Jump to navigation

Table of contents

Page Previous 1 2 3 Next

Sponsored by Alienware tracer
Advertisement

StarCraft II First Impressions

PC First Impressions by Oli Welsh

13 March, 2008

Page 1 of 3. Page 2 ->

StarCraft II is fast. Really, really fast. But lead designer Dustin Browder talks faster. The bald-headed, sharp-eyed veteran of Command & Conquer titles, hired in by Blizzard to take command of this sequel to its decade-old real-time strategy warhorse, jumps into questions halfway through and peppers you with rattling bursts of ideas and arguments. It's like he's involved in a constant game of StarCraft II in his head, where precision, pre-emption, and speed of execution are absolutely everything.

Blizzard gathered press at its California HQ this week to reveal the Zerg, the last of the classic trinity of races from the 1998 original. With all three races in place, there was also the first chance to try out the essential core of the game: blisteringly quick multiplayer matches between the dogged Terrans, hi-tech Protoss and the mutating bio-weapons of the Zerg. Although more than half the units in the game are new, that core - from interface to perspective to mechanics to, most importantly, speed - remains virtually unchanged from the one that birthed one of the longest-lasting multiplayer communities, and most active eSports scenes, that gaming has ever seen. Whether building bases and armies, or micro-managing units in battle, in StarCraft II the fastest mouse always wins.

Weren't they ever tempted to slow it down a bit? "No! Not StarCraft," says Browder. "There's something to be said for that kind of fun. You know it's just, 'Gogogo! Oh I lost. Gogogogogo! Oh I won! Gogogogo.' And then you just play again and again. I think that was a kind of fun that we wanted to create again, that the team wanted to do, and it's certainly the kind of RTS that I prefer."

Lead producer Chris Sigaty - the laid-back, long-haired yin to Browder's yang - reinforces the point: Blizzard at no point considered reinventing this particular wheel. "One of the things we hear is, what's the new big thing you're bringing to reinvent RTS? And I'm like, well, we're not," he states flatly.

'StarCraft II' Screenshot 1

The flying Terrans attack the girly Protoss. Oli didn't do these captions - he had to dash to the airport - so they will be rubbish and uninformed.

"We made a conscious decision not to... One of the things that played into our decision was just how popular the original game still is. Had it been different, had it spiked up and sold well and then disappeared... maybe putting first-person elements might have been something that we'd considered. But we never considered that. Stay true to the original; stick with the original three races; make them more diverse."

True to the original it certainly is. Familiarity is instant to anyone who's played StarCraft, and to some extent Warcraft III: the screen layout, the tight camera that apes the original's isometric display, the slight sense of claustrophobia and panic, the simple but effective unit designs, the tendency away from methodical empire-building and towards sudden, heart-in-mouth raids, and of course the seemingly limitless capacity for micro-management that allows the 300-actions-per-minute Korean pro-gamers to manipulate vast armies on several fronts on an almost unit-by-unit basis.

It's both intoxicating and intimidating. There's certainly an adrenalised rush to it - and the astonishingly vivid, distinctive and beautifully animated new visuals are a powerful draw. But playing against seasoned StarCraft campaigners leaves you with no time to even begin to explore the expanded possibilities of StarCraft II's more involved research and tech trees. Perhaps it's just that no-one is fully familiar with the new set-up, but deep-seated patterns seem to reassert themselves very quickly. It's a pitfall Browder is aware of, and he's working to avoid it, in part through more sophisticated map design: line of sight barriers, placing high-yield minerals behind walls of rocks that take protracted and concentrated fire to take down, and so on.

To Page 2 ->

Advertisement

Are you excited about StarCraft II: Protoss - Legacy of the Void on PC?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-50 of 64 in total | next 50 »

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
speed182
13/03/08 @ 14:13
#1
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Really looking forward to this.
Squire
13/03/08 @ 14:23
#2
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
GOTY on hype alone, I'm sure
thewolfiv
13/03/08 @ 14:38
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
i've never played the original, is it better the COH?
anomagnus
13/03/08 @ 14:38
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
kinda looking forward to it, but......

i've got a little part of me hoping blizzard will fail. It wont happen, i know, but something about them is REALLY starting to grate on me at the moment.

Anyway, roll on DOW2
konnsky
13/03/08 @ 14:40
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
OMG ZERG RUSH KEKEKE

another couple of deaths in South Korea confirmed then
Evolution
13/03/08 @ 14:44
#6
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
They aren't using the same voice actors for major characters. Minor point to a surely superb game, but one that annoys me greatly.
Krusty
13/03/08 @ 14:45
#7
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Never played the original either.... took me a while to really get into RTS

Sounds fun, although any noobs are going to die extremely quickly by the sounds of it.
mingster
13/03/08 @ 14:45
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
/wants badly

still no news on release date though guesses xmas this year.
GordonCaladan
13/03/08 @ 14:49
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Wow 10 yrs ago already is it? kkk looking forward to this alright.
UncleLou
13/03/08 @ 14:52
#10
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I want this. A lot.

Great to hear they won't neglect the single-player camopaign,too.
figgis
13/03/08 @ 14:56
#11
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Sounds exactly like the first game, hopefully unit control will be easier. Although I loved the first one this sounds dull, still Blizzard usually come up with the goods.
gmjapan
13/03/08 @ 15:08
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
reading the previews and watching the vids around it looks and sounds just like the original... what a waste. Starcraft was so incredibly well received and evolved. Seems like they are making a Starcraft 1.5 not SC2.

Nill
13/03/08 @ 15:09
#13
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
i've never played the original, is it better the COH?

In a word: yes. It's perfection, or at least as close as anyone has got.

CoH on the other hand is far from perfect, just have a look at the latest balance-patch coming out soon (2.300) - it's frickin' huge! And that's setting aside all bugs, connection-problems, frequent server-crashes, lacking features etc - but I don't think those necessarily affect how good the game is at its basic level, which is still brilliant.

CoH plays entirely different from Starcraft though; there's definitely room for loving both of them, but in different ways.
ProtoformX
13/03/08 @ 15:39
#14
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I hope Blizzard use some kind of ranking system like Xbox Live's for Battle.net. I wasn't able to take the original online 10 years ago as I didn't have my own internet connection then so I'd love to take this online but without getting my ass kicked multiple times the minute I log in.
Seriously looking forward to the single-player though. The storyline of the original Starcraft is one of the best I've played through. Even more so having read the mini novel at the start of the manual. Better start saving for a new computer though.
JonFE
13/03/08 @ 16:07
#15
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I look forward this and will purchase on release, especially if there's a WarCraft III-style limited edition in the works :)
Dagdriver
13/03/08 @ 16:19
#16
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Frankly I have come to know Blizzard games as solid, polished craftwork - but allmost completely without any appeal to me.
Allthough the first Starcraft felt like well produced polished quality, It totally failed to catch any kind of interrest from me.

A second Starcraft will - no matter how much hype generated - will NEVER get any of my money.

I would rather play something like COH any day than this....

Kremlik
13/03/08 @ 16:38
#17
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The root problem with it is the orginal developers have now all but gone from Blizzard, and these new ones are too scared to upset the SC fanbase for the looks of the oringinal interviews they are going for the 'why change what isn't broken' excuse. However this will shoot them in the foot as the current fanbase now are ethier the tourament playing ones who will buy it in the end or the now CoH/DoW fans who may not..

C&C3 tried to break into the market with the 'old school' ways but with new multiplayer aspects such as the live feed gaming, but it's not been a massive hit as it should have been as the system is bland now, what DoW/CoH and a few others have done is add a level of customisation to units either on the fly or between matches and allowed players to play the same races and units multiple ways and how they play. What C&C3 and from the looks of SC2 are doing is giving you a semi-rigid rock/paper/sicor units and lots of them which is good up until a point, but it's no where near as flexible to what this gen of gaming is used to, this is really the case of 'less is more', I think it's to the stage now it's more about the level of customisation per unit we want more then the number.

If SC2 wants to sell '#1' well it'll be on marketing and hype, not the game itself, as the game from looks is just too far stuck in the 'old school' ways, even Wrath of Kain proves you do have to move with the times.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 13/03/08 @ 16:41
smoison
13/03/08 @ 17:23
#18
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Since the steaming pile of crap that is C&C3 sold well, I have no doubt this will do much better.

I am kind of glad they did not try to remake everything, Warcraft changed soo much I really didi not like it.

Looks very nice, and I can't wait to get back into the StarCraft Universe.


SpeedyThing
13/03/08 @ 18:22
#19
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Although I haven't been excited by any of the previews so far, Blizzard games have a habit of surprising me when I buy them. With the exception of WOW (which I eagerly awaited years before its release) I have bought all the major Blizzard games largely because there was nothing else out. And then, you realise that games don't have to be innovative to be great.

Blizzard's ability (and time and money) to polish an otherwise stale genre is second-to-none. You play them thinking "I've seen this all before", but before you know it you're hooked and awaiting the inevitable expansion pack.

I have few doubts that this will be the same, only this time I'll buy it without looking at the back of the box.

George Roper
13/03/08 @ 18:37
#20
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Conservative.

The word that sums StarCraft 2 up.

They're playing it very, very, very safe. It's simply going to be a flashier version of Starcraft 1. That might be enough for the legions of rabid fanboys but i'll still be looking in Relics corner. True innovators of the RTS genre.
FWB
13/03/08 @ 19:05
#21
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
CoH wipes the floor with SC. The latter is quick fire and limited in scope, but I can see why that attracts people. CoH has so much going for it I don't know where I'd start.

[i]but i'll still be looking in Relics corner. True innovators of the RTS genre.[/i]

Totally. SC2 looks retro next their games.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 13/03/08 @ 19:06
MrED209
13/03/08 @ 19:07
#22
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Is there simply ANY point in this game if you've never played an RTS so much you turn into that twat off of PurePwnage, though?
Melan
13/03/08 @ 19:43
#23
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
its OK by me to play a shiny version og starcraft 1. (which is still on my computer)

I have high hopes in blizzards ability to craft (get it ;) ) a superb story.

They can take their time. Get i perfect, and then get i out.
Its not like it is the only game in the world.
Lim-Dul
13/03/08 @ 20:53
#24
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Yeah, I think that Blizzard played it too safe with SC2 by the looks of it. There were times when Blizzard was pusing the envelope in certain areas, nowadays they seem to be only cashing-in on their brands because they know they could sell crap on a stick and if it was called "SomethingCraft" it'd still sell millions of copies...

I don't doubt that SC2 will be polished, awesomely balanced etc. but I don't see how it contributes to the development of the RTS genre - except for the technological advancements it seems to be stuck in 1998 gameplay-wise...

P.S. I found it funny where in one of the videos the commentator noted that "StarCraft is still a game of epic battles between huge armies" or sth. along this line. No, sir, StarCraft and any other *Craft never was about epic battles - Total Annihilation or Supreme Commander are - the *Craft series are more about medium-sized battles with a strong tactical element and a weaker strategic element, although not AS tactical as e.g.CoH.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 13/03/08 @ 20:57
TexMurphy01
13/03/08 @ 22:09
#25
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
They actually have evolved to the point where they shit money. At least it will be as polished as can be.
Jigglybean
13/03/08 @ 22:24
#26
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Yawn....looks like nothing new at all but will no doubt score well because its Blizzard. The masters of polishing t**ds
Zaelsius
13/03/08 @ 23:08
#27
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Oh, the greatness of the ignore button..! [click, click]

Now, whoever is saying Blizzard is being conservative.. well you can all go back to your "innovative" yearly EA and Ubisoft franchises. C&C is so refreshing.. heck, even Supreme Commander wasn't that revolutionary, basically a TA in steroids that requires a monster of a PC to play smoothly on today's 20"+ LCDs.

StarCraft 2 is everything StarCraft fans wish and I'm sure Blizzard will deliver. Moreover, when it finally gets released, it will run just fine on real midrange computers, like all titles by Blizzard have in the past, not to mention a Mac version from day one.
Lim-Dul
14/03/08 @ 01:37
#28
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Oh, the greatness of the ignore button..! [click, click]

Oh yeah - I love people who can't stand constructive criticism but have to have the last word anyway. ;-)

By the way: who said that you have to look for innovation in EA's or Ubisoft's franchises? 0_o

Just because others follow the same bad practice doesn't mean that Blizzard should be suddenly excused for jumping on the bandwagon.

StarCraft 2 is everything StarCraft fans wish

Yeah, you said it - it'd be nice if it was everything RTS fans in general could wish for...

even Supreme Commander wasn't that revolutionary, basically a TA in steroids that requires a monster of a PC to play smoothly on today's 20"+ LCDs.

Yep - and since 1997 there was no other game like Total Annihilation whereas there were dozens of games like the *Craft series. Besides - what do performance issues have to do with a game being innovative? Supreme Commander is the first RTS to introduce seamless zooming up to a global level and completely to-scale-units and only the second RTS after TA to sport battles on a MASSIVE scale. I don't see SC2 introducing ANYTHING new except for some "gimmicks".
Zaelsius
14/03/08 @ 01:40
#29
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
[click, click]
Lim-Dul
14/03/08 @ 01:56
#30
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
they made a name for themselves by taking someone elses good idea and making a solid game experience around it.

Which is basically the same thing Microsoft is doing but everybody hates Microsoft while loving Blizzard? ;-)

The main accomplishment of Blizzard was the creation of Battle.net. They managed to precisely hit the period where access to the internet became more and more widespread and after that they were basically done. =)

I'm also not sure if there was any ONLINE real-time dungeon crawler before Diablo... They elevated the idea of dungeon crawling to the next level. =)
CouldntResist
14/03/08 @ 02:36
#31
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Noone has made another RTS like Starcraft since Starcraft.

The core mechanics of the game may not have moved on since the original, but in that time, i've not seen any RTS that has the same frenetic pace and finely balanced races as Starcraft. To say that since it does nothing new, it must be bad, is just plain wrong. Certainly, games like DOW and COH have taken the genre to new places, but please don't equate that to taking the genre forward.

There will ALWAYS be a niche for games like Starcraft, and frankly speaking as a veteran RTS gamer, multiplayer in the DOW/COH simply does not compare to the huge cope for tactics found in competitive SC games, where every game is played differently, where thinking and adapting on the fly is crucial, and where new strategies are constantly being developed.

Anyway, am really looking forward to this. May have to quit my job and become a progamer :)...ah who am i kidding, the gf would kill me.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 14/03/08 @ 02:37
Genji
14/03/08 @ 02:50
#32
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Whether building bases and armies, or micro-managing units in battle, in StarCraft II the fastest mouse always wins."

Ah. Looks like I won't be buying this one, then. I like having time to make decisions.
Scimarad
14/03/08 @ 06:54
#33
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I agree with Genji - I think I prefer a somewhat slower style to my strategy games.
Genji
14/03/08 @ 07:13
#34
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'm sure Blizzard doesn't really care whether they get my money or not. Hell, they could make this Korea-only and still absolutely rake in the moolah.
George Roper
14/03/08 @ 08:33
#35
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@CouldntResist

Relic have done more, successfully, to take the RTS genre forward than Blizz have ever done.

Destructable scenery (CoH) alone, is proof of this.

SC2 is derivitive and safe. SC1 fans rejoyce but those of us who have moved onto better things won't be lookiing back



UncleLou
14/03/08 @ 09:15
#36
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Company of Heroes didn't invent destructible scenery for RTS games. CoH borrows heavily from Heroes: Soldiers of WWII in right about everything.

SC2 is derivitive and safe. SC1 fans rejoyce but those of us who have moved onto better things won't be lookiing back

Nonsense. There's room for both Starcraft and Company of Heroes. I've been a militant Relic fanboy ever since the first Homeworld, and I am still looking forward to SCII. And it's way too early to say anything definitive about Starcraft 2 anyhow.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 14/03/08 @ 09:15
LeD
14/03/08 @ 09:45
#37
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
This makes me want to play the original again. Any ideas if it will run on XP/Vista computer?
Nylkran
14/03/08 @ 09:48
#38
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@ LeD

I know for a fact it runs on XP. Vista might need a patch but considering the games following, I am certain it wont be hard to find.
LeD
14/03/08 @ 09:51
#39
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Cheers mate. I've found a demo so I'll give that a go in a few moments. If it goes well, I'll try to hunt down a copy.
LeD
14/03/08 @ 10:27
#40
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Seems to work ok, though it runs in a small window at the center of the screen.
George Roper
14/03/08 @ 11:35
#41
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@UncleLou

"Company of Heroes didn't invent destructible scenery for RTS games. CoH borrows heavily from Heroes: Soldiers of WWII in right about everything.

Nonsense. There's room for both Starcraft and Company of Heroes. I've been a militant Relic fanboy ever since the first Homeworld, and I am still looking forward to SCII. And it's way too early to say anything definitive about Starcraft 2 anyhow"

Heroes: Soliders of WWII eh? Such a great game, i've never even heard of it. Ah, its Codemasters...

There's nothing wrong, as such, with borrowing ideas off other developers/games as long as you do your implementation correctly and enhance the whole game as a result. It is possible to push the envelope within a genre without having to be completely original all the time but SC2 doesnt seem (to me) to present any further ideas above and beyond SC1.

SC1 hardly came out of nowhere, now did it? What did Blizz really bring to the board, in terms of features and additions over C+C? See this is where Relic is getting it right. They're taking established systems and building on them to make them even more impressive. What's going to be in SC2, along these lines? From what I can tell, it will run at higher resolutions and be even more neon than SC1...

No-one can argue against the fantastic implementation of destructable scenery in CoH. It was magnificently done, whether the idea was 'ripped off' another game or not. Where is your similiar feature in SC2? Nowhere, that's where, because it would cause too much upset to the core fanbase. It's better for Blizz to stay safe and satiate the fans (and lets face it, why wouldnt they) raking in massive amounts of cash for what will essentially be a rehash of SC1.

Even the article used the word 'conservative' and we all know what that means.

Derivitive. Safe. Sequel.

UncleLou
14/03/08 @ 12:01
#42
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I don't really see a point arguing with someone about innovation in RTS games who not only has never heard of Soldiers, but also seems to be proud of it, instead of informing himself. But then this is the internet, what did I expect. :)

Anyway, that's not the point. The point is that not every game needs to reinvent the wheel. That never was Blizzard's strength anyway. I just don't believe in the concept "game type A has been surpassed by gametype B". Company of Heroes is absolutely brilliant, no doubt, among the top 5 games of the last years, easily. But it's not inherently a "better game".

Apart form that, if you've read the article, you'll find that Blizzard obviously hasn't nearly revealed everything. Way too early for your misguided crusade.
CouldntResist
14/03/08 @ 14:22
#43
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@George Roper

Again, CoH did not take the genre forward. SC2 and CoH are different styles of RTS, and as UncleLou said, there is enough room in the genre for both. You are trying to justify your own subjective dislike of Starcraft's style of gameplay with the unfounded idea that "New" equals "Better".
George Roper
14/03/08 @ 16:12
#44
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@UncleLou

"I don't really see a point arguing with someone about innovation in RTS games who not only has never heard of Soldiers, but also seems to be proud of it, instead of informing himself. But then this is the internet, what did I expect. :)

Anyway, that's not the point. The point is that not every game needs to reinvent the wheel. That never was Blizzard's strength anyway. I just don't believe in the concept "game type A has been surpassed by gametype B". Company of Heroes is absolutely brilliant, no doubt, among the top 5 games of the last years, easily. But it's not inherently a "better game".

Apart form that, if you've read the article, you'll find that Blizzard obviously hasn't nearly revealed everything. Way too early for your misguided crusade. "

Yeah, because it looks like such a fucking STUNNER of a game. I'm all about grabbing those 70%, "Could have been better" titles.

/sigh

There's a difference between not reinvinting the wheel (see DoW/CoH) and using the same fucking wheel until it grows old and decrepit. By your standards, I guess we should all be using Quickshot 1 joysticks with a single button, yes?

And LOLLERS to your 'they still haven't revealed everything yet!!!' statement. Get real. I'll eat my own ass if they reveal significant feature upgrades/inclusions. Appeal to the SC1 market, said the Blizz man to the Board.


@CouldntResist

"Again, CoH did not take the genre forward. SC2 and CoH are different styles of RTS, and as UncleLou said, there is enough room in the genre for both. You are trying to justify your own subjective dislike of Starcraft's style of gameplay with the unfounded idea that "New" equals "Better"."

New always should equal better. You may be happy to sit in a stagnating pool of years old gameplay but i'm not and nor are many people that I know. Times have moved on. SC1, whilst it might be 'near perfectly balanced' still comes down to Rock, Paper, Scissors. The difference is in the package its delivered in, the environment, the interactivity, the bond formed with squads of troops who gain experience, the ability to pick up enemy weaponry, the ability to hole up in buildings, the ability to upgrade squads to suit a given objective (inclusion of graphical update to reflect), the ability to get behind cover, the ability to cover your escape (or attack) with smoke, the ability to dig into the terrain, the ability to attach commander units to squads, and on and on and on, to have units to scale, to have units who can smash through barriers, to have units who fucking LOOK like men, animated to the nth degree, who look and feel like theyre part of a living battlefield.

SC2 will have very little to none of the above. That's why it's old-school and will remain old-school. And that doesn't just mean i'm targetting SC2. It also applies to C+C3 and all the other derivatives that don't drive the genre forward, instead happy to sit on the fanboy fence, knowing they'll get sales on brand alone. That's why Relic deserve the correct level of recognition in what they've achieved with Company of Heroes. They didn't have a brand for that and yet look at how amazing it turned out.

I'm waiting for a CoH engine version of Dawn of War. That would be the pinnacle of sci-fi RTS.

And, for the record UncleLou, im not on a crusade. It's just that with all the jizz flying around over SC2, im starting to feel a bit sick of the sicophants and baseless opinions.

'Conservative' not my words, the words of Shaki...I mean, the words of Eurogamer.

Edited 1 times, most recently on 14/03/08 @ 16:13
UncleLou
14/03/08 @ 16:33
#45
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It's just that with all the jizz flying around over SC2, im starting to feel a bit sick of the sicophants and baseless opinions.


Nah, you're not. You're just the troll you always are, but it's funny that it annoys you so much that people are looking forward to it. It's doubly amusing that you are one of the biggest Halo fanboys around. Oh, the double standards. :)
CouldntResist
14/03/08 @ 16:53
#46
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Your entire attitude can be summed up thusly:

1. You don't like SC
2. Other people do like SC
3. These people are wrong

The majority of people who don't like SC's style of gameplay are perfectly willing to accept that this is largely a subjective choice between styles rather than an objective difference in playability.

You however, are clearly a troll, and i won't bother replying to you in future.
George Roper
14/03/08 @ 16:59
#47
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@UncleLou

Sorry if the truth of SC2 being an archaic, dinosaur, of an RTS game is causing you so much discomfort.

It must really rile that the article used words like 'conservative'. I can
just imagine your impotent fanboi rage right now :)
UncleLou
14/03/08 @ 17:11
#48
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Ah, don't worry about me, I am not such a big Starcraft fan at all. I liked the original 10 years ago, and look forward to a sequel 10 years later, but that's pretty much it. Not everybody is an irrational fanboy, you know. :)

I think the article is excellent, and the word "conservative" couldn't bother me less. You might have noticed I never argued it would be anything else.

George Roper
14/03/08 @ 18:23
#49
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Nope, never noticed. I was too busy reading accusations of me being a Halo fanboi and not anything really about the comments I made about this particular game :)

SC2 - 7/10

"Ultimately, as polished and refined as SC2 is, times have changed and Blizzard simply haven't kept up. This contributed to making it a rather hollow, if pretty, experience"
Lim-Dul
14/03/08 @ 18:44
#50
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
By they way - I mostly share George's views BUT I WAS a huge SC and WCIII fan. That is EXACTLY why I'm so disappointed with what I've seen of SC2. I want it to be brilliant, kinda a new quality, not just more of the same... We had WarCraft 1, 2 - OK, then came StarCraft and it was very "same-y" but at least it had a new sci-fi setting and all that exciting Battle.net stuff - I loved it. Then we had WarCraft III... Well - yet again it was more of the same but this time we had cool 3D graphics etc. Now we'll get SC2 and it's AGAIN more of the same... For me that's just about the "break point". I'm simply fed up with getting more of the same and mind you, I get to play LOTS of stuff I don't like because that's my job as a video game journalist... I don't want to see Blizzard turn another favorite of mine which is the *Craft series to a "just like the competition" level. I was annoyed enough by World of Warcraft which is brilliantly polished, easy to get into but all in all VERY similar, even inferior to many other MMORPGs who weren't lucky enough to have the WarCraft and Blizzard logos stamped all over them...

Ironically World of WarCraft was the first sign of Blizzard's creations going down-hill for me. Yes, it's a smash-hit but for me the popularity of something isn't synonymous to its being brilliant - good, maybe - it has to be, otherwise people wouldn't be playing it - brilliant, never.

You know - the movie "Jumper" is a smash-hit as well but is it a good movie? Not really... Even in its genre.

The reason why I'm saying this is that overexploiting the same concept can butcher it. It happened to the point-and-click adventure genre which is trying to make a comeback recently and it happened to the Star Trek franchise where in the late '90s we had THREE different continuities running parallel to each other - the last seasons of DS9, ST: Voyager and ST: TNG in the movies. Where did that leave us? ST: Enterprise was a commercial flop although it was a quite good show - better than Voyager or the last seasons of DS9 any day. All we get now will be some lame Star Trek prequel because you now - prequels and re-boots are the shit right now! (Spider Man, Batman, James Bond... The list goes on.) Paramount killed the franchise because it tried to milk it too hard and that's just what Blizzard is doing in the video game industry. Warcraft Adventures got canceled, Starcraft Ghost got canceled... I dread to think how much "life force" there's left in the franchises and each cash-in without introducing anything new besides the brands themselves is just draining it...

Comments: 1-50 of 64 in total | next 50 »

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

X View gallery