SC2Mapster

[REVIEW] Aureolin Eclipse/Perfect Soldiers Trilogy

While strong in beginning and middle, but shaky with it's soundtrack selection, EivindL delivers a pretty much unimaginative ending, with an apparent fright of 'happy ending' that today's society wouldn't just accept.

And, at last, we come to the conclusion of a trilogy that, while did start very generic, eventually gained our hearts gradually, especially because of the characters. Started, back then, with Crimson Moon in 2012, there wasn't much to see about or play about, in my opinion. If anything, I just wanted to play through a StarCraft II campaign out of bore, if only to waste some time as I learned more and more on the editor and stuff. I just wanted some passing-by eye-candy to play with, and it did deliver.

It wouldn't be until the fifth mission, on when the heroes returned to Amina, that stuff was only going to get thicker and interesting. Until then, it was about miners, Zerg and some shady corporation that was going to make it's move, and that it actually did. It was when I started to actually look a bit more into the story and then I started to care a bit about these characters - Like Henderson, whom suddenly is pushed into fighting a corporation that rubbed his people badly and now tries to get his folks through it as well as payback. Or Janus, whom tries chasing his target as well as uncovering the shady plot behind it. While the ending was a bit confusing, at least the characters were interesting, but I didn't think it'd actually have a sequel.

Which actually got, with Amber Sun, in 2013, and pretty much like it, followed up the story as it ran along, as well as introducing new characters like Ryan's brother and Bayo and Cenereal, and the plot got more complex what with all the characters and factions introduced, beyond the Amina, Zerg and Geraldus. I participated back then as a tester as well as offering suggestions and stuff like the terrain for the desert mission, which was open and accessible for ground, but then required you to have Dropships used. I had some bit of gripes with plotholes like 'why would that person betray the heroes, even with all due reason on the world to hate the bad guys' or 'why would a character axe off another who's friend of one of his allies, for people he doesn't owe anything and would likely axe him off later, at some point'... But still it offered some good gameplay in the form of an alterative playstyle that, while not drifting away from Blizzard standards back in WoL/HotS, also offered about one or two different things, like re-routing enemies with bridges or collapsible towers, stealth missions and even a prank moment with some loony bin in a sick apocalyptic world.

Now is the turn of Aureolin Eclipse, which proposes to end it's trilogy weeks prior to the release of Legacy of the Void, and that has much to solve and answer, like 'Will Geraldus finally fall?', 'Will our heroes, or at least one of them, have their turn at a 'happy ending'?' and 'Will Amina see at least a symbolic retribution for all injustices done to them?'. Beginning from a very bittersweet ending from the previous campaign, names like Henderson or Janus are now off the stage and instead we see a new cast in form of mercenary/former operative Corelia, her employer Meridian and a collection of names that, unfortunately, only pass by, and that's a shame for the final scenery. But there are also old, familiar names, like Ryan's brother and Cenereal, whose unchanged views still polarize the conflict on Amina and the surrounding worlds we get to visit.

There's a town on constant fire, a lava valley, a platform, even a Xel'Naga themed map, though that's rarely explained, but still offers some degree of fun with powering/unpowering defensive structures while also defending the Pylons powering them. Other enjoyments include defending convoys along with a single-shot array of strikes to mostly clear enemy bases, defending space cannons and even helping take down Leviathans, a tug-of-war battle, a temporary alliance with enemies in to fend off a major threat, fending off Zerg while harvesting minerals for your next shipment, it gets more varied and surreal. As well as the chance to play another race than just Terran, something both previous campaigns were known for.

While Crimson Moon leaned more towards micro and Amber Sun was a bit more balanced, Aureolin Eclipse goes virtually more macro, but the change is fitting given the scale of confrontations the players face - Not only you fight the ginormous power of Geraldus and it's war machine, but also whole Zerg hives and a separate quasi-religious militant group. All while fighting to not only make a larger army, but making it worthy with what units you'll build other than masses of infantry or your usual deathball of Battlecruisers or Thors. You actually find a use for Widow Mines, High Templar and Archons, Tempests, Dark Templar and other stuff the Blizzard missions showcased but then quickly left aside, apart from this or that mission.

Yet while armies mean stuff on the field, the heroes, particularly the core protagonist, aren't without use - Corellia, though a bit overlapping and repetitive from the Amber Sun Janus' abilities in the final mission, has her array of abilities other heroes don't have, including Blinking around, hardened shielding of Immortals, kinetic blasts, crushing grip. Though a major issue is that she's the only one with such an amount and focus, and even other relevant heroes, like Sgt. Walker and Dunbar, which are introduced in an interesting way in the campaign, are quickly ditched aside in favor of the core character whom starred as a secondary in Crimson Moon and a slight appearance in Amber Sun.

Were this the one only issue as well, that the protagonist perhaps gets a bit *too* much of screen time, so to day. The other issue is the music can often be more and more repetitive in-game, without much variation or an emotional power that'd make me want to remember. When I played 'Crimson Moon', where this fortress defense mission started, I remembered the song of the introduction rather because it was an emotional and fitting moment, this was likely the last stand of the heroes whom were forced into a final desperate plan as the remainder of their forces held off. Other songs can be remembered as well, like Game of Thrones' 'The Devil Inside' in the final 'Amber Sun' mission. I don't know, maybe it's rather my personal tastes, and EivindL tends to take most musics from either Fallout or Metal Gear Solid series, and since I'm not a fan of either, maybe that's the problem. But you can clearly feel an emotional lacking that the music could be able to fit in, but it doesn't. I believe a mission, so much in-game as the cinematics should not only have a lot of music, but also fit in and have something emotional to tell, rather than just being filler. A good example would be this cutscene in Annihilation, where Terrans meet the Protoss and the music provides a nice background, despite it being Warfield's death track from HotS.

But there's still a third issue that was made all the more relevant in the penultimate mission, and that was how much EivindL seems to be so *frightened* of a said 'good ending', like if this would reduce the story to just another Hollywood-ish bullshit, which wasn't even that a big thing in Crimson Moon. I'll be planning to write an article concerning the endings and the apparent hatred for many of them, but let me elaborate here - In the CM ending, it did work and the said 'bad guys' were defeated, they suffered a set back, but we also got the chance for a plot twist and Janus virtually feeling guilty for what he did, after so much chase. That ending was a bit confusing, at first, but at least worked, because both parts were fine, the heroes prevailed but some characters have paid some price for their deeds. Amber Sun, on it's part, was meant to have a happy ending, but then 'The Red Wedding' happened and, yes, it virtually changed EivindL all around, like, if happy endings weren't what people wanted, anymore. Yet, we accepted it because it was so much the heat of the moment, despite me scratching my head on, if there were a sequel, whom would we focus other than Corelia or the Protoss.

But if the ending to Amber Sun was virtually 'The Red Wedding', I can say the penultimate summarizes all of Game of Thrones' 5th season, not in how much they deviated from the source material, but in that it put in unnecessary deaths and twists and how it relied on larger battles in order to catch the audience. I'm getting into HEAVY SPOILERS for those whom didn't play AE or it's predecessors, but Meridian's fate in the campaign reminds A LOT of what Weiss and Benioff did to Stannis' daughter. As well as the battle in the penultimate mission, as well, recalls, due to it's length, the battle the Night's Watch had with the White Walkers in the Wildling coast village. You can even tell how connected this is, given both battles were set in a frozen environment.

The ending itself is riddled with multiple boss fights and situations which you're required rather to time, think and run like it never happened before. The stealth rooms feel more like a puzzle which a single mistake can be costly and there's virtually little resistance to it, as you could account for the Fortress still being heavily defended, yet there are only bosses, machines and nothing else. And despite the retribution being given, there could've been more creativity and a higher catharsis to it. But I believe the plot twist itself was the weakest of all, because, given what occurred, it felt shoehorned into a final definite battle of wills, especially given the use of the infamous 'back from the dead' cliche. Yeah, that's a bit of a spoiler, there. The boss fights were decent, but the way the story ended could've been WAY much more better, given it was merely straight and nothing else, and some parts definitely would require more explaining, like, 'why were these people helping the other and then were fighting them?' and 'why was the heroine manipulating people, if her goal even wasn't one of power?'.

Still, just because of the way the story ended, does this mean that the Perfect Soldiers trilogy isn't worth playing? Not at all. The gameplay, the action and character development are quite enjoyable and every two missions, perhaps, there was some form of inventive gameplay and terraining, which more than makes up for the flaws, which is the apparent fright of 'happy endings' and the uninventive soundtrack. You may not enjoy the way the story plays out after such strong beginning and middle, but you can definitely take a look and see it for yourself - It has what it takes for a riveting run, like conspiracies, good characters, good gameplay and, of course, both Zerg and Protoss, just don't expect that much of an ending run, and you'll be fine.

Overall score - 3.5/5

I think I will say to you what I said to another user who wanted to start a super critical series about custom campaigns. I'm mostly copy/pasting here with a few edits.

You certainly has a specific style to how you critique things so your opinions shouldn't bother anyone as we should all understand what you're actually trying to say beyond being hyper-critical simply to be hyper-critical. Further, there's nothing wrong with being honest.

Frankly though, this community may not need a critical eye like this (at least not currently). Content quality is not improved by tearing apart what we have! We need to be cultivating excitement and attention, which provides incentives to folks to improve and keep trying new things. I'm not afraid to point out what sticks out, but I also don't focus on it more than mentioning it once. Bugs and design flaws in general are things that can be found and fixed. Storylines can be improved upon, but are also solely the property of the content creators who spend the time to actually make them, not those of us who play them.

I think your style of reviewing is something a much larger community could definitely benefit from. Our size here is too small and on the verge of collapsing if too much negativity and nitpicking gets thrown around. You use a lot of negatively oriented words - 'shaky', 'unimaginative' - and that's just in the first blurb! Many of the positive things you have to say are rounded out with poorly hidden, backhanded comments in the same sentence. You clearly have had a bone to pick from the get go and I was surprised with the overall score of 3.5/5 when I got to the end as I was expecting a lower number after reading the whole thing.

Look, I'm not saying Perfect Soldiers is infallible, but the most important thing is this: Imagine a new person coming in here thinking about dabbling in the Galaxy Editor and seeing this. Do you really think they would want to stay and give it a shot? Please don't take this personally as, again, I understand the style you're going for, but I'm genuinely concerned for the sustainability of our small community here. At the same time, no one here is obligated to try to help Mapster grow so, again, there's nothing wrong with you being honest of course! Your review basically says, "I didn't like it. You might, but here are some reasons you should keep low expectations. 3.5/5"

I make it a general point not to comment about opinions. I don't want to be that guy. I'll happily discuss everything else, be it suggestions to gameplay, confusion about story elements, bugs, etc. I don't want to put a mouth piece on people. So I don't have a problem with DC's review.

Whether or not we need to be more positive or not is another discussion. I agree that, in general, we need to champion the community, though people should still be able to say what they want. Constructive criticism is a vital component of improvement, and we do want improvement.

DC's review is definitely constructive, and therefore a welcome deviation from some of the stuff you'll find on, say, YouTube or Battle.net.

Quote from EivindL: Go

a welcome deviation from some of the stuff you'll find on, say, YouTube

You've broken my heart :P

@EivindL: Go

On a serious note though, I completely agree. It seems I've over-perceived this review to have a very backhanded tone and I overreacted trying to be super community champion :/

Quote from JayborinoPlays: Go

@EivindL: Go

You've broken my heart :P

I meant the comments. You know, the kind without capitilization, punctuation and the expression of good manners. Your feedback is always constructive and insightful.

I've actually never played a Fallout game! I heard the track Metallic Monks used in Mass Recall, got hold of the soundtrack, and was immediately hooked! The track Vats of Goo from the first game actually opens the entire campaign (it's basically my Roverville theme), which made it extra fun to discover it being used in Patriot's Blood in Mass Recall. They probably chose it independently from me, but it felt like the circle was complete anyway.

I began listening to the soundtrack for Fallout 2 as well, sitting hours on end in school. Then the track Gold Slouch played, and Ossos was born. Seriously, that one track is the entire reason that mission exists. Listening to it just gave me a vision of a shantytown in Amina, and although the final concept is very different from how I first imagined it, the core idea remained the same.

Well, for all I know, even old campaigns like LotC and VotF in the past used video-game/movies/anime soundtracks and there was never much lawsuit, so I wouldn't expect much of a reaction from official people. But, for courtesy (and if we want to research), it's nice to credit the music used by it's name, the source and the author. Something like this (For example purposes):

Boss Battle Music - The Kyln Escape - Tyler Bates, Guardians of the Galaxy OST

Yeah, I agree with Delta, go for it! Unless we see some sort of complex claims engine like YouTube has (read: we never will) then there won't ever be an issue.

On the other hand, and given I nearly started an incident between EivindL and Jayborino over criticism and YouTube comments, I can say I many times can be a bit harsh on reviewing stuff, when I only aim to be as objective as possible.

The point of a review can and should be to express a personal opinion on another person's work, and while incentive can and should be delivered, the flaws can't be ignored and must also be pointed out. But there are good points which I pointed, like the quality of terraining, gameplay and the characters built up across the trilogy. 3.5/5 should in no way be considered a low note or even mediocre, but a good one and that should be checked out, only the weakest points being the conclusion and the weak plot twists at the end, as well as the soundtrack. At best, if the soundtrack was more memorable and more varied, or if the ending was more riveting, I'd easily have set it a 4. 5 is when virtually everything is good and anything you could complain about would be nothing more than nitpicking.

This also means I, in no way, say I didn't like this campaign, actually I'm quite glad I played and finished it, it was a good entry into SC2 mapping for me, and further gave me inspiration to work on my stuff and even EivindL's tutorials give good suggestions on making a story, terraining and such. You can be a super-community champion, if you want, it's ultimately your choice. But it was mine to be objective when I wrote the review, thinking more on the general audience and those whom aren't so familiar with it rather than the hardcore fans. I even support on incentivating people to get the editors and start making their dreams come true, but I also like the challenge people into 'Why not do something different? Why not step up the game, step up the drama, step up the characters?' And sometimes a bit of good, well-viewed constructive criticism is not only great, but also a necessity. You can, because you may be afraid people will disagree, that the HotS campaign is a good one when it actually leaves a lot to be desired. And contrary to this, the PS trilogy is worth playing, I liked playing through it, though I only wished the story's ending had more definite answers and a strong emotional tie, like 'it was worth the wait'.

Yeah man, I apologize. I took a very myopic view of what you were saying and my response was not though out enough.

While I stick to the general idea of what I said originally, my response was too heavy handed for no reason. At the same time, I am with Lucid on this idea of objectivity. It's tricky because Delta's review was well thought out, but I am perhaps too jaded by the shitty feedback I see in so many other places and I reacted too quickly. I do not agree that the ending was lacking or that soundtrack was boring, but I'm not looking to argue about that as Delta is completely reasonable in preferring what he prefers and explained why in his review.

The shitty feedback I tend to see a lot these days elsewhere would be someone saying they are 'only being objective' so they can say whatever they want about something clearly subjective; then adamantly defending themselves that everyone else just isn't as smart, rational, objective, and knowledgeable about whatever topic they're trying to be unequivocally correct about. Usually, these people have absolutely no background that would make them an expert on the topic anyway, but act as if people should be listening to them as if they have all the right ideas. Delta did not really do anything I mentioned in this paragraph, but I responded to him as if he did and that is why I apologized.