SC2 lives off nostalgia?

[Sieni]

I never played the first Starcraft but I loved the second one.

So... no, it doesn't live off nostalgia.

 

[Mortons4ck]

Man, Chess really lives off of nostalgia. It's so basic. I don't get how anyone can play a game without 3d combat, tactical zoom, terrain bonuses and cover mechanics. Chess is so dated.

I heard Bishops were getting sniper rifles in the next update.

OT: I disagree with the original quote about needing "new shit." Sure innovation is important but to be fair Blizzard didn't just rehash all of its old units and put them in 3D. They designed new units and meticulously balanced them. I don't know how much "new[er] shit" you can get.

If you tried to change StarCraft 2 too much from what StarCraft 1 was, it ceases to be StarCraft. Just look at the "new shit" that 2K is doing to the next X-COM game.

 

[JeanLuc761]

I'm outta this thread - just repeating the same things from this thread and others.

I give up.

Well what do you expect? You're trying to convince fans of a game that the game isn't as good as they think it is.

I happen to love Starcraft 2 and you aren't going to convince me otherwise; this isn't a bad thing, it just means the fans have different taste than you do.

 

[lacktheknack]

well, for starters
SNIPP'D

Better delete that image before you incur mod wrath.

 

[Pearwood]

If you ask me, Starcraft 2 is the way it is for a simple and irritating reason. The fans. From my discussions with them, they seem to be incapable of letting Starcraft 2 by anything other than a shinier Starcraft. I can't fathom this pro-stagnation viewpoint, and I'm not saying that all Starcraft fans are like this, but this is my theory.

It's mostly the fans fault, but it's also Blizzard's fault for giving into them.

I agree with this mostly but I'm not sure you can say it's stagnated after two games. I'd agree that in terms of gameplay Starcraft 2 is primarily a graphical upgrade although there are fairly significant changes in layout like I mentioned with the high ground, observatories and the rich mineral fields which give a tactical advantage if used.

The story of Starcraft 2 has progressed a fair amount in a believable way and the campaigns are VERY good at teaching someone who has never played RTS the basics. So I'd say that Starcraft 2 is polished rather than changed, the campaigns are massively improved to the point where someone completely new to the genre who has tried and failed to understand SC1 and war3 can play and get better fairly quickly. And with a game that's all about multiplayer the ability of the single player to prepare you for playing online is the key thing.

 

[Amnestic]

(well, Tychus and Tosh were awesome anyway)

You didn't like Matt or Nova?

And Major Ocelot Prince Valerian! He was cool too. Not to mention Duran? Dr. Narud :3

Plus we got to see a bunch of upcoming Protoss characters, and Artanis' funky new hat. ;D

imma take what you said about protoss people here.

i personally love the protoss like no other; and when i played the mission where you get the entire council of badassery, i was in heaven. Selendis was my favorite tho; she came in with the carriers *sigh* simply beautiful.

Second female Protoss as I recall, and the first female "High" Protoss we've met.

And I dunno, when Artanis warped in with The Shield of Aiur, his new rank of Hierarch (which I think makes him the current highest-ranked Protoss alive? Except maybe Zeratul who's...Patriarch, I guess, of the Dark Templar) talking about how these were the last of the entire Protoss race and that their final stand would burn a battle so bright it would live on for eternity... Was just awesome.

Although it would've been hella funny if we'd ranked up from Phoenixes to Void Rays to Carriers and then Artanis warps in piloting a lone Scout.

 

[Grubnar]

On its own merit, Starcraft 2 is a great sequel to a great game. I feel that it takes a winning formula, and fine tunes it even further. If you liked/loved the first game, you'll most assuredly like/love this one. I wouldn't have asked for anything different. However, SC2 stands squarely on the shoulders of its predecessor. If this had been another IP from another developer, it would have been laughed back into the RTS dark ages from whence it came.

The genre has moved on from these old school gameplay mechanics. Games such as World in Conflict, Homeworld, Dawn of War, and Company of Heroes were celebrated for their advancements in RTS gameplay. While I enjoy the occasional romp through memory lane, I think the genre should continue to move forward. I just hope other publishers/developers mimic SC2's style of gameplay trying to cash in on its success; thinking that what works for Blizzard will work for them. I'd say we all lose in that scenario...

EDIT: I would just like to note that this is in regards to the general gameplay of SC2. The story and single player elements of this game are well worth the price alone =).

Well said good sir. Better than I could have. I hope you do not mind me quoting you to show how I share your opinion.

 

[Generic Difference]

Man, Chess really lives off of nostalgia. It's so basic. I don't get how anyone can play a game without 3d combat, tactical zoom, terrain bonuses and cover mechanics. Chess is so dated.

I heard Bishops were getting sniper rifles in the next update.

Yeah, well Pawns are getting a charge and AoE move so it'll all blance out so long as you rush.

Also,

At the end of the day one decision determines whether or not you win at all games. Sometimes the decision to play is enough.

 

[ParkourMcGhee]

Starcraft, and to a lesser extent Starcraft II are spot-on. The games have perfected that style of game play and offer hours of fun while still being highly polished in their presentation.

I think Starcraft II suffers a bit because it is being compared to it's predecessor, much like how the latter Halo titles are unfavourably compared to the original, but all are quality titles in their own right.

Actually I think it's as good as it's predecessor excluding the pre-ending (that felt a bit rushed), and the fact that you have to keep getting new units slowly throughout the campaign - hopefully when they do make the 2 sequels, they won't do this again as people will already have been introduced. Then again they could do the same thing just for protoss and zerg :/.

Apart from that I quite liked the game. Especially since I managed to complete the campaign on normal mode (without cheats) when I usually fail at RTS .

Edit:

Major Ocelot Prince Valerian!

I literally burst out laughing at that.

 

[Wicky_42]

It really bothers me that people consider games like Starcraft 1/2 to be superior to a next generation RTS such as World In Conflict/Company of Heroes. Starcraft 1 was a great game when it came out in 1998, but when people keep saying shit like "Starcraft is the best RTS" I facepalm.

Really? A game with basic RTS mechanics (though it lacked que-build back in the day) is superior to 3d graphics, complex combat, and tactical depth? I really like Age of Empires 2, classic RTS, but do you know what? It isn't as good as Homeworld 2 (I have heard the first one is better) or Opposing Fronts, I know difference between nostalgia and game that is still good.

...

You need to do new shit if you want to stay fresh, and you need to perfect something to stay superior in the future; or else it becomes a game that lives on nostalgia.

How many RTS games other than CnC are out that have a resource collection mechanism? How many other RTS games have more than 2 races? How many RTS games even have 2 races with more than cosmetic and token differences? How about three delicately balanced unique races?

You can rag on about it being based on a 12 year old game and lacking in 'innovation' but lets take a step back and look at the bigger picture: nothing really fitted into that slot for a long time as the fashionable thing to do became to scrap base macro management and focus on titchy squad-based games. Personally, that whole thing wore thin for me pretty damn quickly, so far from being a tired rehashing of past dynamics SC2 is more a burst of refreshing air.

No other game that I've played in a VERY long time has made me as actually happy as my first games of SC2 online. I can't honestly think of any game that I've enjoyed playing more. World in Conflict's campaign was great fun but was fundamentally limited by the lack of macro, imo. Red Alert went too silly for my sensibilities, and CnC I lost interest in after the first and lacked the tactical depth I yearned for. Earth Assault was a load of balls, Supreme Commander 2 was too spammy for my tastes and the campaign was crap. DoW 2's campaign was good fun but the multiplayer I found to be boring and limited - I want more than 3 or 5 squads, dammit!

You say that 'you need to do new shit to stay fresh'. I'd make the point that perfecting something that no-one else has mastered is enough on its own, especially when it fills a gap left in the current market. I'd go further and say that 12 years is probably long enough to leave a sequel and not just have it being dismissed as a cash-in or something. If nostalgia was the only thing fuelling SC2 then ask why the UK outsold the first's 12 year total sales in the first couple of weeks?

PS - SC2 does have 3D graphics, complex combat, and tactical depth. If you missed the last two you're doing it wrong and ought to have a look at how the good guys play - check out HDstarcraft on Youtube for some education.

 

[sapphireofthesea]

Man, Chess really lives off of nostalgia. It's so basic. I don't get how anyone can play a game without 3d combat, tactical zoom, terrain bonuses and cover mechanics. Chess is so dated.

I must argue here.

Chess has 3D combat, and if you have a magnifying glass there's tactical zoom as well.

10 points for that one man.

And to add my two cents. I always loved star craft, perfect for blowing off a few hours. I have yet to get SC2 mad but my pick it up sometime if it is more of the same.
I however got into Red Alert 3 simply because they managed to get unit balance spot on right in that, litterally no single unit rush i have tried so far work at all, tactics were always necessary.

So will wait and see, but I must admit I have spent many many days just running single battles against multiple computers in starcraft and it never ever got old, even when i picked it back up a few years ago for a few months (lost it due to issues). So I guess really if it wasn't broken then it didn't need fixing.

 

[IamQ]

I never played Starcraft but I love Starcraft 2. Thread terminated.

Yeah, the same for me.

 

[Evil the White]

I never played Starcraft but I love Starcraft 2. I like how I can actually play against people of a similar skill level to me, rather than random matches with super-ownage skills that made a new account to hide it.

 

[SultanP]

Oh, great. Like we don't have enough people hating on things they don't know shit about already.

I don't see why you feel the need to keep making Starcraft 2 hate threads. You already made at least one before, and people wrote in that one. Now you make yet another one. You seem to be doing this just for attention, and really, making the same thread over and over again is not going to make more people agree with you.

Basically: Starcraft 2 isn't the same game as Starcraft. It's not one game coming out in three pieces. A monthly subscription fee is normal for a larger and more robust MMO. Stop feeling so god damn self important. Get your head out of your ass. Starcraft 2's story does deserve a thread because people would like to discuss it, and yes, there is something to discuss. Hating on a big company that lots of people love doesn't make you cool. Jumping on the hater bandwagon doesn't make you cool. Hating on things you don't know shit about actually makes you less cool. No, I'm not a rabid fanboy, baseless and uninformed bitching and moaning just pisses me off, especially when it's a complaint that has been seen thousands of times before, and even presented better than you're doing it now. Declaring that you've decided to hate something you don't know anything about doesn't make it less ridiculous.

Well, guess I've put a collective answer to a bunch of your recent threads/posts into this one post.

 

[Bravo 21]

Man, Chess really lives off of nostalgia. It's so basic. I don't get how anyone can play a game without 3d combat, tactical zoom, terrain bonuses and cover mechanics. Chess is so dated.

I must argue here.

Chess has 3D combat, and if you have a magnifying glass there's tactical zoom as well.

as for cover, expendable pawns, ftw

 

[Wicky_42]

Yes and I wouldn't have had a problem with that if they had finished the terran part of the damn game, but they didn't, they left it wide open for more terran missions we will never get to play because that part of the story is over, we get the zerg and protoss parts next, not terran part 2.

Well gee, maybe they could, I dunno, continue the Terran story while still playing as the Zerg and Protoss? You know, like they did in the original Starcraft? Or in Warcraft 3 (with their respective races, obviously)?

So they are going to just put what should be the most epic terran battles and the most civil war as background story that you hear in news reports, because that just feels like a rip off. I would have been happy as all hell with the game if they had managed to finish at least something in the first part, I would have absolutely nothing to ***** about other then I don't want to wait for the rest of it...

Sooo...

Spoiler: end game reveal

Invading Char, fighting off basically the entirety of the Zerg army and then wiping them out using the device you've been gathering all damn game and in the process reuniting Raynor with his lost love

wasn't enough of an 'achievement' for you? What did you want - some sort of badge for your profile? Oh, wait you got that too

But seriously, all Raynor's got ahead of him is hell and hardship as the Dominion will be free to hunt him if Valerian turns on him, and he's done his able best to piss off religious zealot Protoss who may be being manipulated by a force that wants to eat the galaxy.

The other two races have much more interesting developing stories that can unfold as Raynor valiantly holds the line or whatever - Kerrigan readying the Zerg for the end times and Zeratul rallying the Protoss to go after the hybrids and perhaps double-teaming the big bad with the Zerg in a climatic end game.

 

[Dr.Nick]

I agree with the OP quote, not the OP himself =p.

Really this sums it up though

If this had been another IP from another developer, it would have been laughed back into the RTS dark ages from whence it came.

That fact makes me dislike SC2 already.

 

[Condiments]

This has me FLABERGASTED that you people believed SC2 would have drastically deviated from its previous iteration. This backlash surrounding its 'unoriginality' would have been a whisper compared to the absolute shitstorm if they messed with things. Starcraft isn't just a game, its a freakin cultural phenomenon! Its an actual sport in Korea, and the fact people play STILL so long after its release is a testament to its quality. It deserved a current gen update with a pleasing continuation to its narrative and that is what we got. Expecting anything else is a delusional and irrational.

Also, If videogames sequels merit were solely decided on their ability to innovate of their predecessors, then we would have very few good sequels.

Don't believe me? Lets list recent favorites...
Mario Galaxy 2
COD MW2
God of war 3
Halo 3
Uncharted 2
Assassin's Creed 2
etc.