Gradius's HoTS Story Review

[FanaticTemplar]

One of the definitions of victory is to prevent your adversary from achieving their goal.

That could be a tactical victory, yes. But when the entire game is framed around the invasion of Aiur and the victory is in the epilogue to the entire game, then "avoiding extinction" is not a victory. Even the quotes you submitted yourself in an attempt to demonstrate that this wasn't just about Aiur, refer to Aiur as the stakes of the battle. Tassadar directly frames the stakes of the final mission as "Aiur shall not fall!"

'Scattered and broken' meant the coordination they got from the Overmind vanished. It isn't the euphiesm for indecision, that's 'the battlefields fell silent'. Yeah they were no longer fighting because the Zerg had stopped attacking for a while after the Overmind died. It does not mean that all fighting is over. I mean the Protoss eventually have to deal with all those Zergs and that's going to involve fighting right? It meant the Protoss had achieved a Pyrrhic victory not a regular victory. Context alone is enough to explain that.

I ask you for evidence and you just assert something. The game is framed in the context of the invasion of Aiur and an omniscient narrator chooses to end the story with victorious Protoss looking over their devastated homeland with their enemies broken before them, and you choose to interpret this as the Protoss being on the brink of annihilation from this very battle because...

The game tells us that the Overmind was dead and the Swarm scattered and broken in the face of their victorious foes and you interpret this as overrunning Aiur because...

The game tells us that the battlefields fell silent with one side winning and the other side broken, and you interpret this as "a brief hesitation" because...

But Tassadar's fleet wasn't available when the Zerg attacked. The new Executor left with Aldaris to hunt Tassadar so the Conclave only put the Protoss in a greater disadvantage then they were in already. Sure the Protoss annihilated countless Zerg but the reason why they did that is because, I presume, the Zerg were always greater in number than them.

But the Overmind left Kerrigan and her Zerg behind too, so that's a wash. And of course the Zerg are in greater numbers. They're equal but opposite halves, one is quantity, the other is quality.

But none of those measure up to what a Cerebrate can do. A Cerebrate can control an entire Brood.

Which is pretty insignificant if the entire Brood is dead.

What? If that were the case then why did Kerrigan brainwash her n the first place? Kerrigan's plan was to initially gain the Dark Templar's trust and after that failed she resorted to kidnapping. Thus she needed someone who would give her a chance and that is Raszagal.

If you can provide a quote of Raszagal saying something with regard to Kerrigan's fate in The Insurgent, then I will concede that I am wrong. In the meantime, no, she didn't say anything.

[TSCR]

That could be a tactical victory, yes. But when the entire game is framed around the invasion of Aiur and the victory is in the epilogue to the entire game, then "avoiding extinction" is not a victory. Even the quotes you submitted yourself in an attempt to demonstrate that this wasn't just about Aiur, refer to Aiur as the stakes of the battle. Tassadar directly frames the stakes of the final mission as "Aiur shall not fall!"

No they refer to Aiur but they refer to the salvation of all that exist as well. Aiur is very important but it's not the only thing that is important.

Explain to me why it can't be a Pyrrhic victory? There are many types of victories and there's evidence that the Protoss won a Pyrrhic victory. It does not have to be a decisive victory. A Pyrrhic victory is a type of victory. It is not a loss.

I ask you for evidence and you just assert something. The game is framed in the context of the invasion of Aiur and an omniscient narrator chooses to end the story with victorious Protoss looking over their devastated homeland with their enemies broken before them, and you choose to interpret this as the Protoss being on the brink of annihilation from this very battle because...

The game tells us that the Overmind was dead and the Swarm scattered and broken in the face of their victorious foes and you interpret this as overrunning Aiur because...

The game tells us that the battlefields fell silent with one side winning and the other side broken, and you interpret this as "a brief hesitation" because...

Look at all the goals Tassadar had. Aiur was not his only goal.

I have stated several times that Aiur was not Tassadar's only goal. It was one his goals, the goal he was most invested in. He's a Templar so his duty is to protect Aiur so protecting Aiur may have even been the most important goal he had but it was not his only goal. His goal was also to prevent the Protoss assimilation into the Swarm by killing the Overmind. He achieved that. Do you consider that a loss?

Look at all the information and you'll see why I've chosen my interpretation of the epilogue.

The narrator never specified what kind of victory the Protoss won so it's believable if he meant that it was Pyrrhic victory.

But the Overmind left Kerrigan and her Zerg behind too, so that's a wash. And of course the Zerg are in greater numbers. They're equal but opposite halves, one is quantity, the other is quality.

Judging by the way Kerrigan was portrayed, she was supposed to deal with the Dark Templar. That's the difference between her and the Cerebrates/Overmind. All of them can control Zerg but only Kerrigan can control Zerg and fight Dark Templar. The Overmind left her on Char to finish the Dark Templar that remained. There weren't any Dark Templar on Aiur so nothing to worry about.

Above all this, the Protoss didn't have the chance for their quality. You said so yourself that they were equal to the Zerg. Now if they're both equal and the Zerg have an advantage from the start then how are the Protoss going to come out on top? Really the only thing that went well for them was killing the Overmind. While the Conclave let down its guard and sent its troops to fight Tassadar, the Zerg could cut through all the weak defenses of Aiur.

Which is pretty insignificant if the entire Brood is dead.

Since when were you assuming that destroy Cerebrate = destroy Brood?

Fenix
Executor, I bring news most dire. The Cerebrate that we thought we had killed has arisen again. The creature's battered form was reincarnated, despite the considerable damage we inflicted upon it. Even now, the Cerebrate drives its Brood in preparation for their next offensive.

If you can provide a quote of Raszagal saying something with regard to Kerrigan's fate in The Insurgent, then I will concede that I am wrong. In the meantime, no, she didn't say anything.

What about the quotes I already supplied you?

KERRIGAN
Well done, mighty Protoss! I'm glad to see that you all are as violent as ever.

ZERATUL
Kerrigan! What mockery is this?

KERRIGAN
Relax, warriors. Despite what you may think, I haven't come here to fight you.

ALDARIS
This is laughable! Do you truly expect us to believe that your intentions here are honorable? That these Zerg here are not under your sway?

KERRIGAN
Look, the Cerebrates you've killed were my enemies as well. If you let me explain, I'm sure you'll understand tha-

ZERATUL
You are the enemy of all who live, Kerrigan. What makes you think we would have anything to do with you?

KERRIGAN
Because, Zeratul, I bring news of an event that threatens us all. If you'd be so good as to escort me back to your Citadel, I'll tell you everything I know.

RASZAGAL
Very well, Kerrigan. We shall hear what you have to say. But be warned: We will not suffer your treachery here.

^It's only due to Raszagal that Kerrigan even gets a chance to explain herself.

Raszagal
My children, you must put aside your fears and misgivings to accomplish what must be done. For the time being, Kerrigan will assist you in your endeavors. Though she has been your enemy, it is enough that we share the same agenda now. Allow her time enough to prove herself to you, and you may find her to be a valued ally. For now, you must focus on the task at hand. Search for the Uraj on the planet Braxis, and let nothing stop you from recovering it.

^Really its everyone's love for Raszagal that gets them to go along with Kerrigan in the first place.

Honestly she wasn't there on the battlefield so obviously she couldn't say anything in The Insurgent.But if say Zeratul took Kerrigan into custody and bought her to Raszagal for punishment the conversation would play out something like this:

Raszagal:

Zeratul I ordered you to kill Aldaris. Why were you negoiating with him?

Zeratul:

I thought I could reason with him and bring him back to our side.

Raszagal:

Didn't I make myself clear last time? I cannot allow any more dissent among our race while the Zerg wreak havoc across Shakuras.

Zeratul:

I see but what punishment have you decided of this wretched Kerrigan?

Raszagal:

Allow her to assisst you in planting the Uraj and Khalas crystals in the Xel'Naga Temple.

Zeratul:

What? She killed a respected Protoss-

Raszagal:

A respected Protoss who had started a rebellion. A respected Protoss who had attacked his own people in our hour of darkness. A respected Protoss that I told you to kill. An order you refused to obey.

Zeratul:

I'm sorry Matraiarch but I sincerely thought I could convince Aldaris otherwise.

Kerrigan:

Really Zeratul? Even after everything he said to you and Artanis?

Zeratul:

He didn't mean it-

Kerrigan:

He insulted your Matriarch and said she would lead you all to your doom. He seemed to believe that just because she was kind enough to give me a chance, she was evil. It looked like the Conclave's prejudice hadn't completely rubbed off him.

Raszagal:

Zeratul I thought I said there shall be no more dissent among us.

Kerrigan:

Zeratul didn't seem that eager to prevent dissent. I thought he was going to create more by negotiating with Aldaris so I took out Aldaris before his influence could corrupt anyone else. I didn't want to see the Protoss fight among one another when there's a new Overmind planning to wipe us all out. Isn't that right Artanis?

Artanis:

Well.......

Raszagal:

I'm grateful for your consideration Kerrigan. Zeratul I don't think you are in the position to inquire about others punishments. Let there be no more dissent. Work with Kerrigan for the future of our race.


Above all this StarCraft and Brood War were only released 8 months apart. 8 months. With such a small development cycle why would Blizzard even need to retcon. Most of the team was the same and they most likely already knew how Brood War was going to begin by the time StarCraft's production was complete. If it was so tied together then why would Blizzard write one ending then retcon it in the beginning of a game which they started right after? I mean if the Protoss really did lose as you say then why didn't Blizzard edit that 1 line of dialogue that said they won. That shouldn't be too hard. Maybe it's because they meant Pyrrhic victory when they wrote 'victory' in the epilogue?

What I'm saying is that since Brood War's production started right after StarCraft and since both of them were released in the same year, it's likely that Blizzard already knew how they would carry the story into the expansion. If not then how could they get it done so quickly? We need to make sense of what Blizzard was trying to say when they wrote 'victory' and using all the information at hand I don't see how it could have meant anything other than a Pyrrhic victory.

[FanaticTemplar]

No they refer to Aiur but they refer to the salvation of all that exist as well. Aiur is very important but it's not the only thing that is important.

You say so yourself. "As well".

Look at all the goals Tassadar had. Aiur was not his only goal.

So?

I have stated several times that Aiur was not Tassadar's only goal. It was one his goals, the goal he was most invested in. He's a Templar so his duty is to protect Aiur so protecting Aiur may have even been the most important goal he had but it was not his only goal. His goal was also to prevent the Protoss assimilation into the Swarm by killing the Overmind. He achieved that. Do you consider that a loss?

You have stated several times. You have provided evidence for it never.

Judging by the way Kerrigan was portrayed, she was supposed to deal with the Dark Templar. That's the difference between her and the Cerebrates/Overmind. All of them can control Zerg but only Kerrigan can control Zerg and fight Dark Templar. The Overmind left her on Char to finish the Dark Templar that remained. There weren't any Dark Templar on Aiur so nothing to worry about.

What does this have to do with anything?

Above all this, the Protoss didn't have the chance for their quality. You said so yourself that they were equal to the Zerg. Now if they're both equal and the Zerg have an advantage from the start then how are the Protoss going to come out on top? Really the only thing that went well for them was killing the Overmind. While the Conclave let down its guard and sent its troops to fight Tassadar, the Zerg could cut through all the weak defenses of Aiur.

The Protoss dealt the first blow, not the Zerg.

Since when were you assuming that destroy Cerebrate = destroy Brood?

I didn't even know I had at any point believed this, especially given that The Culling demonstrates the exact opposite. So I suppose it's up to you to tell me what I believe.

What about the quotes I already supplied you?





Honestly she wasn't there on the battlefield so obviously she couldn't say anything in The Insurgent.But if say Zeratul took Kerrigan into custody and bought her to Raszagal for punishment the conversation would play out something like this:

Raszagal:

Zeratul I ordered you to kill Aldaris. Why were you negoiating with him?

Zeratul:

I thought I could reason with him and bring him back to our side.

Raszagal:

Didn't I make myself clear last time? I cannot allow any more dissent among our race while the Zerg wreak havoc across Shakuras.

Zeratul:

I see but what punishment have you decided of this wretched Kerrigan?

Raszagal:

Allow her to assisst you in planting the Uraj and Khalas crystals in the Xel'Naga Temple.

Zeratul:

What? She killed a respected Protoss-

Raszagal:

A respected Protoss who had started a rebellion. A respected Protoss who had attacked his own people in our hour of darkness. A respected Protoss that I told you to kill. An order you refused to obey.

Zeratul:

I'm sorry Matraiarch but I sincerely thought I could convince Aldaris otherwise.

Kerrigan:

Really Zeratul? Even after everything he said to you and Artanis?

Zeratul:

He didn't mean it-

Kerrigan:

He insulted your Matriarch and said she would lead you all to your doom. He seemed to believe that just because she was kind enough to give me a chance, she was evil. It looked like the Conclave's prejudice hadn't completely rubbed off him.

Raszagal:

Zeratul I thought I said there shall be no more dissent among us.

Kerrigan:

Zeratul didn't seem that eager to prevent dissent. I thought he was going to create more by negotiating with Aldaris so I took out Aldaris before his influence could corrupt anyone else. I didn't want to see the Protoss fight among one another when there's a new Overmind planning to wipe us all out. Isn't that right Artanis?

Artanis:

Well.......

Raszagal:

I'm grateful for your consideration Kerrigan. Zeratul I don't think you are in the position to inquire about others punishments. Let there be no more dissent. Work with Kerrigan for the future of our race.

Wow, that's a lot of words for someone who's basically saying "you're right, Raszagal never says anything."

Above all this StarCraft and Brood War were only released 8 months apart. 8 months. With such a small development cycle why would Blizzard even need to retcon. Most of the team was the same and they most likely already knew how Brood War was going to begin by the time StarCraft's production was complete. If it was so tied together then why would Blizzard write one ending then retcon it in the beginning of a game which they started right after? I mean if the Protoss really did lose as you say then why didn't Blizzard edit that 1 line of dialogue that said they won. That shouldn't be too hard. Maybe it's because they meant Pyrrhic victory when they wrote 'victory' in the epilogue?

What I'm saying is that since Brood War's production started right after StarCraft and since both of them were released in the same year, it's likely that Blizzard already knew how they would carry the story into the expansion. If not then how could they get it done so quickly? We need to make sense of what Blizzard was trying to say when they wrote 'victory' and using all the information at hand I don't see how it could have meant anything other than a Pyrrhic victory.

That's an empty argument based entirely on assumptions, especially given that it is demonstrably untrue - if they had the story of Brood War planned, the existence of the UED wouldn't be such a mess of plot holes and retcons.

[Aldrius]

That's an empty argument based entirely on assumptions, especially given that it is demonstrably untrue - if they had the story of Brood War planned, the existence of the UED wouldn't be such a mess of plot holes and retcons.

Wait, what? How? They don't say anything about earth in SC1 and it's barely mentioned in the manual.

[FanaticTemplar]

Wait, what? How? They don't say anything about earth in SC1 and it's barely mentioned in the manual.

Mostly:

"At some point during the journey the navigational systems linked to ATLAS shut down, erasing not only the coordinates of Gantris VI, but those of Earth as well."

Basically there was no way Earth could know about what was going on in the Koprulu Sector. Even if the Koprulu Terrans had Warp technology sufficiently advanced by the time of Brood War to send communications over that 60, 000 light year distance in the span of days - meaning that communicating with Earth was at the forefront of Warp tech development and yet the Dominion was completely unaware of it - they still wouldn't know where to exit the warp jump. The logistics of the UED invasion make no sense, really, and it's clear that this was not planned for in the original game.

Also, the original game depicts the whole Koprulu initiative as personal enterprise by Doran Routhe, but Brood War has it as a project supervised by the UPL.

[TSCR]

You say so yourself. "As well".

And that does not make it not his goal. He achieved one of his goals but not the other thus he achieved a Pyrrhic victory.

You have stated several times. You have provided evidence for it never.

How is this not evidence?

Tassadar
So you see my friends, we fight not only to save Aiur, but all creation! If we fall to the Zerg then the Overmind will run rampant throughout the stars, consuming all sentience-all life. It is up to us to put an end to this madness, once and for all.

Tassadar
Indeed. My friends, this is our final hour. Not all of us may survive the coming conflict. Yet, death may be a blessing should we fail here. We seek now to destroy a foe that has ravaged its way across the universe consuming all in its path.

And now it has reached the end of its long journey. The Overmind has come to destroy all that we hold dear and assimilate us into itself. And I say to thee, this shall not come to pass! Aiur shall not fall! Executor, I stand ready!

What are the conditions for a Pyrrhic victory?

Save Aiur + Stop Protoss assimilation = Victory
Lose Aiur + Stop Protoss assimilation = Pyrrhic Victory
Lose Aiur + Unable to stop Protoss assimilation = Defeat

I don't see why you can't accept 'victory' to mean 'Pyrrhic victory'.

What does this have to do with anything?

It's why the Overmind left Kerrigan on Char.

The Protoss dealt the first blow, not the Zerg.

But the Zerg dealt the first blow on where it mattered the most. The Protoss homeworld. It's the difference from a battle in the middle of the map and a battle in your main base.

I didn't even know I had at any point believed this, especially given that The Culling demonstrates the exact opposite. So I suppose it's up to you to tell me what I believe.

You said a reincarnated Cerebrate is pointless if his Brood was destroyed:

Which is pretty insignificant if the entire Brood is dead.

So you were presuming destroy Cerebrate = destroy Brood unless I'm missing something?

Wow, that's a lot of words for someone who's basically saying "you're right, Raszagal never says anything."

I'm giving an example of what would have happened had Zeratul tried to apprehend Kerrigan and take her to the Matriarch. Kerrigan could take advantage of the situation because Zeratul disobeyed orders as well. Above all this Kerrigan didn't really do anything wrong by killing someone already ordered to be executed. Zeratul made the right move by exiling her. Anything else would have been detrimental or out of character for him.

You asked for me to give you a quote from The Insurgent to prove Raszagal had a hand in Kerrigan's faith but that is a straw man argument because Raszagal wasn't even on the battlefield. Aldaris was trying to attack her so she was back at the Executor's citadel in New Antioch. I've already provided you with other quotes that demonstrate that Raszagal did play a role in deciding Kerrigan's fate among the Protoss. Nobody was willing to listen to her until Raszagal intervened and Raszagal herself told all the Protoss that Kerrigan may become their ally so they should give her a chance. Why can't you accept this as evidence? If Raszagal had nothing to do with Kerrigan's fate then the Protoss would have killed Kerrigan the moment she revealed herself on Shakuras. Raszagal was the one to decide Aldaris' fate so why not Kerrigan's?

That's an empty argument based entirely on assumptions, especially given that it is demonstrably untrue - if they had the story of Brood War planned, the existence of the UED wouldn't be such a mess of plot holes and retcons.

I'm not saying they had the entire story of Brood War planned but at least a little of it. They obviously had the Kerrigan take over the Swarm in the works because that was in the original game's epilogue. I don't find it unfeasible for them to know how they would begin Brood War if they knew how to end it.

Above all this you're not answering my question. Why can't you accept 'victory' to mean 'Pyrrhic victory'? I've given you plenty of evidence and even another site has referred to it as a Pyrrhic victory. It was never specified what kind of victory the Protoss won so if they stopped themselves from being assimilated but lost Aiur then it's acceptable. You can achieve victory without achieving your main goal.

[FanaticTemplar]

And that does not make it not his goal. He achieved one of his goals but not the other thus he achieved a Pyrrhic victory.

You still have not demonstrated this.

How is this not evidence?



What are the conditions for a Pyrrhic victory?

Save Aiur + Stop Protoss assimilation = Victory
Lose Aiur + Stop Protoss assimilation = Pyrrhic Victory
Lose Aiur + Unable to stop Protoss assimilation = Defeat

I don't see why you can't accept 'victory' to mean 'Pyrrhic victory'.

Because you have not demonstrated why I should. The narrative is framed around the battle for Aiur. The epilogue is clearly taking place after the battle has ended with one side victorious and the other broken. You keep claiming that it is possible to interpret this to mean the opposite of what it should, assuming you read it with the deliberate intent of reaching that conclusion. But why should I read it with that intent? What is there in StarCraft that would lead me to adopt that perspective?

It's why the Overmind left Kerrigan on Char.

I know?

But the Zerg dealt the first blow on where it mattered the most. The Protoss homeworld. It's the difference from a battle in the middle of the map and a battle in your main base.

But if you've been harassing the enemy economy all the while, their attack on your main will be substantially weaker.

You said a reincarnated Cerebrate is pointless if his Brood was destroyed:

So you were presuming destroy Cerebrate = destroy Brood unless I'm missing something?

No, I said a reincarnated Cerebrate is useless if its Brood is dead. I'm not presuming anything, it's pretty much exactly what's written. I'm not sure how to make this clearer. A Cerebrate is a 1500 hp. structure with no attacks. It can reincarnate as much as it wants, it's not going to be much of a threat to the Protoss. Hell, they could put it in a Stasis Cell or something if they wanted.

I'm giving an example of what would have happened had Zeratul tried to apprehend Kerrigan and take her to the Matriarch. Kerrigan could take advantage of the situation because Zeratul disobeyed orders as well. Above all this Kerrigan didn't really do anything wrong by killing someone already ordered to be executed. Zeratul made the right move by exiling her. Anything else would have been detrimental or out of character for him.

I'm not accepting fanfics as a argument regarding the quality of Brood War.

You asked for me to give you a quote from The Insurgent to prove Raszagal had a hand in Kerrigan's faith but that is a straw man argument because Raszagal wasn't even on the battlefield.

No it's not. You're the one who claimed Zeratul couldn't execute or even imprison Kerrigan because he is not the Dark Templar leader. So you have to provide a quote of the Dark Templar leader saying something with regards to Kerrigan's fate. And there is none. Zeratul does take it upon himself to sentence Kerrigan. So obviously he is to be held accountable for his terrible choice.

I'm not saying they had the entire story of Brood War planned but at least a little of it. They obviously had the Kerrigan take over the Swarm in the works because that was in the original game's epilogue. I don't find it unfeasible for them to know how they would begin Brood War if they knew how to end it.

Do you have anything to demonstrate that this might be the case? I'm not going to accept unfounded assertions just because they would support your position.

Above all this you're not answering my question. Why can't you accept 'victory' to mean 'Pyrrhic victory'? I've given you plenty of evidence and even another site has referred to it as a Pyrrhic victory. It was never specified what kind of victory the Protoss won so if they stopped themselves from being assimilated but lost Aiur then it's acceptable. You can achieve victory without achieving your main goal.

Because you have not provided any evidence. You're just saying "If you assume they mean pyrrhic victory, then you can reinterpret this to mean this other thing instead." That's not evidence. It's hammering a square peg into a round hole because you're starting with the assumption that it's a square hole.

[TSCR]

Because you have not demonstrated why I should. The narrative is framed around the battle for Aiur. The epilogue is clearly taking place after the battle has ended with one side victorious and the other broken. You keep claiming that it is possible to interpret this to mean the opposite of what it should, assuming you read it with the deliberate intent of reaching that conclusion. But why should I read it with that intent? What is there in StarCraft that would lead me to adopt that perspective?

There are countless zerg left on Aiur. They're not just going to disappear since the Overmind is dead.

The epilogue is makes it clear that the Protoss have won a Pyrrhic victory. It's not a happy victory where the good guys survive and the bad guys die. Even at the end Blizzard makes it clear that the Protoss have suffered great casualties to bring about the death of the Overmind. Blizzard is clearly trying to say it's a Pyrrhic victory. This is what they mean. Trying to interpret it as any other type of victory is just misinterpreation.

You need to look at ALL of the narrative. The narrative is NOT ONLY focused on Aiur. I've given you quotes in which Tassadar clearly states he's fighting for everyone and not just the Protoss home world. Tassadar clearly states if the Overmind is not destroyed then it will assimilate the Protoss and make the Zerg perfect. Tassadar hopes to prevent this and in doing so also save Aiur. He achieves the former but not the latter. How is this not demonstratable? Just because Tassadar doesn't save Aiur, doesn't mean he didn't kill the Overmind and stop the Protoss from being assimilated. He was victorious in one regard but not the other but he achieved a victory nonetheless.

But if you've been harassing the enemy economy all the while, their attack on your main will be substantially weaker.

But if you go to your exapansion during an attack on your main and get your units to attack each other than you're bound to lose.

No it's not. You're the one who claimed Zeratul couldn't execute or even imprison Kerrigan because he is not the Dark Templar leader. So you have to provide a quote of the Dark Templar leader saying something with regards to Kerrigan's fate. And there is none. Zeratul does take it upon himself to sentence Kerrigan. So obviously he is to be held accountable for his terrible choice.

You're clearly missing the point.

Raszagal was not there when Kerrigan killed Aldaris.

She could not say anything about her fate because she wasn't there. She probably didn't even know about it until after Kerrigan had left Shakuras. It's not her fault that she didn't get a chance to say anything about Kerrigan's fate.

What you're saying is like me asking 'Why didn't Fenix say anything after Kerrigan killed Aldaris'? The answer is because Fenix wasn't there.

However I have provided you with quotes when Raszagal was present with Kerrigan and talked regarding her fate. Why are these not acceptable?

Zeratul spoke out of position. He actually didn't have the right to exile Kerrigan, at least not without consulting the Matriarch as she was the one who stuck up for her all this time. However Aldaris had leaked too much information. Kerrigan could have challenged Zeratul if she wanted and have gotten Raszagal to back her up but then the other Dark Templar may discover that Raszagal was under her spell. Kerrigan leaving at that point was actually the best decision she could make in order to not draw any further suspicion.

Do you have anything to demonstrate that this might be the case? I'm not going to accept unfounded assertions just because they would support your position.

How about giving Blizzard some credit for knowing their own story? I mean if they had Brood War planned then they knew they would continue the story then they had to have an idea of how to carry on the story from th original. The fact that Blizzard released Brood War quickly suggests they always had the expansion planned rather than waiting to see how the original went to determine whether an expansion would be necessary. Bearing this in mind, the fact that they would retcon Brood War at the beginning sounds unlikely.

Because you have not provided any evidence. You're just saying "If you assume they mean pyrrhic victory, then you can reinterpret this to mean this other thing instead." That's not evidence. It's hammering a square peg into a round hole because you're starting with the assumption that it's a square hole.

You have yet to show how what I've demonstrated is not evidence. While what your interpretation may have been true, it does not prove that what I'm demonstrating is false. Stories are subjective and usually it's up to the writer to decide which interpretation is true. Just because your initial interpretation was later stated to be wrong does not mean Blizzard retconned their storyline. 'Pyrrhic victory' is a type victory so why can't you accept that rather than believing that the Protoss achieved the victory having defeated all the zerg on Aiur?

[FanaticTemplar]

There are countless zerg left on Aiur. They're not just going to disappear since the Overmind is dead.

The epilogue is makes it clear that the Protoss have won a Pyrrhic victory. It's not a happy victory where the good guys survive and the bad guys die. Even at the end Blizzard makes it clear that the Protoss have suffered great casualties to bring about the death of the Overmind. Blizzard is clearly trying to say it's a Pyrrhic victory. This is what they mean. Trying to interpret it as any other type of victory is just misinterpreation.

You need to look at ALL of the narrative. The narrative is NOT ONLY focused on Aiur. I've given you quotes in which Tassadar clearly states he's fighting for everyone and not just the Protoss home world. Tassadar clearly states if the Overmind is not destroyed then it will assimilate the Protoss and make the Zerg perfect. Tassadar hopes to prevent this and in doing so also save Aiur. He achieves the former but not the latter. How is this not demonstratable? Just because Tassadar doesn't save Aiur, doesn't mean he didn't kill the Overmind and stop the Protoss from being assimilated. He was victorious in one regard but not the other but he achieved a victory nonetheless.

Your argument keeps being "at one point, it's mentioned that they have another objective aside from Aiur, so it's clear that even though the battle for Aiur is the central conflict of the latter half of the game and the epilogue makes no mention of failing their primary objective, this secondary objective is the only thing that is intended when they talk about victory, in contradiction to all appearances." And you can say that as much as you want, but you still have not demonstrated it. Is there any reason to interpret it this way?

But if you go to your exapansion during an attack on your main and get your units to attack each other than you're bound to lose.

You're talking about The Culling here?

You're clearly missing the point.

No, you're clearly missing the point. I don't care at all whether Raszagal was there or not. You said Zeratul could not issue Kerrigan's condemnation because he is the Dark Templar leader. This flies straight in the face of both the fact that Zeratul did issue the condemnation and the fact the Dark Templar leader, Raszagal, never says anything regarding that.

However I have provided you with quotes when Raszagal was present with Kerrigan and talked regarding her fate. Why are these not acceptable?

Because circumstances have changed and it would be incredibly stupid to expect that someone's grudging invitation should be considered eternal and unchanging even despite the guest demonstrating blatant treachery and hostile behaviour? Hey, I wonder why Zeratul fought Kerrigan in Wings of Liberty, given that Raszagal died without ever rescinding her order for him to work with Kerrigan? I mean, since circumstances are irrelevant, right?

But let's go ahead with this absurd notion that archaic orders are relevant here. You know what else Raszagal says? "Very well, Kerrigan. We shall hear what you have to say. But be warned: We will not suffer your treachery here." So Zeratul was actually on orders not to suffer Kerrigan's treachery, and by not executing her he disobeyed the Dark Templar leader. How's that?

How about giving Blizzard some credit for knowing their own story? I mean if they had Brood War planned then they knew they would continue the story then they had to have an idea of how to carry on the story from th original. The fact that Blizzard released Brood War quickly suggests they always had the expansion planned rather than waiting to see how the original went to determine whether an expansion would be necessary. Bearing this in mind, the fact that they would retcon Brood War at the beginning sounds unlikely.

And yet they did. See the UED.

You have yet to show how what I've demonstrated is not evidence. While what your interpretation may have been true, it does not prove that what I'm demonstrating is false. Stories are subjective and usually it's up to the writer to decide which interpretation is true. Just because your initial interpretation was later stated to be wrong does not mean Blizzard retconned their storyline. 'Pyrrhic victory' is a type victory so why can't you accept that rather than believing that the Protoss achieved the victory having defeated all the zerg on Aiur?

Assumptions are never evidence. You've given me nothing to demonstrate that your interpretation should be correct.

[Turalyon]

FT, I think you've run into the same wall as I did with TSCR much earlier in this debate.

At the end of the day, I think we're trying to compare apples and oranges. As far as I can read it from a third-party perspective is that TSCR interpretation can never be congruous with FT's interpretation and vice versa because their is an inherent but different assumption in both of your (and my ones too, admittedly) interpretations.

For TSCR, the assumption is that there is an "out" in Sc1 for BW to happen as it did. Whilst it is fallacious to use BW as evidence of why BW could only occur as it did, the initial assumption is not entirely devoid of merit nor is it supposed to be treated as a one-way street.

For FT, the assumption is that there are no justifiable "outs" in Sc1 to explain how BW starts out and continues, namely how the Zerg are seemingly unfazed after the Overmind's death. The argument that follows is much more logically sound but the initial assumption is not so water-tight to exclude any out, justifiable in the long run or not.