StarCraft 2

Discussion in 'Games' started by Ja Di ksw, Feb 12, 2006.

  1. Ja Di ksw macrumors 65816

    Ja Di ksw

    Apr 9, 2003
    What would you like to see in SC2?

    Things I would like:

    Hero concept from WC3
    one or two more races
    bridges (either man made or natural) - would really change strategy for setting up attacks or defense
    more than one level of height
    whether or not you have the high ground has an effect on likelyhood of hitting
    more to add later, I'm tired.
  2. wako macrumors 65816

    Jun 6, 2005
    I personally hate the hero thing in WC3. I find it more annoying then anything. Maybe in single player, but I would not like to see it in multiplayer.

    The only thing I would be looking for in the game would be first and foremost...

    Graphics and true 3d enviroment.
    Definately more units
    Uncap 200 units

    Most importantly, develop the story even more!

    I really like the storyline. It is interesting with quite a few twists. Im really want to see how this will develop.

    Im quite pissed though that Blizzard has ditched the Starcraft fans out there. The last installment was in '98! They been working on the Diablo series, Warcraft series for ages now!

    (I dont consider Starcraft Ghost as a installment to the Starcraft series because it is currently just getting rushed to be completed. Also the developement isnt being conducted by Blizzard, but I by some other company.)
  3. eXan macrumors 601


    Jan 10, 2005
    1. I hate heros in WC3. Really annoying.
    2. I think 3 races is enough. In SC they are very well-balanced, so adding more races would probably turn the favor to one of them.
    3. There are bridges in SC
    4. It has 3 levels of height right now.
    5. In current Starcraft, if units attack those on higher level there's only 70% chance of hitting.
    You're welcome :) Anything else?

    I would like to see good 3D graphics, not great, cuz it probably slow down system, just good. (AND better than in WC3)

    They could probably add some more cool features for races, like Terran's nuke.
  4. Ja Di ksw thread starter macrumors 65816

    Ja Di ksw

    Apr 9, 2003
    1. Difference of opinion I guess.
    2. See above.
    3. Can they be crossed under? It's been awhile since I've played SC, but I didn't think they could.
    4. *Shrug*, ok. I'm not so much concerned with X number of levels, but just more variation in elevation overall.
    5. Ah, cool. I was unaware.

    Two people so far have said they hate the Hero concept. Can you explain why you feel that way?

    Thanks, that'll be it for now :).
  5. Lastinline39 macrumors newbie

    Jan 7, 2006
    I'd rather have World of Starcraft :). But seriously SC2 would be cool (hugely unlikely, but cool). I too don't like heroes. They were too much work and more importantly you need something to differentiate the two series other than sci-fi and fantasy. I also hated the graphics in WC3, I actually prefered SC graphics to them. I'd like to see a better number cap than 200. New weapons and buildings and all that obviously. Voice chat online. hmm, now I want to play starcraft.
  6. Seasought macrumors 65816


    Nov 3, 2005
    I also hate the "hero" concept.

    I'd like to see a "World of Starcraft". A combination of EVE online and WoW.
  7. Mechcozmo macrumors 603


    Jul 17, 2004
    1. Heros are just a PITA. They require special attention, etc. I like to just build units and damn the hero's level.
    2. Three races: Zerg for start-game, Terran for mid-game, Protoss for end-game. Any more and you unbalance it.
    3. StarCraft technically has bridges but I know what you mean. I'd like to see the ability to cross from high terrain to high terrain and be able to walk under it, too.
    4. Low, Normal, and High are already there. I like this setup. Makes it simple but not boring. The Fog of War also comes into play.
    5. As mentioned before, you have a 70% chance. Also when under trees, attacking units suffer accuracy loss.
    6. Take a Stim Pack you Marine and GO GO GO!
  8. Maxwell Smart macrumors 6502a

    Maxwell Smart

    Jan 29, 2006
    The one thing I really want is support for more than 640x480! I mean, It's so easy to do, they could do it in a software update, and yet it makes gameplay horrendous especially on widescreen computers :mad:
  9. benpatient macrumors 68000

    Nov 4, 2003
    it's actually not very easy because of the way the game is rendered...Unlessyou mean re-drawing all of the sprites at much higher resolution, which is a task that could take a lot of artists a LOT of time, and might not really result in better visual appeal...

    Even if they did allow higher resolutions, what resolution would they pick? 16x12? That's my LCDs native res, so that's what I'd want.

    The problem is, 16x12 would allow me to see a HUGE amount of the gaming area compared to someone at 8x6 or 10x7.

    Even though the current display feels extremely limiting by modern standards, it is an integral part of the gameplay, and if you change it, you'll be changing the balance and throwing things out of whack.

    No, we just need a new game...
  10. Motley macrumors 6502

    Dec 11, 2005
    If you got the "secret" mission in Broodwar it's pretty much guaranteed that there would be a 4th race, or would it be 5th?

    3D with more story, smarter units, and within the next 10 years (this is blizzard after all) would be nice.
  11. benpatient macrumors 68000

    Nov 4, 2003
    yup. the 4th race.

    I still want Kerrigan to come back to the Good Side. Or maybe she could become a terran/zerg/protoss mixture? that'd be fun.

    One thing that I DON'T want to see is the cartoony "bubble" 3d style of WC3 and WOW applied to the starcraft universe. I'd just as soon it stayed 2d, honestly. There's something to be said for 2d. I don't doubt that SC2 would be 3D, I just want it to look less bubbly. Maybe they're waiting for technology to get to the point where they can get the look they want. Even AOE3 has a sorta "silly" look to the characters when you start zooming in a lot. A quality that SC and SC:BW just didn't have at all.
  12. jared_kipe macrumors 68030


    Dec 8, 2003
    YES PLEASE, I hate warcraft so much. Every time I play the game its like a crap shoot as to whether or not you'll get your but worked over by the insane computers. No good defense, and enemies around the place make things unpredictable and not strategic.

    For instance, generally speaking you HAVE to go out and kill things around your base, you get points and skill for doing so. But that makes you have to balance attacking with building the base. And if you just happen to be attacking a group and the enemy walks up, you're screwed.

    Game has too much anti flying stuff, flying stuff used to be my best strategy, but they made flying stuff weak and every race can pull them out of the air. So whats the point?

    Did I mention that defenses are pointless, they cost too much and get steamrolled by the enemy. Oh and Hero's are worthless, the computer controls them too bloody well, and goes after yours like he's wearing command stripes.
  13. Eric5h5 macrumors 68020

    Dec 9, 2004
    I didn't hate heroes; it was an interesting and fun concept which differentiated the game from other RTS games more. However, I did notice after a while that I tended to play basically the same strategy every game, which wasn't the case with Starcraft (or earlier Warcrafts). So, I'd not want to see heroes again.

  14. Edot macrumors 6502

    Jan 29, 2002
    ...Not that it matters, but it sounds like you are just horrible at the game... Skilled players don't have these problems and tend to use most every unit for a reason. If you spend the time to become a good player the game is amazingly complex and fun. Maybe that is a downside. That it is too complex for the casual gamer, but I think it really rewards avid players, and is an achievement to be that balanced after so many people beating it to death.
  15. Xephian macrumors 6502a


    May 2, 2005
    United States
    I want to actually be able to change the video settings. :p
  16. Mechcozmo macrumors 603


    Jul 17, 2004
    StarCraft, I can master. I don't have time to master WarCraft III. There is too much in it that I can't remember it all. But I can tell you everything in StarCraft and how to defeat what with what, etc. With more people who know the game better, it comes down to skill rather than just knowing the game.
  17. splukutum macrumors newbie

    Feb 18, 2005
  18. Sogo macrumors 6502

    Jan 4, 2004
    I also disliked the hero class thing of warcraft 3. As for the 4th race, it would be cool if they could bring back the xel'naga? That old race that created the zerg and protoss. I know they were apperantly killed and such, but it something i would like. As for the game being 3d? Umm, I think it would be nice if they were high rez 2d figures. But ofcourse im part of the dying breed. I too would like to see the story progress.
  19. cubist macrumors 68020

    Jul 4, 2002
    Muncie, Indiana
    Things I'd like in SC2:
    1. Improved user interface so I'm not rowing the mouse up and down the screen all the time.
    2. More than 10 units in a group.
    3. Some kind of space combat/travel. (All the action is currently on planets, yet most of the cutscenes, including the first one, show space combat/travel.)
    4. Larger maps.
    5. More heights, 1-3 was an improvement over WC2, but come on. You guys played Empire Earth?
    6. Improved economic model - more resources, including some rare resources.
    7. Marketplace-type building where you can trade in resources.
    8. Improved diplomatic/espionage model. (6,7,8 are in RoN but still limited.)
    I can come up with a lot more... I really like StarCraft and RTS games in general.

    Splukutum, can you describe a little further what is going on in your 3D maps? Are you implementing StarCraft units in Warcraft 3?
  20. mrgreen4242 macrumors 601


    Feb 10, 2004
    Well, I loved WC3, and only moderately enjoyed SC... so that out of the way, here's my $.02:

    1) I like heroes, I thought it helped the story and added something NEW to the RTS genre. But it would nice to have them either only in single player mode (where the levels are designed to incorporate them) and only in special multiplayer modes (there are some great hero based mods, like 3 Corridors, for WC3).

    2) Branching storyline; seamless play. Like I said, I didn't play SC much, but WC3's story was linear, and the levels were often pretty unrelated. It'd be more interesting to have the storyline change as you make different choices (say, you pick what your objectives are from a list, which in turn determines what the future missions and objectives available to you later).

    By seamless play I mean that rather than load map, beat level, watch cutscene, load new map, repeat, that you travel in the game to new areas, mmorpg style, and set up new "camps" etc. Make the missions and world seem more cohesive.

    3) Something NEW... if it's just a continuation of the SC story with a new graphics engine and some of the gameplay elements from WC3 I'll probably ignore it entirely and wait for Diabo3.

    Not to sure what new ideas they could have, other than my #2 idea, but here are some rough, half formed ones...

    Skirmishes: A "zoom" in mode where a group of units are combined into a single entity (like a standard group but not separately selectable). They can be sent out to do some side-missions or raids in multiplayer and when they engage the game "zooms in" to a small sized very tactical battle using only those units already in it (no reinforcements) while the rest of the game pauses or slows way down (so other players could still do stuff, just on a very slow clock).

    I'm thinking only 2 sides (no 3 or 4 way battles), a small cap on units, maybe 6 per side, and as I said, highly tactical; meaning terrain coverage effects the chance of being hit, movement speed effects aim, etc. Sort of a mini game that is similar to the main game but much faster, more detailed and "intense".

    Epic Battles: Sort of the opposite of a skirmish, an epic battle would be a once every 5 or 6 missions kind of event, depending on your branching storyline choices ( ;) ), where you have units you have units that are grouped together like skirmish parties, only there are lots of them. They are represented by a single icon/avatar, and are given a set of group stats. Battle fields are huge, and the army's massive. You command the grouped units like you would a single unit, and the strategy comes in forming combinations of units for the most effective fighting force (which skills and abilities combine to make the best 'squad').

    Almost-Massive Multiplayer Modes: My favorite part of RTS games has always been multiplayer. I'd like to see some multiplayer modes that let you have large teams, each controlling just one army. Someone in charge of building and production, someone in charge of defense tactics and control, someone else for offense tactics, etc.

    Additionally, I would like to see teams be formed with a commander who plays like normal (gives orders to units) and rather than the computer actually carrying out those orders, they are relayed to a real person who must then excecute them. This would work really, really well with the above two ideas. A multiplayer mode that is an "Epic Battle". The commander sees the whole field of war, with small squads looking like a single icon to him. The other players are assigned one (or more) squad, based on their cumulative skill ranking on bnet. The commander gives an objective based order to a squad and that officer has to carry it out, with battles for him taking place in a "Skirmish" type mode.

    OK, that was all pretty long and crazy. It's Friday and I'm not feeling very productive at work, so that's kinda what I'd like to see in a new RTS, and since Blizzard is, in my eyes, the king of RTS', and it sounds like SC2 is the next RTS game they are releasing, it's what I'd like to see in it. :)
  21. Yvan256 macrumors 603


    Jul 5, 2004
    I'm also voting for "World of Starcraft". A combination of World of Warcraft and Starcraft. ;)
  22. cubist macrumors 68020

    Jul 4, 2002
    Muncie, Indiana
    That's some really good stuff. The skirmish mode and the team-multiplayer changes would be GREAT. I wish Blizzard would read this thread and implement it all... but, frankly, I don't think they are working on SC2 at all.
  23. mrgreen4242 macrumors 601


    Feb 10, 2004
    Thanks... maybe I will have to make a game like that (with the combined epi battle/skirmishes multiplayer only mode :p)

    I though they were working in SC2? I'm not a big fan, like I said, maybe I am crazy... any even unofficial word that they are working on it?

    I always figured they make a new RTS engine, release SC2 then reuse it the next year for WC4. They must be making enough cash off of WoW. :p
  24. Mechcozmo macrumors 603


    Jul 17, 2004
    Heros were in StarCraft...Jim Raynor? Remember him in the Vulture and as a Marine?
    How about Kerrigan?

    They were 'heros' but not "level-up-so-much-gonna-kick-your-ass-with-one-special-move" heros. :D And they selected as a different color than normal troops.
  25. eXan macrumors 601


    Jan 10, 2005
    Doesn't it has 12? But still even 12 is not enough. Maybe 24

Share This Page