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:
I liek how the drones that “escape” the lava stand right NEXT TO the collection point with hands full of ore.
You wouldn’t see that happen in Rise of Nations (<3)
Mmmm rise of nations, the one of the most awesome RTS games ever made. to bad they made that stupid Rise of Legends game instead of making rise of nations 2 (then maybe trying something new)
I thought Rise of Legends was good, but Rise of Nations was pretty mediocre.
@Serondal
Amen. Rise of Nations stands as one of only two RTS’s I’ve ever played that has really stood the test of time. I’m still playing it to this day, and I owned it when it was brand new.
The other one, incidentally, is the (slightly inferior to RoN but still very good) Dawn of War: DC (and occasionally SS, but I can’t really get behind that one as a classic).
Interesting videos, but I think we all know competitive multiplayer is where it’s going to be all at.
But you will need to play through the single player to get to that stage and from what I see it looks fun.
“The criteria for a game to be popular competitively isn’t necessarily the same as the criteria for a great single player or casual (non-”professional”) multiplayer game.”
“Criteria” is in the plural; either use “criterion” to indicate singular, or change “isn’t” to “aren’t” in line with its plural subject.
In my opinion, the best games are simply the most polished, end of story. Sure, innovation’s great and ought to be praised where present, but focussing only on innovation is very short-sighted. In 10 years’ time, no-one will find it easy to remember that a given game was the first to showcase a given feature, and it won’t *feel* new to play at all. However, a perfectly polished game will *always* be perfectly polished (barring patches, &c…), and will be enjoyable for that reason in perpetuity.
I therefore assert that one ought to hope for innovation, but [i]demand[/i] polish (even to the exclusion of the former). For this reason, Starcraft and Warcraft III are the two best RTSs yet made, and unpolished innovators like DoW2 ought and shall be forgotten quickly.
In my mind, I associate a cheap-thrills, what’s-the-newest-pretty-thing-I-can-play audience with the console market in contrast with the longer attention-spanned audience found on the PC where 12-year-old games are the most popular/respected/admired (SC, Counterstrike, DotA’s getting there).
If you consider yourself a true PC gamer, then I would suggest that you start to appreciate the option with a longer attention span (and thus, one might say, more developed intelligence): polish, over innovation.
“I therefore assert that one ought to hope for innovation, but [i]demand[/i] polish”
Please use the proper syntax for style markup; the result should be demand, not [i]demand[/i]. I’m not sure how you missed that when the markup instructions are right above the comment submit button. Perhaps you didn’t proofread carefully enough. Boy, being pedantic about minor grammatical or markup errors sure is fun and contributes to the discussion.
Now, onto your actual points:
In 10 years’ time, no-one will find it easy to remember that a given game was the first to showcase a given feature, and it won’t *feel* new to play at all.
Yeah, no one remembers Rainbow Six as one of the first mainstream FPS games to feature realistic weapon damage; or Half-Life as the game that advanced FPS narrative past “there are monsters in this level and you want to shoot them”; or Thief as the originator of the stealth FPS; or Company of Heroes as the game that popularized the importance of cover (i.e. not having your troops stand still in the open firing at a bunker like turrets). Since these games don’t have disproportionately large multiplayer followings they were clearly commercial and critical failures.
However, a perfectly polished game will *always* be perfectly polished (barring patches, &c…), and will be enjoyable for that reason in perpetuity.
Besides a small hardcore demographic (i.e. people still playing QWTF to this day) players will generally migrate to a sequel if it is sufficiently good compared to its parent because they want some kind of advancement or change to the game. The change could be something fundamental like gameplay mechanics, functional like the interface, or superficial like the graphics.
For this reason, Starcraft and Warcraft III are the two best RTSs yet made, and unpolished innovators like DoW2 ought and shall be forgotten quickly.
Please explain how DoW2 is unpolished. You certainly can’t argue that on the multiplayer side, considering how a major multiplayer rebalancing has been released recently based on player feedback. You’re taking popularity and longevity as an absolute indicator of merit. I think Warcraft 3 is a better game (that is, more fun) than Starcraft. Since Starcraft is more popular does that make me wrong?
In my mind, I associate a cheap-thrills, what’s-the-newest-pretty-thing-I-can-play audience with the console market in contrast with the longer attention-spanned audience found on the PC where 12-year-old games are the most popular/respected/admired (SC, Counterstrike, DotA’s getting there).
Wait, I thought console players were the ones who bought sequels that were essentially yearly graphics/roster/weapon upgrades and PC gamers were the refined connoisseurs of electronic entertainment that appreciated innovation and experimentation. I must be getting my baseless stereotypes mixed up; I’ve got to stop skipping the Two Minutes Hate.
If you consider yourself a true PC gamer, then I would suggest that you start to appreciate the option with a longer attention span (and thus, one might say, more developed intelligence): polish, over innovation.
Translation: If you don’t agree with me you are stupid, not a “true” PC gamer like the rest of us, and you probably are ugly too.
Lol @ TRUE PC GAMER!
Kudos to GB for referencing 1984 and kicking an elitist’s ass