*drools*

10-year-old gameplay and pretty cutscenes, here we come!

I hope I can just extract the cutscene movies from ths one....

>> ^mysdrial:

10-year-old gameplay and pretty cutscenes, here we come!
I hope I can just extract the cutscene movies from ths one....


Good gameplay doesn't become outdated. What are you going to complain about next? How Street Fighter 4's gameplay is so 1991? Or how Civ 4 is still turn based? Or how games still have deathmatch and CTF (So 1993!!!!!!!)?

Why play chess? Its gameplay is so 15th century.

Have you even seen the cool innovative stuff they're doing for the single player campaign or the power of the new map editor?

I always preferred the more turrtley RTS's like Total annihilation and Homeworld. Starcraft was a little to twitch for my tastes. I wonder if my tastes have changed enough to like this one a bit more...Find out soon I guess

It's not 10 year old gameplay at all. Most of the units from starcraft I have been replaced for a start and the extensive online beta testing has privided literally tens of thousands of hours of game testing for blizzard that they can use to fine tune the gameplay. Starcraft II may be a sequel but the experience will be all together different from the original

>> ^acidSpine:

It's not 10 year old gameplay at all. Most of the units from starcraft I have been replaced for a start and the extensive online beta testing has privided literally tens of thousands of hours of game testing for blizzard that they can use to fine tune the gameplay. Starcraft II may be a sequel but the experience will be all together different from the original


Just the fact that the game has hard counters for every unit makes it a rock paper scissors type of situation. There is still a good deal of (from starcraft 1 reckoning) a good amount to be made for personal adaptation. But in the end, if a person has "a" unit, you are forced into "b" unit, and I never quite liked that. And I like my rts games to go on for at least a half hours. A SC game could be over in 15 mins. That said, perhaps that actually suites my lifestyle more than it did back then.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^acidSpine:
It's not 10 year old gameplay at all. Most of the units from starcraft I have been replaced for a start and the extensive online beta testing has privided literally tens of thousands of hours of game testing for blizzard that they can use to fine tune the gameplay. Starcraft II may be a sequel but the experience will be all together different from the original

Just the fact that the game has hard counters for every unit makes it a rock paper scissors type of situation. There is still a good deal of (from starcraft 1 reckoning) a good amount to be made for personal adaptation. But in the end, if a person has "a" unit, you are forced into "b" unit, and I never quite liked that. And I like my rts games to go on for at least a half hours. A SC game could be over in 15 mins. That said, perhaps that actually suites my lifestyle more than it did back then.



The whole "hard counter" system is quite exaggerated. You almost never use units in isolation, and there's always a way to outplay your opponent. For example, terran Thors "hard counter" mutalisks. Thors have ridiculous anti air range, deals splash damage, and gets + damage versus light, which is the armor type of mutalisks. Straight up, 3 or 4 thors cand destroy dozens of mutalisks.

However, if you watch some amazing high level tournament play from asia, zerg can still tech early to mutalisk against a mech heavy terran. The mobility of mutalisks are used against Thors, to harass and contain Terran. Engagements are won by using ground units like zerglings to distract the Thors while your mutas do the damage.

So no, there really are no "hard counters", aside from obvious situations like losing because you have no anti air, or cloak detection. Units are used in combination to overcome individual weaknesses, a unit can still be powerful even if your opponent has the "counter" to that unit.

O totally. I know it is exaggerated to an extent, but that is only because I am relating it to other games where there are tons of unit types and larger groups of strats to use. I never said I didn't like SC, just didn't prefer it. The part I hated the most was just the fact that offensive units were always the focus. I liked the idea of building up mega ultra buildings that win the game from your base. SC rewards those who win with their army, which has a certain appeal, but it is/was not what I was looking for in an RTS exactly. In other words, I wanted my game to start at 15 mins not be a forgone conclusion.

starcraft2 is a failure because blizzard created this game purely for south korea.
they did not want to upset south koreans by changing this game too much.
ffs the 1st ever official announcement was done in south korea!

even CnC advanced their gameplay so much.
starcraft2 is a failure.