[Spoilers] Gradius's LoTV Thoughts

[Turalyon]

They probably could have played it as a more stealthy operation, with Raynor attacking under the distraction provided by the Dominion, I think that could have worked too. I don't actually have a problem with Valerian fucking up the invasion that bad though. He's young and inexperienced and thinks he knows a lot more than he actually does. I like that as a facet of his character.

Warfield should have known better though. He's not as bad as Duke, but then Duke just flew from failure to failure without giving a damn. It's like he was just a few years from retirement and had stopped giving a shit a long time ago. I'm oddly fascinated by the guy.

It would've worked, too, if Raynor went to Char alone and won since the previous examples I provided were a precedent for that to happen.

Keep in mind though that we are talking about the utility and value of Raynor allying with Valerian to joint attack Char on the basis that the reveal is the artifact can kill Zerg rather than reverse deinfestation. I think Raynor would still ally with Valerian for convenience sake but even if Raynor refused Valerian's help, he could still have conceivably gotten the job done by himself due to his unparalleled skills. He also has the artifact pieces and the prodigies, Stetman and Swann, to help him figure out the artifact given time.

I'm not certain what your perspective here is. True, it wouldn't be strange for Arcturus to read him badly, or for him to believe Raynor intends to kill Kerrigan. But he's also demonstrated that at other times he can accurately gauge people (like when he recruits the player character in Desperate Alliance) and he would also know of Raynor's track record with Kerrigan.

I don't know about him recruiting the magistrate in Desperate Alliances as a demonstration of him reading people but rather that Mengsk is quite shrewd in looking for and exploiting opportunities. Mengsk doesn't need to read the Magistrate at all in that situation because it's a no-brainer - come with me or get eaten by Zerg. He attempts to pull the same thing on Duke but he's a little more stubborn or dumb or even perhaps wise to Mengsk's manipulation of that scenario and Mengsk gets angry. In short, this demonstrates that Mengsk is good at reading situations, not people exactly. He could be good at that, too, but there isn't enough evidence for that in Sc1 or BW.

Also, if Mengsk knew Raynor so intimately in Sc1, he would have persuaded Raynor down to help Kerrigan on New Gettysburg and left them both down there to be consumed by the Zerg, not get mad at him afterward when Raynor tells him to go to hell since he should have expected that reaction from him if he was good at reading people.

So it's not like it's inconsistent for him to be straight on here, and having the villain cut straight to the deep emotional vulnerability of the hero is exactly the kind of move that one should want from a social-focused villain like Arcturus. Isn't this exactly what you want from Arcturus? I thought the disappointment people had was that he didn't have more scenes like this one?

It's not really a matter of inconsistency but rather a matter of continuity (or discontinuity as the case may be) as I tend to keep saying. How and why would Mengsk know Raynor always wanted to save Kerrigan when there has never been an indication that he thinks that way and especially when in BW, the last time Raynor and Mengsk are within the general vicinity of each other, it's when Raynor declares intent to kill Kerrigan?

It's a great moment that Mengsk is able to show that side in WoL, but it seems somewhat unearned. Especially so when one considers how poorly he reads Kerrigans intent and is so blindsided by her betrayal in BW - and this is someone he should've known even better than Raynor!

EDIT: Incidentally, I don't dislike True Colors at all, I think it's one of the genuinely good points in the otherwise disappointing Brood War, alongside The Evacuation of Aiur and, if you're willing to accept the premise of the United Earth Directorate, Patriot's Blood.

Oh sorry, I didn't mean to say you didn't like True Colours specifically, but just BW in general. Disliking something often makes you willingly "forget" things that did actually (and unfortunately) happen. It's happening to me right now with Sc2.

[ragnarok]

It's not really a matter of inconsistency but rather a matter of continuity (or discontinuity as the case may be) as I tend to keep saying. How and why would Mengsk know Raynor always wanted to save Kerrigan when there has never been an indication that he thinks that way and especially when in BW, the last time Raynor and Mengsk are within the general vicinity of each other, it's when Raynor declares intent to kill Kerrigan?

It's a great moment that Mengsk is able to show that side in WoL, but it seems somewhat unearned. Especially so when one considers how poorly he reads Kerrigans intent and is so blindsided by her betrayal in BW - and this is someone he should've known even better than Raynor!

The only way this could make sense would be if Mengsk intercepted the transmissions Raynor made from "The Hammer Falls", when he blamed himself for what happened to her on Tarsonis. Yes in the 3rd BW Zerg mission briefing, he did blame Mengsk, but likely Mengsk would have put two and two together and would think perhaps Raynor would blame himself for not having the balls to stand up to him when he had the chance back then.

[FanaticTemplar]

I don't know about him recruiting the magistrate in Desperate Alliances as a demonstration of him reading people but rather that Mengsk is quite shrewd in looking for and exploiting opportunities. Mengsk doesn't need to read the Magistrate at all in that situation because it's a no-brainer - come with me or get eaten by Zerg. He attempts to pull the same thing on Duke but he's a little more stubborn or dumb or even perhaps wise to Mengsk's manipulation of that scenario and Mengsk gets angry. In short, this demonstrates that Mengsk is good at reading situations, not people exactly. He could be good at that, too, but there isn't enough evidence for that in Sc1 or BW.

Maybe, but going for the whole 'it's a chance to save those people' really echoes Raynor's own argument from the previous mission - "I'll go down there now, and do what I can. You send in some militia and we'll save those folks. Trust me." Obviously the player character is mostly a blank slate, but the repeated theme seems deliberate. You'll note that he doesn't utilise the same approach for the Magistrate and for Duke either.

Also, if Mengsk knew Raynor so intimately in Sc1, he would have persuaded Raynor down to help Kerrigan on New Gettysburg and left them both down there to be consumed by the Zerg, not get mad at him afterward when Raynor tells him to go to hell since he should have expected that reaction from him if he was good at reading people.

Eh, you're trying to reduce this to an overly simplistic "Mengsk is either right 100% of the time, or 0% of the time". Instead, view it as a learning experience that gives him more information on how Raynor ticks.

It's not really a matter of inconsistency but rather a matter of continuity (or discontinuity as the case may be) as I tend to keep saying. How and why would Mengsk know Raynor always wanted to save Kerrigan when there has never been an indication that he thinks that way and especially when in BW, the last time Raynor and Mengsk are within the general vicinity of each other, it's when Raynor declares intent to kill Kerrigan?

He doesn't need to believe that this was always Raynor's intention. The wound's still there even if Raynor had accepted that she couldn't be saved. Remember that the barb isn't about saving Kerrigan, it's about saving himself - if Raynor's accepted that Kerrigan cannot be saved, then he's reminding Raynor of what a failure he is.

It's a great moment that Mengsk is able to show that side in WoL, but it seems somewhat unearned. Especially so when one considers how poorly he reads Kerrigans intent and is so blindsided by her betrayal in BW - and this is someone he should've known even better than Raynor!

Now Mengsk's behaviour in Brood War is one of the things I tend to try to forget . I do believe that the writers should be allowed to move past those bad decisions, but even if you don't, there's no shortage of bad Arcturus moments in StarCraft II either, sadly.

[Gradius]

Listening to the developers talk about the epilogue on the behind the scenes DVD.

"We thought about how to end the trilogy and long and hard about the relationship with Sarah and Jim. There's this cool quaint little moment with Jim back at the bar and we're like 'wouldn't it be cool if...you know, maybe it's a dream, maybe it's not." <trails out>

[Aldrius]

I can see her being angry at the world and lashing out (hell that's what she does in heart of the swarm). But going from an idealist with clear standards to torturing for the evulz is bad writing.

No it isn't.

The execution might have been bad (I don't think it is) but that's not bad writing to have a character betray their values and their ethics when something horrible happens to them.

Being betrayed by someone you TRUSTED and being genetically manipulated by an enormous hive mind would mess up your head regardless of any physical changes. Hell, I'm not even sure that the Confederacy DIDN'T mess her up. She murders Lieutenant Rumm in Uprising pretty brutally. It could all be there, bubbling under the surface, with only her own guilt, Raynor's friendship and Mengsk's guidance keeping it at bay. Let's not forget that Kerrigan is a TRAINED military assassin working for an insurgent rebel group. She is a nice woman to speak to, but she's still a killer.

Now that's not really apparent from StarCraft's narrative (just Uprising's).

But even so, there are plenty of well established good books and stories that involve a character turning on everything they believed in. Some of the best.

Going back, again, to Shakespeare. We have MacBeth. He spends the first act of the book thinking about how abhorrent the idea of murdering the king is. And then he does it because his wife basically clucks like a chicken and questions his manhood.

[ragnarok]

Listening to the developers talk about the epilogue on the behind the scenes DVD.

"We thought about how to end the trilogy and long and hard about the relationship with Sarah and Jim. There's this cool quaint little moment with Jim back at the bar and we're like 'wouldn't it be cool if...you know, maybe it's a dream, maybe it's not." <trails out>

Which is BS. However you're going to wrap things up, at least make it concrete, not this vague interpretation which will leave the door open for them to return someday.

[Visions of Khas]

However you're going to wrap things up, at least make it concrete, not this vague interpretation which will leave the door open for them to return someday.

"You know nothing of the Blizzard writers!"
-Narud


Vague interpretations is their MO.

[ragnarok]

"You know nothing of the Blizzard writers!"
-Narud


Vague interpretations is their MO.

Which is not acceptable to the community. You can't keep things vague forever and then when the next game comes out, pull out another pile of retcons specifically via that excuse.

[Visions of Khas]

No, it isn't acceptable. But I do think it's laudable they hired a new lead writer for LotV, which is well ahead of the previous two installments in quality.

[ragnarok]

No, it isn't acceptable. But I do think it's laudable they hired a new lead writer for LotV, which is well ahead of the previous two installments in quality.

Now they just have to do it for the epilogue, and rewrite at least half of it.