Slashdot Mirror


Blizzard Announces StarCraft 2

We'll be returning once again to the world of StarCraft, it appears, and not in the form of a Massively Multiplayer game. Blizzard has announced StarCraft 2 at their packed event in Seoul, South Korea. IGN is liveblogging the event, describing gameplay footage being played as well as full cinematics. From the description of ongoing events there are massive changes to the way the game plays, new units, a physics system within the game engine, and the capability to show over 100 units onscreen at a time. "Showing gameplay footage - Looks like protoss ships - floating over asteroid/ base structure - entering protoss ase - similar looking buildings - vespene gas still in the game - character pane shows up on right side - some protoss guy - shifts to terran bases floating on rockets over same type of territory - sill collecting crystals as resources - marines load out. Dustin is actually playing the game - nothing in the game is final." Additional coverage from Milky at 1up.

7 of 550 comments (clear)

  1. Starcraft 2 by ASkGNet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I only hope that Blizzard won't try to mix&match genres in an attempt to gain wider audience. The fact that in WC3, the game degenerated into Hero rush is what kept me from playing it.

    They should look at the original Ground Control for an idea of a good strategy game

    1. Re:Starcraft 2 by dosboot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      WC3 did however make it so you didn't spend half the game clicking peons, you could cast spells easily, and all around had subtle micro improvements. As much as I like starcraft, warcraft 3 was much more accessible. I'm still only a touch better than hopeless at starcraft, whereas in less time with wc3 I can understand the game very well. For me this makes being hero centric and small scale irrelevant, and it is where I want sc2 to be exactly like wc3.

  2. Likely no revolutionary gameplay changes... by mstroeck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm entering "long, pseudo-philosophical rant"-mode here, so caveat lector:

    Improving StarCraft is like improving chess - arguably possible, but hardly without upsetting a lot of people. StarCraft is still being played today because as a game, it's one of the most polished and consistent experiences available. It's not truly "real-time", it has little to do with "strategy", it is certainly not trying to be realistic and the graphics suck by today's standard - but that's also true for poker and darts. I feel most of the comments calling for Blizzard to "look to Title X" for new ideas for StarCraft 2 are a little misguided. StarCraft's gameplay is in a class of it's own, people will buy it because it's StarCraft. And they will buy it because StarCraft -even in its current form- is just a damn good game in it's own right. It's just imaginable that, a hundred years from now, people will still enjoy slightly enhanced versions of exactly the same formula, just like we enjoy back gammon thousands of years after its original form was created.

  3. Re:Awesome by Derekloffin · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I hope it follows after Warcraft III's model.

    God I hope not. I don't want a WCIII mod with SC skins, I want StarCraft II. It should stand out as unique from both it's predecessor and it's brother in the WC universe.

  4. Re:Looks like Starcraft 1 with new graphics... by graymocker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's unsurprising to see how reminiscent of Starcraft this is. Innovation has never been strength of Blizzard; historically, Blizzard games have never had revolutionary features. Starcraft itself was merely the purest, best manifestation of a RTS formula that was very well established by the mid-90s. Blizzard sticks to refining established gameplay concepts into a perfectly crafted and meticulously balanced gem. This is not intended either as a insult of Blizzard, merely an observation - the studio is obviously very, very good at what it does, and it is rightly rewarded for that by the market. Indeed, the games industry would be much poorer without Blizzard, as it had a hand in popularizing many otherwise overlooked innovations in games, but the fact is that they don't innovate and never have. (The Gauntlet-style RPG slasher was about dead prior to Diablo, and Warcraft 3's appropriation of the hero system from neglected games like Battlecry and Kohan seems to have made it a staple of the RTS genre, etc.)

  5. Re:Awesome by geniusj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ick. As far as I'm concerned, skip the heroes. It's the reason I didn't get into WC3. I've got enough to think about without micromanaging heroes too.

  6. Mod Parent Up by Longtime_Lurker_Aces · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is NOT flamebait, this is the sentiment of millions of gamers. I strongly prefer the starcraft style of gameplay to the warcraft 3 style.

    I too hope it does not have the heros, they're the reason I grew weary of wc3 in a week instead of the 4 years I played sc.