Are Dragoons "Realistic?"

[Turalyon]

Eh, when you think about it, the appeal of and the conceit for any sequel, prequel or reboot is the author preying/capitalising on the nostalgia of some aspect that came originally/first/before.

I always saw a portrait of nostalgia addicts in void legacy, you are the ones who cling to the glorified past Aiur or Khala
every time Artanis talks about not clinging, I imagine he speaks to you, "everything to cling to an ideal, maybe irretrievable" "Aiur is our past, but will it be our future?" "Rohana free from the past and enter this new era"

Yeah, I am kinda nostalgic for the days when SC was more creatively interesting and open to interpretation rather than having its themes brow-beaten into me like it is now. Sucks to me I guess.

[Mislagnissa]

If we're nostalgia addicts, why do we think Covert Ops > LoTV > WoL > HoTS? The order the games came out has nothing to do with their quality. Obviously you don't understand how nostalgia works. I can be nostalgic for a cartoon I watched when I was a kid and recognize that the writing sucks; something you seem to be incapable of doing to SC2 due to...what? Fanboyism?

Eh, when you think about it, the appeal of and the conceit for any sequel, prequel or reboot is the author preying/capitalising on the nostalgia of some aspect that came originally/first/before.



Yeah, I am kinda nostalgic for the days when SC was more creatively interesting and open to interpretation rather than having its themes brow-beaten into me like it is now. Sucks to me I guess.

When I first played SC1 years and years ago I never noticed the bad writing, but as an adult being effectively introduced to the series for the first time I can easily notice the bad writing afflicting the games from their genesis. I am not going to say am I not blinded by nostalgia, but I am humble enough to admit that the franchise has always had writing problems. The manual provided a decent basis for an IP, pretty bare bones but serviceable, expandable and more importantly open-ended to support a multimedia anthology franchise in the military scifi genre (similar to the 40k that it ripped off, but much less crazy, smaller scale and political drama focused). It boggles my mind that each of the games butchered everything that preceded it and destroyed what potential the original premise had for a deep and believable narrative universe.

Only the licensed expansions Insurrection and Retribution really explored the potential of StarCraft as an anthology franchise, and the lack of budget and experience is painfully obvious. I still wonder what they could have been in better hands.

[drakolobo]

If we're nostalgia addicts, why do we think Covert Ops > LoTV > WoL > HoTS? The order the games came out has nothing to do with their quality. Obviously you don't understand how nostalgia works. I can be nostalgic for a cartoon I watched when I was a kid and recognize that the writing sucks; something you seem to be incapable of doing to SC2 due to...what? Fanboyism?

in reality it is very easy to explain covert ops , it was the narrative and structure more similar to the narrative of original starcraft specifically to the narrative (aspect already indicated by you), activating nostalgic sensors, legacy of void delo would be in the number one of Your list of jeje.covers ops was good but it was not to put it on a pedestal.
Fanboyism?
starcraft 2 missed opportunities, there are plot holes yes, are bad writing? this is more reduced to subjective criteria I have simply observed that people reject because they expected the same feeeling dark and cynical universe,and perpetuation of concepts, while each campaign in sc 2 offered a different perspective to the original
*that the terran campaign offers an cowboy adventure narrative of the tragic past hero redeemed fought against adversity ending with the hero walking towards the sun, the zerg campaign a story of revenge (I emphasize emotionally the perpetual debate villain kerrigan does not deserve redemption offers that some people seem to lack the experience of different types of personalities and the psychological impact of past dependency experiences (I have seen people who miss the conduct of raynor or kerrigan when toxic relationships show the high tolerance of people to couples that do not suit them))you do not have to think if it's fair or not the story ends when the bad end bites the dustas raw as life. the campaign protoss an experience of an epic a epopeya mortals against gods , that exactly emphasizes questioning the past even the most sublime believes that it can be a lie that they avoid change. each of them are valid experiences.


The main mistake is not being able to understand that different types of narratives can exist in the same universe as well as a comedy and tragedy can be contextualized in real life a raw history and a compelling story both can coincide. an intimate story and an ahistory about the nature of the universe, the universe of starcraft is not to marry a style as a director as snyder has a way of telling other directors account in another way, without the difference they do bad writing only different, and the anchoring in archetype of the past limits the analysis of the frames
I remember that the previous talk about how the dragons worked was very interesting

[Gradius]

Yes, I get the themes of the games and they're still sub-par. Raynor and Kerrigan getting whatever they want is childish. Maybe SC1 was darker, but at least it had an aspect of realism that adults could relate to, unlike SC2 with dragonball z battles, Gods fighting each other and Raynor (the most honest man in the universe according to Metzen) being in love with the person who murdered his best friend and billions of other people. It's embarrassing that this came from a AAA game studio.

I'd say the aspects of SC2 where they tried to appeal to nostalgia were among some of the worst:
- Replacing the Dominion every game as the top dogs when they should have been defeated and another faction taken their place was stupid.
- Bringing back Tassadar and then retconning that as a lie by Ouros ended up being stupid.
- Bringing back Stukov was cringeworthy. Everyone was confused by his presence.
- Bringing up the Overmind and bringing back the Primals instead of making something new just pissed everyone off because the whole manual ended up getting retconned, not to mention that Dehaka ended up being a terrible character.

Fenix and re-using the psi emitters was good or at least had nothing wrong with it, but Blizzard appears to have kept replacing the writing staff until they got better towards the end. I felt zero nostalgia with Fenix, Artanis, Tassadar, The Overmind, Kerrigan or Zeratul. They look, sound, and act nothing like the characters they were based on, but ok.

there are plot holes yes, are bad writing? this is more reduced to subjective criteria

Translation: Blizzard please take my money.

Would love to hear what your "objective criteria" are, which so far boil down to having a narrative type/theme. Which means basically every story is good according to you. Which implies you would gobble up pretty much anything Blizzard excretes because you can't tell the difference between professional writing and hot garbage.

Nostalgia is a feeling. Fanboyism is mostly a bias.

[Turalyon]

*that the terran campaign offers an cowboy adventure narrative of the tragic past hero redeemed fought against adversity ending with the hero walking towards the sun

There is definitely adventure in WoL's campaign, but there's no real plot or narrative. It arbitrarily starts with Raynor who is down and out after four years "struggling" against Mengsk only to miraculously turn things around and then some all because he got angry at Mengsk calling him a criminal on TV. He then goes about doing odd jobs (in which his war against the Dominion/Mengsk ultimately turns out to be as well) and is then handed "redemption" through a plot device when he wasn't really looking, expecting nor asking for it. The only important plot missions are the artifact ones (since they lead to the ending where Kerrigan is deinfested) and they're nothing more but a shopping list of chores with no real story or thematic weight behind them.

[sandwich_bird]

, it was the narrative and structure more similar to the narrative of original starcraft specifically to the narrative (aspect already indicated by you), activating nostalgic sensors

Starcraft 2 is good in a saturday morning cartoon kind of way sure. It delivers the kind of stuff you would want out of this type of entertainment. That doesn't make it quality writing though. It's like if a fancy restaurant chain suddenly started serving you McDonald. Yeah I like the cheeseburger but I was expecting filet mignon and you can't convince me that the burger is of a higher culinary caliber than what we had before. It's not nostalgia goggle, it's being offered something that we didn't want branded under the same name.

[Mislagnissa]

I heard someone else put it this way: instead of focusing on the world they built and its potential for storytelling, the writers of Starcraft chose to make it a soap opera focused entirely on Kerry and the people relevant to her.

[ragnarok]

I heard someone else put it this way: instead of focusing on the world they built and its potential for storytelling, the writers of Starcraft chose to make it a soap opera focused entirely on Kerry and the people relevant to her.

Because there were those who wanted redemption for her. I've read the SC fanfics on that topic LONG before Blizzard even started thinking about the SC2 storyline. If only they knew how to properly implement the whole concept.

[Mislagnissa]

Because there were those who wanted redemption for her. I've read the SC fanfics on that topic LONG before Blizzard even started thinking about the SC2 storyline. If only they knew how to properly implement the whole concept.

The person I was paraphrasing, as well as myself, were not talking about "redemption." How did you ever get that impression? We were discussing how QoB took over the franchise from her introduction in Episode 2 onward and how this was a bad thing. Redemption arcs are irrelevant because she was always a poorly written character.

Let me rephrase my last post so that you do not misinterpret it again: Blizzard built an expansive setting for military scifi stories. They had three sub-galactic empires fighting for the fate of the galaxy and it was a great opportunity. Rather than continuing in the vein of a political drama and gritty war narrative and so forth... they decided to focus on a psychotic Mary Sue literally written as an afterthought and force the narrative of the entire setting to contort around her at the expense of everything else that was vastly more interesting. They killed off the Overmind so she could take over. They killed off the UED to show off how cool she was. They handed her a deus ex machina so she could defeat the next generic bad guy. All of that was bad writing.

It should not be possible for you to misunderstand anything I say anymore since I spent the past year waxing poetic about how much I hate QoB since her birth and how I think the franchise should be rebooted back to basics without her in it. The franchise is called StarCraft, not The Adventures of Kerry. If you want to write Kerry-centric fanfiction then make a new franchise solely about her rather than turn StarCraft into a farce. StarCraft should be a military scifi political drama about three races fighting for morally grey reasons, not a romantic comedy soap opera about a cartoonish supervillain and her equally cartoonish boyfriend.

[Gradius]

They’re not really fighting over the galaxy though, just a small section of space. The UPL was way more “galactic” than all the races combined.