Slashdot Mirror
The Evolution of StarCraft
Ars Technica's Opposable Thumbs blog links to a piece chock full of gaming history. The StarCraft Legacy site offers up a historical record of the evolution of StarCraft . Written back in 2004, it is still relevant today. A game title that, lo these many years later, not only has an avid cult following but may be the most popular sport in South Korea is something you want to keep in mind. We may even hear word of a sequel this year. The piece runs down the numerous changes the game underwent, from the ugly alpha days through to the upheaval of Brood War (damned Lurkers). Tidbits like this make the article well worth checking out: "The game made a weak first impression at [E3], and it received much criticism. There were many remarks that the game looked too much like 'Orcs in space.' When Blizzard came back from E3 that year, they decided to scrap the idea. Their decision? 'Let's step it up a little more, let's revamp the engine, let's do more than what we're showing. We can't do Orcs in space.' Thus, StarCraft was reborn. The basics of the Warcraft II engine were still used, but more work was being put into the design and programming."
Ah. Interesting ... so the finished product was an improvement over the beta?
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
"why is it that evolutionists jump on the opportunity to use the word 'evolution' any chance they have, regardless of if it is the best suited word for the sentence in question? is it the way they were intelligently designed? (see, if we started doing it, it would be really really annoying.. for you, at least)
but seriously... it really makes me laugh sometimes watching history/discovery. 'the evolution of handtools' oh, so now handtools traits and genes are transferred through reproduction? did the torx come by means of mutation?"
This is the story of the torx screwdriver, as I've been told.
its eons old, and I feel no need to question it, it just makes sense.
In the beginning there was nothing, Great Inventor Dude (GID)
decided, well this kinda sucks..
GID declared that there be stuff, the first day he
created bits and pieces.
GID then decided that bits and pieces still weren't really
that cool and created phillips and flathead, that they may
rule over all bits and pieces, and should they will it turn,
into stuff.
Well to make a long story short, phillips and flathead multiplied
and were many, till either or both, populated the earth.
Then phillips and flathead rebelled, and instead of making stuff
and honoring GID they started questioning and taking stuff apart.
So in a huge deluge lasting 90 days and 90 nights GID submerged
the earth a pool of molten steel.
no phillips or flathead was spared, they were all consumed by the
fire and brimstone and high carbon molten steel.
Only one place on earth was safe, atop a mountain, not the highest
mountain on earth mind you, but it was that mountain, there lay a
forge, and torx was its name.
Henceforth only the righteous torx would remain, to assemble and
build stuff as GID willed, never to be taken apart by phillips and flathead..ever again.
This is my story and I'm sticking to it.
^_~
1. Open "Warcraft II" Project
2. Replace "Dragon" with "BattleCruiser", etc.
3. Fix the "runs as a DOS program" business
4. Save as "Starcraft" Project
5. Many years later, release IP-friendly patch
The StarCraft brand is among the strongest game brands in the world in terms of a PC game and certainly for RTS games. That recognition was forged with a great game, great support (BNET, patches) and most importantly, adaptation as one of, if not the first game to be played on a wide-spread competitive level. StarCraft has enjoyed a vast amount of press based on these accomplishments and almost all have been positive over the years.
:) - I am certainly routing for them.
That being said, Blizzards time to cash in on the StarCraft name has got to be running out. Clamoring about the release of a second installment has been already been plentiful online for years. Blizzard has yet to say anything except that they hope to revisit the StarCraft world in the future. With the announcement, hype, and eventual termination of StarCraft: Ghost, Blizzard has yet to realize that in the way of a official release.
Time could now against Blizzard to cash in on the StarCraft brand. For many of us who played the game, we are fans forever, but for groves of people that know what a zerg rush is, but have never played, these peoples memory of the brand has got to be nearing its end. The StarCraft name means less and less everyday that goes on and new gamers are being introduced to the market who know nothing of its legacy.
Now on the other hand, Blizzard carries a brand as a publisher that is second to none in the PC World so it may not matter at all. They seem to break there own sales records with each game they release, so who knows
Invexi - a Phoenix, AZ based web design and web development company.
Welcome our overlord... overlords?
We require more overlords.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
Starcraft I feel was possibly the most interesting RTS that had been
released during its time
Ever play Total Annihilation?
StarCraft: high terrain serves only to create choke points and barriers to units. It is completely ignored for anything but restricting movement.
TA: Terrain is modelled as truly 3D, and has great effect on combat. High gound matters; a unit firing off a ridge can be protected by the ridge while pummelling its targets below.
StarCraft: Every shot fired hits its target, even when a moving target changes direction as a slow-moving projectile approaches.
TA: Weapons are semi-realistic; they can miss a fast-moving target or be stopped by terrain.
StarCraft: Air units move just like ground units (with the exception of the Carrier's drones), only ignoring terrain.
TA: Air units move realistically, with planes banking and gunships swerving to avoid enemy fire.
StarCraft: Units either move or they fight. Not both.
TA: Most units are capable of firing while on the move, and frequently do so on their own.
Don't get me wrong; StarCraft was a fun game and brought some great things to the RTS genre. Its three balanced factions brought a new element to strategy gaming that is used heavily today. But that was the only real innovation in SC; the only great step it took from WC2 was that the factions forced players to learn a variety of tactics to be competitive.
Total Annihilation was years ahead of its time with gameplay elements that weren't seen in other games until just recently. It's probably the most underrated RTS out there.
120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
That's why WWII was so interesting, Axis was armed with tanks and planes, the Western Allies made use of its army of Mech Warriors and the Soviet army was built on a strong front line of Bionic Brain Slime.
I remember that in the second battle of el-Alamein, Irwin Rommel researched "Purity of the Aryans" in his Totenkopf tower, giving all his infantry units an extra point of amour and was keeping the Allies busy with constant strikes with his three wheeled motor bikes (called "Bavarian Thigh Slappers") and of course with Charlimagne (complete with rocket launchers) who Rommel summoned at the Ahnenerbe Alter.
Bernard Montgommary was going the the "Three Pub" build strategy and had an initial weakness in his defense, but was able to recover using his "Big Ben" laser towers for base defense, summoned the Black Cyborg Prince with his Alter of Albion and focused on building his Australian mole mechs in his Woolloomoloo University. After he researched "Wombat's Burrow" his mole mechs were able to dig under Rommel's Swastikas and destroy his Concentration camp, forcing Rommel to retreat to Tunisia.
The Great NPC Winston Churchill was known to have said of the victory: "This is not the beginning of the end, but TOTAL PWNAGE ke ke ke ke ke!!!!!!!!!!!111111oneone".
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem