Pearce: SCII should be "compelling" for all

By Tom Bramwell Published 28 May, 2010

"It's just like World of Warcraft, right?"

Blizzard co-founder Frank Pearce believes that everyone who has a crack at StarCraft II should be able to get into it because the game accommodates players on a number of levels.

The real-time strategy game has a reputation for its intimidating speed and depth, but Pearce isn't concerned.

"It's just like World of Warcraft, right?" he told Eurogamer this week.

"With WOW there's all these different types of play, and by far the most intimidating type of play is the PvP element, right? Whether it's open world or Battlegrounds or arenas, it's the most intimidating part.

"But StarCraft II should be a compelling experience for everyone, regardless of how deeply they want to partake of it, just as WOW has compelling experiences depending on how you want to play it."

One example of that is the way the single-player campaign is constructed, with each map offering its own unique challenges. (Check out our hands-on StarCraft II preview to learn about The Dig and Welcome to the Jungle scenarios.)

"Totally. If all we wanted you to do was build up your forces and sweep in and destroy your opponent's base, we don't need to do a lot to design that, and you can get that experience in skirmish against the AI of different skill levels anyway," Pearce said when asked if he saw each map as a sort of puzzle.

"We wanted to make sure that the single-player was different. I mean, it's 29 missions: if you had to play 29 missions of 'build your base and sweep in and destroy things', it would potentially get very boring. We wanted to make sure it was engaging throughout."

StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty is due out for PC and Mac on 27th July.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000. Follow him on Twitter.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (16) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Quixz #1 2 years ago

    Bring it on!

  • davisorle #2 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 20:44:35 16-04-2012

  • Hantheman #3 2 years ago

    People will disagree with this because they're LEET! But Blizzard have it right, just like Super Street Fighter 4, games need to have both sides, the opportunity to go hardcore but a strong basic level for hose who work full-time to pick up and enjoy it.

  • abigsmurf #4 2 years ago

    I'm not convinced this game will be accessible online to people who are rubbish. The problem with ranking is that 'new' players get paired against rubbish players. These 'new' players may be veterans re-installing, people who played the beta or just naturally good players.

    They also need to make efforts to ensure a good, friendly community. I doubt anyone wants a community like that of DotA (except maybe dota players). You get flamed into oblivion if you're a newbie. You get flamed into oblivion if you're not good. You get flamed into oblivion if you are winning 'in the wrong way'. Generally not a nice game to play in public matches.

  • mingster #5 2 years ago

    Sorry a bigsmurf you are wrong.
    They won't be people re-installing the game as you would need to buy a brand new copy of the game to reinstall it iunder a different Battlenet name.
    Battlenet also logs how many games you've already played so you you won't be playing a against people whohave played more games than you oir are better than you.
    It has rankings and levels for everyone from complete noob through to Pro.
    You will be paired with someone of the same skill level.
    The matchmaking is better than any multiplayer matchmaking on any other online game ever.
    It has a perfect ladder system.

  • Avarice36 #6 2 years ago

    @abigsmurf

    if the player was any good at his placement matches he would not get paired with rubbish players

  • ChaK #7 2 years ago

    I suck donkey balls at RTS. they'd need to make a 'I WIN' button for me to win a MP match

  • Slipstream #8 2 years ago

    I think he means the original Warcraft and not World of Warcraft, I know he's talking in terms of accessibility but because they require different gameplay mechanics they are still worlds apart.

    Starcraft is primarily an RTS in Space. A genre and setting that I cannot stand. But I can definitely get its appeal for those who do.

  • abigsmurf #9 2 years ago

    @mingster

    I'll believe it doesn't mismatch rubbish people when I see it. In my experience with ladders and matchmaking for types of games I suck at is that once you get to a constant level of suck, you find every other battle is against someone who is either a good newbie or someone who was misranked (quite easy if you have a particularly tough ranking opponent or a bad streak) and has to steam-roll 4-5 rubbish people to get back to the level he should be at.

  • geeza2020 #10 2 years ago

    wheres warcraft 4?

  • Rubarack #11 2 years ago

    They didn't even mention multiplayer because they realise it's impossible to sort this out. Newcomers to Starcraft will come in just the same as people who have played 100,000,000 hours of the original and both will play against people who have played 10,000 hours and as a result of their inexperience get pushed to the bottom of SC leagues.

    The single player sounds interesting, not sure I can overcome my Actiblizard loathing to buy it though.

  • butler` #12 2 years ago

    abigsmurf

    there won't be much in game slandering like in CS/WOW/whatever else simply because 99% of people are too busy playing the game

    if you're spending time to type unless you're SlayerS_`BoxeR12131!1 you're going to lose.

  • sonicgoo #13 2 years ago

    As I understand it, the game takes into account the singleplayer/skirmish/practice games you play beforehand. It even measures how fast you click and such, and out of that builds your first ranking.

  • Demiath #14 2 years ago

    RTSs belongs to a previous era of gaming to me (C&C Generals was the "I don't care anymore" moment for me personally), but I really appreciate how Blizzard seems to be hard at work experimenting with the singleplayer both as a mode onto itself and as an introduction (through various means) to the online experience.

  • craziii #15 2 years ago

    @abigsmurf maybe 1 v 1 isn't for you if you constantly get owned. do you improve at all? you might wanna make some friends and plays some 2v2 or 3v3. less daunting? the game is meant to be fun.

  • Buran #16 2 years ago

    Uh, no. I remember that the last mission of Brood War (called "Omega";) took me 9 hours to finish. And for my experience with the SC II, the game looks like pretty hardcore.

    RTS games are really hardcore; in a online fps when you lose, you still have your little achievements, as to take a flag, destroy a enemy position, etc. But in a rts, when you get crushed, you get crushed, there's no sense of achievement at all: is all or nothing.