<!--quoteo(post=1628906:date=May 24 2007, 06:54 AM:name=Swiftspear)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Swiftspear @ May 24 2007, 06:54 AM) [snapback]1628906[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->You're practically saying that all you hear coming out of the orchestra is a bunch of sound to a room full of music enthusiasts. I can respect that you don't personally like RTS games, but your rationalizations are pretty close to blasphemous against all gamers. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> No, actually he is saying what a lot of us (gamers) are saying: that we love "orchestral music", but why is it being played through a gramophone? RTSs are the gramophone: the genre is old, played out, and has seen its time, as with FPS (to a lesser degree though). As a long-time RTS and FPS player, I am capable of making this statement unbiasedly. Next-Gen gamers are looking for something more: something that breaks the boundaries of any genre by encapsulating <b>every genre</b>: the RTS, FPS, and MMO genres all into one game. The future of gaming will look something like your standard eye-candy FPS mixed in with your real time strategy elements of an RTS, combined with the multiplayability, scalability, and character depth of an MMO; a gaming world that mimics the visual, logical, and chronological characteristics of our own or any conceivable reality. And so, we, the concerned, are simply posing the question that, if Blizzard is to be (or wants to be) an international leader and progressor in the gaming industry, then why have they spent (and will continue to spend) so much time developing a game that is clearly of an "ex-gen" genre? It's because they're not interested in innovation when it gets in the way of profits; they have their target audience and the sales from them, and who could blame them? Profits drive industry. And its this (not the actual SC2 game) that urks gamers; to watch a revered and more-than-capable "heavy-hitter" not using the success, influence and power we (the gamers) gave to it, to drive the gaming community forward into its future. Sadly, what Blizzard has done (is doing) is an all-too familiar industry caveat: it parallels the state of the electric car exactly; clearly being held back by those in industry who have the power to push it (and us) into the future, but would rather keep us back out of fear of failure and sustinance of profit.
I was hoping SC2 would use the first-person perspective, seeing as all Blizz's RTS games have something new in them. Then maybe Flayra could join Blizzard and have a big Natural Craft 2 game and...
The mere fact that gaming technology is now capable of creating a new hybrid genre of game does not automatically imply that the old genres are obsolete or no longer worthwhile. Games become obsolete, Genres usually don't. They could probably make a half-way decent FPS/RTS/MMO today, but that doesn't mean people won't want any more ordinary FPS or RTS or MMO games anymore.
<!--quoteo(post=1629041:date=May 24 2007, 05:49 PM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ May 24 2007, 05:49 PM) [snapback]1629041[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> No, actually he is saying what a lot of us (gamers) are saying: that we love "orchestral music", but why is it being played through a gramophone? RTSs are the gramophone: the genre is old, played out, and has seen its time, as with FPS (to a lesser degree though). As a long-time RTS and FPS player, I am capable of making this statement unbiasedly. Next-Gen gamers are looking for something more: something that breaks the boundaries of any genre by encapsulating <b>every genre</b>: the RTS, FPS, and MMO genres all into one game. The future of gaming will look something like your standard eye-candy FPS mixed in with your real time strategy elements of an RTS, combined with the multiplayability, scalability, and character depth of an MMO; a gaming world that mimics the visual, logical, and chronological characteristics of our own or any conceivable reality. And so, we, the concerned, are simply posing the question that, if Blizzard is to be (or wants to be) an international leader and progressor in the gaming industry, then why have they spent (and will continue to spend) so much time developing a game that is clearly of an "ex-gen" genre? It's because they're not interested in innovation when it gets in the way of profits; they have their target audience and the sales from them, and who could blame them? Profits drive industry. And its this (not the actual SC2 game) that urks gamers; to watch a revered and more-than-capable "heavy-hitter" not using the success, influence and power we (the gamers) gave to it, to drive the gaming community forward into its future. Sadly, what Blizzard has done (is doing) is an all-too familiar industry caveat: it parallels the state of the electric car exactly; clearly being held back by those in industry who have the power to push it (and us) into the future, but would rather keep us back out of fear of failure and sustinance of profit. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Dude, people still play tennis games.
Renegade, you seem to be asking for a miracle, in that every game should push the genre forword, should innovate. I have yet to see anyone suggest anything that's new these days, and yet would keep the Starcraft feel, while appealing to the old audience, and most importantly, give the game a competitive edge and quality.
Meh, cynicism is boring and overdone these days. Maybe, instead of being consumed with risk analysis, they just want to make a game that they can call a successor to Starcraft's throne.
Well, that's everything. It HAS to sell. It's not like they actually put quality in mcd's burgers. They just know it sells.
I just expected something more than "pretty" from Blizz, who has done crazy stuff with RTS. They started with pretty good stuff with warcraft, added a third race and uniqueness in starcraft and then heroes in warcraft 3. There has to be some factor that is different in sc2. FPS would have been cool.
<!--quoteo(post=1629041:date=May 25 2007, 12:49 AM:name=R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(R_e_n_e_g_a_d_e @ May 25 2007, 12:49 AM) [snapback]1629041[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Next-Gen gamers are looking for something more: something that breaks the boundaries of any genre by encapsulating <b>every genre</b>: the RTS, FPS, and MMO genres all into one game.tl;dr <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> The more genres you stuff into one game, the less gamers it interests. Because each gamer has to have some interest in each genre to accept a game with all in them.
<!--quoteo(post=1628761:date=May 23 2007, 03:05 PM:name=DiscoZombie)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DiscoZombie @ May 23 2007, 03:05 PM) [snapback]1628761[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->my strat in RTS games is like my strat in Civilization games. Minimal military, farm an awesome economy until I've got all the upgraedz, then churn out enough units to smash the enemy. Completely useless vs. hard mode AI or 99% of human players. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually there is a team strat like that in Warcraft III in 3v3 or larger (preferably larger) match. One person (often me) goes nightelf and does nothing but heros and mass wisps. That person "feeds" the entire team resources. In fact, when a gold mine is cleared, only that person caps the mine. This is extremely effective when the teammates are humans and orcs, which are very strong after they have a large army and high research. This "pooling" of resource collection in an efficent maner with teamwork leads to some pretty crushing victories. And the risk? Well if they find and rush the resource farming guy's base.
For the hardcore, heres the Q&A roundtable at the Blizzard event. Warning: it's one hour long and pretty slow going as they translate everything to Korean. But! Korean is a nice language to listen to and theres some random bits of info <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
KassingerShades of greyJoin Date: 2002-02-20Member: 229Members, Constellation
Please keep posting anything you have on SC2. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
For the hardcore, heres the Q&A roundtable at the Blizzard event. Warning: it's one hour long and pretty slow going as they translate everything to Korean. But! Korean is a nice language to listen to and theres some random bits of info <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
Thanks for the link! I'll put down the juicy bits in text: (Please excuse me for any engrish or bad english if present)
Q: When did you start developing SC2? A: Shortly after WC3:TFT, we have been working on it since then.
Q: How far are you getting/have you gotten with SC2 now? A: Pretty far along, we can play it multiplayer with all 3 races, we're focused on announcing a game that is fully playable.
Q: When do you plan to release it? A: *Groan* WHEN. IT'S. READY.
Q: What is the biggest challenge in producing SC2? A: Really high expectations from all the SC fans, having to have live up to those.
Q: What's the development budget? A: We don't really have one, we'll spend as much time and resources as we need to make it a great game.
Q: What's the size of the development team? A: 40 people (core dev team) few more teams that are helping out, started smaller right after wc3:tft, gotten bigger.
Q: Planning more WWI - cool events? A: Still exploring doing that, we will get you more fun stuff.
Q: How do you plan on growing marketshare/the competitive RTS scene in the USA? A: 3 major thing, 1: Making it a great game, making it competitive ready, 2: great place to play, battle.net is for that, going to improve/extend it for SC2, 3: making a game that is understandable and fun to watch for people that don't know/play it
Q: In developing SC2, has it been difficult to balance the demands of the E-Sports community with those of the ordinary consumers? A: Uh, actually it's somewhat difficult, if your focused on making a singleplayer game, there are way less factors take in account (units, features). Competitive games are a lot different. Our approach in all our RTSes we design the multiplayer first, getting it up and running, balancing, in the last year or two of the development, we focus on the singleplayer part, making the game accessible for the broad market.
Q: After watching the game, it seems that SC2 is somewhat slower then SC, no more fast and quick battles? A: The demonstration itself was slow, we are going to make sure SC2 will have identical speed to the original SC.
Q: How are you going to address the imbalance of the game? Seems imbalanced now. A: We only showed a small part of the game, so it may seem unbalanced, but we're not really done now with the game.
Q: Will be people be able to play through Battle.net, will you charge fees for playing through Battle.net? In SC, people were freely able to play in E-play competitions, there were rumors that is is going to be restricted in some way. A: Battle.net will be improved, get more features, it will be brought to a new level, we learned a lot all this time. As for the business model (paying for bnet), we haven't made up our mind about that yet. I would like to add that the focus of the SC2 developers is on the actual development, design and features of the game. Competition in the game is incredibly important to us, since it's the key component in what made SC so popular, we'll work more closely together with the broadcast companies and competitive E-Sport groups.
Q: In SC there were suggestion to a 4e race. Is there going to be one? A: In the secret mission of this Broodwar Campaign, there was this thing about a Protoss/Zerg hybrid race, that's a storyline that we might or might not get further into in SC2, in SC2 we will have 3 races, we thought about a 4e race, but we decided to focus on making each of 3 races more different from one another then previously.
Q: Are the game mechanics in SC2 going to be the same as they are in SC? A: Will be very similar, resourcing will be as important in SC2 as it is in SC, protecting your economy will be as import as it is in SC.
Q: What about the system requirements for SC2 A: We're aiming for pixel shader 2.0, apart from that we don't really know what the system requirements of SC2 will be at the time it ships.
Q: What can you tell about the storyline? the original characters? A: I've been sworn to secrecy, but we're very keen about reintroducing the original characters.
Q: There were a lot of rumors about the next game from Blizzard, that is was going to be a new Diablo, a new MMO, why did Blizzard go for SC2? A: Ever since the original SC game, we've wanted to do a sequal, after finishing the WC3:TFT expansion, there was really a unanimous consensus (we all really wanted to?) within the company, that it was time to revisit the SC universe, the technology was there to do the things in 3d, with large armies, lots of units. The other part of your question is, how does that fit within our product line, actually I think it fits really well, we don't view ourselves as a MMO company, we happen to have a very successful MMO game, but that doesn't mean that's all we make now, we're happy to share we're working on a RTS game that we're very exited about.
Q: What ever happened to the other SC game, did it become a ghost? (laughing) A: SC:Ghost is as all of you know on a definite hold. We've shifted all our resources to the PC, I don't have any new news about it. (aka, it's in the fridge)
Q: Making nothing new? Still the same type of games. A: We all like making new stuff up, but the current things we make are in demand, so we're continuing on making those. Perhaps one day. We don't milk out stuff (EA anyone?), we want to make a perfect game, SC is a good example of that (RAWR, EA could learn about that with their half assed games.)
Q: SC on TV, very important for Korea, not in the USA/Western part of the world, how about it? A: TV is obviously a great way to get more publicity, to get people to understand the game. E-Sports is a good example of that. Poker for example has had its boom around the world, we're trying to find out how we can do the same with SC2, make it more interesting for the rest of the world.
Q: Distribution of SC in Korea, how are you going to provide this with SC2? A: No comment.
Q: Based on the video we watched during the presentation, what we saw were new units and all that, the gameplay doesn't seem all that advanced from the previous SC, what will be new? A: For the competitive scene, we're not going to make something radically new, there will be small new things, new abilities, like warping for the Protoss.
Q: What about user content? A: We saw how the mod community behind SC/WC has grown, and we strongly believe in supporting that, we'll put more power in the mod maker's hands.
Q: Why are you only focused on PC games? A: We're going to focus our efforts on working on a few things, and making sure they come out exceptional, what we find out after SC:Ghost, we needed to prioritize on PC games more.
Q: What about the competition from Microsoft with their Xbox Live service to you with Battle.net A: We're sticking with Battle.net, since we can control it, add features to it, specific to each game, that's not something we want to give up.
Man this is getting pretty complicated. Starcraft 2, Blizzard's new RTS, has an obscure homage to World of Warcraft, Blizzard's MMO based off of Blizzard's other RTS franchise, which itself is an homage to Alizee (or generic strippers, I'm a member of the first line of thought). Soon Blizzard won't have to make anything new up, it can just make references to stuff it's already done.
<!--quoteo(post=1630433:date=May 31 2007, 05:30 PM:name=Aldaris)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Aldaris @ May 31 2007, 05:30 PM) [snapback]1630433[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> It's not Alizee, it's the Night Elf female dance from WoW, which is based off a lapdancer. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I disagree.
<img src="http://dropbox.nextwish.org/alizee.gif" border="0" alt="IPB Image" /> (hope you guys are mature)
Nothing groundbreaking in it apart from: <ul><li>Confirmation that there will definitely be no 4th race</li><li>Physics system that we saw will have a small impact on gameplay. It's primarily a graphical feature.</li></ul> Shame about 4th race.. although it was 90% confirmed anyway I can understand the decision. V. happy about the physics system. Gameplay > realism.
<!--quoteo(post=1629776:date=May 29 2007, 06:45 AM:name=Zaggy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Zaggy @ May 29 2007, 06:45 AM) [snapback]1629776[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Q: Based on the video we watched during the presentation, what we saw were new units and all that, the gameplay doesn't seem all that advanced from the previous SC, what will be new? A: For the competitive scene, we're not going to make something radically new, there will be small new things, new abilities, like warping for the Protoss.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Cue more whining saying "It's not innovative enough!!!1"
Not read it myself yet but theres some nice eye-candy <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
<u><b>2</b> Marines' shield is part of a defensive upgrade</u>
Thanks for the update Zor2 <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" /> Just read the making of the trailer. Very interesting. Five million polygons, wow!
<!--quoteo(post=1630729:date=Jun 2 2007, 06:35 AM:name=CoolCookieCooks)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(CoolCookieCooks @ Jun 2 2007, 06:35 AM) [snapback]1630729[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> I hope they do take their time with Starcraft 2, it really doesn't look THAT amazing to me. Especially when comparing it to supreme commander. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Frankly after Supreme Commander <i>nothing</i> looks quite the same. I look at RTS games in two categories now: Supreme Commander and everything else. One of them lets you zoom out and the other doesn't is what it boils down to.
<!--quoteo(post=1630746:date=Jun 2 2007, 11:08 AM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TychoCelchuuu @ Jun 2 2007, 11:08 AM) [snapback]1630746[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Frankly after Supreme Commander <i>nothing</i> looks quite the same. I look at RTS games in two categories now: Supreme Commander and everything else. One of them lets you zoom out and the other doesn't is what it boils down to. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I can't say I would want to play a SC where you can zoom out, it would ruin the involved feeling of battle. [lol] I look at RTS games in two categories now: StarCraft(and you can throw WC3 in there if you want) and everything else. One of them is arcady/hyper-involved with the battle and the other isn't is what it boils down to.[/lol]
Comments
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
No, actually he is saying what a lot of us (gamers) are saying: that we love "orchestral music", but why is it being played through a gramophone? RTSs are the gramophone: the genre is old, played out, and has seen its time, as with FPS (to a lesser degree though). As a long-time RTS and FPS player, I am capable of making this statement unbiasedly. Next-Gen gamers are looking for something more: something that breaks the boundaries of any genre by encapsulating <b>every genre</b>: the RTS, FPS, and MMO genres all into one game. The future of gaming will look something like your standard eye-candy FPS mixed in with your real time strategy elements of an RTS, combined with the multiplayability, scalability, and character depth of an MMO; a gaming world that mimics the visual, logical, and chronological characteristics of our own or any conceivable reality. And so, we, the concerned, are simply posing the question that, if Blizzard is to be (or wants to be) an international leader and progressor in the gaming industry, then why have they spent (and will continue to spend) so much time developing a game that is clearly of an "ex-gen" genre?
It's because they're not interested in innovation when it gets in the way of profits; they have their target audience and the sales from them, and who could blame them? Profits drive industry. And its this (not the actual SC2 game) that urks gamers; to watch a revered and more-than-capable "heavy-hitter" not using the success, influence and power we (the gamers) gave to it, to drive the gaming community forward into its future.
Sadly, what Blizzard has done (is doing) is an all-too familiar industry caveat: it parallels the state of the electric car exactly; clearly being held back by those in industry who have the power to push it (and us) into the future, but would rather keep us back out of fear of failure and sustinance of profit.
The mere fact that gaming technology is now capable of creating a new hybrid genre of game does not automatically imply that the old genres are obsolete or no longer worthwhile. Games become obsolete, Genres usually don't. They could probably make a half-way decent FPS/RTS/MMO today, but that doesn't mean people won't want any more ordinary FPS or RTS or MMO games anymore.
No, actually he is saying what a lot of us (gamers) are saying: that we love "orchestral music", but why is it being played through a gramophone? RTSs are the gramophone: the genre is old, played out, and has seen its time, as with FPS (to a lesser degree though). As a long-time RTS and FPS player, I am capable of making this statement unbiasedly. Next-Gen gamers are looking for something more: something that breaks the boundaries of any genre by encapsulating <b>every genre</b>: the RTS, FPS, and MMO genres all into one game. The future of gaming will look something like your standard eye-candy FPS mixed in with your real time strategy elements of an RTS, combined with the multiplayability, scalability, and character depth of an MMO; a gaming world that mimics the visual, logical, and chronological characteristics of our own or any conceivable reality. And so, we, the concerned, are simply posing the question that, if Blizzard is to be (or wants to be) an international leader and progressor in the gaming industry, then why have they spent (and will continue to spend) so much time developing a game that is clearly of an "ex-gen" genre?
It's because they're not interested in innovation when it gets in the way of profits; they have their target audience and the sales from them, and who could blame them? Profits drive industry. And its this (not the actual SC2 game) that urks gamers; to watch a revered and more-than-capable "heavy-hitter" not using the success, influence and power we (the gamers) gave to it, to drive the gaming community forward into its future.
Sadly, what Blizzard has done (is doing) is an all-too familiar industry caveat: it parallels the state of the electric car exactly; clearly being held back by those in industry who have the power to push it (and us) into the future, but would rather keep us back out of fear of failure and sustinance of profit.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Dude, people still play tennis games.
I just expected something more than "pretty" from Blizz, who has done crazy stuff with RTS. They started with pretty good stuff with warcraft, added a third race and uniqueness in starcraft and then heroes in warcraft 3. There has to be some factor that is different in sc2. FPS would have been cool.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The more genres you stuff into one game, the less gamers it interests. Because each gamer has to have some interest in each genre to accept a game with all in them.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually there is a team strat like that in Warcraft III in 3v3 or larger (preferably larger) match. One person (often me) goes nightelf and does nothing but heros and mass wisps. That person "feeds" the entire team resources. In fact, when a gold mine is cleared, only that person caps the mine. This is extremely effective when the teammates are humans and orcs, which are very strong after they have a large army and high research. This "pooling" of resource collection in an efficent maner with teamwork leads to some pretty crushing victories. And the risk? Well if they find and rush the resource farming guy's base.
For the hardcore, heres the Q&A roundtable at the Blizzard event. Warning: it's one hour long and pretty slow going as they translate everything to Korean. But! Korean is a nice language to listen to and theres some random bits of info <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
<a href="http://uk.media.pc.ign.com/media/850/850126/vids_1.html" target="_blank">http://uk.media.pc.ign.com/media/850/850126/vids_1.html</a>
Please keep posting anything you have on SC2. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There is nothing more. All knowledge has been consumed.
REPENT SINNERS.
[/subtle bump]
For the hardcore, heres the Q&A roundtable at the Blizzard event. Warning: it's one hour long and pretty slow going as they translate everything to Korean. But! Korean is a nice language to listen to and theres some random bits of info <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
<a href="http://uk.media.pc.ign.com/media/850/850126/vids_1.html" target="_blank">http://uk.media.pc.ign.com/media/850/850126/vids_1.html</a>
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thanks for the link!
I'll put down the juicy bits in text:
(Please excuse me for any engrish or bad english if present)
Q: When did you start developing SC2?
A: Shortly after WC3:TFT, we have been working on it since then.
Q: How far are you getting/have you gotten with SC2 now?
A: Pretty far along, we can play it multiplayer with all 3 races, we're focused on announcing a game that is fully playable.
Q: When do you plan to release it?
A: *Groan* WHEN. IT'S. READY.
Q: What is the biggest challenge in producing SC2?
A: Really high expectations from all the SC fans, having to have live up to those.
Q: What's the development budget?
A: We don't really have one, we'll spend as much time and resources as we need to make it a great game.
Q: What's the size of the development team?
A: 40 people (core dev team) few more teams that are helping out, started smaller right after wc3:tft, gotten bigger.
Q: Planning more WWI - cool events?
A: Still exploring doing that, we will get you more fun stuff.
Q: How do you plan on growing marketshare/the competitive RTS scene in the USA?
A: 3 major thing, 1: Making it a great game, making it competitive ready, 2: great place to play, battle.net is for that, going to improve/extend it for SC2, 3: making a game that is understandable and fun to watch for people that don't know/play it
Q: In developing SC2, has it been difficult to balance the demands of the E-Sports community with those of the ordinary consumers?
A: Uh, actually it's somewhat difficult, if your focused on making a singleplayer game, there are way less factors take in account (units, features). Competitive games are a lot different. Our approach in all our RTSes we design the multiplayer first, getting it up and running, balancing, in the last year or two of the development, we focus on the singleplayer part, making the game accessible for the broad market.
Q: After watching the game, it seems that SC2 is somewhat slower then SC, no more fast and quick battles?
A: The demonstration itself was slow, we are going to make sure SC2 will have identical speed to the original SC.
Q: How are you going to address the imbalance of the game? Seems imbalanced now.
A: We only showed a small part of the game, so it may seem unbalanced, but we're not really done now with the game.
Q: Will be people be able to play through Battle.net, will you charge fees for playing through Battle.net? In SC, people were freely able to play in E-play competitions, there were rumors that is is going to be restricted in some way.
A: Battle.net will be improved, get more features, it will be brought to a new level, we learned a lot all this time. As for the business model (paying for bnet), we haven't made up our mind about that yet.
I would like to add that the focus of the SC2 developers is on the actual development, design and features of the game.
Competition in the game is incredibly important to us, since it's the key component in what made SC so popular, we'll work more closely together with the broadcast companies and competitive E-Sport groups.
Q: In SC there were suggestion to a 4e race. Is there going to be one?
A: In the secret mission of this Broodwar Campaign, there was this thing about a Protoss/Zerg hybrid race, that's a storyline that we might or might not get further into in SC2, in SC2 we will have 3 races, we thought about a 4e race, but we decided to focus on making each of 3 races more different from one another then previously.
Q: Are the game mechanics in SC2 going to be the same as they are in SC?
A: Will be very similar, resourcing will be as important in SC2 as it is in SC, protecting your economy will be as import as it is in SC.
Q: What about the system requirements for SC2
A: We're aiming for pixel shader 2.0, apart from that we don't really know what the system requirements of SC2 will be at the time it ships.
Q: What can you tell about the storyline? the original characters?
A: I've been sworn to secrecy, but we're very keen about reintroducing the original characters.
Q: There were a lot of rumors about the next game from Blizzard, that is was going to be a new Diablo, a new MMO, why did Blizzard go for SC2?
A: Ever since the original SC game, we've wanted to do a sequal, after finishing the WC3:TFT expansion, there was really a unanimous consensus (we all really wanted to?) within the company, that it was time to revisit the SC universe, the technology was there to do the things in 3d, with large armies, lots of units.
The other part of your question is, how does that fit within our product line, actually I think it fits really well, we don't view ourselves as a MMO company, we happen to have a very successful MMO game, but that doesn't mean that's all we make now, we're happy to share we're working on a RTS game that we're very exited about.
Q: What ever happened to the other SC game, did it become a ghost? (laughing)
A: SC:Ghost is as all of you know on a definite hold. We've shifted all our resources to the PC, I don't have any new news about it. (aka, it's in the fridge)
Q: Making nothing new? Still the same type of games.
A: We all like making new stuff up, but the current things we make are in demand, so we're continuing on making those. Perhaps one day.
We don't milk out stuff (EA anyone?), we want to make a perfect game, SC is a good example of that (RAWR, EA could learn about that with their half assed games.)
Q: SC on TV, very important for Korea, not in the USA/Western part of the world, how about it?
A: TV is obviously a great way to get more publicity, to get people to understand the game. E-Sports is a good example of that.
Poker for example has had its boom around the world, we're trying to find out how we can do the same with SC2, make it more interesting for the rest of the world.
Q: Distribution of SC in Korea, how are you going to provide this with SC2?
A: No comment.
Q: Based on the video we watched during the presentation, what we saw were new units and all that, the gameplay doesn't seem all that advanced from the previous SC, what will be new?
A: For the competitive scene, we're not going to make something radically new, there will be small new things, new abilities, like warping for the Protoss.
Q: What about user content?
A: We saw how the mod community behind SC/WC has grown, and we strongly believe in supporting that, we'll put more power in the mod maker's hands.
Q: Why are you only focused on PC games?
A: We're going to focus our efforts on working on a few things, and making sure they come out exceptional, what we find out after SC:Ghost, we needed to prioritize on PC games more.
Q: What about the competition from Microsoft with their Xbox Live service to you with Battle.net
A: We're sticking with Battle.net, since we can control it, add features to it, specific to each game, that's not something we want to give up.
It's not Alizee, it's the Night Elf female dance from WoW, which is based off a lapdancer.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I disagree.
<img src="http://dropbox.nextwish.org/alizee.gif" border="0" alt="IPB Image" /> (hope you guys are mature)
[Amazing transcript]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nice one Zaggy!
Again for the hardcore, new interview with Vice-President of Blizzard:
<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18925251/" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18925251/</a>
Nothing groundbreaking in it apart from:
<ul><li>Confirmation that there will definitely be no 4th race</li><li>Physics system that we saw will have a small impact on gameplay. It's primarily a graphical feature.</li></ul>
Shame about 4th race.. although it was 90% confirmed anyway I can understand the decision. V. happy about the physics system. Gameplay > realism.
Q: Based on the video we watched during the presentation, what we saw were new units and all that, the gameplay doesn't seem all that advanced from the previous SC, what will be new?
A: For the competitive scene, we're not going to make something radically new, there will be small new things, new abilities, like warping for the Protoss.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Cue more whining saying "It's not innovative enough!!!1"
I disagree.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're still wrong <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
<a href="http://eu.starcraft2.com/features/interviews/cinematicteaser.xml" target="_blank">http://eu.starcraft2.com/features/intervie...maticteaser.xml</a>
[Information via an email release]
Not read it myself yet but theres some nice eye-candy <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile-fix.gif" />
<u><b>2</b> Marines' shield is part of a defensive upgrade</u>
Source: <a href="http://www.battle.net/forums/thread.aspx?fn=sc-general&t=186087&p=1&#post186087" target="_blank">http://www.battle.net/forums/thread.aspx?f...amp;#post186087</a>
Just read the making of the trailer. Very interesting.
Five million polygons, wow!
IGN:
<a href="http://pc.ign.com/articles/793/793320p1.html" target="_blank">No Starcraft II Until 2008? Sorry, everyone. There's always next year.</a>
I hope they do take their time with Starcraft 2, it really doesn't look THAT amazing to me. Especially when comparing it to supreme commander.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Frankly after Supreme Commander <i>nothing</i> looks quite the same. I look at RTS games in two categories now: Supreme Commander and everything else. One of them lets you zoom out and the other doesn't is what it boils down to.
Frankly after Supreme Commander <i>nothing</i> looks quite the same. I look at RTS games in two categories now: Supreme Commander and everything else. One of them lets you zoom out and the other doesn't is what it boils down to.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I can't say I would want to play a SC where you can zoom out, it would ruin the involved feeling of battle.
[lol] I look at RTS games in two categories now: StarCraft(and you can throw WC3 in there if you want) and everything else. One of them is arcady/hyper-involved with the battle and the other isn't is what it boils down to.[/lol]