How ar the artifacts Dues Ex Machina?

[Turalyon]

When does she does this?

I've always found it odd that this Stukov deinfestation is considered canon. I'm not too familiar with the story (are these custom maps? Books?), but the whole idea is a bit weak. It destroys the poignancy of Patrio's Blood and is kinda insulting and somewhat of a retread. And as for the serum: If Metzen said it wasn't canon, then we wouldn't have this discussion. It's as if he says it, and then he does not in WoL, indirectly.

My bad. She doesn't because the infestation problem wasn't so serious (!?!) if you chose Hanson, but she's working on it - just in time for HotS, I guess.

The serum idea is no more weaker than a magical artifact. When it comes to a gritty, sci-fi universe, a serum at least sounds like it would fit in that universe rather than rocks with power-beyond-imagination.

As for your disdain about insulting what was done in Patriot's Blood, what if (and I mean if) Kerrigan is deinfested and turned good, does that not also destroy the poignancy of Kerrigan's tragic rise?

From Resurrection IV I got an impression that the Protoss designed the serum soecifically to deinfest Stukov. After all, his infestation was kind of unique, since Cerebrate's own cells were used to revive and infest him.

Are you now saying that this serum is not relevant in the discussion about a cure for infestation in general or for Kerrigan because Stukov had a special, unique infestation (can we call it Stinfestation?)? Not really a cure for infestation then if it only works on one individual and not to mention that Stukov was not really "infested" (he was Stinfested) in the generalised/normal way that we know that Zerg usually do). Yay, more unneccesary hair-splitting about the peculiarities of infestation!

[Karass]

Basically, yes. Stukov's infestation was clearly different from the "regular" infestation of a Terran: Cerebrate's own cells were used in it.

can we call it Stinfestation?

Yeah, that's a very good name!

[Eivind]

The serum idea is no more weaker than a magical artifact. When it comes to a gritty, sci-fi universe, a serum at least sounds like it would fit in that universe rather than rocks with power-beyond-imagination.

Here I think I made myself misunderstood, which in retrospect seems perfectly reasonable. I don't actually mind that there is a serum, in the same way I don't mind there being an artifact. What I mind is that there is a serum that somehow is forgotten all about. If Metzen just said, "The infestation isn't canon", it wouldn't be a problem. But because he did, there exists both a serum and an artifact, which makes Rayno's surprise upon the artifact's true effect very contradicting. I take it that he did say it is canon, and then went back on that (without saying it) in WoL. Perhaps if you asked him now, it isn't canon anymore?

As for your disdain about insulting what was done in Patriot's Blood, what if (and I mean if) Kerrigan is deinfested and turned good, does that not also destroy the poignancy of Kerrigan's tragic rise?

Well, both yes and no, but mostly no. The idea about Stukov being infested is to me insulting* because we see him die, right before our eyes. He's dead, and we killed him. That he's actually alive later completely destroys that. It's like, "No! He died! And we helped Duran! Oh, gosh!", and then, "Oh never mind, he didn't die, and although he was infested, we fixed that. Phew!"

* A bit too much of a strong word when I think about it now, but that's not really important.

Kerrigan is a bit different. With her infestation, we were also mislead, but in a different way. In Patriot's Blood, we enter the installation with the (wrong) idea that Stukov is now the villain. We shoot him, and when it turns out we were wronged by Duran, it's too late. The blood is on our hands.

The blood is on our hands with Kerrigan too, but we never intended to leave her behind. Our intent was to destroy the Protoss, which we did, but when we were ready to leave, Mengsk decided to leave Kerrigan behind. It was never established that she was dead (only assumed so), and unlike Stukov, we never see her corpse.

That she comes back is, indeed as you say, tragic. That she now is deinfested is to me not insulting because the tragedy is neither erased nor forgotten (the latter part might probably be of importance in HotS), just stalled. With Stukov, it's as if nothing happened. Yeah, we shot him, but he didn't die, and he didn't become a mass murderer, so the same harm wasn't done. With Kerrigan, we unintentionally got her left behind, she came back, a lot of harm was done, and now her ability (or at least will) to not cause harm has (maybe) been weakened.

But not forgotten.

[Turalyon]

Interesting, Eivind. Since WoL, I don't really take much stock in what is considered 'canon' anymore when things can so easily be 'reinterpreted' down the track or when something is considered canon is then superseded by more recent canon stuff or even worse, downgraded to 'not-canon' if it doesn't fit.

WoLs story has shown me that I can't take anything I've been told in the past for granted because since we start seeing things as being set in stone, you get annoyed at 'changes' that are not really changes because you thought wrong, even if the original material lead me directly to these "wrong thoughts". *Sigh*

The idea about Stukov being infested is to me insulting* because we see him die, right before our eyes.

I can actually think of many 'outs' to justify Stukov still being alive. One, Stukov may just have thought he was dying from his wound and just fainted and was then infested. Two, Stukov was actually revived by the Zerg through this unique method called "Stinfestation". I could go on.

They may not 'sit right' with you but as long as there's a semi-justification, all's good, am I right? Some of the people who don't like WoL for some reason or other have arguments that are somewhat similar to the reasons why you dislike the notion of Stukov still being actually alive.

I wonder how you feel about Tassadar. It is heavily implied his sacrifice in Sc1 meant that he died. It is now revealed in Wol that suffered a "comic-book death"

I have never tasted death, Zeratul -- nor shall I

It is never actually stated that "Tassadar is dead" in SC1 or BW but the word 'sacrifice' crops up a lot in SC1 and BW to describe Tassadars action against the Overminds. Because people here are so fond of hair-splitting to justify some of the strange plot goings-on in WoL, I can say that the definition of "sacrifice" does not always entail death.

[Eivind]

You make a ton of great points, T.

Interesting, Eivind. Since WoL, I don't really take much stock in what is considered 'canon' anymore when things can so easily be 'reinterpreted' down the track or when something is considered canon is then superseded by more recent canon stuff or even worse, downgraded to 'not-canon' if it doesn't fit.

WoLs story has shown me that I can't take anything I've been told in the past for granted because since we start seeing things as being set in stone, you get annoyed at 'changes' that are not really changes because you thought wrong, even if the original material lead me directly to these "wrong thoughts". *Sigh*

I totally agree. I'd like to explain why I accept certain stuff, and not others, though. I accept the new information about the Overmind in the same way I accept a twist in a movie. We are told we have been fooled, and that things weren't how we thought they were. I like being fooled when it comes to a movie, but I don't like feeling insulted.

Let me give an example. The new information about the Overmind is more contradicting to how I perceived the Overmind than how it really was. Yes, you can argue that this information does contradict what the Overmind really was, but I don't agree with that. Therefore, I accept that new information.

Stukov is different. If there exists a serum, then the revelation about what the artifact does contradicts facts, not interpretetation. Let me give an example.

A. We first think the Overmind is one thing.
B. We later find out we were wrong. I am fooled.

A. Stukov is deinfested by a serum.
B. An artifact is found that can deinfest. This is supposed to be surprising because this has not been possible before. I am insulted because this doesn't make any logical sense.

The two situations are similar, but not identical. The new revelation about the Overmind is not necessarily contradicting how the Overmind was, just what we think it was. But when the artifact's effect is supposed to be new, that is contradicting how things are. There is a serum. If Metzen had just said it was a wacky idea and no canon, the serum can be ignored and it becomes possible for Raynor to be surprised of the artifact's effect.

I can actually think of many 'outs' to justify Stukov still being alive. One, Stukov may just have thought he was dying from his wound and just fainted and was then infested. Two, Stukov was actually revived by the Zerg through this unique method called "Stinfestation". I could go on.

They may not 'sit right' with you but as long as there's a semi-justification, all's good, am I right? Some of the people who don't like WoL for some reason or other have arguments that are somewhat similar to the reasons why you dislike the notion of Stukov still being actually alive.

I wonder how you feel about Tassadar. It is heavily implied his sacrifice in Sc1 meant that he died. It is now revealed in Wol that suffered a "comic-book death"



It is never actually stated that "Tassadar is dead" in SC1 or BW but the word 'sacrifice' crops up a lot in SC1 and BW to describe Tassadars action against the Overminds. Because people here are so fond of hair-splitting to justify some of the strange plot goings-on in WoL, I can say that the definition of "sacrifice" does not always entail death.

I agree completely. It's just that I wish Metzen would disregard Stukov, because that would fix a lot of inconsistency.

[Turalyon]

You make a ton of great points, T.

Thanks, Eivind. It's good to know that my rants are at least sometimes semi-coherent

I have been told by others on this forum (Gradius in particular) that I shouldn't speculate or make assumptions too strongly. It makes sense because it could lead to 'false' facts that will set you up for disappointment. Funny thing is, without explicitly stating every single rule and fact in a fictional universe from the get go, we have to generate/assume/speculate unspoken facts from the material (an in-universe set of rules if you will) in order to like and at the least, make it believable. Since these 'false' facts in the universe can be uprooted at any time it can eventually cause a break in the believability of that fictional universe and disappointment. Keep this in mind as you go through the rest of this...

I accept the new information about the Overmind in the same way I accept a twist in a movie. We are told we have been fooled, and that things weren't how we thought they were. I like being fooled when it comes to a movie, but I don't like feeling insulted.

Let me give an example. The new information about the Overmind is more contradicting to how I perceived the Overmind than how it really was. Yes, you can argue that this information does contradict what the Overmind really was, but I don't agree with that. Therefore, I accept that new information.

Some of the people who don't like WoL, feel likewise "insulted" by these changes. I'll keep the following restricted to the Overmind "revelation" but you can make inferences to other "revelations" in Wols story, but "WoL dislikers" may feel it:

1) insults the nature of the character. It was a fact that the Overmind was metaphysically free in SC1 because we are not told otherwise, but now we are told it is not due to some "overriding directive" and because it was never stated as fact that it was metaphysically free in SC1.
2) insults their intelligence. How would you feel if some generalised your own whole character down to this one trait - this "overriding directive"? What would stop them saying Raynor is under some "hidden control" too because it was never mentioned that he was metaphysically free in SC1? We just assume he is because he's a human, right? But we can't with the Overmind because its alien? It sounds extremely conceited and truly facepalm material when it feels like that they're treating you like a fool. There is a difference in being fooled and being treated like one.
3) insults the subtle complexity yet inherent simplicity of the original. The revelation of the Overmind feel's like a revisionist take on the original rather than genuinely adding something new. Instead of natural and more interesting discussion about the motivations of the character, we now have more hair-splitting and nit-picking reasoning to justify the Overmind "revelation". Case in point (see (1) is the the circular reasoning that the Overmind has an overriding directive was because it did not say in Sc1 that it did not have an overriding directive. Also, Karass' reassurance that the Overmind in Sc1 has NOT really changed and should not be reinterpreted at all - how are we not able to be forced to nit-pick and make assumptions (wrong or right) when this new piece of information is presented as such a revelation?

Stukov is different. If there exists a serum, then the revelation about what the artifact does contradicts facts, not interpretetation. Let me give an example.

A. Stukov is deinfested by a serum.
B. An artifact is found that can deinfest. This is supposed to be surprising because this has not been possible before. I am insulted because this doesn't make any logical sense.

The two situations are similar, but not identical. The new revelation about the Overmind is not necessarily contradicting how the Overmind was, just what we think it was. But when the artifact's effect is supposed to be new, that is contradicting how things are. There is a serum. If Metzen had just said it was a wacky idea and no canon, the serum can be ignored and it becomes possible for Raynor to be surprised of the artifact's effect.

Not quite so. I don't mean to upset you by saying this, but your feelings of being "insulted" are misplaced because your assumption of "A. Stukov is deinfested by a serum" is wrong.

As I mentioned before and with Karass' help, your A should be Stukov was "de-Stinfested" with the serum. I know it's a nitpick (which you know how I feel on that matter) but with this in mind, now it is similar to your Overmind A and B situation. You shouldn't feel insulted by this now because you were misled/fooled in your assumption of (A) Stukov being "infested" in the first place, am I right?

I could spin it another other way. How can you be sure that your "B. An artifact is found that can deinfest" is correct? I've been told by others that it may not be actually causing de-infestation, it may just look like it is or it's doing something else (see this nit-picking trend, I mentioned?). Therefore, you shouldn't be insulted, because maybe "A. Stukov being de-infested by a serum" is right and worthy of your surprise, but B shouldn't be, because you (and Raynor) were misled/fooled into thinking the artifact specifically (and only) deinfests. Happy now?

I agree completely. It's just that I wish Metzen would disregard Stukov, because that would fix a lot of inconsistency.

Careful now. You're adding fuel for the "WoL dislikers" cause. What you think of as "inconsistency" is what they think about with all this Overmind and Tassadar stuff in WoL, too.

[DarthYam]

the xel naga created other species before the protoss meaning that they may have wanted failsafes. Also, both protoss and zerg were uplifted via protogenic energy.

My guess is that two things happened.

First, the artifact is established to absorb energy; as such, it would drain the protogenic energy from kerrigan and her forces; this could be used to non lethally incapacitate early experiments that went out of control, but would kill species such as the protoss and zerg. in absorbing the protogenic energy it reverted the DNA transformation that made Kerrigan the Queen of Blades.

Second; since the zerg conditioning surpressed kerrigan's sense of empathy and compassion (thus making her a sociopath free to act on her darker instncts) the deinfestation would shatter the conditioning enough for the good person she once was to return.

Also, Kerrigan still has a long way to go; she still has to face her anger issues and lust for vengeance (that was an issue as seen when she killed the monster who abused her in the ghost program) and the darkness in her heart.

My guess is that she will face duran and kill him, but as he dies he says something like "even if you win, you will always be alone in the universe."

[Rake]

Second, infestation with a hyperevolutionary "virus" itself doesn't make any sense to begin with, and I think the term "virus" is a misnomer and some terrans in the SC universe who didn't know what they were talking about invented the term. How does a DNA-altering virus even know what to touch?

It seems implied to me that the virus doesn't know what to touch but randomly 'enhances' the body it infests. This may be why infested terrans often seem random and monstrous. The most successful of the random mutations would presumably propagated throughout the population to create successful strains of solider, such as we see in zerglings and hydralisks etc.

A creature's phenotype is the result of many genes, not one, as well as the environment. A virus can't just change one part of the DNA to give the creature a claw.

There is no reason why it can't. Genes can be put anywhere using retroviruses and can cause dramatic effects in the body.
For an example: http://www.thatsweird.net/news48.shtml (the story has a happy ending)

Originally Posted by sandwich_bird

"I didn't talk about a virus here. I'm thinking more about some kind of microscopic eukaryote based entity. The zerg cells wouldn't actually mutate the host cell's genetic code. Their metabolic activities would alone alter the host physical and behavioral aspect. If you're able to somehow remove every zerg cells present in the host (artifact thingy) then normal metabolic functions of the host would carry back on. Of course, this would only count for an organism that was infested like Kerrigan and not for one that was born "Zerg" which is why the artifact would kill zerg units(and structures I assume) but not Kerrigan."

This is actually a very interesting idea. It suggests a parasitic organelle that is responsible for all the zerg functions. However, I still maintain that if these organelles had a significant role to play in the organism (and I think in Kerrigan's case it is clear that it does) then removing them would still cause death. For instance, you would only need to have them say, strengthening a blood vessel, and their removal would cause that blood vessel to burst and then Kerrigan would haemorrhage and die. That is only one example, other problems, such as with metabolism, could also be fatal.


Ultimately, whether she would die or not and the exact nature of infestation does not really matter. What matters is how likely we perceive successful de-infestation by artefact to be. For me, the idea that someone 'infested to the core' as Kerrigan is could be non-fatally de-infested by an artefact that does not appear to be specifically designed for the job appears so unlikely as to take something away from the story. If it works for you that is great.

Second; since the zerg conditioning surpressed kerrigan's sense of empathy and compassion (thus making her a sociopath free to act on her darker instncts) the deinfestation would shatter the conditioning enough for the good person she once was to return.

Also, Kerrigan still has a long way to go; she still has to face her anger issues and lust for vengeance (that was an issue as seen when she killed the monster who abused her in the ghost program) and the darkness in her heart.

I suspect this is where HotS is going. If it is done well it will be worth any complaints we might currently have.

[Gradius]

It seems implied to me that the virus doesn't know what to touch but randomly 'enhances' the body it infests. This may be why infested terrans often seem random and monstrous. The most successful of the random mutations would presumably propagated throughout the population to create successful strains of solider, such as we see in zerglings and hydralisks etc.

That's only for "failed" infestations. Kerrigan for example, isn't random.

[Rake]

That's only for "failed" infestations. Kerrigan for example, isn't random.

Good point. However, the problem is that in order to make the de-infestation of Kerrigan work, you need to start jumping through a number of hoops. In this case, that her form of infestation is particularly susceptible to non-fatal de-infestation. Did the Overmind particularly create her this way? Is she infested using zerg organelles rather than a zerg virus? Did Terran scientists know this before hand?