS is one of the reasons why I'm looking forward to its release.

It's funny how we talk about expectations. WoL met my expectations and more... it's just that I didn't want them to because they were negative ones, unfortunately.

[Hawki]

You have to look at the flip side. The questions that are chosen are what, I suspect, reflective of a certain fan sentiment that has gained traction. To not answer such questions, when they are probably at the forefront of a great many number of "fans", at all by ignoring them would then be deemed by the fans as them "dodging" of the worst kind and that they're not really doing these QAs for the fans at all. Half-hearted answers are better than not at all. Some of the questions are about specific plot points that are yet to be revealed (like the DV one) so I actually expect them to be evasive purely because of going into spoiler territory.

The problem is that they kept on being brought up over and over again. I mean, looking at the questions, many times the same questions keep getting repeated over and over, yet there are still some good ones. If Kindragen felt he had to address the DV and fan misgivings, they could have easily been confined to a single thread. He isn't being put on the spot, he can pick and choose what questions to answer, so he's under no obligation to repeatedly address questions that shouldn't be answered (which the fans should realize as well). Simple questions such as "why can't Nerazim be infested" are, I doubt, spoilers, and since the potential answer is simple (reliance on Void energies), and could easily be answered. Or if not, say, "can't answer this" in one thread and leave it at that.

Being narcissistic is certainly within his right at some level given that he's writing the story and has the choice of whether or not to spoil his own story or not by answering these questions. Even then, he doesn't come across overly so - if he was, there would be no Q&A at all and he'd simply just ask us to trust him (oh wait, I think I've heard Blizz say this before, too).

I wouldn't really say it's his 'right.' It's an inclination that any artist has (the term artist here is broad, extending from artists to chefs for instance) to defend their work from criticism, but it's an inclination that should usually be kept in check (not entirely, but it's more a case of knowing when to draw the line). Some people (some, as in, ranging from the Internet to writing courses) seem incapable of keeping that urge in check, but as Kindragen is published, I'd have thought he'd be able to do better than say "well, Raynor could have mentioned Fenix, but other than that, but other than that, the job I did was perfect." Heck, I'm not the one making the claims and I still find some of his wording incredibly arrogant and condacending at times.

And again, this wouldn't be so bad if the process wasn't repeated in one Q&A after another...

As I've mentioned before, your reaction to HotS is one of the reasons why I'm looking forward to its release.

Um...okay.

Not sure how that'll work out though. I wouldn't really say I have any real misgivings bar the shortened campaign length (granted, 20 missions is still impressive in itself) and that many of them are seemingly non-plot related (single infestation missions outside the main storyline). And, come to think of it, kind of iffy about Kerrigan being on the field of battle in almost every mission. Feels a bit iffy, though her power development could be fun to play with. And I think certain things have a potential to go either way, such as, I think a balance needs to be struck between Kerrigan repeating BW (evil beyond reproach and all that) and taking the zerg to the other end of the spectrum (insert flower and butterfly imagery here), and other plot points that could go either way as well (e.g. returning to Zerus...nice idea, but will need a lot to make it work, such as distance and why it's now covered in jungle). But I wouldn't say I've got too much expectation of quality. This isn't a slight against Blizzard, but more along the lines of the zerg being my least favourite race to play, and pretty much the least interesting of the 'big three' for me. Fair's fair I guess-after all, those who dislike (playing as) terrans had to struggle through WoL, so now's it's the zerg haters' turn to suffer.

So yeah. The only expectation I really have is that I won't have as much fun playing HotS as I did WoL. Which is kind of a moot point. Disapointing expectations don't harm you. It's the negative things you don't expect that get you down.

[Turalyon]

I wouldn't really say I have any real misgivings bar the shortened campaign length (granted, 20 missions is still impressive in itself) and that many of them are seemingly non-plot related (single infestation missions outside the main storyline).

Yeah, this is one thing to keep an eye on. I'm actually in agreement with Blizz that WoL was actually too long for it minimalist plot which wasn't really helped by the meandering focus of "seemingly non-plot related" elements (the Tosh and Hanson side trips in particular) in it as well. If HotS is shorter but still containing many of these "seemingly non-plot related" elements, I would have to come to the conclusion that the story of SC2 isn't really worth it/ meaty enough for a trilogy at all (much like the feeling I'm getting from the new The Hobbit film).

And, come to think of it, kind of iffy about Kerrigan being on the field of battle in almost every mission.

Hey, it didn't hurt Warcraft 3.

And I think certain things have a potential to go either way, such as, I think a balance needs to be struck between Kerrigan repeating BW (evil beyond reproach and all that) and taking the zerg to the other end of the spectrum (insert flower and butterfly imagery here), and other plot points that could go either way as well (e.g. returning to Zerus...nice idea, but will need a lot to make it work, such as distance and why it's now covered in jungle).

Not sure if the Zerg have any "spectrum" to speak of beyond being blood-thirsty monsters. Kerrigan, with her recent transformation, is a different matter. It all has the potential to live up to it name, Heart of the Swarm (could it be the Zerg getting some compassion, flowers and rainbows through Kerrigan's newfound humanity, a direct reference to who ultimately controls the Zerg Swarm or about the immutability of Zerg nature?) unlike Wings of Liberty. I still have no idea how it relates to the story itself without stretching (Raynor is free... but then gets roped/forced into yet another conspiracy in which he doesn't really have freedom at all such that "liberty" is fleeting or has "wings". God, I've spent way too much time overthinking this ) such that I've jokingly referred to "Wing of Liberty" in the past as reference to the conceit of Blizz's writers in making crazy shit up.

...but more along the lines of the zerg being my least favourite race to play, and pretty much the least interesting of the 'big three' for me. Fair's fair I guess-after all, those who dislike (playing as) terrans had to struggle through WoL, so now's it's the zerg haters' turn to suffer.

Although I'm primarily a Zerg lover (largely because they are so different and require a certain mindset to understand), I wouldn't say I struggled through WoL because "I don't like Terrans". In fact, I actually like the Terrans in their own way (much like the Protoss in their own way). Indeed, I found the Terran component in the original SC to be the strongest of the 3 campaigns with the Zerg being the weakest and yet I still find the Zerg intriguing. When I say "Terran", "Zerg" and Protoss" here, I don't mean it specifically directed to any individual character but more in a "racial/special (pronounced spee-shul) identity" way.

WoL wasn't necessarily more about Terrans in general than it was about being the "Jim Raynor Show". Granted Raynor is a Terran, but he isn't the only one nor should he have been representative of them as a whole as he is in WoL.

Disapointing expectations don't harm you. It's the negative things you don't expect that get you down.

I don't often let my expectations of something to get in the way of me experiencing it for real but disappointing expectations are still bad when you hope they won't be met but are still met regardless. The "negative things you don't expect" are just the additional "cherry on top" (read as: kicking dirt in my eyes when I'm already on the ground).

[Hawki]

Yeah, this is one thing to keep an eye on. I'm actually in agreement with Blizz that WoL was actually too long for it minimalist plot which wasn't really helped by the meandering focus of "seemingly non-plot related" elements (the Tosh and Hanson side trips in particular) in it as well. If HotS is shorter but still containing many of these "seemingly non-plot related" elements, I would have to come to the conclusion that the story of SC2 isn't really worth it/ meaty enough for a trilogy at all (much like the feeling I'm getting from the new The Hobbit film).

Huh, so not only do we disagree on WoL, but on The Hobbit as well. Go figure.

Hey, it didn't hurt Warcraft 3.

I never said it did. My 'iffiness' in HotS is more down to 'feeling' rather than gameplay though. If Kerrigan's in most missions, I'm glad that she has a respawn option to encourage using her. However...well, look at the past games. SC1, on the field in almost every mission in the zerg campaign where she has a 'right' to be. Servant of the Swarm, hand of the Overmind, logically fights as a warrior. In BW, she's on the field once, helping out the protoss, before controlling a brood on Char, then becoming the mastermind running the show. Leader of the zerg, doesn't have to lower herself to that level. In WoL, she's on the field as an enemy in two missions. Mostly the 'distant evil' that I felt worked well, but when she was on the field, her presence meant something.

In HotS? She's the leader of the zerg, no matter how small the zerg might start off. A leader wielding a canister rifle. It felt iffy when using Duran and Fenix in the zerg campaign in BW, and IMO, it feels iffy for Kerrigan to be on the field when the Swarm should be able to do her fighting for her. I mean, yes, it would be far more satisfying for her to kill Mengsk herself than have some random zerg do it for instance, but...I dunno, I just feel that her being on the field in HotS should be the exception rather than the rule. But at least we have her powers to play with, so at the least, the gameplay should be enjoyable.

Not sure if the Zerg have any "spectrum" to speak of beyond being blood-thirsty monsters. Kerrigan, with her recent transformation, is a different matter. It all has the potential to live up to it name, Heart of the Swarm (could it be the Zerg getting some compassion, flowers and rainbows through Kerrigan's newfound humanity, a direct reference to who ultimately controls the Zerg Swarm or about the immutability of Zerg nature?)

I dunno. You know, I think the zerg have more potential for change than most other 'bug species' in that at the least, they had actual characters (Overmind, cerebrates, Kerrigan, etc.) rather than a single hivemind, or no characters at all. But I don't think we'll get into flower territory. It's one of those things that I wouldn't mind myself in theory, at least, reaching the stage where the zerg are no longer the bringers of death they once were. But I'm sure too many people would loathe it. Plus, assuming SC3 goes where I think it'll go based on hints, the zerg will probably still be 'nasty' and all that.

unlike Wings of Liberty. I still have no idea how it relates to the story itself without stretching (Raynor is free... but then gets roped/forced into yet another conspiracy in which he doesn't really have freedom at all such that "liberty" is fleeting or has "wings". God, I've spent way too much time overthinking this )

Yes. yes you have.

WoL wasn't necessarily more about Terrans in general than it was about being the "Jim Raynor Show". Granted Raynor is a Terran, but he isn't the only one nor should he have been representative of them as a whole as he is in WoL.

Didn't get the sense of Raynor representing terrans as a whole. Heck, I've never got the sense of that of any of the campaigns. Which, IMO, is a good thing. Given the current powerplays between the terran factions, and how the UED is completely isolated from them, I don't think any one faction/character can represent humanity as a whole.

[Telenil]

I've read that Flashpoint includes Arcturus' fleet destroying Valerian's half, which should be an enormous blow to the Dominion's military, if not spark a civil war between Valerian's supporters (who seem to be many) and Arcturus' loyalists.

Who wants to bet that it won't have any more effect than all the defeats the Dominion suffered in Brood War?...

[Hawki]

Less I guess, as HotS isn't in a position to go too in-depth into Dominion politics, whereas in WoL we saw a weakened Dominion.

[Telenil]

When does the Dominion look weak in WoL? Oo They make superweapons, send entire fleet against the Zerg, and other Terran factions are barely mentionned at all.

[Hawki]

Um, the fact that the Dominion is barely holding together, with rebellion and internal dissent running rife? The fact that the KMC and UP are mentioned to be fighting their own wars, as the independent bodies they became after the Brood War? The fact that they had to send half their fleet to establish a mere beachhead on Char, the notion of taking Kerrigan head-on never really a possibility? The fact that if not for Kerrigan's true goals it could have easily been erradicated? The fact that they had to abandon an entire section of space to hold any ground at all, turning away refugees from said sector of space? The fact that part of holding that ground is part of the innovations they made after BW, the whole 'essence' of the new terran units in flavour lore (similar to the flavour lore of protoss HotS units)? The fact that it's become far more draconian since BW?

Could go on, but playing WoL, I never got the sense of the Dominion being all powerful, only it being like the Confederacy at the end of its era. The rotten tree, to borrow words from Asimov. Looks strong until it's blasted apart.