Haha, also at this point we've spitballed every single possible named character left in EivindL's universe so something's bound to be right!
I notice no one has mentioned Combat Jack. :D
I managed to do some substantial work in the weekend. It's a micro mission, which means it'll take some more time. But I'm getting there. The intro cinematic is starting to look cool, as it reveals some things that have been hinted at back in Crimson Moon and Amber Sun (things no one seems to have picked up on). It'll also include things that have been talked about, but which have only happened off-screen. The terrain is practically done (I have only one room left).
School-work is actually light this week, so I'm hoping to have the first draft finished and sent to the testers by Sunday.
On another subject: Am I the only one who thinks Blizzard cinematics have a tendency to be really short? I know this is probably a necessity considering how long it takes to create those fantastic-looking pre-rendered cutscenes, but they've really made a niche of these 2-4-minute scenes where the characters barely get a word in.
In addition to your note of the money used to produce them, I would think the average player would rather play the game than watch movies. I could be wrong, but there's definitely decreasing margins of benefit the longer the cutscene is.
We're using all economic terms now? :D I don't think you're wrong, but at the same time, a lot of people play the campaign for the story, and I'm sure they (or "we", I should say) wouldn't mind more of it. If it was better, that is (an important point to make). It's just that I think that you constrict yourself if you always have to make a point in 3 minutes. Having now tried my hand at story-telling, I can say that I appreciate the freedom to sometimes go longer.
And look at the Odyssey campaign, which has arguably the richest lore of all custom campaigns, frequently broadening its world with these cool little details. Yes, length does not equal quality, but if you cut the story down enough, all you're left with is a set-up and a punch-line. Obviously, Blizzard's pre-rendered cutscenes can't be much longer. But those using the in-game graphics could.
If I wrote it, I'd have Zera showing up in the middle too; arriving too late to stop the invasion, but just in time to persuade a now wiser Artanis.
You are right that Artanis has other considerations. The last short story, as well as Reclamation, has showed how much he's putting into this. But then we're back to my first point: everything prior is irrelevant.
Putting the finishing touches on the first boss fight now. I've also begun making the opening cinematic, and it's looking so cool at the moment. It'll be a feast for the lore hounds!
It's a common misconception that, if you have invested a lot of resources into something, you should just go ahead and continue doing that something. However, because the resources you have invested are irreversible (so-called "sunk costs"), they should not be taken into account in future decisions.
And yet a lot of people (yes, in real life as well as in StarCraft), fall for this fallacy anyway. In Artanis' example, he thinks that, because he spent a lot of time and resources preparing for the invasion of Aiur, he should just go ahead with it even in the event of new information. But then Zeratul comes with his talk about Amon and the true battle. What does Artanis do? He decides to ignore it. He has fallen for the sunk cost fallacy.
If Artanis was economically logical, he should only have cared about what Zeratul has to say, and not about the resources he has already spent, and therefore stopped the invasion.
It's quite an interesting subject. I couldn't wrap my head around it first, and I've fallen for it myself too, but I've now realised it makes sense. Read more about it here.
On another subject: Am I the only one who thinks Blizzard cinematics have a tendency to be really short? I know this is probably a necessity considering how long it takes to create those fantastic-looking pre-rendered cutscenes, but they've really made a niche of these 2-4-minute scenes where the characters barely get a word in.
Artanis and Zeratul's convo is the most extreme example of this. It's just so incredibly short, with Zera barely getting a word in before the frickin' invasion starts. Surely Artanis could have spared a few more minutes to listen to his old friend? If not, then the Protoss are not as prepared as they think they are.
But maybe I've just played far too much MGS. For the record: I'm not recommending 70-minute cutscenes neither, but a little more room for the characters to breathe would have been preferable.
0
Yeah, ramps are doing the same for me. How fortunate that I've placed all the ones I need.
0
No, that's another room. :D
0
Liar.
0
No.
Yes.
0
What could this be?
0
No, I don't it'll be too long a mission (if that's your concern).
0
I notice no one has mentioned Combat Jack. :D
I managed to do some substantial work in the weekend. It's a micro mission, which means it'll take some more time. But I'm getting there. The intro cinematic is starting to look cool, as it reveals some things that have been hinted at back in Crimson Moon and Amber Sun (things no one seems to have picked up on). It'll also include things that have been talked about, but which have only happened off-screen. The terrain is practically done (I have only one room left).
School-work is actually light this week, so I'm hoping to have the first draft finished and sent to the testers by Sunday.
0
Interesting oberservation.
0
We're using all economic terms now? :D I don't think you're wrong, but at the same time, a lot of people play the campaign for the story, and I'm sure they (or "we", I should say) wouldn't mind more of it. If it was better, that is (an important point to make). It's just that I think that you constrict yourself if you always have to make a point in 3 minutes. Having now tried my hand at story-telling, I can say that I appreciate the freedom to sometimes go longer.
And look at the Odyssey campaign, which has arguably the richest lore of all custom campaigns, frequently broadening its world with these cool little details. Yes, length does not equal quality, but if you cut the story down enough, all you're left with is a set-up and a punch-line. Obviously, Blizzard's pre-rendered cutscenes can't be much longer. But those using the in-game graphics could.
0
I'm not gonna answer on whether you're right or not, but I hope you reread that post after you play the mission.
0
Yo, dude, where you been? I wanted to play your campaign, man!
0
If I wrote it, I'd have Zera showing up in the middle too; arriving too late to stop the invasion, but just in time to persuade a now wiser Artanis.
You are right that Artanis has other considerations. The last short story, as well as Reclamation, has showed how much he's putting into this. But then we're back to my first point: everything prior is irrelevant.
0
There are three, and all of them can be guessed. Although, there's one guess you won't get right, even though you think you will. ;)
0
Putting the finishing touches on the first boss fight now. I've also begun making the opening cinematic, and it's looking so cool at the moment. It'll be a feast for the lore hounds!
0
It's a common misconception that, if you have invested a lot of resources into something, you should just go ahead and continue doing that something. However, because the resources you have invested are irreversible (so-called "sunk costs"), they should not be taken into account in future decisions.
And yet a lot of people (yes, in real life as well as in StarCraft), fall for this fallacy anyway. In Artanis' example, he thinks that, because he spent a lot of time and resources preparing for the invasion of Aiur, he should just go ahead with it even in the event of new information. But then Zeratul comes with his talk about Amon and the true battle. What does Artanis do? He decides to ignore it. He has fallen for the sunk cost fallacy.
If Artanis was economically logical, he should only have cared about what Zeratul has to say, and not about the resources he has already spent, and therefore stopped the invasion.
It's quite an interesting subject. I couldn't wrap my head around it first, and I've fallen for it myself too, but I've now realised it makes sense. Read more about it here.
On another subject: Am I the only one who thinks Blizzard cinematics have a tendency to be really short? I know this is probably a necessity considering how long it takes to create those fantastic-looking pre-rendered cutscenes, but they've really made a niche of these 2-4-minute scenes where the characters barely get a word in.
Artanis and Zeratul's convo is the most extreme example of this. It's just so incredibly short, with Zera barely getting a word in before the frickin' invasion starts. Surely Artanis could have spared a few more minutes to listen to his old friend? If not, then the Protoss are not as prepared as they think they are.
But maybe I've just played far too much MGS. For the record: I'm not recommending 70-minute cutscenes neither, but a little more room for the characters to breathe would have been preferable.