Chris Metzen has likened the story to that of the film 300
QuoteChris Metzen has likened the story to that of the film 300
Ignore me, the rage will pass, and discussing the why will not bring anyone closer to becoming The Transcendent.
Ignore me, the rage will pass, and discussing the why will not bring anyone closer to becoming The Transcendent.Your anger will certainly guide others to you though... :warp:
I'll probably get it after I eventually get HotS. I wanna hear the rest of the story. Screw you literary types.
Ahahaha the design for female Protoss is 'bare midriff'
Out of genuine curiosity though, who here is actually considering the purchase of this game and why do they?
Out of genuine curiosity though, who here is actually considering the purchase of this game and why do they?
Out of genuine curiosity though, who here is actually considering the purchase of this game and why do they?
Out of genuine curiosity though, who here is actually considering the purchase of this game and why do they?
http://images.wikia.com/starcraft/images/5/52/Zealot_SC1_Art1.jpgAhahaha the design for female Protoss is 'bare midriff'
Now hold up, that's been Protoss design in general since the first concept designs for the Zealot hit back in the days of developing the first game. Be that fair at least.
http://images.wikia.com/starcraft/images/5/52/Zealot_SC1_Art1.jpgAhahaha the design for female Protoss is 'bare midriff'
Now hold up, that's been Protoss design in general since the first concept designs for the Zealot hit back in the days of developing the first game. Be that fair at least.
What NGTM-1R said.
http://images.wikia.com/starcraft/images/5/52/Zealot_SC1_Art1.jpgAhahaha the design for female Protoss is 'bare midriff'
Now hold up, that's been Protoss design in general since the first concept designs for the Zealot hit back in the days of developing the first game. Be that fair at least.
What NGTM-1R said.
That guy doesn't even have a midriff, it is not particularly the same
I still have to wait for HotS to go on sale for a ridiculously cheap price. Mostly because I enjoy the SP gameplay and I'd like to see firsthand how badly Blizzard has ****ed up the story.
She's even got a wee belly button :3I... I'd hit it...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=haCzrILCWHI#t=113s
She's even got a wee belly button :3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=haCzrILCWHI#t=113s
Though I admit they probably did it so she would look more attractive and Spoon would want to Spoon it. Course, let me guess they probably threw cannon anatomical fluff about Protoss out the window as well?Fixed. ;)
Aside, holy crap. HotS is bad. I wounder how much worse they can make the story?
What i don't get is a number of the random in-universe books were actually *good*. Why u no fire your writing stuff and get the book writers to do the story instead? *rams head against wall repeatedly*Could ask Bungie the same thing when making Reach, actually
And then there's choosing 300 as a quality standard...
Worrying about Starcraft's story is like worrying about Command n Conquer's story.
Im looking to buy WOL, if the storylines poo is the gameplay at least good? I don't remember the storyline of SC1 being all that great.
EDIT2: If you are pointing out that the good of both IPs was there gameplay and the story just the glue for gameplay sequences, than a) point taken and b) that's so your opinion
EDIT2: If you are pointing out that the good of both IPs was there gameplay and the story just the glue for gameplay sequences, than a) point taken and b) that's so your opinion
I find your lack of faith in C&C's lore disturbing!
Im looking to buy WOL, if the storylines poo is the gameplay at least good? I don't remember the storyline of SC1 being all that great.
The gameplay is the same as StarCraft except for a few unit swaps/new units (acutally in the campaign you get almost all SC1 (the Valkyire is absent, and you can choose wheter or not to have Ghosts/Science Vessels) units plus some new ones)
(and on a side note the only thing screwing up the story are the Protoss mini arc (which is a detour into fanatasy), the inconsistant presentation of Raynor and that for everyone but the Protoss Brood War appearently neven happened)
Im looking to buy WOL, if the storylines poo is the gameplay at least good? I don't remember the storyline of SC1 being all that great.The gameplay is great
Spoiler:And then comes the whole "I give you the chance to make Kerrigan human again"-thing and Raynor obviously forgets who the Queen of Blades is/what she has done/etc etc pp and just thinks about humping Kerrigan again.
HotS puts a bit of logic back into him by following the lovestory pattern established at the end of WoL but again cares nothing for connecting back to SC or BW but in shout-out "you killed my friend" without any strings attached.
My favourite story in a RTS is still World In Conflict. That was a RTS that made me care.As a non american, I found it hard to really care.
It is hard to find any RTS/RTT game that makes you care for the characters or the setting. There is a huge disconnection caused by the way the gameplay is done: "They blew up that factory with all the workers inside? No problem! Just queue up another one."
The gameplay & the story must work together to make us want to care. RTS/RTTs are bad at this simply because of their mechanics, or at least their execution is not well done.
Homeworld, Ground Control 2, MechCommander, XCOM
Ground Control 2 had terrible gameplay compared to the first. I actually couldn't finish it because it was so bad.
Homeworld, Ground Control 2, MechCommander, XCOM
Homeworld: Only cared about banana ship.
GC2: Never played it so I can't say.
MechCommander: Never gave a damn except about m1n3 l33t p1lot5
XCOM: Never played it. From what I've seen it's one of the games that pulls it right, with the full customization the players they develop a bond to their squads.
They are exceptions over the rule. You get that, right? 4‱
They are exceptions over the rule. You get that, right? 4‱
Ground Control 2 had terrible gameplay compared to the first. I actually couldn't finish it because it was so bad.
I finished them both! Your definition of 'terrible' is unfortunately pretty terrible - they each had their strengths
Oh, also Cyberstorm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MissionForce:_CyberStorm) was a mech tactics game that made you start to care about your pilots, in much the same way that XCOM did.
They are exceptions over the rule. You get that, right? 4‱
Even something as impersonalized as Harpoon you can get very attached to effective or lucky units. (And Harpoon is ultra-impersonalized.) The little computer guys, they're fighting for you, and that's a very powerful motivator to make you care. RTS/TBS/RTT have a huge advantage to make you care about such things.
Ground Control 2 had terrible gameplay compared to the first. I actually couldn't finish it because it was so bad.
I finished them both! Your definition of 'terrible' is unfortunately pretty terrible - they each had their strengths
I suppose if I'd played them out of order I would have given the second one more of a chance. But I was expecting good, in-depth, tactically sound gameplay as per the first and got rote C&C/SC/Whatever ZERG-****ING-RUSH instead, which is something I've never enjoyed.
So, yeah. The second game's gameplay sucked compared to the first. (yay, opinions!)
It is hard to find any RTS/RTT game that makes you care for the characters or the setting. There is a huge disconnection caused by the way the gameplay is done: "They blew up that factory with all the workers inside? No problem! Just queue up another one."
The gameplay & the story must work together to make us want to care. RTS/RTTs are bad at this simply because of their mechanics, or at least their execution is not well done.
It is hard to find any RTS/RTT game that makes you care for the characters or the setting. There is a huge disconnection caused by the way the gameplay is done: "They blew up that factory with all the workers inside? No problem! Just queue up another one."
The gameplay & the story must work together to make us want to care. RTS/RTTs are bad at this simply because of their mechanics, or at least their execution is not well done.
Homeworld, Ground Control 2, MechCommander, XCOM
They are exceptions over the rule. You get that, right? 4‱
The 'rule' is wrong; there are no structural impediments to an RTS making you care about its characters or story. In fact they're ripe for the kind of emergent narrative that really gets people attached to their units. The problem is simply that most designers don't leverage this space.
I think I preferred GC2 gameplay for the fact you could call in fresh troops which made the game less about trying to keep every unit alive and freed up the fun.
Also: No mention of dawn of war? Speess Mariness!
Nanuchka III Glint o7 o7 o7
Care like 'yo, this cloned-cannon-fodder-slave-soldiers **** is a really really bad idea', or care like 'I can't lose Naj-Zero cause he's the bestest cybrid slaying superman ever, i'ma gonna throw the rest of them at that Nihilus so he doesn't die?'
Out of genuine curiosity though, who here is actually considering the purchase of this game and why do they?
When you're out of ideas for a story, history is usually a good place to find one.
When you're out of ideas for a story, history is usually a good place to find one.
If you enjoy getting yourself caught in a web of bias, favourism, chauvinism and authenticity debates, then yes.