Poll: Starcraft 2: whats all the hype about?

[Mucinex-D]

Isn't that cute... OP thinks his opinion is a fact. You made a thread asking peoples opinions and then everyone who gives you one you feel a need to tell them they're wrong and make an excuse for why they think that way? You're making yourself look like an idiot. Your oversimplification of an entire genre of gaming did give me quite a laugh, but the fervor with which you pursue your opinion (and I feel I need to reiterate that it is only an opinion) makes you sound like a child who isn't getting his way. If you were going to whine this much about people telling you their opinion and their thoughts on your opinion you should never have said it in the first place.

"i'm not saying its logical that people find it fun, but fun FPS games are".

Why can the same not be said of a good RTS and just let it be at that?

"I just don't think that RTS games are interesting enough to hold a persons attention"

While that is your opinion and I respect that, I think you should take a look at how Korea has reacted to Starcraft and how much of the gaming world has reacted with the beta release of Starcraft 2.

I think anything else I have to say has already been covered. Remember that these are my opinions only.

OT: I'm looking forward to it. But I think the best RTS was the first Dawn of War, simply for the little things they added to the RTS style of gaming (cover, attacks aren't and instant hit, etc.).

edit: I'm not saying any of this to be cruel, simply to let you know you're coming off childish. Perhaps if you explained your opinions with actual facts to back it up, or even if you worded it in a manner that might be more understandable it would be clearer to take your meaning. As of yet your posts have shown a great lack of forethought.

 

[Acier]

No. I despise RTS games.

The thing I don't like about them is the lack of persistence. You play a long multiplayer match, you win or lose...and the next match, you're back to square one.

Give me something for my time.

If it makes you feel better you "level up" in story mode.

Although you're completely right about multiplayer

 

[Digitaldreamer7]

story is great but I don't like the RTS element of this, theres no strategy to "build xyz" units faster then the other person and zerg them. Once the most successful combination of units for the race you are playing is achieved its all about if you can click faster then the other person. I liked the Age of Empires games that my buddy and I would play for hours on end, even save them and play days later. There needs to be a strategy game where you have the option to play the long games.

 

[Woodsey]

No. I despise RTS games.

The thing I don't like about them is the lack of persistence. You play a long multiplayer match, you win or lose...and the next match, you're back to square one.

Give me something for my time.

You get a win or a loss, how is that not giving you something for your time? There's a singleplayer campaign mode with a story too.

OT:

Because it's a sequel to one of the most beloved games of all time, and in its multiplayer beta format it's already one of the best games of the year?

Just going out on a limb here.

This I'm guessing, although I don't know much about the beta. Not really an RTS man (the only one I've played is Rome: Total War - a hybrid of an RTS and TBS - and I always skip the battles!) but I can still appreciate why people like it.

I'm just too lazy to make 300,000* actions a minute.

[small]*Possibly an inaccurate figure[/small]

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

No. I despise RTS games.

The thing I don't like about them is the lack of persistence. You play a long multiplayer match, you win or lose...and the next match, you're back to square one.

Give me something for my time.

You get a win or a loss, how is that not giving you something for your time? There's a singleplayer campaign mode with a story too.

Campaigns are fun, usually. But there isn't much replay value to RTS campaigns.

 

[Jazzyluv2]

I love that the majority of people that play starcraft don't know diddly shit about it's gameplay. First off, the original starcraft is all about strategy. A 4 pool, is a strategy(building a spawning pool on 4th drone) And it's an all in strategy. Other games don't allow you to do shit liek that. I think that most RTS have strategy as simply a name labeled. The whole concept of strategy is of course a way of beating the opponents, some strats counter other strats. But people will just keep building zealots cause they can't fathom playing any other way.

You actually have to be good at a game to truly have any weight on your opinions when speaking about multiplayer games

 

[Digitaldreamer7]

You actually have to be good at a game to truly have any weight on your opinions when speaking about multiplayer games

This is inaccurate, I know with the first round of a new game if it's going to take actual strategy or if I can master the top 10 OP moves or just camp the graveyard to win. Starcraft is just that, master the top 10 hurry up and click as fast as you can ways to win.

BTW I love the starcraft universe, HATE the multiplayer for the reason above.

 

[TheTaco007]

It's fucking Starcraft.

 

[John Funk]

It consists very little of army balancing, positioning, and field manoeuvres.

That's actually ... really not correct.

It's very important to have a good mix if you're up against someone of equal skill. And positioning is CRUCIAL, especially as someone who plays the zerg. If my Zerglings can catch someone in an open field where they can surround them, then the fight is much more in my favor compared to if they can position themselves with their backs against a wall.

 

[Lancer723]

It's the sequel to one of the most popular and successful RTS' ever. If you had to pick several games upon which modern gaming is built on, the original Starcraft would undoubtedly be one of them. It's no surprise that SCII is so hyped, so many people played the original, as a matter of fact it was many RTS players (me) first ever introduction to the genre if not gaming in general.

Leaving aside my personal thoughts on your comments on not only the game, but your analysis of RTS' in general, you should at the very least be able to acknowledge that other people may like things you do not, and thus can be excited for something that does not excite you.

 

[Zani]

RTS is my second favourite genre, but I didn't really get into the first StarCraft, so I'm indifferent about the sequel, but it might be good.

 

[michael_ab]

Ya'll replying to a troll thread.

at least hes a smart troll, hittin starcraft is gonna get him ALOT of posts and views

 

[LogicNProportion]

I didn't find much to the original either.

I'm a 40k nerd though, so all I could do was say:

"Oh look, it's a Space Marine! Oh look, Eldar! Oh, look! Nids! Wait, they're rushing? Oh, I guess the game is over."

And then it was over, and I realized I had spent 20 bucks on a battle chest of programming I didn't want...

 

[YurdleTheTurtle]

So basically this is another one of those "I'm not really a fan of this genre, so I feel the need to question why other people like it" thread?

No offense intended, but these are getting old.

Yes, I do like RTS games, have played the original Starcraft, and am currently in the SC2 beta, but this could go the same way for other genres. When people ask "Why do people like this game?", it's a silly question.

Some people like the game, some people don't. People have diferent tastes, it's that simple. I don't understand why people have to go around questioning this.

 

[Kushin]

StarCraft was one of the most popular and successful RTS games ever made. Koreans play it professionally. So it's a big deal no matter how you look at it. I loved the 3 different races, the awesome story and the varied and interesting characters. The online play was where it was at though, with UMS games like Evolves and Golems. Actually, this thread gives me a good opportunity.

A few days ago, Gamestop called me and told me I had a SCII Beta Key to pick up, due to signing my name and phone number a few years back when it was supposedly going to be released in 2009. I would love to play, but in all honesty I'm not really someone who does well with beta tests. I would not be able to devote 100% of my time to finding bugs or cracks in the game, or even enjoying it like other people might. Since their pretty common now, what do you guys suggest I do with it?

If you wouldn't mind, I'd like the key. I'd like to try the beta.

OT: The reason it's so hyped up is because its the successor to the best selling RTS ever. That's all there is to it.

Personally, I'd be interested to see which version would be used in the Korean tournaments now. If you can't use LAN then you have to rely on Battle.net to schedule the tournaments around. I personally think that they'll continue to use the original just for the fact they are comfortable with it, and they can use it with LAN.

 

[Callate]

The big achievement of Starcraft, to my mind, is that it managed to have three different sides that weren't just different graphic sets and a little bit of stat-rearranging but actually played very differently, yet were still very well balanced and allowed someone playing any one of them to have a chance of winning.

(That said, I don't know if I ever want to play anything as tedious as some of the later Zerg v. Zerg missions in Brood War again.)

Good RTS games are like watching evolution. You can see where things went right or wrong at any given step, where a player sowed the seeds of their victory or destruction, maybe even see how a tactic might have fared well against another tactic that was anticipated yet failed against the one that was actually deployed.

Conversely, bad RTSs are largely matters of who can click fastest to churn out tanks (or the equivalent) and throw out as much metal to a location as possible.

I am, as usually seems to be the case these days, several games behind right now, so I don't find Starcraft II pressing. And I'm more than a little concerned with the tack Activision seems to be taking with classic franchises and its attitude toward its customers, so I suspect a "wait and see" position will be rewarded. Still, there's no immediate reason SCII shouldn't be a good game.

 

[NoNameMcgee]

No I'm not into strategy games, I find them too difficult. I just don't have a very strategic mind I suppose.

 

[flaming_squirrel]

Total War is beginning to lose me. I love the franchise. It's a blast. I have every game through Napoleon. But unless they get their **** together in the next game and make a halfway decent AI, I'm done. They make the AI cheat to stand a chance and it has really turned me off to the series. They essentially make the player come up with mods to help the AI stay on its own feet after being just.....awful. The sad thing is, the game AI isn't better as you increase the difficulty, it just gives it absurd bonuses and penalizes the player. Which means that you don't get much more of a challenge, you just take longer to kill stuff. It's really getting sad.

At the moment I'm playing through the campaign on full difficulty settings co-op with a mate who also loves the TW series but sometimes there are some bizzare ai issues which spoil it utterly.
When they've set up gun+infantry barricades they'll instantly abandon them to run into a massive block of men in the center and just mill around, even when you're only a couple of hundred yards away, making it less of a fight and more of a pointless massacre.

On the odd occasion where they dont do this instead they'll start the battle by charging all of their cavalry straight at your infantry, general included, which unsurpringly results in them all being very dead, very quick.

There's also problems with the ai of individual people (although not as many as Medieval2) where they'll occasionally just go a bit mad and do the opposite of what you tell them to do.

 

[BlindMessiah94]

Right so starcraft 2 is coming out, now personally i only played the original a couple of time and way after it came out, but i really can't see why so many people are excited about. The main problem i have with Starcraft 2 is that it looks like a classic RTS, (the first type of game i played = Age of empires etc.)and after playing many different genres i realised RTS had very little strategy element, essensially build troops, collect reasorces: archer beats infantry beats cavalry beats archer etc. for me RTS is a dying genre that cannot live up to others in todays gaming world, being neither particularly exciting or strategic.

Anyway my point is this, i don't think that even with the shiny new graphics Starcraft 2 will build on the RTS genre, it won't suddenly make it good, and i can't see why so many people are desperate for it, especially with other better releases due to come out later in the year (for me Fallout New Vegas)

What are your opinions on Starcraft 2 and RTS games in general?

EDIT: let me elaborate over "very little strategy", what i mean is that RTS games try to fit the very complex procedure of a "real" strategy (that is the complex aquisition of specific resources, researching technologies over long periods of time, wars lasting years etc.) into a small time space, which just feels cheap, i mean ffs some RTS games have 1 resource which is used to produce everything. The worst part is that at the end of the game (1 hours +) you have acheived nothing, except the ability to start again....and its not as though you can say RTS have any story resemblence really...sure somepeople will argue there is a story, but cmon RTS games can never have as much emersion as other genres, especially in the storyline department

You've got to be frakkin me....I've been waiting for this game for over a decade. I understand if you don't like RTS as a genre, but as far as RTS games go, it's pretty much SC or go home for most people.

The fact that SC1 is still being played to this day, online, frequently, should be enough of an indication that it's a great game. I can't think of any other game in any genre that still has that big of an online community that was made over a decade ago. I'd say give it a chance for those reasons alone.

If you don't like it, then fine that's your opinion but really I don't see why you can't understand what all the hype is about. I for one can't stand HALO but I see what all the hype is about. It's one of the best games in it's genre. For consoles anyway.

 

[kahlzun]

You can't realistically compare Starcraft to RTS's in general.

Starcraft actually has a lot going on behind the scenes that you don't find out about unless you dig. I appreciate that the difference isn't much for the casual player, but it really does make a difference against the, say Warcraft 2 style of RTS.

One of the common selling points is also that each race is well characterised, and appeals to a certain subset of player.

I was never very good at it, but Starcraft is a million dollar industry in Korea, and no-one is exactly forcing them to play -that- game specifically.