Well, I actually totally agreed on the RPS article: SC2 campaign characters were a complete collection of most overused cliche and stereotype:

- The roughed pirate drunk who actually have an heart (Han Solo anyone?)
- The Brawn without Brains
- The Officer with ideals and uniforms
- The Doctor chick, straightly dressed but actually loving the rough pirate
- The badass evil chicks who wear skin tigh suits/dress/whatever
- The evil emperor
- The black rastafarian, voodoo loving, speech impaired whose drugs addict friends are all in prison

I could go on really....

Bear with me though I did not dislike the campaign itself and overall enjoyed it so I am trolling or pissing on everyone's parade.
Gameplay was good, missions were much more fun than usual RTS "destroy their base" and the presentations itself is topnotch.

Just that until about half the campaign I was wondering if they were actually ASSUMING the cliches in the characters and go with 2nd degre like what Red Alert 3 did or actually taking themselves seriously.
Unfortunately for me they choose the 2nd way.

It's just that I really did not remember SC1 or even Warcraft 3 to have such "flat" characters, of course they had good heroes and bad vilains but most characters had some kind of a twist.

I just feel with the resource they have and the time they took, Blizzard could have hired a better script writer and fluffed a bit more the characters to be less generics.