StarCraft 2's designer stands by tradition, promises updates 'soon'

@Premature ejaculation man

It's NOT going to be the full price!
It'll probably cost 40$ - the regular price for Blizzard's expansions.

@Premature ejaculation man

It's NOT going to be the full price!
It'll probably cost 40$ - the regular price for Blizzard's expansions.

@Silex

Awesome! That makes the game cost only $140!?!?!

@Dizazter

It's fair a price for a game and two expansions.
Not to mention that the multiplayer part of the game gives way more value than 99% of other games.

@That Burning Sensation

He's talking about RTS. :\

@R Planteer Haha, what? Did you not play StarCraft 1 or WC3? The camera and graphics style are what Blizz always uses.

I see what he' s saying, though. If you just throw every single "innovation" made in the RTS scene into one game, it'd be a mess.

@R Planteer

They didnt....

@PedoJokerBear

Like hell they didnt. Branching campaign? Upgradable units? Story mode that plays different from online mode? Dynamic camera that can zoom in super close? And the art style is a DIRECT copy of the DoW series. Hell, even some of the reviews I read about SC2 stated similar things.

Im not saying SC2 is a bad game by any means, but give credit where its due.

@R Planteer Sorry guy, but you're m-m-m-mega daft if you think they stole any of that from Relic, or if you think Relic innovated in any of those fields - perhaps you should play the original Starcraft or Warcraft III, since evidently you either haven't or have completely forgotten everything about them. Sure, DoW did branching campaigns better at the time, but that aside you are very unfortunately misguided.

@darkinchworm

Im happy to say I own and have completed both the orginal SC games and played a decent amount of Warcraft 3.

I stand by my opinions. Of course, given DoW 2 sales and the average mindset of a blizzard fanboy, its not much of a stretch to say im the only one in this thread to own DoW2, so the downvotes are not unexpected.

@R Planteer Incorrect assumption about ownership of DoW2 - but I assumed you didn't play the other Blizzard RTS games, so it's a fair trade I suppose. I don't know... I really think you're making a huge stretch here with some of your comparisons. Is Blizzard really making any dire infringement by implementing something as rudimentary as a zooming camera? Along with virtually everything else you mentioned, I wouldn't consider that or those innovations, I would consider it natural stylistic progression of the genre over the whopping 12 years that have separated the original and its sequel.

I could be a dick and counter your argument by saying, oh, Relic totally abandoned Homeworld and moved toward more traditional RTS elements with DoW/CoH, but that would be contrary to the point I just tried to convey. Let's see if I can elaborate on what's running through my head (probably not well):

Blizzard - one of the pioneers of real-time strategy, mind you - has developed their own "playbook" of sorts when it comes to developing their strategy games. Each one has differing features, but a few core elements make them each stand out as a game distinctly Blizzard, with just enough variation between each to make them unique and interesting (Warcraft III varying the most, in my opinion). Similarly, the teams behind Command & Conquer over the years have been able to boast their own hallmark elements even throughout variation, notably in the way that buildings and units are produced, resources are collected, etc. Admittedly, Relic's games differ the most from one another - seems that way to me at least - but they too have a distinct Relic feel and design theory behind each.

Now, bearing all that in mind, you can definitely tell that these developers and other RTS studios have borrowed from one another and taken inspiration from new releases over the years. These people definitely play each others' games and remark over their strengths and weaknesses, but all the top-tier RTS developers are still more than capable of developing games that feel like distinct products of their own companies.

Do I make any sense here?

Along those lines, I highly doubt the quotes about the success of competitors' games and traits such as economy/micro were meant to insult the competition - it read to me as, "Millions of people bought and still love the original, and no one has rendered our style irrelevant, so why rewrite the formula when you've been at the top all this time?" Sure, that tune will probably change when/if a game comes along that blows Starcraft out of the water, but in the meantime he makes a valid point.

TL;DR:
They all rip off each other to some degree, but a Blizzard game is definitely a Blizzard game and the same can be said for Relic and other studios. You're looking too deeply into it, and I'm writing entirely too much about it.

@darkinchworm

I dont disagree with any of your points, but that doesnt make mine false. Blizzard went 7 years without releasing a single RTS game.

"Innovation" is a very broad word to use. Halo CE didnt "innovate" regenerating health, but the gaming community at large points towards halo as the reason for the current trend of the regenerating hp system of todays shooters. RE4 certainly didnt innovate QTE events -Shenmue did that years early, and other rpgs even before that. But again, many people would agree with me in saying that RE4's success is the reason QTE are so popular in action games today.

Maybe im alone in this, but I was getting DoW flashbacks the whole time I played SC2.I dont know how anyone who has played both games can say with 100% certainty that Blizzard didnt get a bit of inspiration from Relic, at least in some way. But thats pretty much exactly what this guy is saying.

Like I said, it all probably comes down to interpertation. Am I saying Blizzard watched Relics progress for 5 years and then bum rushed SC2? No, especially if their "SC2 was in development for 10 years" is to be believed.

SC2 isnt a bad game by any means, (I do enjoy it), but I will say this: It sure as hell doesnt feel like one of the largest companies in gaming spent 10 years working on it.

@Scuffles

Trying times we live in when a polished, fleshed out, and elaborate single player mode with 20+ hours of content, choices(upgrades as well as some story), and excellent replayability can be included with a free addictive multiplayer mode complete with a huge dedicated community, unlockable bells and whistles like achievements and avatars, and a custom map creating tool promising huge support for highly creative and fun custom game modes is not a "whole game experience" for $60.

@Dizazter Two things are evident here, either:
a) you are completely unfamiliar with Blizzard's popularity in this sector, or
b) you are trolling hardcore

Look at the game's day-one sales figures and the sales for all Blizzard games ever, take a peek at the online community, and then try telling us no one will care. Please, present a compelling argument. I challenge you.

(by the way, there is an achievements system in-game)

@darkinchworm

Man, I've never been into trolling, and I've been a fan of Blizzard's since Warcraft 2. I own the game, I'm aware of the "achievements" that are in it, I think they'll need some sort of more elaborate unlockables to get people into the expansions.

Oh I'm sure a sizable amount of people will buy the expansions blindly, I just don't think they'll see typical sales numbers. I think the concept of Blizzard turning a $50 game into a $140 game will not appeal to everyone's budget in this economy. Compelling enough?

But you have to acknowledge how sad it is that Blizzard's own employees proclaim that they have 3 week long holy wars over the tiniest of decisions. Can you imagine if every company operated that way?

Blizzard has done great things, it just really makes me sad to see them mired by this kind of conflict, taking 11 years to release games, and likely using 80% of their focus and resources on the cash cow, Wow, which is now in decline.

@Dizazter

I think blizzard has always used this attitude while developing games. Intense arguements are a sign that they care. You don't argue over major decisions for weeks if you're apathetic about your product, your fans, and your community.

And judging by the complete team working on WoW, the complete team working on SC2, and the complete team working on D3, I don't think "80%" of their effort is working on WoW...

@darkinchworm misplaced response, nothing to see here, move along.