Why, Blizzard, WHY?!?!?! - Page 5

Lord Setheris · 10-17-2008, 01:20 AM

Why not release a starcraft II where some campaign levels can and will be played online with other individuals?

That would actually be really cool.

Mirai Gen · 10-17-2008, 01:36 AM

I'm glad I suck at RTS games because that way I won't give a shit about this game at all. I can just YouTube the cinematics and Wikipedia the story and be good.

Having said thus this seems like one of those early-onset ideas that game companies come up with or something they mention gets flexed out of proportion like crazy. Like, Starcraft 2 isn't going to be complete at the beginning, it's going to be a trilogy, and by that we mean we're going to release two expansion sets and the core game is going to focus on the Terran Marines.

A PR spin later - "Starcraft 2 is going to only feature Terrans."

So I'll hold off for a while.

Amake · 10-17-2008, 02:23 AM

For practical purposes, I'll just pretend Starcraft 2 is planned to be released in 2012. It should be about then they come out with a box including all three parts for 60-70 bucks.

Though it'll be hard to wait, especially when you could get such parts as the map editor early. The map editor to which the FAQ pretty much reads

Quote:

Q: Can you -
A: Yes.

Mirai Gen · 10-17-2008, 02:29 AM

One thing I'll hand to Warcraft 3 was the mod community making all kinds of crazy shit, and I'm not just talking DOTA or Wintermaul. Starcraft 2 seems like an improvement to that, which sounds sexy. Maybe they'll fix WC3's fucked up pathing.

01d55 · 10-17-2008, 02:39 AM

WC3's map making community started in the first Starcraft. If you haven't lost your CD-keys, google Kill That Zerg. It's crazy awesome.

EDIT: They've already made pathing much better - you can see it when you use Zerglings, which are much scarier that they used to be. (I played the SCII demo at blizzcon, which was a 1v1 against either another person or an AI - separate lines, more than anything else).

Also, learning to play an RTS through the single player campaign is learning to lose. You never have to deal with the really critical game elements - every map is Turtle->build army -> crush preset AI base, or some truncation of that process.

Also, here's a preview of the campaign, at the end of which is the trilogy announcement.

Kaneda · 10-17-2008, 02:44 AM

I'm late, but this is really stupid. No matter how amazing and in depth each campaign is, once you buy the next game, you're just paying $60 for a new campaign and no real improvements in the game itself. Which is just dumb.

I'm ridiculously horrible at RTS's though, so eh.

01d55 · 10-17-2008, 02:46 AM

I strongly suspect that most people will only buy the first game. I won't even consider going past the Terran campaign if the Zerg and Protoss boxes aren't steeply discounted.

synkr0nized · 10-17-2008, 03:24 AM

Oh, I will. I'll just complain about.

Also, Krylo, thanks for continuing on with your thoughts. I have a better idea of what you mean and think I was incorrectly reading short of that / blindly ignoring that the game(s) will still be good for the sake of joining the complaining bandwagon. Which I will still do. While I set aside money for the games.

Professor Smarmiarty · 10-17-2008, 04:05 AM

To be honest I'm not sure how this will actually work.
As we are hearing full multiplayer will be instituted from the first game so while they are developing the second and third parts they can't suddenly charge unit powers.
Thus all the races ahve to be fully programmed at the start, and the year long delay is just to program campaigns. But one has to assume allt he campaigns are already plotted out as the first campaign has to tie to the last campaign and one would imagine that they tried to break up each campaign into parts before deciding to split it by race.
Is the year-long break really necessary to put together the missions?
I would suggest that this break is more dramatic than anything else and they feel the game/story will play out better if they release it that well.
Maybe it'll work. I hated the starcraft story but some people loved it and maybe they can improve it through a new version. They clearly trying somethign different so it best to wait and see.

I'm still concerned that huge campaigns will one race will get totally boring though.

Amake · 10-17-2008, 04:29 AM

Most of the time and disc space will probably be for CGI. But yeah, maybe they're aiming for Valve-levels of perfection in storytelling, scripting and whatnot. Who knows, they may even come up with something that challenges the player in other ways than putting you against overwhelming forces.

10-17-2008, 01:20 AM	#41
Lord Setheris A Guardian Angel Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 1,311	Why not release a starcraft II where some campaign levels can and will be played online with other individuals? That would actually be really cool. __________________ As a 21 year old virgin, I'm strongly opposed to anything that reminds me that people are having sex in high school.

10-17-2008, 01:36 AM	#42
Mirai Gen We are Geth. Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 14,032	I'm glad I suck at RTS games because that way I won't give a shit about this game at all. I can just YouTube the cinematics and Wikipedia the story and be good. Having said thus this seems like one of those early-onset ideas that game companies come up with or something they mention gets flexed out of proportion like crazy. Like, Starcraft 2 isn't going to be complete at the beginning, it's going to be a trilogy, and by that we mean we're going to release two expansion sets and the core game is going to focus on the Terran Marines. A PR spin later - "Starcraft 2 is going to only feature Terrans." So I'll hold off for a while. __________________

10-17-2008, 02:29 AM	#44
Mirai Gen We are Geth. Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 14,032	One thing I'll hand to Warcraft 3 was the mod community making all kinds of crazy shit, and I'm not just talking DOTA or Wintermaul. Starcraft 2 seems like an improvement to that, which sounds sexy. Maybe they'll fix WC3's fucked up pathing. __________________

10-17-2008, 02:39 AM	#45
01d55 Not 55 years old. Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 2,098	WC3's map making community started in the first Starcraft. If you haven't lost your CD-keys, google Kill That Zerg. It's crazy awesome. EDIT: They've already made pathing much better - you can see it when you use Zerglings, which are much scarier that they used to be. (I played the SCII demo at blizzcon, which was a 1v1 against either another person or an AI - separate lines, more than anything else). Also, learning to play an RTS through the single player campaign is learning to lose. You never have to deal with the really critical game elements - every map is Turtle->build army -> crush preset AI base, or some truncation of that process. Also, here's a preview of the campaign, at the end of which is the trilogy announcement. Last edited by 01d55; 10-17-2008 at 02:45 AM.

10-17-2008, 03:24 AM	#48
synkr0nized synk-ism Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: throughout the Wired Posts: 6,857	Not a happy move, but I suppose it is still SC. Oh, I will. I'll just complain about. Also, Krylo, thanks for continuing on with your thoughts. I have a better idea of what you mean and think I was incorrectly reading short of that / blindly ignoring that the game(s) will still be good for the sake of joining the complaining bandwagon. Which I will still do. While I set aside money for the games. __________________ Find love.

10-17-2008, 02:44 AM	#46
Kaneda Pitch black and covered in soot. Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Bennington, Vermont Posts: 729	I'm late, but this is really stupid. No matter how amazing and in depth each campaign is, once you buy the next game, you're just paying $60 for a new campaign and no real improvements in the game itself. Which is just dumb. I'm ridiculously horrible at RTS's though, so eh.

10-17-2008, 02:46 AM	#47
01d55 Not 55 years old. Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 2,098	I strongly suspect that most people will only buy the first game. I won't even consider going past the Terran campaign if the Zerg and Protoss boxes aren't steeply discounted.

10-17-2008, 04:05 AM	#49
Professor Smarmiarty Sent to the cornfield Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: K-space Posts: 9,758	To be honest I'm not sure how this will actually work. As we are hearing full multiplayer will be instituted from the first game so while they are developing the second and third parts they can't suddenly charge unit powers. Thus all the races ahve to be fully programmed at the start, and the year long delay is just to program campaigns. But one has to assume allt he campaigns are already plotted out as the first campaign has to tie to the last campaign and one would imagine that they tried to break up each campaign into parts before deciding to split it by race. Is the year-long break really necessary to put together the missions? I would suggest that this break is more dramatic than anything else and they feel the game/story will play out better if they release it that well. Maybe it'll work. I hated the starcraft story but some people loved it and maybe they can improve it through a new version. They clearly trying somethign different so it best to wait and see. I'm still concerned that huge campaigns will one race will get totally boring though.

10-17-2008, 04:29 AM	#50
Amake Keeper of the new Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: A place without judgment Posts: 4,506	Most of the time and disc space will probably be for CGI. But yeah, maybe they're aiming for Valve-levels of perfection in storytelling, scripting and whatnot. Who knows, they may even come up with something that challenges the player in other ways than putting you against overwhelming forces. __________________ Hope insistent, trust implicit, love inherent, life immersed