BlizzCon 2008: Starcraft II gameplay panel notes

Rob Pardo and Chris Metzen hosted the Starcraft II gameplay panel here in Anaheim this afternoon at BlizzCon 2008 -- they showed off, for the first time in public, some of the adventure-based gameplay and ingame cinematics that will come with Blizzard's next RTS release (or next three RTS releases, as the case may be).
After the break, what we saw of Starcraft II's Terran campaign, and Rob Pardo explains the reasoning behind Blizzard's decision to turn Starcraft II into three separate games.
After the break, what we saw of Starcraft II's Terran campaign, and Rob Pardo explains the reasoning behind Blizzard's decision to turn Starcraft II into three separate games.
Pardo started off the talk by talking about Blizzard's goals for Starcraft II. With Powerpoint slides flying, he said that Blizzard wants to emphasize player choice in the game (by creating branching storylines and paths for characters to take), and really immerse players in the Starcraft universe. To that end, Starcraft II won't be your normal RTS -- there are ingame cutscenes and what might best be described as "interactive menus" in between the RTS stages. You'll choose what to do next and what paths to take by clicking on interactive 3D environments, like living menus on the screen.


In the environment (an interactive 3D panorama, basically), there are all kinds of things to click on -- a jukebox that plays music (it only turns on and off at this point, but eventually you can imagine that a Warcraft tune will probably be hidden in there), an artboard with various photos and mementos on it that Raynor will tell you about as you click on, a television that will play the latest news from the Starcraft universe (likely whatever mayhem you've caused in your last mission). And of course, there's something to click on to actually start the mission.
Which Pardo didn't do -- instead, he used a cheat code ("skipmission," though of course that won't work in the final game) to move to the next cutscene. He didn't show off RTS gameplay at all -- this demo was all about the stuff in between the RTS stages, and how Starcraft II builds up the story and the characters when you're not real-time strategizing.

And speaking of building up characters, eventually it's discovered that Raynor isn't so down-on-his-luck after all -- he's got a warp class jumpship that can come pick him up when the Zerg rear their ugly head. On the ship, there are three more different environments to explore, each with their own gameplay tweaks: in the ship's cantina, you can meet new characters, and in the ship's armory, you can talk to an engineer and upgrade your technology. And on the ship's bridge, the universe really opens up, and you can see all of the various available missions to run and visit. He showed an early version of the star map -- it looked kind of like the Mass Effect map, where you could choose which missions to run and get a little briefing for each.
Pardo then turned the game off, and it was time to make the announcement: he said that with all of this adventure gameplay and all of these cinematics and missions Starcraft II was just getting too big -- they wanted every race to have its own filled-out story, complete with options and branching paths and full characters. And so, said Pardo, they had three options: cut back and do less, open up and make three games, or delay the game greatly while still compromising. He asked the audience what they would have done, and they cheered when given the option Blizzard chose: there will be three different Starcraft II games, one for each race.













Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
mr.g.bent @ Oct 10th 2008 11:12PM
I am starting to warm up to the idea blizzard. Keep going. Because now for the first time you will have to convince me to buy one of your games.
rTwelve @ Oct 10th 2008 11:22PM
I want to see the cinematics :(
Einhanderkiller @ Oct 10th 2008 11:24PM
I don't have a problem with the splitting of the campaign as I'm mostly going to be playing the multiplayer anyway. I'll just play the Terran campaign, play mp, play Zerg campaign, play mp, play Protoss campaign, then play multiplayer until StarCraft 3 releases. ( I like StarCraft :D ).
Monkeys Suck @ Oct 10th 2008 11:37PM
I REALLY hope that each campaign will be as big as they say. If so, it might be worth it. But really, couldn't they fit all this on a dual-layer DVD? Or will one campaign be bigger than that?
Tatticus @ Oct 11th 2008 12:41AM
I think they just don't want the game to come out in 2017 so they're going to release it quasi-episodic.
Eh @ Oct 10th 2008 11:38PM
Who cares, this game is going to suck now. Being able to play on each side for the single player mode is one of the saving graces that make up the RTS genre. Bring on Red Alert.
Sheppy (of the Fidlious Clan of Wong) @ Oct 10th 2008 11:39PM
You know, this all sounds fine and stuff but here is my problem and maybe I'm not the only one with this issue.
The campaign in Starcraft was actually the tutorial. Each branch taught you the intricacies of the racial structures and how things worked. First five missions of each race WAS this aspecy.
So... this grand campaign sounds crispy and I'm all for it, but do I have to wait until chapters 2&3 to learn the intricacies of playing as Zerg and my fav Protoss? Will tutorial missions be provided for these races? Or will they prefer to go the Ultra Deluxe Strategy Guide route?
That's where my concern lies. That two of the three races will be dramatically changed and you're somehow supposed to learn these changes with any semblance of a base you were attempting to create goes down in flames.
VerticalEvent @ Oct 11th 2008 8:41AM
Or, you can load up a custom single player game (a skirmish), and read the manual..
In all honesty, doing it this way would teach you just as much, in a much shorter time period.
Sfoms @ Oct 10th 2008 11:40PM
Thats an interesting idea they got there for storytelling on their RTS.
It sounds good and if someone can pull it of right, thats blizzard.
It seems like the story will be good and well told, I hope that it introduces you well into it tho because while I have played the older SC games, I didnt play the story modes .
I know a lot of people in a similar positions.
And about the game being divided into 3, they better give the option to just pay and download to make it less annoying.
jcd @ Oct 10th 2008 11:41PM
Personally I don't like paying more than once, but if all campaigns are at least as long as the original game I will reconsider.
To be honest I really only enjoyed playing Terran, so I might only buy that. I hope the campaign has a little more challenge now.
Paviel @ Oct 11th 2008 12:04AM
I've heard that each campaign is going to be 25-30 scenarios long...
...as they had fucking better be...
Linkdead @ Oct 11th 2008 12:41AM
With so little news coming out of Blizzcon I'm expecting a November 2012 release of the first installment.
Does anyone else think they are spending an awful amount of time developing the single player campaign. Most people will spend 100 times the time investment on the multiplayer portions. Look at the original Starcraft, yea I'm sure people have played the campaign a few times. The game is still alive today because of the multiplayer.
If they are going to go overboard developing all this campaign nonsense that's fine. However stop holding up the release date adding all this junk that people are going to play once and forget.
Jeff @ Oct 11th 2008 1:14AM
Honestly, if they just released a multiplayer portion, I wouldn't even bother with the singleplayer.
And I'm sure most people feel the same way.
What will piss me off is if I'm forced to buy all three singleplayer campaigns in order to keep my multiplayer updated. Multiplayer should be treated as a separate client that is updated separately. That way, to a certain extent, we can all choose how much of an investment we want to make for SC II. It's great if tons of people want all 3 campaigns and Blizzard can make that money-- but fuck that. I just want multiplayer, and I don't want to pay for it 3 times.
rizzuh @ Oct 11th 2008 1:55AM
i think that's partially why they're splitting up the campaign into 3 "separate games". waiting to finish all 3 first would take much too long, so with only 1 campaign at first, i'm guessing the game will be out sooner than we thought. especially since blizzard has already confirmed that the blizzcon cards they gave out was for the upcoming SC2 beta.
Linkdead @ Oct 11th 2008 2:10AM
I just get the feeling we won't even see this game in calendar year 09 when for the most part it's DONE. I've been playing the multilayer portion of this game at every convention Blizz has attended for the last 2 years.
Ihavepants @ Oct 11th 2008 4:05AM
Am I the only one who thought the Starcraft story was fucking amazing and can't wait for it to continue in Starcraft 2.1,2.2 adn 2.3?
I am?
Naw.
MtnManiacX @ Oct 11th 2008 1:01AM
I really only ever play the campaign mode. I'm into the story and I've never much enjoyed multiplayer. I wouldn't call the campaign mode nonsense.
As for having to buy 3 different games, I think that sucks! I really enjoyed playing each race, but I'm not going to pay $180 to buy 3 $59 games just to be able to play each race in solo mode.
willferal @ Oct 11th 2008 1:57AM
Zeratul is not a Zealot, in fact he is a Dark Templar.
I'm kinda disappointed with the revelation that it's going to be 3 separate campaigns, but I guess it only means MORE starcraft for the consumer, and that's not a bad thing at all.
Ihavepants @ Oct 11th 2008 5:25AM
Yeh I didn't catch that in the article until you mentioned it.... ZEY MUST FIX IT NAO.
magicalpoop @ Oct 11th 2008 1:58PM
If anyone read the anniversary special on Blizzard.com several years ago, or any commentary
You would realize the campaign was always set up integrative to help you learn the game + tell a story. "Stand alone product" Really...did any of you actually find the game play of SC that intriguing? Aside from maybe the combined time of 30-40 minutes of Cinematics+Speech , the other 8 hours was just boring RTS gameplay.
Keeping that mind, think about this too.
Q: When will Starcraft 2 be done?
A: When it's done
Right...so thats basically a stand on quality..pretty much a Blizzard marquee. I guess that's changed. This is just selling out, I don't care if each expansion is 10$ . Think about it
59$ USD for the initial Box. 10-20$ for the other 2 expansions. That's 100$ for a f-ing PC game that will take you 1 year to finish buying. Then..the expansion pack...49$..oh wait they're going to split that up too... that's almost 150$-200$.
Think about this, the typical WoW player plays for at least a year or so, or 2. 59$ Box + 14.99 monthly fee X 12 = 180 + 59 = 239$
That's almost the same. Fuck you Blizzard. Like Guitar hero World triple XXX extended tour and WoW doesn't make enough $ for you.
KapsLocked @ Oct 11th 2008 3:19PM
Wow, dude. Way to jump to conclusions. Have they even priced the game, much less even put out a release date?!
I figure they would price them similarly to how Half Life 2 episodes would be priced - not sixty bucks.
... and where did you get $59 for the game in the US? PC games are usually $49.99 on release! These aren't PS3 and 360 games...
mochabear @ Oct 12th 2008 12:41PM
magicalpoop is a complete idiot; as evidenced by his name.
mochabear @ Oct 12th 2008 12:48PM
wait i just read his entire comment now and i will go as far as saying magicalpoop is one of the dumbest people to ever grace the comments of joystiq