Starcraft 2 Innovations

Recommended Videos

Soviet Heavy

New member
Jan 22, 2010
12,210
0
0
Now, I'm not bitching or anything like that. I have yet to buy Starcraft 2, so I'm asking you guys who already have. Has anything changed since SC1? Is it still traditional RTS style gameplay, or have there been changes like cover systems added?

And, have any good custom maps been made yet?
 

Soviet Heavy

New member
Jan 22, 2010
12,210
0
0
Yosharian said:
Apparently a cover system was tested but they decided it didn't work well. I think they've basically just remade SC1 with better graphics and a new story. One of the things they said was that they DIDN'T want to innovate.
Yeah, well, I suppose with a game like Starcraft you could see how that could backfire.

Dawn of War 2 did a complete overhaul of their game, but it wasn't met with the same reception given here.

Is there a point where innovation vs traditionalism collide?
 

martin's a madman

New member
Aug 20, 2008
2,319
0
0
New units, new play style. The interface is still more or less the same, but the addition of new units and abilities/removal of old units and useless abilities makes it feel different.

And the small details that you'll appreciate like Autocast Repair and Smart casting is also a really welcomed addition.
 

Wolfram23

New member
Mar 23, 2004
4,095
0
0
It's SC1 on drugs. If you liked the first, this game is the same but better in every way.
 

Eclectic Dreck

New member
Sep 3, 2008
6,660
0
0
There aren't really innovations but there are changes that I welcome. Most notable, you spend less time fighting with the UI in this entry. As a simple example, in SC1, optimal resource collection demanded that one manually assign each worker unit to their own resource node individually. In SC2, one can simply select a batch of them, direct them to a resource area and they will do the job themselves.

Mechanically, even conceptually the game is identical. Sure there are a few new units on the field and all - the result is still the same. I'm not certain I approve to be honest. Of late I have really enjoyed the sort of RTS where I don't have to expect to lose a significant portion of my army if I play well. Time will tell if SC2 wins me over I suppose, seeing as I've owned it for less than a day so far.
 

Kagim

New member
Aug 26, 2009
1,200
0
0
In the campaign you now have the armory system where you can upgrade your units you use most with new abilities or enhancements to there current abilities.

The laboratory where every 5 research specimens you can apply interesting upgrades or field new units. Both Protoss and Zerg have experiment decisions to make based on your play style.

For example, the first Protoss decision is make each Weapon upgrade increase rate of fire as well or armor upgrade increase health as well. While the final Zerg upgrade can either grant you a building that slows all zerg down or permanently take over the mind of a Zerg.

You unlock mercenaries as well over the game which you can buy from a building you start off with. They have enhanced stats and are drop podded in instantly but have a cool down time and cost more as well as a limited number of squads you can call in.

The missions themselves are very varied and the missions were never just "Destroy X's base". There was always something making it more complicated then that. Whether it be the planet is slowly being consumed by flames, the area you are attacking is covered in death ray fields, or your only in control of one lone specter sabotaging the enemy from behind the lines. There was always something To make every mission feel different and fresh. I never felt like it was just same old same old to me. Each mission was different, and i loved that.

In the first Starcraft How i usually felt was that my only goal was to burn down the enemy base. Sometimes things would be switched up but in the end by the third act i had done a build and burn mission at least for a third of the game. I never got that feeling playing Starcraft 2.

I also liked how i could choose the order i took on the missions. While yes, ultimately i am doing all of them, it was nice to look over them and choose which seemed more interesting. As well the three missions you make a choice on how it goes down are cool to. Especially the last one since your choice there effects the game in a large way(To me at least).

So yeah. I think its innovative.
 

Danceofmasks

New member
Jul 16, 2010
1,511
0
0
Well, the most annoying thing about SC1 was the drudgery.
Want to build marines out of 8 barracks? You gotta click each barracks.
Although,that was less annoying than control groups being of a limited size.
Sure, using multiple hotkeys helps with controlling the units, but if I want to assign my 20 zealots to the same hotkey, and use my other hotkeys for spellcasters, why can't I?

So they fixed that stuff.
Some people have said that made the game more n00b friendly, but they have put in more macro mechanics to use your actions-per-minute on.
Spawn larva, chrono boost, M.U.L.E. ...

Anyhow, I really like the improved controls.
You can select multiple buildings and assign them to a hotkey, then set all their rally points simultaneously.
Wanna build 4 marines, 2 medics, and 2 marauders? Press your hotkey, then E,E,D,D,A,A,A,A.
(oops, you don't get medics in multiplayer .. yet)
You can rally workers directly to mineral patches (or your gas harvesting building), so you don't have to manually issue a mining order every time.

Also, there are little things with the controls that are very neat, which takes some getting used to.
For instance, if you want to make your 15 stalkers blink up a cliff (assuming you have vision), you could ..
(Hold shift for the whole thing) A-move to below the cliff, B and select the top of the cliff, move a few steps past the cliff edge, then A-move further in.
Doesn't take much time, and your stalkers will do stuff that looks like something that requires 300 APM to do in SC1.
 

MikailCaboose

New member
Jun 16, 2009
1,246
0
0
I'm pretty sure that you can have more than twenty units per group. That bugged the hell out of me in SC1.

Also I've probably been ninja'd on this but whatever.
EDIT: (I've never played it, just going from what I've seen, or rather what I thought I saw, in various videos)
 
May 23, 2010
1,328
0
0
The title made me lol.
Minor improvements to ui and steamlined controls are not innovation.
If innovation + new really wild things are your sort of preference, then there are plenty of other titles out there - SC2 isn't one of them.
 

Zanaxal

New member
Nov 14, 2007
297
0
0
Well new and innovative to some extent, you now have units that can move while burrowed, you have units that can fly over obstacle. You have the dual attack of a unit, so it shoots 2 shots at the same time and dmg's with each of em. not that big of change but interesting none the less. There are much more units then in stracraft 1 in general. Zerg seem to have drawn the shortstick in the unit pick, but they always seemed to have the least diverse army build.
 

The Madman

New member
Dec 7, 2007
4,400
0
0
Change the formula too much, and people complain. Don't change it enough, and people complain.

Funny how that works.

But no, Starcraft 2 doesn't really innovate at all. It's yet another fine example of Blizzard taking familiar ideas and polishing them to such a perfect shine that you just really don't care how old the system beneath might be. If it ain't broke don't fix it, right? They 'have' made playing the game easier and more newbie friendly, better hotkey support and all sorts of various tweaks and adjustments made to make the game more enjoyable for us slobs that aren't either fanatics or Korean masterminds. Singleplayer is bloody brilliant, and the multiplayer is solid even if it really isn't my thing. Fun to play with friends though!

I'd say go for it!
 

Pearwood

New member
Mar 24, 2010
1,929
0
0
Wolfram01 said:
It's SC1 on drugs. If you liked the first, this game is the same but better in every way.
I dunno, the gameplay is better but the queen hissing "We require more vesssspene gasssss" at me now haunts my dreams. And it has a psychic Jamaican. And the adjutant stuttering is very SHODAN, putting SHODAN and Kerrigan in the same game just seems like a mistake...

OT - The briefing room thing got thrown out, replaced with actual conversations between characters. Other than that I think any 'innovation' they made would take away from the game, the first game was so great I think that just replicating it and improving graphics and rebalancing it is the best they could do. Although I wish they let us keep lurkers...
 

Kurokami

New member
Feb 23, 2009
2,347
0
0
Soviet Heavy said:
Now, I'm not bitching or anything like that. I have yet to buy Starcraft 2, so I'm asking you guys who already have. Has anything changed since SC1? Is it still traditional RTS style gameplay, or have there been changes like cover systems added?

And, have any good custom maps been made yet?
Story's actually fun to play. Now I enjoyed the story in SC1 and WC3 very much, but the gameplay was dull as hell, that's no longer a problem.
 

TerranReaper

New member
Mar 28, 2009
953
0
0
The Amazing Tea Alligator said:
The title made me lol.
Minor improvements to ui and steamlined controls are not innovation.
If innovation + new really wild things are your sort of preference, then there are plenty of other titles out there - SC2 isn't one of them.
Nice to see you again. On to business.

Well, we wouldn't want another Dawn of War 2 now, do we? I don't think I've asked this, but if you were in charge of the project, what would you have done in order to innovate but at the same time, maintain your audience so they don't all get turned off by the massive amount of changes? In other words, how much would you change before Starcraft stops becoming Starcraft?
 
May 23, 2010
1,328
0
0
TerranReaper said:
The Amazing Tea Alligator said:
The title made me lol.
Minor improvements to ui and steamlined controls are not innovation.
If innovation + new really wild things are your sort of preference, then there are plenty of other titles out there - SC2 isn't one of them.
Nice to see you again. On to business.

Well, we wouldn't want another Dawn of War 2 now, do we? I don't think I've asked this, but if you were in charge of the project, what would you have done in order to innovate but at the same time, maintain your audience so they don't all get turned off by the massive amount of changes? In other words, how much would you change before Starcraft stops becoming Starcraft?
Lol, nice to seee you again too.

Well, first of all I'd want to design the game to fit the themes of Starcraft. I'm (obviously) not much of a Starcraft guy, but from what a friend of mine tells me, it is a very dark universe with a whole lot of "Oh god, they're all dead what just happened". Therefore, the game would need to be on a large scale, with many units, eith little survivability, yet just enough that they might survive and endear themselves to you right before they got killed.

I like the classic RTS resource model, not so much a fan of mucking about with requisition points, so I'd keep the resource system as it is. So far as I've ever seen, buildings that one builds aren't ever really something fought over, and never fought 'in'. I would change that, make buildings VEWRY large, in fact, proper scale. Actually using buildings is fairly rare (unless building units and I'll get to that in a sec), so what I would do is simplify reseearch to how it is in SINS (except of course that certain upgrades would require a specific building rather than a number of research stations). For the most part, building construction would remain the same, except for terrans, who would call buildings down from space, rather than constructing these (now very large) buildings out of nothing. Come to think of it, drones wouldn't make much sense transforming into these large Hive complexes, so perhaps it would take multiple drones to invest into the thing?

Anyway to build units. In each building would be a control panel/'brain'/what would the protoss use? a crystal? that you can select, giving access to all the units that can be created. When a unit is being built for protoss, their just coming through a portal so that's fine. For zerg it's the larvae, so that's fine. The terrans. These are different, as you can't just have them walk through a wall. I guess that there are a two ways (that I can think of) to deal with this. One way is to have them be dropped in from space. I'm not sure how 'to lore' this is, so this may or may not be acceptable. Another way is to simply have a room where you can see a recruit walk in and go through that thing from the teaser. Where the recruit would appear from origonally is still a problem, but at least you can see the marine being prepped right? All other machines etc. are fine to be shown being built, and the factory lines would certainly be an interesting place to fight. Most infantry units would probably have to be built in squads, but not locked into them, to encourage whatever strategies the player prefers.

The combat. The combat would be fast-paced, with most units dying from a a few bullets. The environment would need to be as detailed as the units themselves, and would need to be destructible, as to be as intense as possible. Tanks should not simply have a health value, but rather take damage based upon where it was hit, and how thick/sloped the armor was there.

Every soldier would have an inventory, but a more realistically sized one than in Men of War. They would be able to pick up the fallen's ammo, and would automatically do so/scavenge for ammo if they were dry.

Direct Fire, but as first person/TPS.

Diplomacy ala SOASE, where peace treaties and going to war is far more serious.

The AI. Designed as if one was making an FPS if you ask me. Soldiers should take cover, say things relating to the battle field, and inform his fellows on what limbs he's missing. Soldiers should cower/shit their pants ala a morale system should the going become rough. They should be able to jusge when to throw grenades and other accessories (though the player can of course control this to higher precision).

Maps would have to be larger scale of course, to accomidate the buildings, and as said earlier, would need to be more detailed.

The Conclusion. So yeah. Effectively my dream Starcraft would take the basic game of Men of War but fix all of it's problems, and take it up to 11. It's certainly a ridiculous project, but every element has been done, so I don't see why it couldn't be all put together. Although I think it'd work better in Star Wars...

EDIT: Shit, this might be my longest post yet. Sorry, got a little carried away.
EDIT2: And no, we definetely don't want another DOW2.
 

Zaik

New member
Jul 20, 2009
2,073
0
0
One thing i noticed, might just be in my head though, but I think the individual units work better in groups now without you babysitting them during fights.

I remember in SC1 if you had, say, 20 marines, they might shoot 10 different targets in an enemy group if you didn't go through individually having them attack each one. Now they will coordinate much better, occasionally spreading it out well enough to kill 4 or 5 smaller units at once instead of spreading it out over a bunch of zealots or 30 marines shooting one zergling all at once.
 

oliveira8

New member
Feb 2, 2009
4,726
0
0
The Amazing Tea Alligator said:
I think you need to play a little more Starcraft to see how pretty much most of that stuff doesn't work.

Ammo scavenging? Inventory? You want to add MORE stuff to micromanage, in what already is a complicated game to micromanage? Also how exactly are you picking ammo from Zergs? Or Protoss? They don't use Human weapons. At all.

You want to add FPS elements to a game where units can die in a blink? And some of them are creepy crawlers?

You want to add more stuff to an already extremely busy map with huge building and more useless NPS's for flavour?

Diplomacy? Really? Do you know the Starcraft universe at all? You talking about redneck humans, racist aliens and creatures that can only talk via grunting and you want a diplomacy section? You should play Brood War(The expansion to the first game) so you can see how diplomacy works in the SC universe.

The shooting buildings from space is already in, to some buildings via upgrades. Also units.

Seriously the game is perfect as it is. Don't fix what isn't broken.

You want to switch SC, a Fast Paced RTS, to what appears to be a Slow Paced RTS. That isn't what SC is. Not to offend you or anything, but those suggestions would completely break what SC is.
 

Catalyst6

Dapper Fellow
Apr 21, 2010
1,359
0
0
There really isn't a lot of change between the two, but let's be frank: to use the overused, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

SC was successful because of how it played, and changing the game mechanics would only serve to hinder the enjoyment that people would get out of it. Yes, some units have changed around, but the mechanics are still similar, if changed for the better in minor ways.
 
May 23, 2010
1,328
0
0
oliveira8 said:
The Amazing Tea Alligator said:
I think you need to play a little more Starcraft to see how pretty much most of that stuff doesn't work.

Ammo scavenging? Inventory? You want to add MORE stuff to micromanage, in what already is a complicated game to micromanage? Also how exactly are you picking ammo from Zergs? Or Protoss? They don't use Human weapons. At all.

You want to add FPS elements to a game where units can die in a blink? And some of them are creepy crawlers?

You want to add more stuff to an already extremely busy map with huge building and more useless NPS's for flavour?

Diplomacy? Really? Do you know the Starcraft universe at all? You talking about redneck humans, racist aliens and creatures that can only talk via grunting and you want a diplomacy section? You should play Brood War(The expansion to the first game) so you can see how diplomacy works in the SC universe.

The shooting buildings from space is already in, to some buildings via upgrades. Also units.

Seriously the game is perfect as it is. Don't fix what isn't broken.

You want to switch SC, a Fast Paced RTS, to what appears to be a Slow Paced RTS. That isn't what SC is. Not to offend you or anything, but those suggestions would completely break what SC is.
To me, this is the problem ^

This would obviously not be a sequel gameplay-wise. Unfortunately, diplomacy would not work as well due to the material, hence why it would be better with star wars, but I tried my best. Large scale wise, it would be a slow paced RTS, but the combat would be quite faced paced.

I don't know what an NPS is. However, these Neuro-Penguin-Soldiers would still be under your control (provided that their morale hasn't gone to shit), but they would act like soldiers so that....

There would be SOME more micro, in controlling ALL of your troops, but also less, because your troops could handle themselves better (but if you're a god, then perhaps an option to turn off your soldiers throwing grenades without being asked?).

Humans'd pick up ammo from their own dead, or from enemy humans. I'm not sure how the protoss roll with their ammo (is it infinite?) so that might not be a problem.

I don't see how most of this wouldn't work. It's take some finangling to get right, sure, but most of it has already been implemented in other games. All this would be is taking those elements together. They wouldn't break what Starcraft is. They would 'change' what Starcraft is.

If it ain't broke, why build a new one? Why not instead re-envision it, to try new things! TO BOLDLY GO where no man has gone before! To breach the realm of the impossible! To discover! To create!
 

TerranReaper

New member
Mar 28, 2009
953
0
0
The Amazing Tea Alligator said:
TerranReaper said:
The Amazing Tea Alligator said:
The title made me lol.
Minor improvements to ui and steamlined controls are not innovation.
If innovation + new really wild things are your sort of preference, then there are plenty of other titles out there - SC2 isn't one of them.
Nice to see you again. On to business.

Well, we wouldn't want another Dawn of War 2 now, do we? I don't think I've asked this, but if you were in charge of the project, what would you have done in order to innovate but at the same time, maintain your audience so they don't all get turned off by the massive amount of changes? In other words, how much would you change before Starcraft stops becoming Starcraft?
Lol, nice to seee you again too.

Well, first of all I'd want to design the game to fit the themes of Starcraft. I'm (obviously) not much of a Starcraft guy, but from what a friend of mine tells me, it is a very dark universe with a whole lot of "Oh god, they're all dead what just happened". Therefore, the game would need to be on a large scale, with many units, eith little survivability, yet just enough that they might survive and endear themselves to you right before they got killed.

I like the classic RTS resource model, not so much a fan of mucking about with requisition points, so I'd keep the resource system as it is. So far as I've ever seen, buildings that one builds aren't ever really something fought over, and never fought 'in'. I would change that, make buildings VEWRY large, in fact, proper scale. Actually using buildings is fairly rare (unless building units and I'll get to that in a sec), so what I would do is simplify reseearch to how it is in SINS (except of course that certain upgrades would require a specific building rather than a number of research stations). For the most part, building construction would remain the same, except for terrans, who would call buildings down from space, rather than constructing these (now very large) buildings out of nothing. Come to think of it, drones wouldn't make much sense transforming into these large Hive complexes, so perhaps it would take multiple drones to invest into the thing?

Hmm, this seems more of a "gameplay should reflect the lore/reality a bit more", which isn't bad, but isn't entirely necessary. If Terrans called down buildings as opposed to magical construction from nothing, then I'd imagine you would want some sort of beacon to be placed, however, the beacon would probably need to have some sort of ridicious amount of health that would reflect the health that the building is calling down. Or you can just have it like the Space Marines from DoW1, either way works I guess. For Zerg, this is the biggest change, since the current gameplay/balance has the rest of the races only having one worker unit construct/warp/pull building from nowhere, the Zerg would be at a severe disadvantage since they have to give up several workers to make a large building. To compensate, you'll probably need to either change the other race's mechanics to be on par with this or change the worker so loss of economy is not so severe that it renders Zerg as an undesirable race to play.

Anyway to build units. In each building would be a control panel/'brain'/what would the protoss use? a crystal? that you can select, giving access to all the units that can be created. When a unit is being built for protoss, their just coming through a portal so that's fine. For zerg it's the larvae, so that's fine. The terrans. These are different, as you can't just have them walk through a wall. I guess that there are a two ways (that I can think of) to deal with this. One way is to have them be dropped in from space. I'm not sure how 'to lore' this is, so this may or may not be acceptable. Another way is to simply have a room where you can see a recruit walk in and go through that thing from the teaser. Where the recruit would appear from origonally is still a problem, but at least you can see the marine being prepped right? All other machines etc. are fine to be shown being built, and the factory lines would certainly be an interesting place to fight. Most infantry units would probably have to be built in squads, but not locked into them, to encourage whatever strategies the player prefers.

Ehhh.... sure? I can't imagine random recruits appearing in the middle of a desert/alien world/arctic world/space platform and walking into the barracks to get suited up into a marine. For reasons unknown, I can't think of anything that wouldn't resemble 40K Space Marines being drop podded in. Without getting into the meta-game TOO much, infantry squads might work if the meta-game is changed a bit.

The combat. The combat would be fast-paced, with most units dying from a a few bullets. The environment would need to be as detailed as the units themselves, and would need to be destructible, as to be as intense as possible. Tanks should not simply have a health value, but rather take damage based upon where it was hit, and how thick/sloped the armor was there.

This wouldn't be a problem if the battles only consisted of Terran (Or Terran faction A vs Terran faction B), however, only one faction has tanks while the rest are either advanced alien machinery or some sort of giant bug. I'd imagine you would need to implement some sort of other mechanic for Protoss and Zerg units in order to compensate. For example, Zerg units should be able to be crippled in certain parts of the body which limits either their movement or combat efficiency. For Protoss, you could do the same thing for some of their units, but they also have shields which plays into the equation. The lore seems to be limiting factor that makes your ideas very hard to implement.

Every soldier would have an inventory, but a more realistically sized one than in Men of War. They would be able to pick up the fallen's ammo, and would automatically do so/scavenge for ammo if they were dry.

Could work, in fact, you can probably do it with the map editor right now.

Direct Fire, but as first person/TPS.

Diplomacy ala SOASE, where peace treaties and going to war is far more serious.
Doesn't seem necessary, and in Sins, if you've ever played a game that lasts for around 4-6 hours, you tend to notice that people tend to make peace with people that are more powerful. Either that, or it just seperates in set faction wars or large backstabbing fests. In which case, I don't really see the point of this.

The AI. Designed as if one was making an FPS if you ask me. Soldiers should take cover, say things relating to the battle field, and inform his fellows on what limbs he's missing. Soldiers should cower/shit their pants ala a morale system should the going become rough. They should be able to jusge when to throw grenades and other accessories (though the player can of course control this to higher precision).
Could work, however, I myself tend to be more trusting for soldiers NOT to use grenades without me saying so. Most AIs in games don't really tend to have better judgement of this and although it does seem realistic, it simply shouldn't be the case, unless you can have it so infantry can "regenerate" their supplies from time to time. This is more a gameplay mechanic though and it varies.

Maps would have to be larger scale of course, to accomidate the buildings, and as said earlier, would need to be more detailed.

The Conclusion. So yeah. Effectively my dream Starcraft would take the basic game of Men of War but fix all of it's problems, and take it up to 11. It's certainly a ridiculous project, but every element has been done, so I don't see why it couldn't be all put together. Although I think it'd work better in Star Wars...
Main problem is the lore that is set from the original game, because there are three distinct factions, the ideas from Men of War can't simply be ported into Starcraft. Men of War consists of several factions from WWII that operate more or less the same (I don't think the Nazis built their stuff any different from say, the Russians). You simply don't have that in Starcraft, you have three races that operate very differently, lore-wise and gameplay wise.

EDIT: Shit, this might be my longest post yet. Sorry, got a little carried away.
EDIT2: And no, we definetely don't want another DOW2.
All of my statements are in bold.