More hyperbolic hyperbiff inbound from Blizzard, who are going to be causing fanmen to punch the air and whoop at Blizzcon later this week. It’s time for the Starcraft II trailers, and we have a CGI sequence with Zeratul up to his Protoss-business in some space-ruins – not Blizzard’s best, but okay – and then plenty of in-game footage, showing off storyline, environmental effects, and tiny men shooting each other unto death. Also robo-things with lasers for eyes, which usually go down okay in the Rossignol household.
Other SC2 news includes: No co-op campaign, and some kind of DLC, as well as a “trial”, which will be released after the game hits the shelves/internet.
Related Stories:
Aw, thought there was a new cinematic out. That one’s a year or so old, no?
Well, it’ll certainly be on my wish-list for Christmas of 2011.
Is the cinematic old? I’d not seen it before. Apologies for reposting if it is ancient.
Am I the only one who can’t seem to get any kick out of starcraft 2? It looks a bit too, well, archaic compared to the newer brands of RTSs. I really like the DoW style of game where units are a group of multiple infantry rather than just one unit. Also it seems like too much of the same thing, and considering that thing will be almost 12 years old by the time this one is released, I think blizzard could really have done better for themselves.
No, Professor. I’m completely uninspired by the gameplay vids they’ve posted. The gameplay all looks very tepid.
Aye, it’s an old cinematic.
@Jim: That’s the same cinematic that they released at the last blizzcon, but I think Kerrigan’s voice is different. The one a year ago used the Kerrigan from SC1, where as this one seems to be the new voice actor.
Seeing Kerrigan again after all these years made me sqwee.
@Professor
“Also it seems like too much of the same thing”
Y’know, the more unreasonable set of fans is saying the exact opposite.
I find it funny.
At least Robert Clotworthy’s back as Raynor.
Psychopomp:
I know, that’s the problem with blizzard really. They haven’t done anything groundbreaking ever. All they’ve ever done was take an existing formula and master it to the point of a diamond sheen. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but it is dangerous when a company stops thinking of new things and begins to stagnate into a massive cash machine (EA). Personally, I’m a huge diablo fan and I’m looking forward to diablo 3, but I really wish they went and made it slightly different, with newer gameplay elements, or world design or concepts. Not just a graphics tune up and no inventory system.
I really wish blizzard starts making original content soon, seems like they’re stuck in a vicious cycle of incredible money.
But I gotta hand it to them, they make the most dumbfounding CGI of any company, be it gaming or film or whatever.
“…and tiny men shooting each other unto death.”
Sadly, the unit size(and design) is so FUBAR it’s anything but. Haven’t seen such preposterousness on the battlefield since Dark Colony.
Does anyone honesly care about it’s age if it’s fun?
Blizzard has two unannounced projects in the works, one of them being definitely new IP (though an MMO, so I don’t really care).
As for SC2 being “archaic” – who cares? If the gameplay is still good, there’s no sense in making something different just for the sake of being different. Gimmicks are no substitute for gameplay depth, after all.
It looks pretty, but also pretty boring. SC1 with a graphics update. I still think DOW2 is the far superior for the effort to do something new. I wish Relic had had Blizzard’s time and resources for DOW2…THAT would have been amazing.
BOOOOOOOOOORING
Warcraft 1 gameplay, with flashy graphics. That’s why shogun total war was so awesome, too bad that series has turned to crap too.
I am not going to buy this, will instead look forward to having new takes on the RTS genre.
The infantry combat in the video was awful. The marines just stand there firing like robots until they win due to sheer numbers. It looks outdated compared to games like Company of Heroes and Dawn of War 2 where the player would have to take cover and use grenades/satchels/artillery to have a chance against the bunkers or heavy weapon emplacements against the living statue things.
On the other hand the Battlecruiser looks a lot more impressive now being able to barrage enemy swarms instead of having to individually pew pew every Zergling.
I’d been concerned (and still am a bit) that this was just going to be a graphical update of the original game with some new (and interesting-sounding) single player campaigns, but you know what? Who cares! With the RTS genre rapidly evolving into “baby’s first tactical wargame” it’s nice to see a game that emphasizes base-building again, even if I basically have played it before. If the campaign is actually non-linear in a meaningful sense and barring unforeseen unpleasantness, I’m probably in.
yep i think it’s a slightly different version of an old trailer
Professor: I certianly agree that Diablo 3 isn’t exactly the most imaginative and revolutionary game, but there are some improvements that go beyond graphics and inventory: the health orb thingies replacing the continuous stream of potions and the skill rune system could make D3 distinctly different from D2. Also, wasn’t there something about actual fighting companions, that is NPCs (the C very much upper-case) instead of the scores of random mercenaries?
It’s what Blizzard does, take a known concept and polish it to a mirror finish, then release it. It has made them more money than most other big Dev houses, so you can’t blame them for continuing the trend. Adding some neat new stuff is then just icing on the cake.
I must say that I’m only interested for the single-player campaign, as I’m far to slow for online play. And it’s looking damn good. ^_^
At least with Diablo they’ve changed SOME things. Warcraft 3 wasn’t just Warcraft II. WoW is the most successful MMO on the market. But Starcraft 2 is, as someone said in PC Gamer (I heard it from their podcast) just Starcraft with a “2″ stuck at the end. From what I’ve seen they’ve changed almost nothing.
I can’t really say I agree with the people who wish StarCraft 2 was more like DoW2. We already have DoW2. If I want to play DoW2… I’ll go play DoW2.
SC2 is turning out to be exactly the kind of game I want it to be, and I’m really excited for it (though I do have to admit that I’m looking forward to the mission editor even more. The editors have always been my favorite part of every Blizzard RTS, and they get more and more powerful with each new game, so I can’t wait to see what SC2’s editor is capable of).
@Vinraith: I agree. This is almost like “arcade RTS” compared to some of the newer games, but that’s actually a nice change. (Well, there’s C&C as well, but that’s never really managed to get multiplayer right, which Starcraft does)
A few of my friends recently got back into Starcraft proper, and after trying to play a few rounds with them it occurs to me that one shouldn’t underestimate the effect of basic logistical and UI updates.
I mean, things like being able to zoom out a bit further than SC’s tiny, tiny screen? Not being limited to selecting 20 units at a time?
And from the looks of things (and that hands-on a few posts down), units do things like organizing themselves based on type. Enough little touches like that, I think, could make a huge difference in taking the “wrestling with the clunky and outdated UI” factor out of what’s otherwise still a pretty decent game.
@KickassAssassin
Excellent point, I’d forgotten about the mods. Mods were a large part of the original Starcraft’s longevity for me, and virtually the only reason I played Warcraft 3 for any length of time. A new Blizzard mod platform for RTS is worth the price of entry all by itself.
radomaj: They’ve changed plenty with SC2, even in the multiplayer. There have been a ton of updates to the UI to make it more modern (unlimited unit selection and multiple building selection, for example). More than half of the units for each race have been replaced with new ones, there are a bunch of new mechanics like units that can jump up and down cliffs, warp-in for protoss that lets them get units out into the battlefield more quickly, etc. that will have a pretty big impact on the way the game is played online. The races are looking to be much more diverse in the way they play than they were in the original game (which is saying something, since StarCraft was the game that really revolutionized having races with uniquely different play styles in an RTS game, while keeping the game well-balanced).
I’ll take SC2’s polish and character over DoW’s or CoH’s innovation and bland atmosphere anyday. Besides, Blizzard looks to be doing plenty of innovation on the campaign side of things with between mission activities, perpetual upgrades, plot-relevant mission choosing, etc.
“There have been a ton of updates to the UI to make it more modern (unlimited unit selection and multiple building selection, for example)”
That ain’t modern, that’s pure basics, akin to a decent 1997 RTS UI which the original StarCraft (1998) completely missed for no valid reason. Good thing to see the sequel doing something a little better after more than eleven years but that still won’t take away the fact you’ll have to micro and babysit the shit out of every little thing just to appeal to hyped Koreans.
I like the new gameplay bits as much as anyone (the capturable radar, the jump jets, the obscuring terrain and such) but truth be told they’ve been done plenty of times before and in a much more significant, non-gimmicky way in other RTSs.
StarCraft II shouldn’t be DoW II but it shouldn’t be mostly a remake in multiplayer/skirmish either (hell, even a new race or a really big new gameplay mechanic would have been nice). Thank god Blizzard did learn that there’s more to do with singleplayer RTS campaigns than just the linear street of the first SC. Now if they would just realize the multiplayer game needs a radical shift as well…
I wouldn’t really say SC2 is just SC with a 2 on it, that’s a very simplistic view of it. A person can make anything sound dumb if they really tried. Soccer is just a bunch of guys running around kickin a ball. Trying to deconstruct something to its most basic and trivial components, without any context, has never been a valid form of criticism.
Oh dear, people are comparing apples with oranges once again. “Starcraft 2 needs to be more like Dawn of War 2″, “Starcraft 2 needs to be more like Shogun.” (WTF?) As KikassAssassin says, if you want to play those games then go play them, whilst those that want to play the Starcraft 2 can play that.
My only concern with this game is whether it will be able to sustain itself across the 30 missions with just a single race. The missions are going to have to be varied, rather than the standard RTS fair of build base in this corner and destroy base in that corner. The video looks like that is what they are striving for, as does the hands-on posted earlier.
Meet the new game, same as the old game.
I’m sure it’ll sell like hot cakes, and get Editors Choice™ thrown at it’s feet, and I’m also sure it’ll live up to Blizzards usual standards of high polish, but I just can’t help but wonder what all the fuss is about.
It doesn’t look particularly fun, or interesting in my opinion, and it just strikes me as kind of absurd that it’s taken 12 years for a massive developing titan like Blizzard to pump out a slightly better looking version of a primitive late 90’s RTS.
/shrug
I’m pretty excited. I loved Starcraft when it first came out, and had a blast playing with my friends. While there have been a couple disappointments about its release (no co-op, no lan play, needing to buy a whole new game for each class) in general I’m still really looking forward to it. I’m sad there seems to be such a negative reaction! Hopefully when it comes out it will be good so good everyone can jump back on the bandwagon. Right now it seems a little like a case of “Hate the Rich Industry Giant” is going on.
KickassAssassin is correct. There are hardly any mechanics left over from the original that have not been tinkered with. Unique death animations based on what type of unit kills the other. Varying mineral values to create higher value, riskier expansions. Line of sight doodads to create ambushes or scout terrain. Tons of new units and abilities plus new race-wide macro mechanics to further differentiate each side.
And it looks as if the single player campaign is probably going to have a much expanded army, keeping all of the units that were too experimental or unbalanced for competitive online play.
People are hating on this because it cashes in very successfully on the familiarity of the original StarCraft. “It looks like therefore it must feel like.”
Yes it will probably play very much like a base-oriented RTS. No one in their right mind would expect them to abandon that in favor of a DoW/CoH/Whatever system. Blizzard is not going to completely repurpose an old IP that way. That’s what new IPs are for unless they are branching into a completely different genre (WoW.) And they certainly aren’t going to completely rethink StarCraft from the bottom up as an RTS, not with the Korean esports scene watching their every move. And most importantly, knowing Blizzard, it will play better than the original. And all of the little touches you aren’t noticing now will make you stop and wonder why no other RTS in this vein ever did them.
And then you’ll remember it’s Blizzard and that everyone’s been desperately copying them since Warcraft II.
I just love how the gatherer are staying there, looking at nothing, when the lava rose and the player had to place them aside.
Just like every fracking RTS out there, the gatherers are dumb fuckers. blarg I say, BLARG!
Honestly, DoW2 and its supposed reinvention of the RTS genre is a load of bull. That a company can somehow be appluaded for decreasing unit sizes and removing base building only to replace that with hotkey spamming is beyond me. Starcraft is an RTS, DoW2 is DotA with capture points and less snappy controls.
To all the people who are going against SC2’s modernization: When I’m saying that SC2 should be more like DoW2, I mean that it should take a step forward towards unfamilliar terrain and do something original and fresh. DoW2 took a big step forward and while it wasn’t a masterpiece it certainly was a good start. I know I for one got sick of generic resource gathering war RTSs somewhere around 2005. And starctaft 2 is the definition of generic by the looks of it.
First of all, what good is starcraft 2, even if it’s gonna be the best rts ever if i’ll be 100 years old when it comes out? Seriously now, 12 fucking years?
Second, people who want this to be like DOW 2 do not want an rts, they want an action game. Dawn of war 2 had NOTHING new. The cover system was already there from CoH. All they did here was remove the buildings and cut out 5 races from the previous.
It’s called “streamlining” the gameplay to “focus on action” or whatever bullshit reason they gave people. That’s the evolution of RTS games? Seems like a step backwards to me.
It’s so sad that the only choices are either the same formula from 15 years ago or cut 50% of the normal formula and add some flags all over the map so you can run around feeling like a game of tag and call it TACTICAL and improved gameplay.
Has anyone noticed the Zerg? Now that’s what I call a nice improvement.
The Zerg-rush at about 01:45 looked nicely organic, rather a flood of Zerg flowing around those buildings taking them with them than a simple attack. Really gives a nice impression on how this race works, weak as single but in large numbers like a large, terrifying flood. Great stuff :)
And I see that the comments given after you issue orders are still the same annoying crap. If I hear that snotty ‘ooutstaanding’ one more time I’m going to get sick.
That’s why I always turn these acknowledgments off..can’t it just beep to signal that you just clicked somewhere?
p.s.:
Why Starcraft 2 will be better (or at least way more fun) than any given RTS? Because of the Zerg. All the other WW2/pseudo-realistic stuff is just boring..more like the news on tv and tactical maybe..but more fun? Without the Zerg? Naaah…
Alez, DoW2 was more of a real time tactics game than a real time strategy game in that sense. But going from that to calling it an action game is kind of pushing it, don’t you think?
This gets a big MEH from me.
Blizzard may be the original masters of RTS, but the genre has evolved and left them in the dust from what these videos show. Of course it will be insanely popular and make a ton of money, but that’s not always an indication of good design is it?
Yes professor, it is pushing it. A better term would have been half an RTS. But then the phrase would have sounded stupid : people don’t want an rts, they want half an rts.
@Alez
If you think DoW 2 isn’t deep, you didn’t play it.
You may think you did, but you didn’t.
First of all, what good is starcraft 2, even if it’s gonna be the best rts ever if i’ll be 100 years old when it comes out? Seriously now, 12 fucking years?
Uh… if it’s literally the best RTS game ever, I doubt anyone worth listening to will care if it’s old. People still play the original, and that was far from perfect. And it won’t be old, anyway, will it? It’ll be new, by definition, when it’s released. And it’s still clearly being worked on, and not something that’s been sitting idle since 2005. I really don’t get what your point is here at all.
Cinematic was rather “meh” but the in game footage looks awesome.
@Anthony Damiani LOL :)
Sinister agent, i meant I WILL be 100 years old. Not the game. As in, the’re taking their sweet ass time to make the game, i’m sure it’s polished and shit but what good will that do to me when i’ll be too old to care about games? That’s my point, they should hurry the fuck up already.
Psychopomp then i’m a moron that needs buildinz and shits to blows up cause i likey them explodey things and not to run around the map and spam “retreat” every 2 minutes.
Also, chess is deep yet we prefer rts games because they have more stuff to fuck around with. An rts with identical sides of just 4 unit types could also be deep, but wouldn’t you want more? That’s what i’m saying.
@Professor: Blizzard tried something original with Warcraft 3 and learned their lesson there, I think. I remember reading an article where one of the designers talked about how the original design was a lot more similar to Sacrifice, with a third person camera on your hero and no bases at all. That got scrapped because they realised that it wasn’t going to sell nearly as well as if they just made a traditional RTS. Still, they kept the heroes and experience and items and whatnot within that traditional RTS gameplay, and you know what? A lot of people complained about exactly that aspect. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s great that Relic are doing well with Dawn of War – it’s nice to see that developers can take risks and still achieve good sales – but I really can’t blame Blizzard for the direction they’re taking with Starcraft 2. People have been trying to reinvent the genre since C&C first came out, and the graveyard of “brave new RTSs” is just too big.
@Alez
Complaining that DoW doesn’t have buildings, is like complaining that TF2 doesn’t have grenades. You’re completely missing the point.
And if your games of DoW could be accurately summed up as “run around, spam retreat,” you had some really, really shitty games.
SwiftRanger says:
“There have been a ton of updates to the UI to make it more modern (unlimited unit selection and multiple building selection, for example)”
That ain’t modern, that’s pure basics, akin to a decent 1997 RTS UI which the original StarCraft (1998) completely missed for no valid reason.
Thoroughly agree. I remember playing the demo of Starcraft back when it came out and after months of Total Annihilation I couldn’t see what the fuss was all about. Now I can look back and understand how impressive the balancing of the three sides was and the story certainly was better than TA’s “eternal war blah blah” garbage … but man I could not get past how clunky those controls were. Micromanaging resource collection? Select only a couple of units at a time? Was there even any waypointing? That stuff was basic already.
Alez: You know the game hasn’t been in development for 12 years, right? They’ve only been working on it since after Frozen Throne was finished, and they stopped working on it for a while to help finish up WoW sometime between then and now, too.
The game will be out next year (hopefully early next year, since their original plan was to have it done by the end of this year). I’d rather they take their time with it to make sure it’s a solid game when it comes out. It may be frustrating to wait so long, but it works out so much better in the long run when a developer actually takes their time to finish their games rather than push out a buggy, broken game like so many developers/publisher do.
Also, there’s no such thing as being too old to care about games. ;)