Getting a Grasp on Starcraft

VS debates involving other fictional universes than Star Trek or Star Wars go here, along with technical analysis, detailed discussion, crossover scenario descriptions, and similar related stuffs.
Post Reply
Nonamer
Jedi Knight
Posts: 269
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 7:05 pm
Location: Outer Space

Getting a Grasp on Starcraft

Post by Nonamer » Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:40 pm

Right now, at SB.com, the big topic on the versus forum is figuring out the exact ability of various Starcraft forces. The problem being that there is no accepted canon policy whatsoever regarding Starcraft, official or fan consensus. Making matters worse, nothing in Starcraft particularly support each and there are many contradictions. For instance, the manual says that marines uses gauss rifles that fire hypersonic bullets but the in-game cutscene support the claim that they are convention firearms. Zerglings can do everything from shrug off streams of bullets or get taken out by pitchforks. Firepower figures for most larger weapon systems are wildly inconsistent as well.

Obviously, that doesn't bode well for any versus debate regarding Starcraft, and consequently it has descended into a flamewar at SB.com. So let's try to make sense of it all here, and hopefully the much smaller userbase right now at this place will make the discussion a bit friendlier.

The main problem is the issue of canon: What can we actually consider to be the "valid" Starcraft? Seeing the endless debate going on at SB.com, I dispute that there even is a valid version of Starcraft. Cutscenes and in-game and books all have highly differing claims about Starcraft firepower figures. For instance, if we go by cut-scenes and say that Marines only use conventional firearms, then we are left with the major logical problem of futuristic soldiers having so weak firearms. Given the fact that they wear massively large power armor, there's no way that they can conduct meaningful warfare against each other with guns that weak. Instead, if you go by the gauss rifle claim in the manual, Starcraft marines would be far more logical. However, since Starcraft is more Space Opera than science fiction, we can to an extent assume that they are just that weak for sake of storytelling. Since both arguments are pretty convincing, I support that we have to simple divide Starcraft into multiple canons. One from the manual, another for the cutscenes, and another for the books.

User avatar
AnonymousRedShirtEnsign
Jedi Knight
Posts: 380
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 10:05 pm
Location: Six feet under the surface of some alien world

Post by AnonymousRedShirtEnsign » Tue Aug 22, 2006 4:10 pm

Starcraft is a video game. Therefore, weaponry and character balance is based on creating fun game play, not being realistic, or making sense for that matter. Like in Halo, it's 2552 and your main weapon is a basically an AK-47. Battlefront is another example of in game weaponry being totally inconsistent with canon firepower (other than weak blasters, I found the rest of Bf2 to be surprisingly true to the movies).

Anyways, my ordering for video game canon is a such
1: firepower demonstrated in game play by the game engine
2: Dialog about weaponry (this is pretty much only applicable for tutorials and Doom3 from what I've seen)
3: Cut scene footage
4: Official manuals and strategy guides
5: Other sources affiliated with the game (books & films if the game came first like Halo, Doom, Tomb Raider)
6: And maybe stuff on the company/ game's official website, and press releases/ interviews, stuff like that.

Nonamer
Jedi Knight
Posts: 269
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 7:05 pm
Location: Outer Space

Post by Nonamer » Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:12 am

You never want to go by gameplay figures. You'll have marines that can stop Battlecruisers in orbit and Zergling that can survive Battlecruiser hits.

User avatar
l33telboi
Starship Captain
Posts: 910
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 7:15 am
Location: Finland

Post by l33telboi » Fri Sep 29, 2006 7:45 am

I'd say that the cutscenes would be ranked as the highest canon, as they aren't affected by the mechanics in the gameplay, and they are part of the game itself.

Incidentally, i do not agree that taking the strength of units from gameplay is the way to go, the marine vs. battlecrusier problem is just one of the problems that presents. Also, this contradicts heavily with the cutscenes, since in one cutscene a BC totally annihilates another with the Yamato, but nothing of the sort is possible in-game. And do you really think that a blast like that would be unable to kill a single zealot? (i have to admit that i didn't check if a yamato actually is able to kill a zealot when i wrote this, but from what i remember from the time i actually played the game, this is so.)

Following the novels could be a good idea, unfortunetly i've heard of some pretty disturbing stuff being written in them. Pitchfork wielding rednecks being able to kill zerglings for instance. Something that contradicts the cutscenes heavily.

The manual is something that i would like to accept as high canon, since it was created by the same guys who made the game, but the apparent gauss gun problem becomes apparent then. One way to work around this though, is to say that the weapons we see in-game are not the same ones described in the manual. I.e, both types of weaponry are employed.

So, in short. There really is no good source to call absolute canon, except the cutscenes, and even they have some flaws.

User avatar
AnonymousRedShirtEnsign
Jedi Knight
Posts: 380
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 10:05 pm
Location: Six feet under the surface of some alien world

Post by AnonymousRedShirtEnsign » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:19 pm

What happens when there are multiple types of games that are part of the same franchise, like Starcraft Ghost and Halo Wars?

Nonamer
Jedi Knight
Posts: 269
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 7:05 pm
Location: Outer Space

Post by Nonamer » Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:09 pm

AnonymousRedShirtEnsign wrote:What happens when there are multiple types of games that are part of the same franchise, like Starcraft Ghost and Halo Wars?
Currently that's not really a problem since Ghost is cancelled. There are some vids showing some differences between the enemies in Ghot and the original SC games, but these are easily explanable (the Zerg evolved, tech changed, different models, etc.). The novels however, fuck everything up as they are very very inconsistent (the original game itself is pretty bad too, but not that bad).

User avatar
SailorSaturn13
Bridge Officer
Posts: 214
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:45 am

Post by SailorSaturn13 » Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:33 pm

I'd say the best are the novels, overridden by visual pictures where appropriate.

But Game stats are actually also valid, if you take them like in "Daggerfall": HP are NOT simply live points but a product of survivability and ability to evade, so say zergling surviving a BC hit translates that only 1 of 2 shot hits (and then of course kills) it. And 170 seconds of supersonic projectiles may very well bring a cruiser down...

Post Reply