StarCraft II Single-Player Details Revealed

As Blizzcon approaches, a number of gaming sites were invited out to California to get an early look at the single-player campaign for StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty. Kotaku has a detailed write-up (spoiler-free version), and 1Up summarizes one of the missions: "... you're on a planet with an alternating day/night cycle (every five minutes, it switches): during daylight, you're safe. You can build forces and go out and destroy structures. At night, the infected Terrans will relentlessly stream towards your base — necessitating a strong defense against the 'zombie horde.'" An interview with some of the developers is available, in which lead designer Dustin Browder says Blizzard will continue their trend of having downloadable maps and other improvements throughout the game's life. BlizzPlanet posted a mission guide for the part of the game they got to see, and new video footage has been released that shows off the single-player mode.

Comments

the next lost generation of koreans

[jollyreaper]

As if Starcraft wasn't damage enough, now comes Starcraft 2. Millions of young South Korean men idling away their lives on multiplayer servers. I think Blizzard's done them more damage than the Japanese occupation.

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[Hatta]

So how are the dedicated fans of Starcraft going to take any changes in the gameplay? Starcraft was perfectly balanced, the fact that people are still having competitions after so many years shows that much. What can Blizzard do to Starcraft to make it new and worthwhile, without damaging the perfection of Starcraft?

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[dkleinsc]

Of course not. In Korea, only old people play Starcraft.

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[Mister Whirly]

Apparently by adding zombies.

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[SQLGuru]

Next up....Pirates and Ninjas! Then the triumvirate will be complete!

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[tick_and_bash]

On the bright side, that's millions of available South Korean women.

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[jgtg32a]

Hell they gave it away in the beginning

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[Chris Burke]

Next up....Pirates and Ninjas! Then the triumvirate will be complete!

Off in the corner, unnoticed and unloved, a single drop of hydraulic fluid leaks from a robot's optical sensor.

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[Mister Whirly]

That actually sounds awesome. Starcraft but with Zombies vs. Pirate vs. Ninjas. I would buy that game.

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[Anonymous Coward]

But then it's just Warcraft III, and that's just not as good.

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[Jurily]

That's because his left diodes hurt.

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[ae1294]

Seems like the green-zealots might have something new to get pissed about...

Was this intentional?

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[Joelfabulous]

It wasn't just that it was insanely well balanced, it's also that Blizzard patched it over the years as exploitable game mechanics came about. It could be argued that the constant focus on balancing and rebalancing the game, as well as listening to the community from pros on down is what made Starcraft a perfectly balanced game.

(for an RTS -- I suck horribly at micromanaging so TBS is more my bag)

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[theheadlessrabbit]

On the bright side, that's millions of available South Korean women.

you've obviously never been to South Korea.

in starcraft, my ass was handed to me by just as many female gamers as male gamers at the PC bang.

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[twocows]

And those that will tell you that Zerg or Protoss is. The top three Starcraft players in the KeSPA rankings right now are Zerg, then Protoss, then Terran third (link).

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[SQLGuru]

It wouldn't be fair to add cyborgs/robots to the mix. The robot overlords would win every time and StarCraft aims to have good balance.

Re:the next lost generation of koreans

[Goldberg's Pants]

It's such a ridiculous argument...

Everyone knows Protoss is best...

Seriously though, the game is fantastically well balanced. Not so much when it first came out but Blizz did an awesome job patching it.

Starcraft is a classic. SC2 won't be. The Blizzard who developed the original SC is a VASTLY different company than the one who developed SC2.

Incidentally, I notice no mention of the "There will be 3 different releases, one for each race" nonsense. Have they dropped that? Or are they hoping people might forget that money gouging nonsense?

Every five minutes

[Daimanta]

An unstoppable message stating: "What A Horrible Night To Have A Curse" or "The Morning Sun Has Vanquished The Horrible Night".

Re:Every five minutes

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.screwattack.com/AVGN/2006/Castlevania2

Can they do anything wrong?

[Stenchwarrior]

Warcraft(s), Diablo(s), Starcraft(s)....These guys are the Tom Petty of video games; they just can't write a bad game.

Maybe they'll get smart and include 40 hours of marriage counseling with this one...

Re:Can they do anything wrong?

[space_jake]

I think they can create a bad game, they are smart enough not to release it.

Re:Can they do anything wrong?

[caladine]

Now, if only they'd add LAN play back.

Re:Can they do anything wrong?

[hansamurai]

Ahh... Starcraft Ghost.

Re:Can they do anything wrong?

[Chris Burke]

I am still waiting on my damn Lost Vikings 3.

I think that part near the end of LV2 where Erik had to jump over a shark was an indication that they don't think there's much left to do with the franchise.

Though on the other hand I made that up.

Re:Can they do anything wrong?

[loufoque]

There is no need to.
Just set up your own personal Battle.net server.

Re:Can they do anything wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's actually a cool idea. Play the role of a Ghost doing espionage against the enemy. There's a lot of potential when you flesh out the roles. Next up: Galaxy of StarCraft (GoS) to replace WoW. I'd hate to be the zerg guy that gets turned into a building.

Re:Can they do anything wrong?

[Akaihiryuu]

Blizzard wasn't making Ghost. It was being made by a third party (the name escapes me), with Blizzard being given approval over it. They canned it for not meeting their standards.

Sounds like a Standard Tower Defense Game

[Useful Wheat]

This sounds suspiciously like a standard tower defense game. They were wildly popular when I played starcraft (9 way lurker defense anyone) and if you visit any flash gaming website you'll find a dozen. I'm not saying this is a bad thing (I'm addicted to gemcraft), but it does seem unoriginal. I wonder if they'll give you the ability to change it to nighttime at will.

Re:Sounds like a Standard Tower Defense Game

[Turiko]

tower defence isn't exactly right... tower defence always makes the enemy come from one certain direction, or a few. In this one mission, they'll more then likely come seeping out of every hole.... oh, and they aren't so stupid to run right past your base either :).

Re:Sounds like a Standard Tower Defense Game

[Anonymous Coward]

The Horde (1994) had this same 'night monster rush' concept a long time ago. Blizzard isn't revolutionizing anything new.

Re:Sounds like a Standard Tower Defense Game

[StreetStealth]

If just one mission is tower defense, I think that leaves a good degree of potential for the rest of them.

I wouldn't worry much about mission variety here -- if the originality Blizzard has been cranking out for of World of Warcraft quests in the expansions is any indicator, they'll have their hands full experimenting with mission structures.

Re:Sounds like a Standard Tower Defense Game

[Anonymous Coward]

Blizzard never was a revolutionary company. Warcraft was just dune/c&c with a warhammer-like theme. Starcraft was "just" Warcraft in space, with non-identical sides this time (THE major difference, I would say). Diablo is just a 3rd person real-time dungeon hack. World of Warcraft was not the first mmorpg. What all these games have in common is this: they're well made. To increases sales, they also try not to murder your poor PC.

Re:Sounds like a Standard Tower Defense Game

[BassMan449]

You stated your self what revolutionary things Blizzard has done. The big one being non-identical sides. Think of the major games before Starcraft. I honestly can't think of a single one that had teams that were more than different models and maybe a few variations on special abilities like Warcraft had. The idea of having 3 completely distinct and yet balanced races was extremely revolutionary. What Starcraft did was show that you could have races that were absolutely nothing alike and yet the battles would still be balanced and fun.

Re:Sounds like a Standard Tower Defense Game

[impaledsunset]

It doesn't matter if it's technically a standard tower defense game, looking at the screenshot it looks like it's a little scary at night, so it will probably be a lot of fun, your classic standard tower defense game lacked that feeling. A lot of things technically are the same, but when you change the circumstances, they can become quite different. Technically, walking through an empty street after sunset is the same as walking the same street at midnight. If you go and try, though, it certainly doesn't feel the same.

You can hardly do much to introduce a new game type that is very different from what you had with the original Starcraft without straying from the genre, but you can improve the old ones to create something new, fresh, and exciting. And that's what they've done.

Re:Sounds like a Standard Tower Defense Game

[SQLGuru]

Archon had non-identical sides.......and the units fought each other and there was strategy. The only piece missing was the real-time aspect.....which in the head-to-head mode, you got.

Re:Sounds like a Standard Tower Defense Game

[BassMan449]

They had differences among units sure, but on the whole the races were very similar. With Starcraft playing Zerg requires a completely different style than playing Protoss. As Zerg I can throw Zerglings at you and if they die I don't really care. They are cheap and easy to produce. With Protoss your economy can feel every unit lost. As far as I know no other game had tried something so radical at the time.

Re:Sounds like a Standard Tower Defense Game

[Black Cardinal]

Actually, I think you mean Dune II, the first RTS from Westwood. It was released in 1992. And yes, it was a great game. It runs great on DOSBox, and once in a while I still play it.

Re:Sounds like a Standard Tower Defense Game

[PitaBred]

The thing is, Blizzard is revolutionary because they typically do things right. There are very few other games that I can remember (even now) that are as well designed as Starcraft or Diablo. They just work... you can get lost in playing the game, you stop thinking about the engine in the game, where the pathing weaknesses and such are. You just play. THAT is the revolutionary work that Blizzard does.

Re:Sounds like a Standard Tower Defense Game

[Goldberg's Pants]

Given about half the quests in WOW boil down to "Go get 20 Murloc penises".

haha

[Anonymous Coward]

is it just me, or does anyone else get the feeling that when they play these strategy games all they are essentially doing is balancing a giant system of linear equations?

Starcraft 2 will not be defined by single player

[Daveznet]

Starcraft Broodwar was not defined by how good it's single player campaign, it was defined by how balanced the game was in multiplayer mode. Sure Blizzard games usually have really great story lines and awesome cinematics but there is a reason why it has been delayed till 2010. Battle.net. For this game to succeed the multi-player aspect must be up to par with Starcraft Broodwar, Blizzard is currently having difficulties with the latest version of Battle.net and this is why it has been delayed till 2010. This single player stuff is nice to see but it is just a very small portion of what is in store for Starcraft 2.

Re:Another Day/Night RTS??

[Desler]

Did you miss the part where this was only just one of the missions? It's not the entire storyline.

Re:Another Day/Night RTS??

[cheesybagel]

I can remember at least two other games doing this off the top of my head. Warcraft III, Wesnoth (ok, that is a tactical turn based game).

Re:Starcraft 2 will not be defined by single playe

[Anonymous Coward]

Glad to know that the only opinion that matters is yours. I'll be sure to consult you next time I need to know if a game is good or not.

Personally I couldn't care less about the multiplayer. My idea of a good time doesn't involve teenage boys calling me a faggot Mexican Jew Lizard, which is pretty much all that multiplayer games are.

SC2 will require internet to install

[Vaphell]

incgamers.com
quote: In order to install the game, "you need to connect once to install the game," StarCraft II lead designer Browder revealed. A player will also either have or sign up for a Battle.net account during the installation process.

Re:SC2 will require internet to install

[seizurebattlerobot]

It goes without saying, though, that this "phone home" feature will be used to enforce an inevitable lifetime install limit. It also goes without saying that this limit will be arbitrarily small.

What I find more troubling, however, is that this DRM is a vehicle to violate the privacy of the user and otherwise subvert the operation of the computer it is running on against the interests of its owner. I have no interest in joining Blizzard's organization (Battle.net) or being subjected to its terms of service, which Blizzard considers legally binding and may change at any time. I have no interests in my personal information being stored indefinitely in Blizzard's marketing database - ready to be sold to the highest bidder, should the company ever become desperate enough for the cash.

If I play this game, it will be a pirated and cracked version that does not have these defects.

Re:SC2 will require internet to install

[Desler]

Why connect to some distance server for all that traffic when the overhead could be kept on the local LAN for strictly local gameplay?

You've apparently never played on Battle.net before. Battle.net has never worked this way. The people all directly connect to each other there is no remote server involved at all. There is no reason to expect this behavior to change.

Re:Starcraft 2 will not be defined by single playe

[__aagctu1952]

The game has amazing re-playability (multi-player). You can only play single player campaigns for so long until it gets boring. Trust me when I say that the majority of the Starcraft gaming community have NOT been playing single player campaign for 10 years.

Sure. But how many copies will a pure single-player gamer (who will only play through the game once and then shelve it) buy? One. How many copies will a hardcore multi-player gamer (who will play it obsessively for years and years until he finally croaks in an internet café) buy? One. Once you've bought your copy, it doesn't matter how much or for how long you play it. The money's already changed hands.
Good multi-player is a selling point. But don't delude yourself for a minute that the fanatic cliché is who the game is developed for - it's developed to lure in as many customers as possible, and there are a hell of a lot more casual than hard-core gamers.

Like the Anonymous Coward, I don't really care about Starcraft II's multiplayer (and much for the same reasons) - but if its single-player mode is as good as Starcraft I's, I'll buy it in a heartbeat.

Re:Question is...

[m.ducharme]

Hmm, I can see it now. " BRAINS! BRAIIIII- what? Oh, right, well we're attacking your bunkers, you see, we're all hungry for BRAINS! BRAAAAII--right, sorry. ...The Supply Depots? Really? Are there brains there? No. So what.....munitions. Er, munitions? ARe they delicious? No? So why would....the contract? What contract? I see. Yes. Section 11(b)...in every case the zombies shall attack the supply depots.....bunkers are off limits until such time... Hm. I had no idea. Well let us get to it then, and we'll meet again here in a few. Off we go chaps! MUNITIONS! MUNIIIIIITTIOOOOOONS!"

Re:DRM + Restricted off-line play = FAIL

[melikamp]

I hate and distrust non-free software more than most, but I actually am OK with this type of non-free for big-budget computer games. Basically, I must be able to run them in the userland, privilege wise, and I want my privacy preserved (no submitting hardware/other software specs without my consent). Beyond that, they can do whatever chit-chat with the home-base they want. They can require uninterrupted Internet connection. (I do, so why cannot they? Being on the Internet is quite a priority for me, and I am not alone here.) A title can submit my usage statistics for itself. I am OK with all that producer-serving crap because its just a freaking game. It's a pure luxury and an expensive work of art, and I am thankful for having it at all. As far as copy protection goes, this is the least annoying one for me as a user. This is by far the best (for everyone) way to pay for big-budget games. The only thing better is paying up front for a free game.