starcraft 2, zerg released.

Ugh I hated the Zerg (I hate bugs) but my friend loves 'em. I usually Protoss or Terran in SC because they can block with turrets or those house thinggies with bunkers behind them.

Woohoo

With this and a new Dawn of War rumoured, things are looking up for the RTS genre next year.

You know, I actually have very little interest in the multiplayer side of SC. I'm interested in this purely to see the continuation of the series and the story. I'm looking forward to the singleplayer campaign, it looks like they're trying to make it more in-depth.

I don't know about DoW, but the simple fact that "Blizzard won’t be messing with the formula that makes StarCraft an undying success" (to quote DailyTech) basically means StarCraft II is going to be a horrible bomb.

I... don't understand?

They're updating their game and refining the sides. The emphasis is on keeping the play mechanics the same ones that made SC so popular in the first place. I don't see why giving the fans what they want is a bad thing.

The thing about Starcraft is that it's fairly simple for even a new person to get into but at the same time it's got the kind of complexity and depth to it (if you're willing to go that far with it) that the hardcore and tournament gamers love so much. They have no reason to mess with that.

Not only that, but they've also deliberately stuck with lower system requirements and instead have focussed on maximising the art-style. This gives it a much greater potential audience than a lot of more recent RTS's (Company of Heroes, Supreme Commander, World in Conflict...)

Sorry, I just can't see this game failing at market purely because they're giving their fans what they want. Heck, the sales in South Korea alone are likely to be through the roof.

I find it highly ironic to find posts praising or anticipating Starcraft when there's so much negativity on this forum about unit spamming in Sins. Starcraft is all about unit spamming, particularly on the Zerg side. All of the preview teasers have featured unit spamming. Zerglings are no different from LRM's or Siege frigates. I cannot recall a Starcraft game I played that featured anything other than spamming.

Maybe it's just me, but I've never liked Blizzard strategy games. They all play like RTR (real time rush) instead of RTS (real time strategy). I don't see much in terms of strategy in the new Starcraft II previews. There's not any more than what there was in the original game. Everything will boil down to massing a bunch of a single unit and attacking.

I'd say there's about as much strategy as you want to put into it. I've watched some high level games recently, and the stuff they pull off is really cool. It's all about constantly judging your opponents and trying to do things that they did not anticipate.

The pro matches I've watched so far laster around 15-20 minutes, but they were short and intense with a lot of strategy going on.

I think "rushing" has gotten a bad rep in strategy games. High level SC play demands immediate recon and early raids to attempt to cripple the enemy economy and capability. That doesn't mean there isn't enough time to go up the tech tree either, you'd be surprised how fast you can advance up the SC tech tree if you know what you're doing (I certainly was).

Anyway, you can check out some of what I'm talking about here. If you're not into the gameplay then this won't interest you or anything, but you can get a rough idea about how high level play progresses. I found it very interesting.

I think in general I prefer macro strategy to Micro, so I tend to prefer games like SupCom and Sins to micro heavy games like high level SC. But I can appreciate how it works if nothing else. Although, I'm actually a big fan of Company of Heroes as well, so go figure.

SC is ten years old. Real time strategy has moved on since then. The mechanics everyone took for granted then (scrolling and minimap instead of zooming comes to mind very specifically) are intolerable now.

Basically, all they are doing is rebuilding SC using an engine for 2008. Thats my problem with it. Sure, they're playing around with the units. But unless the stuff they're hiding (and we all know they're hiding a lot) is pretty revolutionary, SC2 is going to be a SC1 clone.

Ick.

Correction. RTS games have implemented different ideas. Some of these are definitely more advanced and complex than what Blizzard has done with SC, but that doesn't inherently make them better.

Blizzard are trying to remain faithful to the gameplay style that their fanbase expect from the series. There's no point in instituting things like Capture points, 3 degrees of cover and unit morale, that's just not the style of gameplay that Starcraft is aiming for.



Not to disagree too much, but most RTS games I can think of today still make use of a fixed degree of zoom coupled with a minimap. I like Supreme Commanders zoom ability, but playing with a minimap is in no way intolerable, and plenty of games still do it today.



The mantra is refinement, not revolution here. Blizzard aren't seeking to change the genre with this title, they're seeking to refine the playstyle to make it even more fun and keep the awesome 3-way balance they had. They've added a lot in terms of units and unit abilities to give new strategic options in-game. It's not going to create an entirely new genre of strategy game, nor is it trying to.

I'm sorry, I still can't see how this is going to flop when it hits the market. They're appealing to the fanbase with new possibilities whilst still keeping it simple and open enough for new players to come in. I have little doubt it'll sell a LOT of units.

I can appreciate the sentiment that you want to play something different. But there are other games and franchises for that. I wouldn't expect Blizzard to change gameplay style that their fans love and that they know works well.

Even if it was only a graphics update I'd still get it. My friends and I STILL play SC1 once in a while over Hamachi, no other game have given longer replayability and fun (closest 2nd would be Heroes of Might and Magic III).

I think they're tweaking and adding just enough to make it fresh. I like the heavier focus on infestation for the Zerg and things like that. The single player campaigns should be groovy with their selective mission approach like a META map, and of course it'll be balanced very well right out of the box.

I would like to be able to zoom all the way out (Damn you SINS and SupCom!) and I'd love to see sort of cover system ala CoH as I think both of those are really awesome advancements for the RTS genre. I also love SupCom's projectile system, every bullet follows a true trajectory. That said though, I'm sure SC2 is going to be an amazing success and I hope to get as much gameplay and enjoyment out of it as I did the first one

/drool

...I mean, Sins is great and all, but for some fast Planet side action, I'll be away for a bit when SC2 comes out.

One of the Starcraft Lead devs has outlined a little bit about the design philosophy of the game. I'm just going to go ahead an post it here, it's interesting to see just what their intentions are with the series. You have to admit, it must be REALLY tough to have to follow up on a game like Starcraft

Dustin Browder:

well if the game does not (yeah right :LOL:)sell good they always have WOW

Yeah, I remember all the rumours circulating at the time about how "Dude, of course it's going to be World of Starcraft. Seriously, they'd make more money that way, and you think it's going to be Starcraft II?"

And I just kept thinking that a) That would do nothing except upset their SC fanbase, and When you've got an absolutely huge juggernought like WoW, you don't want to create your own competition to it.

But yeah, Blizzard have enough money coming in right now to pretty much bankroll anything they want to any extent they want. Personally I imagine that they must be at least working on one or two new franchises to add to their properties. Or possibly Diablo III, who knows. I can't imagine that SC2 is all they're into right now.

Throwing my hat behind this. I'm looking forward to SC2, but mainly due to the continuing story. I've always liked Blizzard RTS's because they do a better job at storytelling than a lot of others, and even though the MP gameplay style doesn't appeal to me a whole lot, it's hard to say their games aren't polished and unfun to play though the campaigns

It's ironic that their RTS series has a much better storyline to it than their RPG series (Diablo).

Diablo was made by a separate company.

Fair point. Blizzard North didn't even exist until about 6 months before Diablo shipped, and even then you really can't say they were the same company except in name really.

I am rather sceptical about the new starcraft. These days, I enjoy RTS's with more depth to them than building a base and spamming a couple hundred zerglings or marines to go entertain my opponants, gameplay wise, not story wise. That is why i enjoy RTS's like Sins or the Total War series, or Supreme Commander. They all have their unique standings. Starcraft 2 is worrying me because, although there is new UI and units and some new strategies and such, there just doesnt seem to be enough to set it apart from other fast paced RTS's like command and conquer or others like it. I loved the original starcraft, dont get me wrong, hell, i still play it from time to time, but what made starcraft good back in the day was how damned original it was compared to all of the other RTS's, in story and gameplay. Today there are plenty of RTS's with story and original gameplay and i am not sure if blizzard will be able to surpass some of them. Personally, i highly doubt i will enjoy Starcraft 2 more than Sins because i have kinda moved away from fast paced, straightforward attack attack ATTACK AND ATTACK SOME MORE style RTS's. I enjoy using diplomcy, markets, multiple armies, and good ol' time to beat my games, not selecting 75 zealots and 50 dragoons and clicking on the enemy base. Now, if Starcraft 2 does includes some of these options, i may be convinced of its second coming, but, seeings as how the Zerg have never really been all too good at banking and negotiating...well...i cant see that happening without a few thousand more evolutions.

Those words just scared the shit out of me. Think about what he is saying there, "working on balance between low/medium-skill players and pros who are concerned about multiple-building selection because they think it reduce skill." What the hell is he saying??

Are they gonna make a new SC which take advantage of the many great advances on the RTS genre, like better UI, stacking orders, unit/abilities/economy management etc, which greatly eases micro-ing units and allow for more epic battles, with two or more players engaging in combined arms battles giving different orders to differents units while also handling all of their units' diferent abilities to great effect, and at the same time managing their economies and buildings their bases??

Or are we gonna be sent back in time 12 years where the whole point of a RTS game was to build a base, build a army, and just send the whole blob of units on a B-line straight to the enemy base, simply because you couldnt do anything more complicated with the clumsy/limited UI??

I hope they don't listen to those micro-hungry fans that just want a new SC with more microing.

The hype machine seems not to be working for me. The more I see about SC2, the less excited I get.

What Blizzard sees is tens of millions of brainless fans with cartoon hypnotized eyes shambling zombie style towards cash registers with boxes of StarCraft 2 mumbling "must buy StarCraft 2 ... must buy StarCraft 2 ..." Sadly, I will certainly be shambling along in that line. Sure, I'll buy it; no doubt of it.

But ... I agree with most of the misgivings expressed above. No zoom? Can I live with that in a state of the art game? Be hard.

Will the game play change? Always against human players you were either rushing or fighting off a rush, and if you both survived then wildly skirmishing over resources while flinging everything you could spam out into the fray. Only rarely did you get to ascend the research and tech tree for an elegant game. Yes, indeed, I really liked the single player campaign (with those nice cheat codes -- I have no shame); but online play was always a big thud for me.

What I spent the most time doing with SC was dinking around with the modding tools and making maps. Big software tinker toy.

SC2 will have to do until World of StarCraft comes along. I'm not holding my breath.

I completely agree with what you said. That's the same way I feel. I've grown tired of the Starcraft, Warcraft, and Command & Conquer formula. I really like the addition of economies, borders/culture, markets, diplomacy, and all that. It adds a lot of depth that the other older formula RTS games don't have. I hesitate to call them fast action because Rise of Nations/Legends were both deep games and could have bouts lasting minutes or hours depending on your choices. Sins is a bit slower, but the new patch may change that. Starcraft was revolutionary back in its day, but I have this bad feeling that Blizzard just wants to appeal to its long term almost-religiously devoted fans and this will result in an "Epic Failure" of the size of Unreal Tournament 3. It just seems like they're being too narrowly focused and are going to miss out on how the genre has evolved.


That's also what has me voicing concerns and unable to get excited about SC2. It seems like they're only listening to the hardcore players (they say they're not, but media/press interview misdirection is a popular tool used to push modern games). You can't even voice concerns where Blizzard checks for them because you get immediately smashed by all the fans. Micro was one of the things that always ruined Blizzard RTS games for me since I'd constantly have to give orders and hold my units hands through battle. I remember when the Medics first came out they wouldn't heal unless you told them too (I think that became automated after a patch, but I forget). I absolutely love the way micro has been put into Sins since you can let the units use their abilities on their own (autocast) instead of holding their hand through every battle. Furthermore, you can even give a degree of automation to macro activity too (auto placement), which is very nice. I'm definitely a macro player. I don't send units on a b-line to the enemy base. I flank, create traps, and rotate forces appropriately to keep my opponent on their toes. With Starcraft all that was never possible. About the most strategy that could be employed was with the Terran tanks and Zerg lurkers.


Same here. What's worse is all these die hard, religiously-devoted Blizzard fans who immediately pounce on any concerns, constructive criticism, or suggestions that may pop up. It's gotten to the point where I can't even make a comment or hope about something getting added to make me want to play that game because the fans immediately insult and attack you for "bashing" their favorite game that hasn't even come out yet. I really don't like those kinds of fan bases. It's all very hostile. Question Blizzard and it's like questioning God. I'm really tired of that and it's driving me further and further away.

I'm by no means a religiously-devoted Blizzard fan, but I mean look at it this way:

Starcraft has a pretty strong following, even today. As the saying goes, why fix what isn't broken? It's worked for them, and all they're trying to do is recreate the same gameplay experience that their large existing fanbase wants with a more modern game - not a completely new gameplay design.

If you read their press releases and whatnot, this is pretty evident. They always reference the original, and they don't make it a secret that they pretty much want SC2 played the same way SC1 was.

Game sequels are usually never drastically different from their predecessors. I can't say I blame them for doing this either, they pretty much know it's going to attract a lot of attention *just* by staying with the same formula, they would actually have more unknowns by going in a new direction (though I'm sure it would still sell well).

In the end, it's a business, and if they know it's going to be well received because of the huge popularity of the original Starcraft, why would they try to mess with what worked for them? I realize that a lot of people (myself included, really) would love for them to make an RTS with a few more modern features that are gaining popularity (like the SupCom-style zoom), but I don't think that's a very realistic thing to expect out of a game whose whole premise is remaining faithful to the original gameplay style

Starcraft = unitspam ?!?!?!?!!

No offence at all but...have your watched or played any high level starcraft games? WCG, Blizzar invitation?

It's mostly about micro and strategy, It's a game of SKILLS! unless you're talking about the noob "fastest maps" ...koreans look down on ppl who play those.

As an asian, I'm really offended that u diss up starcraft like that....a game that lasted for almost 10 years and became the soul of RTS in asia...

Yeah...go watch some starcraft highlights on youtube...

sorry about the rudeness.