|
I expect this to get a lot of views and heat. Here we go.
First I should define failure. I have no doubt that Starcraft 2 will sell a ridiculous number of copies. Blizzard is pretty much guaranteed a huge market success from the Starcraft 2 title. Even if the game was just a half-assed attempt with no attention to gameplay or balance, the title Starcraft 2 itself is enough to set sales records solely on the name itself, albeit Blizzard’s reputation would be tarnished. However, compared to a pay-to-play model like WOW, SC2 from this business perspective is unable to achieve a profit margin anywhere near the profitability of WOW. Implementing a free Bnet is required and expected, and charging for multiplayer service is an undoubtedly unpopular and probably harmful move.
But let’s put that aside and say that SC2 is a decent game. It cannot be a truly amazing game for several reasons. One is that, from its very core, it is simply a remake of the same Starcraft game we have grown to love over its highly extended life span. The same game that people have spent countless hours playing, analyzing, conditioning, assimilating and engaged in, to the point where it has become an embodiment of second nature. For most people, this appeal does not last forever, and they eventually move on to other games to entertain themselves. To a minority (ie. TL community) they continue this pursuit to achieve excellence in this game, honing their mechanics, timing, and game sense to every higher levels. It eventually reaches a point where the game no longer presents novel scenarios for creative thinking, but rather becomes an exercise in rhythm and getting into the flow of the game.
There is no point in criticizing those “less hardcore” segment of the gamer population. I experienced this phenomenon myself, when at some point the game became an exercise in hand-eye coordination and mechanics, almost something that seemed more like work than entertainment. I guess part of that has to do with my own lazy, casual personality and approach to life. Nevertheless, the loyal Starcraft community values this kind of speed and dexterity to win. Starcraft 2 is pretty much the same game, with new units, buildings and tech trees. Therefore, even before it is released, the game is already stale. Players are familiar with the same overall pattern of gameplay, feel, and mental preparation. Sure, new strategies and trends will emerge, but it feels too much like the original game, a property that developers and the fan base aimed for intentionally, no doubt.
The player base will be composed of those new to the Starcraft franchise, the still active SC1 veterans, and the majority should be people who played Starcraft before, stopped playing, and will probably revisit SC2 for its brand name and to relive fond memories long ago. Most of the population, just as before, will give it a try, and move on relatively quickly once they realize the amount of time, effort and training required to become competitive.
Personally, I would have liked to see Starcraft 2 really take some new risks and innovate with some daring features. An example I could use, though I’m sure most would vehemently disagree, is to one-up the race count from WC3 and put in 5 races. Balance may be impossible, but you never know. Starcraft with new units, graphics, and abilities is still just Starcraft with new units, graphics and abilities. Updating a legendary, dated game is not enough to really invigorate the market, and remind everyone why Blizzard is the best. Truthfully, pretty much any company could try to do the same thing, and the most notable difference would probably only lie in balance.
But SC2 will not suffer all that much from staleness or a shrinking community. Offering a well designed, integrated ladder in Bnet 2 is sure to do wonders in sustaining a healthy competitive scene. However, I predict that SC2 “standard melee mode” will be easily eclipsed by a well made, highly popular UMS, ala DOTA.
I have many good reasons for this prediction. SC2’s map editor has been promised to be a gigantic leap forward from the already very powerful WC3 map editor. I do have very high expectations for this tool, and will probably be blown away by its features. Even if I myself do not have the knowledge or expertise to fully exploit the complexities of the program, there is a large community of map-makers full of creative talent that can.
SC and SC2 are mostly designed and played in a one-on-one format. While this is easily the most balanced and competitive set-up, from a player’s perspective, it simply is not as fun as playing in a team game or larger FFA with multiple players in one game. 5v5, whether in DOTA, CS, or whatever, is just that much more enjoyable when you can share your clutch plays and teamwork elements with many others, also introducing a social aspect to it.
SC2 will be forced to take itself extremely seriously from the very start. Balance is number one, while players’ demands may conflict, and changes could be expected to come very slowly and cautiously. Compare this with a custom made map, where the creator pretty much has the freedom to do whatever they wish. Updates, improvements, additions, and tweaks can be made quickly. Editors have very high flexibility in making the game more enjoyable for players. If large mistakes are made, they are better tolerated then when introduced via an official patch to the serious business game of ladder.
Shortly after SC2 is released, there will be a huge influx of map editors trying to make the next DOTA for SC2. It will most likely be a team format. Many will be simple rip-offs of the general DOTA gameplay, but I am much more excited for new and original formats. People will be inspired by DOTA’s success, and perhaps see if they are able to make their own. Soon, as from the points listed above, SC2’s popularity will stagnate and slowly dwindle, and some new custom map will eclipse the ladder game in terms of popularity and “casual” tolerance. Something that is more enjoyable to the general market, and that less resembles “work”. A team will be built around this UMS game, to build, polish and balance it to remarkable levels. It will likely reach a level of quality enough to be a standalone game, and LAN cafes will advertise tourneys for that UMS over the SC2 ladder game.
You heard it here first. What cha think?
I guess I'll also throw in that I've never played SC2, nor do I have that much interest in its development.
  
|
Wow 13:37 on April fools day. This isn't a troll post or April fools day joke either, in case it might look like it.
|
United States889 Posts
I'm gonna be straight with you...you probably shoulda kept that last line to yourself. The fact that you haven't played the game or have kept up with its development pretty much makes everything else you said lack any credibility whatsoever. It may well be as you say, but given that you know less than the average TL.netter does about the game by your own admission makes your entire post conjecture.
|
On April 01 2010 13:37 Shiverfish wrote:it is simply a remake of the same Starcraft game we have grown to love over its highly extended life span.
This is where I stopped reading.
|
what a load of bullshit. arrian has already pointed out why this blog is a waste. someone please close this, it makes me sick
|
On April 01 2010 13:55 DanceCommander wrote:
what a load of bullshit. arrian has already pointed out why this blog is a waste. someone please close this, it makes me sick
mr.defensive over here b/c he clearly just got a beta key lol
|
On April 01 2010 14:00 Zapdos_Smithh wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2010 13:55 DanceCommander wrote:
what a load of bullshit. arrian has already pointed out why this blog is a waste. someone please close this, it makes me sick mr.defensive over here b/c he clearly just got a beta key lol
i dont think defensive is the right word.
|
On April 01 2010 13:37 Shiverfish wrote:
I guess I'll also throw in that I've never played SC2, nor do I have that much interest in its development.
You and your blog are doomed to failure.
|
Well, I think there might be a lot of incorrect conjectures in your blog post, but here is the one that I think it the most inaccurate.
You claim that BW, at this point, is only played for the speed and dexterity, and that there is no room for creative thinking. I completely disagree. I think the exact opposite: that the reason BW is still going where other games have failed is that there is a strategic depth that surpasses every other game. There has been consistent meta game development from the moment it was released until even today.
SC2 seems to put an even greater emphasis on strategic depth rather than mechanics like micro and macro, leading me to believe that it might have even greater esports potential than BW.
|
T.O.P.
Hong Kong4685 Posts
You can't expect Starcraft 2 to be made to fit your needs, especially if you don't like Starcraft 1. There are plenty of other RTS games out there that might be better suited for you. Starcraft was made for a different type of person.
You sound like a guy that would like Dota imo.
|
April Fools! ohwait =(
Assuming your denial of this being an april fool's joke is genuine, I don't even know where to begin with this one.
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
Meh, well-written but definitely the wrong site to put this at...
Also lol @ your time and date posted ^_^
You had some credibility in my eyes until the last line...
|
konadora
Singapore66163 Posts
On April 01 2010 14:04 lolaloc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2010 13:37 Shiverfish wrote:
I guess I'll also throw in that I've never played SC2, nor do I have that much interest in its development. You and your blog are doomed to failure.
This
Before I got my beta key (derp), I thought it was absolute garbage. After playing it, it's still a piece of crap, but not as bad as I thought.
It's still playable and makes for fun games (especially 2v2s), but spectator-friendliness-wise, it'll never compare to SC1.
|
He has a fair point, but then again in any debate its not just the fair point but how far it goes to support you.
Starcraft may have become less of making new strategies and into more reactions and timing. In a sense this could be inevitable for any game. But name me a game that doesn't have this nature? (Chess after decades has also become mastered, just that the skill level is much wider)
In any case, a couter argument can be easily built by your idea of hand-eye coordination. In a game, depending on who you play, you can easily learn about a person through their style.
This may not occur all the time, but eventually through playing continuously, you can tell how someone is deep down through playing them across the monitor. The other person has nothing to hide, for he/she is behind the safety of the monitor, so in a sense he/she can show you his/her personality through the game. (This can be disproven because some people might not have the mechanics, but generally you can learn about people through the game).
For example, many of my friends who play really show off their style. My pasifist friend does relatively safe builds. On the other hand, my outgoing friend is more well rounded and likes to play risky, which really reflects their character. (Note: This can be disproven, but I notice this with some people)
The reason Starcraft allows this is through its balance and variability despite figuring it out. Thinking about what a person does, how to respond, how to counter back after an attack etc is really exciting in that your having a mental battle with someone else, thats different than any other thing. (people who play 1v1 sports can relate to this idea of a mind battle between two people). I have no doubt that Starcraft 2 once balanced can also have this potential.
Other games have a lower ability to do this because many games are biased towards certain styles. Massing tanks in C and C is almost auto win, so everyone seems to do it. Point is Starcraft has that factor that allows people to learn about each other, without actually meeting them. This combined with the fun factor, the hand-eye corrdination and gamer base, makes the game truly great.
|
MAAAAAAAAAAN you couldnt be more wrong. did you just enter the video game world today? let me break it down for you.
the entirety of your opinion is contrived because you believe that because a sequel is similar to its predecessor, then its stale. this is WEIRD of you to think, and i must assume you've never looked at sales for other video games.
for example, every single FPS ever made is similar to the other. same rhythm same set of gameplay ideas. HOWEVER the sales for FPS's keep getting higher and higher ever single year, because tiny things are improved on, smoothness, graphics, incorporating multiplayer elements, etc etc.
you dont have any idea how to make an argument, it comes down to the establishment of 3 things
ethos
pathos
logos
you have failed to establish a foundation for ANY of these things, therefore you will convince absolutely no one of your opinion. ^_^
|
On April 01 2010 14:14 SniperVul5 wrote:Show nested quote +He has a fair point, but then again in any debate its not just the fair point but how far it goes to support you.
Starcraft may have become less of making new strategies and into more reactions and timing. In a sense this could be inevitable for any game. But name me a game that doesn't have this nature? (Chess after decades has also become mastered, just that the skill level is much wider)
In any case, a couter argument can be easily built by your idea of hand-eye coordination. In a game, depending on who you play, you can easily learn about a person through their style.
This may not occur all the time, but eventually through playing continuously, you can tell how someone is deep down through playing them across the monitor. The other person has nothing to hide, for he/she is behind the safety of the monitor, so in a sense he/she can show you his/her personality through the game. (This can be disproven because some people might not have the mechanics, but generally you can learn about people through the game).
For example, many of my friends who play really show off their style. My pasifist friend does relatively safe builds. On the other hand, my outgoing friend is more well rounded and likes to play risky, which really reflects their character. (Note: This can be disproven, but I notice this with some people)
The reason Starcraft allows this is through its balance and variability despite figuring it out. Thinking about what a person does, how to respond, how to counter back after an attack etc is really exciting in that your having a mental battle with someone else, thats different than any other thing. (people who play 1v1 sports can relate to this idea of a mind battle between two people). I have no doubt that Starcraft 2 once balanced can also have this potential.
Other games have a lower ability to do this because many games are biased towards certain styles. Massing tanks in C and C is almost auto win, so everyone seems to do it. Point is Starcraft has that factor that allows people to learn about each other, without actually meeting them. This combined with the fun factor, the hand-eye corrdination and gamer base, makes the game truly great.
it is nice to be able to see someones personality through their gameplay, but im not quite sure you understand what hand eye coordination is lol n__n
|
I seriously hope this is an April Fool's, or else the only joke here is the op's ignorance.
|
On April 01 2010 14:20 mOnion wrote:
MAAAAAAAAAAN you couldnt be more wrong. did you just enter the video game world today? let me break it down for you.
the entirety of your opinion is contrived because you believe that because a sequel is similar to its predecessor, then its stale. this is WEIRD of you to think, and i must assume you've never looked at sales for other video games.
for example, every single FPS ever made is similar to the other. same rhythm same set of gameplay ideas. HOWEVER the sales for FPS's keep getting higher and higher ever single year, because tiny things are improved on, smoothness, graphics, incorporating multiplayer elements, etc etc.
you dont have any idea how to make an argument, it comes down to the establishment of 3 things
ethos
pathos
logos
you have failed to establish a foundation for ANY of these things, therefore you will convince absolutely no one of your opinion. ^_^
lol I have my doubts that most people consider ethos, pathos and logos while arguing things. Regardless I agree he's wrong. Think about any popular video games and their sequels.... they succeed because they are similar enough to catch the same crowd and different enough to offer new challenges. SC2 is no different.
|
SC2 is not doomed to failure, but all I know is that it won't be as fun as the first one. I will still play it though; that's all I have to say.
|
You do realize that there will be ALOT of new faces, and seeing as how majority of the bw players played like 5-7 years I would think, why would this be any different for the new generation of players, along with the old generation that chooses to continue to play. What a fail blog  .
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
