Poll: Does Blizzard write good plots?

[Veylon]

The only recent Blizzard games I've played are the installments of Starcraft 2, in which the plot has wavered between "serviceable" and "goddawful stupid". And, for some reason, the finale of the story also has to be the climax of the stupid. I would think that the game makers would want to end on a scene that makes the audience want to empathize with the main characters or admire them rather than want to throttle them for their gross idiocy, but what do I know?

Spoiler

The particular idiocy in Wings of Liberty was Raynor's indifference to the fact that his buddy had a bomb wired into him and was obligated to take orders from a shadowy somebody or other. Jim Raynor is an idiot. The shadowy figure turns out to be Mengsk, who inexplicably lets Findlay run a gigantic mech through his capital city. Mengsk is an idiot. Findlay, too, I guess, but he's at least in character.

The idiocy in Heart of the Swarm was Kerrigan twice unnecessarily walking into an obvious trap. She has a innumerable horde of expendable minions. If something has to get fried, chopped, frozen, zapped, or crushed, it's better to send a few dozen disposable Zerglings than risk her own irreplaceable self.

And all of these happen via mandatory cutscene. No amount of player skill can keep the characters they are meant to think of themselves as from eagerly sticking their heads into various guillotines. You can't, say, send Findlay off to the other side of the map to keep him away from Kerrigan or throw a squad of Hydralisks into Mengsk's office.

 

[Janaschi]

If you were honestly expecting stories with depth for Warcraft and Starcraft, then I think you completely missed the point. Both of the 'Craft games were never meant to be much more than light-humoured fun:

Starcraft) was originally conceived as, "Rednecks in space!" - words from the devs themselves, and it absolutely showed in the cut-scenes full of bucktoothes & ignorant soldiers drinking beer and blowing themselves up. It is not quite as evident in Starcraft II, but the central-theme always has been, and still is encapsulated around back-world rednecks, overly-cheesy romance, and cowboy justice.

Warcraft) I really should not have to explain this one: the dialogue is goofy, the secret missions (flaming flying sheep, anyone?) are goofy, the Pandaran brewmasters and other merc Heroes are goofy, etc. etc. etc. The books, and to an extent WoW, got a bit more serious, but just like Starcraft, the underlying-theme is just a fun one - was never really meant to break ground and revolutionize game story-telling. I also do not feel the need to explain how this is seen in Hearthstone, either.

They are just meant to have fun with, with average plots, memorable characters, and goofy shit as far as the eye can see. Not everyone can obviously appreciate that - there are millions of gamers, after-all. So if you, personally, cannot appreciate/understand Blizzard's tact in certain games... it really is a simple matter of moving on. No one will blame you, and you have every right.

 

[BoogieManFL]

Poll is a little to black or white for my tastes.


Really, sometimes they do and sometimes they don't.

 

[13e thr33]

yeah but blizzard didnt write it, Tolkien did.

Tolkien's influence is heavy in the Warcraft universe, so is Warhammer's, ALL fantasy after Tolkien can be attributed to him somehow.

But plot lines like Arthas's have nothing to do with Tolkien.

 

[Nazulu]

They're not great or original, but I actually wanted to know where they were going in Starcraft and Diablo 2, which can't say for everyone's favourite story's.

I mean I really wanted to know who was going to die next in Starcraft, and the cinematics in Diablo 2 are some of the best I've ever seen in a game. That's as long as the dialogue isn't tripe, like all of Blizzard Souths work.

Didn't answer the poll

 

[zumbledum]

yeah but blizzard didnt write it, Tolkien did.

Tolkien's influence is heavy in the Warcraft universe, so is Warhammer's, ALL fantasy after Tolkien can be attributed to him somehow.

But plot lines like Arthas's have nothing to do with Tolkien.

no seriously, arthas the lich king is beat for beat note for note a direct rip of the witch king of Angmar. I always assumed the name was a nod of recognition to the source. ok they changed a ring to a sword and afaik the Witch king didnt kill his father (might of i just dont know) but other than that its direct copy/paste.

 

[jklinders]

Good stories compared to what? Granted I never played WoW so I have no yardstick to measure anything on a full scale RPG type experience but for their RTS games I have no complaints. Their world building and original settings were for the most part well thought out. The characters were a little flat but how much narrative are you going to cram into an RTS? Compare and contrast to the the stories in the C&C games (all of them) that ranged from amateur at the high end to Tommy Wiseau levels at the worst for pure narm. There is only so much camera mugging from Tim Curry or out and out eye rolling from Micheal Dorn or that guy who played Red Foreman I can take before I realize that this shit is pretty bad.

So in general, Yes, Blizzard is hardly Shakespeare when it comes to writing. But I put their world building on par with Bethsoft's (that's a compliment) while being slightly tighter on the story side (that's not a compliment). Compared to the overwhelming majority of RTS games I have played, it's goddam Chaucer.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

I can only speak for Diablo III, but holy moley macaroni, was that plot awful. The cringe starts in the very first cutscene with dialogue like "The armies of heaven and hell shall clash upon the fields of eternity!" and never stops. And I haven't really heard much good from any of their other plots either, so I guess the general consensus is no.

 

[LetalisK]

Blizzard creates amazing lore and characters and then creates average stories around them. I've been frustrated more than once with Blizzard wasting the potential of what they have.

 

[Kerg3927]

yeah but blizzard didnt write it, Tolkien did.

Tolkien's influence is heavy in the Warcraft universe, so is Warhammer's, ALL fantasy after Tolkien can be attributed to him somehow.

But plot lines like Arthas's have nothing to do with Tolkien.

no seriously, arthas the lich king is beat for beat note for note a direct rip of the witch king of Angmar. I always assumed the name was a nod of recognition to the source. ok they changed a ring to a sword and afaik the Witch king didnt kill his father (might of i just dont know) but other than that its direct copy/paste.

I hadn't thought of the Witch King of Angmar angle, but it makes sense. It is also the Anakin Skywalker story, a guy who starts out good, but who cannot control his passions, which leads to him turning to evil. And hell, that throne scene is straight out of Conan the Barbarian. It's not very original, but Arthas/Lich King is still a cool story. I have gone back and played through all the WC3 missions half a dozen times, and the story is one of the main reasons.

 

[13e thr33]

no seriously, arthas the lich king is beat for beat note for note a direct rip of the witch king of Angmar. I always assumed the name was a nod of recognition to the source. ok they changed a ring to a sword and afaik the Witch king didnt kill his father (might of i just dont know) but other than that its direct copy/paste.

I'm going to list off some plot elements of Arthas's story, I'll also try to find ANY link to the Witch king of Angmar.

Arthas tries to save his kingdom (of humans) which he is a prince of.
Witch King of Angmar was a king of humans.

Arthas sacrifices the city of Stratholme trying to stop the spread of plague.
Witch King of Angmar has no relatable plot element.

Arthas succumbs to the temptation of Frostmourne and lets it devour his soul. (The first soul frostmourne took was arthas's)
Witch King of Angmar succumbs to the temptation of one of the nine rings given to men, and lets it control him.

Arthas obeys the Lich King in order to help him free of the demons control.
Witch King of Angmar has no relatable plot element.

Arthas defeats/kills Illidan (who is serving the demons in a way) on his ascent to the Lich King.
Witch King of Angmar is killed by a human while serving Sauron.

Arthas combines with Ner'zhul when freeing him, and forms the Lich King as we know him, controller of the scourge, forged by Demons.
Witch King of Angmar has no relatable plot element.

The Witch King of Angmar is a servant, a slave to his master that shows no sign of fighting his control.
While Arthas is a slow descent into that which he sought to destroy, a story of conviction so strong that it causes your enemy to overcome you.

I see no major connections at all.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

I can only speak for Diablo III, but holy moley macaroni, was that plot awful. The cringe starts in the very first cutscene with dialogue like "The armies of heaven and hell shall clash upon the fields of eternity!" and never stops. And I haven't really heard much good from any of their other plots either, so I guess the general consensus is no.

Yeah the dialogue in D3 was abysmal.

 

[Eddie the head]

no seriously, arthas the lich king is beat for beat note for note a direct rip of the witch king of Angmar. I always assumed the name was a nod of recognition to the source. ok they changed a ring to a sword and afaik the Witch king didnt kill his father (might of i just dont know) but other than that its direct copy/paste.

I see more Boromir in Arthas to be honest. Main difference being Boromir didn't get the ring and Arthas got his sword. And Artha's "sin" was on a slightly larger scale. Strangely less meaningful though.

 

[Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)]

Agreed.

Though, to be fair, the plots of Warcraft 1 and 2 were very generic fantasy standard.

But Warcraft 3 and it's expansion were quite revolutionary. The Orcs being actually good guys, that's not something you saw every day back then.

Well there was a reason orcs where never the "good guys" in most story's. They where made to be the dark reflections of elves. That's why they existed, it served a thematic purpose. Now orcs are fantasy race number 368.

no seriously, arthas the lich king is beat for beat note for note a direct rip of the witch king of Angmar. I always assumed the name was a nod of recognition to the source. ok they changed a ring to a sword and afaik the Witch king didnt kill his father (might of i just dont know) but other than that its direct copy/paste.

I see more Boromir in Arthas to be honest. Main difference being Boromir didn't get the ring and Arthas got his sword. And Artha's "sin" was on a slightly larger scale. Strangely less meaningful though.

I may piss you and others off by saying this but I think lord of the rings doesn't really have good villains. they have scary villains and threatening villains but none of then have that interesting as character with the exception of gollum and even then he's not really part of sauron forces. The strength of the stories come from the heroes and the villains are just obstacles they have to overcome.

To be fair I've only really seen the original movies (haven't read/watch the hobbit and I have no idea what the hell happens in the prequel book which I've heard mixed things about) but I don't find villains's Lord of the rings strong suit.

Also I prefer blizzard orc to tolkien orcs because I prefer villains to be a little bit more sympathetic in tolkien orc are just boring. don't get me wrong I'm not saying wow has a better story than Lord of the rings, lord of the rings is clearly better I just think it does villains a little better.

also I thought the drow are supposed to be the dark reflection of elves now and tolkien orc are just barbaric tribes in most fiction now

 

[mysecondlife]

Not really. I haven't played their new stuff.
But... when Sarah Kerrigan, a human gets transformed into a zerg and wreaks havoc

and

Arthas who is also a human gets turned into undead wreaks havoc


It gets really fcking old.

 

[Tuxedoman]

Okay so, here's a thing. Most plots in games that are praised for having a good story are honestly not that good. Even take something like Spec Ops: The Line, if you looked at -only- its plot then its not really that big of a deal.

The big thing that sets stories apart is not their plot, its how the plot is told. The characters within the story that go on the adventure are far more important than the adventure its self, and that is honestly where blizzard kind of falls short. Due to the games they choose to make, they don't really have the room to make these super engaging epic storylines. The early Warcrafts were all told through text and narration. The early Starcrafts were only a small step ahead of that in having talking faces in the corner that would say stuff to each other before and during a mission.

Warcraft 3 did a pretty good job of telling a story in my opinion, with the tools it actually had to use. That all said, I don't think anybody plays an rts for the thrilling story.

Wow has the same problem as everything else up till this point; most of its story is not actually told. You're handed a book and told 'if you wanna know whats happening here, read this yourself'. There are very few times where the story is actually woven into the game.

The Diablo franchise is a -little- better at telling a tale compared to most of Blizzards catalog, mostly because its easier to tell a decent story in a dedicated RPG. Diablo 2 had a fair number of interesting and rememberable characters despite the plot itself being quite simple (Go east, kill demons). Diablo 3 on the other hand sort of shat the bed by killing off one of the two previously known characters and having npc's just magically know what to do next without much reasoning behind it.
Also it had really obvious foreshadowing.
Also Azmodan is the worst general of all time.

Reaper of Souls was better, but still predictable.

At the end of the day, I think Blizzard has some amazing stories to tell. Problem is, they're not very good at actually getting them across with their games.

 

[Eddie the head]

I may piss you and others off by saying this but I think lord of the rings doesn't really have good villains. they have scary villains and threatening villains but none of then have that interesting as character with the exception of gollum and even then he's not really part of sauron forces. The strength of the stories come from the heroes and the villains are just obstacles they have to overcome.

To be fair I've only really seen the original movies (haven't read/watch the hobbit and I have no idea what the hell happens in the prequel book which I've heard mixed things about) but I don't find villains's Lord of the rings strong suit.

Also I prefer blizzard orc to tolkien orcs because I prefer villains to be a little bit more sympathetic in tolkien orc are just boring. don't get me wrong I'm not saying wow has a better story than Lord of the rings, lord of the rings is clearly better I just think it does villains a little better.

also I thought the drow are supposed to be the dark reflection of elves now and tolkien orc are just barbaric tribes in most fiction now

Well this is going to take me a bit, but lets start. In the end both Wow and Tolken have the same bad guy. A discord angle, or god or titan whatever you want to call it. They have the same "big" bad. Sauron's equivalent would be that one red dude form the sunwell raid. I fail to see how wow's "big bad" guys are that much better. But lets disregard that.

Ultimately I don't care about the villain. His motivation is doesn't matter much. It's the hero's story. And Tolkien actually has heros. Not self insertion avatars.

I think you completely miss the point of orcs. I'm honestly kind of dumbfounded by this. You don't feel any sympathy for a bad guy that can't help but be that way? Where the most kind thing you can do is to kill them? The elder race fallen form grace? Theses being of light distorted by the shadow? I can't tell you what to think, but I think a bad guy that doesn't have a choice in the matter is much more tragic. The I want to say Forsaken are a good analogy. Ultimately they are evil, but you can feel petty for them for what they once where. It's a way to say that evil can't create it can only corrupt.

As to drow. No. That's mostly an invention of D&D to my knowledge. Somebody reading that there where "dark elves" in Norse mythology and not understanding that that was a classification of beings, that included orcs, trolls, and goblins. Not elves that are black. To make a Warcraft comparison Night elves are much closer to regular elves, and Blood elves are much closer to "dark" elves, despite the skin color. In simplest terms orcs are dark(drow) elves.

 

[Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)]

I may piss you and others off by saying this but I think lord of the rings doesn't really have good villains. they have scary villains and threatening villains but none of then have that interesting as character with the exception of gollum and even then he's not really part of sauron forces. The strength of the stories come from the heroes and the villains are just obstacles they have to overcome.

To be fair I've only really seen the original movies (haven't read/watch the hobbit and I have no idea what the hell happens in the prequel book which I've heard mixed things about) but I don't find villains's Lord of the rings strong suit.

Also I prefer blizzard orc to tolkien orcs because I prefer villains to be a little bit more sympathetic in tolkien orc are just boring. don't get me wrong I'm not saying wow has a better story than Lord of the rings, lord of the rings is clearly better I just think it does villains a little better.

also I thought the drow are supposed to be the dark reflection of elves now and tolkien orc are just barbaric tribes in most fiction now

Well this is going to take me a bit, but lets start. In the end both Wow and Tolken have the same bad guy. A discord angle, or god or titan whatever you want to call it. They have the same "big" bad. Sauron's equivalent would be that one red dude form the sunwell raid. I fail to see how wow's "big bad" guys are that much better. But lets disregard that.

Ultimately I don't care about the villain. His motivation is doesn't matter much. It's the hero's story. And Tolkien actually has heros. Not self insertion avatars.

I think you completely miss the point of orcs. I'm honestly kind of dumbfounded by this. You don't feel any sympathy for a bad guy that can't help but be that way? Where the most kind thing you can do is to kill them? The elder race fallen form grace? Theses being of light distorted by the shadow? I can't tell you what to think, but I think a bad guy that doesn't have a choice in the matter is much more tragic. The I want to say Forsaken are a good analogy. Ultimately they are evil, but you can feel petty for them for what they once where. It's a way to say that evil can't create it can only corrupt.

As to drow. No. That's mostly an invention of D&D to my knowledge. Somebody reading that there where "dark elves" in Norse mythology and not understanding that that was a classification of beings, that included orcs, trolls, and goblins. Not elves that are black. To make a Warcraft comparison Night elves are much closer to regular elves, and Blood elves are much closer to "dark" elves, despite the skin color. In simplest terms orcs are dark(drow) elves.

I prefer villains with little bit sympathy and they never really play up the tragic nature you're talking about of the orcs in the original lord of the rings, I understand the supposed to be corrupted elves but they never really played it up in the original movie and when a tolkien orc is used in most fiction they never really do anything with them except being extra experience. (once again only the movies)

Also the forsaken are not evil, they have free well although the faction have done some questionable things. I'm thinking you're talking about the scourge who the original forsaken who Escaped from thanks to Sylvanas WindRunner and the scourge do have a lot of similarities with tolkien orcs now that I think about it but only slightly and after the Lich King is dealt with I think most of the scourge regain their free will and join the forsaken.

I don't want to get into a debate about which series is better(lord of the rings would win and I know this) but I'm think calling wow a rip-off would be unfair. That's like calling Star Wars a Flash Gordon ripoff or most superhero fiction a rip off of Superman. The fantasies setting that Lord of the rings created has inspired countless fictions that have taken inspiration from it and played the tropes in a very unique way and I don't think lord of the rings ever had goat people from outer space running from demons because one of his friends betrayed him because he didn't side with him and his brother to make there people join space Satan. .......Wow is fucking weird.

also they were originally ripping off Warhammer get your facts straight.