I have been playing SC since it came out and never have I let it go. The game is just so much fun. No matter what game I play none lasted as long as SC has for me. DoW and CoH were not bad I just think that SC is better. I never really liked the cover systems they always seemed to make strongpoints on the map while in Starcraft all the maps are mirrored meaning no one gets a terain advantage.

I also have to argue about what you said about South Korea. If they had not latched on to it I’m not sure it would have matter when I was a kid no one really cared what South Korea did. They just saw and bought a great game. I also think the RTS market is still going strong well maybe not like the FPS or RPG markets but it is not stagnant. I have been buying and playing RTS’s all my life and they are the only games I don’t throw out, trade, sell on eBay etc. The games just having a lasting appeal for me.

I also don’t ever remember being this excited for any game sequel. SC never needs to change. What Blizzard is doing right now is perfect in my eyes (but they could do it a little faster). I may not be an expert critict but I am the consumer. I am the one who buys the game. Nothing is going to change my mind about this game I am going to buy it and I will love it.

Now if you’ll excuse me I’m going to go play Starcraft.

DoW, 1 and 2, are not bad games, they are actually very good. However, making a game easier to play does not make it better. Sure, it makes it more accessible and perhaps more fun for newcomers to become involved in, yet the fact is that it makes the game far too easy. It’s supposed to be a game, a challenge, a competition between you and someone/something else, not an interactive movie. I used to be someone who hated multiplayer, hated competition in games, always playing single player. I could always win that way, I was the best. I soon learnt the real challenge lies in multiplayer, the continual challenge and self-improvement, having to be creative and innovate rather than do the same thing to win. Why have Blizzard been so successful? Because they’re games are hard and have great depth in skill level, yet are extremely well balanced. Why is WC3/SC so fun to watch? Because I see things that take immense skill. People like Moon and Boxer will do things I can only dream of pulling off, the same as people like David Beckham or Michael Jordan, for example. It’s enthralling to watch others who are so gifted.

Also, how can you claim the WC3 e-sports scene is a failure? It’s been going, and still is, for about 6 years. Sure, it’s coming to an end but it’s easily the second most popular e-sport RTS. How can you even say it fails when DoW has virtually no or very little competitive scene.

However, I will agree that SC2 does need to be different than SC. I can understand the SC scene being very protective of SC1′s competitive game and scene, yet the way some people want it makes you think “Isn’t that just the same as SC1?” Big gameplay changes and mechanics need to be introduced and have been already, to an extent, yet those changes should not make the game extremely simplistic or easy. Does it feel like an expansion? Perhaps, in certain aspects but the game will be different enough to be new and fresh, yet retain the same enthrallment and skill-level of SC. I certainly hope for a more micro-based game in SC2, yet with the explosive pace of SC (compared to the somewhat slow WC3) and for sure, a good amount of base and resource management. Basically, SC’s macro and and speed, but with more emphasis on WC3-like micro.

Sure, games are reaching an age where they are based on accessibility and a wide audience, but I believe there will always be a competitive audience and scene for RTS games, which will continue to flock to Blizzard’s games; just look at the SC following 11 years on. The game barely changed patch wise for a long time (same for WC3, which has been basically the same patchwise for a few years now). Yet Blizzard always had a depth in their games where the players, not the producer, could change the face of the game completely (known essentially as the meta-game). That’s what makes it exciting, that’s why, unless Blizzard gets it completely wrong, which I haven’t the slightest worry about, I’ll be playing SC2 in the very near future; it’s a game I can play for a lifetime and still not know or be able to do a quarter of the things the best can do, the fact I’ll always be chasing others, looking to improve. That, to me anyway, is a game.

I just posted a response article over at StarFeeder, here:

http://starfeeder.gameriot.com/blogs/Looking-Forward-1/Can-Blizzard-do-it-again

Starcraft was and is a great game. The gameplay is well balanced and varied, and it deserves the acclaim it gets. I don’t actually like the game that much for other reasons, but strictly in terms of gameplay, it deserves its spot in the pantheon of classics.

I agree that the second one should be changing up the formula more. I agree that the genre has almost completely stagnated. I had hoped that Starcraft 2 could be the game to push things forward. I don’t see that happening, unfortunately, and that makes me sad. I have a feeling that, no matter how good the game is, there will be a huge backlash against it. On one side, the people who wanted more change aren’t getting it. On the other, the people who have played starcraft for 15 years will have to adapt to differences, which could be very frustrating. It will be extremely difficult for Blizzard to please one, let alone both, of these sides; the way they are heading now makes me think they won’t please either.

I’m not planning on buying the game; suffice it to say, however well balanced the gameplay is, at a very fundamental level it is incredibly unrealistic, as every RTS ever made is. I had hoped Starcraft 2 would change this, and it isn’t.

I don’t want the same great game. I want a new great game.

I for one do not want to see simplification of gameplay. The best part of Starcraft is that its too immensely complicated to master completely. A game that appeals to the masses doesn’t redefine the genre, it just focuses on a different target group.

Personally, I can’t think of many more things Blizzard could do to revolutionize their game without taking away the magic of the original. It is true that they are not innovating major gameplay changes in the RTS genre, but, I can’t really think of any that would not hurt it. With RTSes in general, I don’t think theres much you can really innovate without changing the genre. Also, how could they call it a sequel if its a completely different game?

It comes down to what you look for in an RTS game. But at the same time, I don’t see Dawn of War being played by pro-leagues in cash tournaments…