The Future of Starcraft

[Nissa]

Okay, so I was thinking about it, and while we all have forty bajillion ideas on what we would have done with Starcraft, what's done is done. So, let's hear predictions: where is Starcraft going to go from here?

I predict that once LotV is out, Blizz will pretty much ignore Starcraft for another ten or more years. Fan demand, now diminished, will not insist on a sequel. The franchise will only be picked up again if someone in Blizz wants to make a personal project out of it, or if technology makes a sudden leap again that results in new gameplay opportunities.

What startled me about Heroes of the Storm's unit quotes was how many of them sounded self-aware about the flaws of SC2, so if I'm wrong, probably what will happen to Starcraft is something goofy.

[Drake Clawfang]

I suspect any future games for the series will prominently involve the UED's return. Now there's a climactic mission; invade Earth and destroy the UED headquarters.

A character arc I think would be cool for Valerian is if he begins the slide to despot, but is oblivious to it. He honestly and truly thinks he's still a good guy and making good choices for good reasons, but is turning into Arcturus 2.0.

Beyond that, it can't be judged until SC2 ends. For all we know LotV ends with the Zerg and Protoss eradicated.

[TheEconomist]

It's dead to me either way. Each additional scifi book I read weakens the interest I have in it further. That's to say nothing of Blizzard themselves with Whispers of Oblivion.

But, I agree with Nissa, they'll wait a long time to do a sequel. Maybe a future, post-"crash" Blizzard get back to what made the company great and we can get excited about StarCraft III again, but, until then ... RIP

As for the lore, the only thing I can think of that we're not so sure about is an additional race. They should probably start working on introducing a fourth race of StarCraft III so I'm sure there'll be some Purifier or Hybrid stuff starting.

[Gradius]

It's dead to me either way. Each additional scifi book I read weakens the interest I have in it further. That's to say nothing of Blizzard themselves with Whispers of Oblivion.

But, I agree with Nissa, they'll wait a long time to do a sequel. Maybe a future, post-"crash" Blizzard get back to what made the company great and we can get excited about StarCraft III again, but, until then ... RIP

This. I will perhaps pursue mapping with other RTS games, but that's about it.

[Nissa]

Yeah, and Econ graces us with his wisdom. Probably right. I'll probably finish my fanfiction about meeting Aldaris in real life, and use that story to engineer SC to my own views, for my own personal happiness.

Y'know, that was the real gem of SC1 storytelling. It was jumpy because of the talking heads and almost no storytelling apart from whatever they could cram into the mission or briefing. That left so much to player imagination, and our imaginations made it so much of what the story was.

[Turalyon]

So, let's hear predictions: where is Starcraft going to go from here?

Probably more books? Not that I care, not having read any of them before anyways.

I'm just going to be cynical and say that when Sc3 does come, storywise it's either gonna be more, but new, inane stuff happening (oh look, some other threat) or just retreading and aping past things (like UED). People won't notice either immediately because it'll be flashy and distracting at first (like how Sc2 was).

[KaiserStratosTygo]

Okay, so I was thinking about it, and while we all have forty bajillion ideas on what we would have done with Starcraft, what's done is done. So, let's hear predictions: where is Starcraft going to go from here?

I predict that once LotV is out, Blizz will pretty much ignore Starcraft for another ten or more years. Fan demand, now diminished, will not insist on a sequel. The franchise will only be picked up again if someone in Blizz wants to make a personal project out of it, or if technology makes a sudden leap again that results in new gameplay opportunities.

What startled me about Heroes of the Storm's unit quotes was how many of them sounded self-aware about the flaws of SC2, so if I'm wrong, probably what will happen to Starcraft is something goofy.

" where is Starcraft going to go from here?"

The toilet I Imagine :/

[sandwich_bird]

They might make a spin-off.. I'd buy a third/first person SC shooter(rip SC:G)... But, otherwise, I really don't think we'll see much from SC in a while. I wouldn't be surprised if SC3 is some kind of mp only f2p game. I mean, sc2 is already half f2p. I guess they would release stories as episodic DLC's or whatever. One 10$ mission every month.

That's what I suspect anyways. My wishlist(aka ''it will never happen'') for sc3 would include the following:

-Reboot the series with actual good sci-fi writers and write a mature story; not a Saturday morning cartoon.
-Remove the dumb WarCraft art style and return to the gritty style(screw you Samwise).
-FORGET ABOUT THE DUMB PRO-SCENE
-Completely remake the gameplay to be less about APM and more about grand scale strategy(I'm thinking Planetary Annihilation scale.. yes, PA is meh but the scale is amazing)
-Allow the ability to jump in 3rd person mode for some missions(like this (http://universumwar.com/) game is doing).

[TheEconomist]

FORGET ABOUT THE DUMB PRO-SCENE

We don't take kindly to your sort around here.

[sandwich_bird]

We don't take kindly to your sort around here.

But... I thought this forum was all like "lore > mp"!

Joke's aside; I don't see any way that blizz would ever be able to make starcraft the #1 esport game again. They can mostly thank PC Bangs for the success of BW. There's a reason why DOTA and LoL are at the top and it's because they're accessible. RTS by definition are not accessible and when you try to make them accessible you end up with C&C4. With that said, might as well not focus on trying to make SC3 an esport game.

[Nissa]

But... I thought this forum was all like "lore > mp"!

Joke's aside; I don't see any way that blizz would ever be able to make starcraft the #1 esport game again. They can mostly thank PC Bangs for the success of BW. There's a reason why DOTA and LoL are at the top and it's because they're accessible. RTS by definition are not accessible and when you try to make them accessible you end up with C&C4. With that said, might as well not focus on trying to make SC3 an esport game.

Well, it's not like Blizz originally intended SC to be an esport. If they just make the game good again, the esport scene will follow.

[TheEconomist]

Actually, given the recent WoW expansion, it's a real (still HIGHLY unlikely) possibility they'll just retcon StarCraft II and go back to the original. (/wishfulthinking)

[Visions of Khas]

Actually, given the recent WoW expansion, it's a real (still HIGHLY unlikely) possibility they'll just retcon StarCraft II and go back to the original. (/wishfulthinking)

Holy crap, what the hell?? So do this and the previous expansion completely obviate all past stories?

[Robear]

As far as I can tell (which was pretty much from me looking up what was up with the Warlords of Draenor cinematic), Grom Hellscream's son is defeated by the combined other races in the normal WoW timeline, but manages to time-travel back to the WC1 time period to stop the orcs from drinking the demon blood and becoming slaves to the Burning Legion in the first place, so they can give attacking Azeroth a proper go for themselves. But I was under the impression that in the game, he went through a portal to an alternate reality to get to the alternate timeline, not that the existing WoW world and timeline was instantly/retroactively altered in any way. And you can go back and forth between the normal WoW world and Draenor from a couple generations ago in the expansion.

And then in this new cinematic teaser for the new new expansion, it looks like Gul'dan is meeting demon form Illidan in stasis? Which has to be the Gul'dan from the new altered timeline who had his demon plans foiled by Garrosh, looking for a new source of demonpower in the original timeline side of things, where he died a generation or two ago. Ironically iirc Illidan consumed Gul'dan's skull to become his demon form in WC3, so I'm sure that'll be a weird conversation for the two of them. "Where did you get these magnificent powers?" "Your skull..." So, not completely overwritten.

I mostly think sandwich_bird's ideas for where it could go are the right direction, but it'll be in a decade+. The gameplay has to change imo. Even when SC2 came out I was a little surprised at how many mechanics relating to just things about how the maps were structured, with the same high ground and low ground and ramps were 100% unchanged from SC and WC3, and, aside from cliffjumping, no new ways of interacting with the environment.

Not that the game needs any of these things, or that they're even good for the RTS genre, but, like, ramps for jumps, dynamic burning trees/environments to alter the terrain instead of just destructible buildings/rocks like people added into SC1, more natural-looking terrain a la Halo Wars, amphibious/underwater units, 3D positioning/height mattering, zero gravity or altered gravity on different planets changing gameplay, cover systems... Give me a map that's a space platform where on both the top and the underside it has gravity, and you can flip the camera over and have to keep track of both sides at once. And your units can climb around the edges to switch from once side to the other. Like, I don't want all of these in Starcraft, but, literally anything new. I'm sure they tried some new things, (black hole for one) but we basically got gameplay that was totally possible in the WC3 engine. If in 10 years they release the same thing again it won't be good. :/

I don't think we'll get any fps or tps kinds of spinoffs anytime in the next 7 years because I think they'll just be focusing straight on Overwatch for that kind of gameplay. In line with Nissa's original post, the only place I see Starcraft going in the next, yeah, 7 or so years, would be maybe some sort of mobile/tablet/pc turn-based spinoff game, a la Hearthstone. Which could be fine, as a spinoff. I could imagine some kind of interesting turn based gameplay, maybe even with a deck for a random element, but then involving expanding territory to control a planet and its space platforms or something.

But, probably that won't happen either, since Starcraft's characters don't have anything like the appeal of WoW's enormous cast and huge number of races for the millions of WoW subscribers. So, yeah, I expect a big SC break, except for more Heroes of the Storm content. I wonder if Overwatch will have a modding/custom arcade kind of scene. Then I could see people modding in Starcraft characters.


I expect their next RTS game will be a Warcraft one, in like 7 years or something.

[KaiserStratosTygo]

"C&C4" This was the only game I legitimately played ONLY ONCE, not beaten, but just played. No delusion, no "It's okay" no this game was ass from beginning to end (less than 1 hour total of gameplay) -_-


Actually, given the recent WoW expansion, it's a real (still HIGHLY unlikely) possibility they'll just retcon StarCraft II and go back to the original. (/wishfulthinking)

I hope to Tassadar, this happens, and they do it RIGHT, none of that Fantasy BS, yeah SC is on the softer side of Sci Fi, but it's still Sci fi goddammit.

[TheEconomist]

with the same high ground and low ground and ramps were 100% unchanged from SC and WC3

That's not quite true. In SCBW, you could attack on higher ground, even if you had no vision, with a 50/50 hit chance. In SC2, you have to have vision. Also, the fact that AI makes ramps so deadly in SCBW, to me, means that, effectively the gameplay was changed drastically in SC2.

But I understand your point and agree completely. I remember the old DOW2 vs SC2 debates. Back then, most of us agreed that there was a bit more time and a bit more that could be done with that standard formula. The fact that SC2 has done so well has demonstrated that. However, if SC3 is basically SC1/SC2 is new units and a race, then it would most likely be a failure. It's time to move on to something new.

[Nissa]

Okay, so what would it take to make SC3 successful? Besides a well written, retconned plot?

[Robear]

-Mass appeal and a F2P model. Somehow their last couple goes with Warcraft got it. I can't really explain WoW's success, but that WC3 UMS scene had people paying for the game and never even touching the campaign, just playing DotA or whatever. Obviously that would never happen these day because people would just play literally any free alternative, but I think after HotS and Overwatch they'll be pros at that. Though I guess the industry could shift to another business model in 10 years.

-New, reinvented RTS gameplay. I'm still fine with the default top down view and UI and everything, but the way bases and units and resources and the environment interact with you and each other needs something new. WC3 did a decent job of mixing things up by adding new things like a day/night cycle, and also obviously the idea of heroes and killing neutral creeps for gold and XP, which isn't something I want added to Starcraft, but was an example of changing the formula.
Another (failed) RTS called Paraworld didn't quite go far enough with it, but it had the newish idea of having its maps have animals living in them. And instead of neutral creeps wandering randomly or neutral hostile creeps attacking on sight or when attacked, all that Blizzard has ever done, it would have different animals with different behaviors, like herbivores moving in herds that one, were a resource that you could kill and your workers could harvest, but two, might start to stampede if startled by an explosion or something. Or, carnivores that might hide from a lot of units, but pick off a unit traveling alone. I don't remember if that one was actually in there, and this sadly didn't really end up affecting the gameplay much at all, but, it could have. That's the level of newness I demand. Yeah, I guess I'm just reiterating what I said in my last comment. Oops.

-Yeah, good plot would be nice. Wings of Liberty actually had a very strong marketing campaign I thought, but I never really got the sense that casual people cared about the story in the slightest. Whether that's because they were the kinds of gamers who skip every cutscene and never pay attention to any story to begin with, or because the story didn't engage them, or because it was bad, I don't know. The multiple 'choice paths' were a big dud, but I don't think casual players noticed.

-I would kind of like to play as my own character though. They could even try to do choices again and implement them better. But it's not as interesting for me personally to sit there as an invisible presence while clicking on Tychus to make him say to Raynor "you bastard, I haven't seen you since you got me thrown in prison" as it would be to have Tychus say to me, the player, "you bastard, I haven't seen you since you got me thrown in prison." I loved when the Overmind in SC1 exhorted me to infest all the Terrans. I could get into getting into character while playing these games, I don't want to rely on Raynor to experience things for me. I don't even want to play as Raynor, or Zeratul, or Kerrigan, actually... This might just be me personally. And you being a character in the game can easily be ruined with either bad writing or if they make your character do something you think is stupid. But I think people like the idea of getting to create a character or roleplay. I think people are more interested in getting to imagine how their character interacts with the world in a game like Skyrim or whatever than, like, The Force Unleashed 2, where you're just someone else's generic character and all your motivations and goals are told to you in cutscenes featuring 'you,' and then all the interactive bits are just mechanical.

-The time should be right for nostalgia/reinvigoration of the RTS genre. In the mid 2000s there was sort of a last, dying wave of new RTSs that SC2 was the most successful of, but now there's like none. I imagine we're at the middle or over the peak of the Moba wave, but it's still very strong. I don't know how to predict trends like this or when there are perfect opportunities, and it's impossible to time because of years of development time needed, but there would be a perfect time for a Starcraft 3 and the next few years will not be it. It might be the right time in a couple years for a new F2P rts to reinvigorate the scene by making something new and that works with the focus/attention span of either the fast paced or mobile paced markets, and then Blizzard can a few years later swoop up and dominate the established genre like they did with WoW and mmos. There's been a lot of nostalgia for '80s games, maybe there'll be a wave for '90s games with Sim City and Doom and Age of Empires and Baldur's Gate and all that coming back, and then Blizzard can whip out a Warcraft RTS again.

idk, just rambling

[Nissa]

Well, you've mentioned some great ideas. I too liked the idea of being an invisible character in the games. Even if it had no real affect on the plot, it was a nice touch. I especially like that we were the same cerebrate in both Zerg mission sets. That made it feel like our invisible character was actually making some form of progress. It would have been especially epic if a second expansion set had ended with the death of our cerebrate. Like it's a mission to kill Kerrigan's cerebrate because she depends on him so much.

I dunno, I've always been a fan of Starcraft for the story. I suck at actually playing the game (bad at strategy games in general...), so I'm not all that troubled by lack of gameplay innovation -- obviously I'm not the person to ask in that regard. To me, if they'd ended it with a second expansion, that would work for me. The story of Starcraft isn't the kind that can support a continual series. It has to end at some point. If Blizz had just finished the story properly and never touched the franchise ever again, that would have been great. It's not as if BW's style of gameplay couldn't support decades more of Esports.

Actually, I think that's what fan should do. They should make a mod of Starcraft (maybe adjust the one that makes SC2 play like BW) into what we would consider our dream story ending. That way it would be what we want.

[Turalyon]

Okay, so what would it take to make SC3 successful? Besides a well written, retconned plot?

I don't think its success (in terms of sales) will be predicated on the story in the slightest since we have Sc2 and Diablo 3 as proof of this.

[Drake Clawfang]

I'd like to see more environmental hazards. Have one-way cliffs that you can move units down but not up. Have low-land areas that flood for periods of time and then retract, so you can move armies over them at specific times only. Have weather to various effects; new ramps appear as snow builds up, rain can flood out paths.

Perhaps have neutral bases players could buy out or rent. Buying them out would be more expensive than building them yourself, but you get them instantly. Or with a rental, they cost a fraction of the main structure, but you can only use them for a couple minutes before they revert to AI control. Naturally, the good buildings are like rich minerals, hard to get to or hard to defend.

400 min and 2 minutes, not to mention several hundred minerals worth of workers, is a costly investment to expand, and expanding is always a huge game decision. IMHO, it's a foregone decision, you just have to commit to it to make sure it works because it is such a hefty investment if it fails. So, allow new ways to gather resources. How about the automated refinery and extractor from the campaign, but nerf them by making them only work within a certain range from a control building, so you can't just plop them down anywhere. How about from Whispers of Oblivion, the idea that Zeratul's ship could harvest resources from orbit, allow that in melee but it's much slower than workers with a base.

This all expands on the ideas of scouting, map control, aggression, harassment, and so forth. Encourage players to be more active in the game and always be looking for ways to get a leg up on opponents and not let them do the same in turn, and give them more ways to get that leg up.

[Nissa]

I don't think its success (in terms of sales) will be predicated on the story in the slightest since we have Sc2 and Diablo 3 as proof of this.

That's why I said, "besides." With the intent to hear other suggestions.

Though now that I think about it, a good story would strengthen mediocre gameplay. Particularly given that SC2's gameplay, from what I can tell, isn't purely awful. Then again, there's no real need to separate story from gameplay in terms of what makes a game better or worse. A good story shows signs that the developers care about what they're doing, and if they care, they aren't going to produce a shoddy gaming experience.

[Drake Clawfang]

That's why I said, "besides." With the intent to hear other suggestions.

Though now that I think about it, a good story would strengthen mediocre gameplay. Particularly given that SC2's gameplay, from what I can tell, isn't purely awful. Then again, there's no real need to separate story from gameplay in terms of what makes a game better or worse. A good story shows signs that the developers care about what they're doing, and if they care, they aren't going to produce a shoddy gaming experience.

Dood, a lot of multi players don't even touch the campaign. I play guys all the time who don't have a single achievement or point in the campaign.

Not that the story is not important, ofc, but the melee fanbase and the campaign fanbase are worlds apart. Melee players may not even know what SC2's story is, much less care if it's good or not.

[Nissa]

Dood, a lot of multi players don't even touch the campaign. I play guys all the time who don't have a single achievement or point in the campaign.

Not that the story is not important, ofc, but the melee fanbase and the campaign fanbase are worlds apart. Melee players may not even know what SC2's story is, much less care if it's good or not.

Fair enough, but I still say adding another expansion set and finishing things there is a better idea. SC2's gameplay didn't bring too much to the table, and one of the frequent complaints I hear about it is that it's more like rock/paper/scissors than actual battle. An expansion set would satisfy the story crowd, while leaving fan expectations lower in terms of gameplay revolution. Not to mention it would come out quicker.

With the story pat, the pressure to release a sequel would be lesser -- let's be honest, most of the voices demanding a sequel in the in-between years were story freaks. BW's solid gameplay kept esports and general gaming going on for years, and if an expansion simply finished the story and did some minor tweaking, then Blizzard could take as long as they wanted to produce a sequel. That way they'd have the gameplay inspiration they need to do some of the stuff Robear mentioned, and anyone who hated the sequel's story could simply pretend that the sequel doesn't exist.

[Turalyon]

I wonder what would've happened if the singleplayer/story/campaign stuff of Sc2 was made into optional DLC. It would be interesting to track and compare the "success" of each subsequent campaign DLC as they came out.

[Nissa]

I wonder what would've happened if the singleplayer/story/campaign stuff of Sc2 was made into optional DLC. It would be interesting to track and compare the "success" of each subsequent campaign DLC as they came out.

You mean, sort of like the WoW expansions?

[Gradius]

You mean, sort of like the WoW expansions?
Something like ME3's dlc. Id pay like 3 bucks for the whispers of oblivion campaign if it didn't suck.

[sandwich_bird]

Okay, so what would it take to make SC3 successful? Besides a well written, retconned plot?

It depends on how you define success. Critics ratings? Revenue?

If they want mass appeal(as it is expected from a blizz game) they definitely need to revamp the gameplay. Simply adding small new mechanics like faction perks or a 4th race will not cut it anymore. The starcraft name alone would have been enough to carry SC2 but in 10 years? I speculate that it won't have as much power for SC3.

With that said, there's a lot of unexplored area in the RTS genre and they'll need to show us something new to build the hype. In any case, coop needs to be their focus. What they're doing with allied commander and archon mode is exactly the direction that needs to be taken. Like I said before, RTS are unwelcoming and dumbing down the complexity is not the way to go. Coop is an alternative to fixing the problem and I see it as a perfect fit for starcraft.

[The_Blade]

*Whispers* Allied Commander *Whispers*

[Jconant]

That game footage showed a few cool things: a continuation of cool co-op missions like left2die

a potential to have multiple commander choices (zeratul or a DT commander with sneaky void oriented powers), dahaka, zagara or abathur for varied zerg strains, and valerian/tosh for stealth or dominion tech.

and a glimpse of how protoss campaign will be like: warp in tech on crack (be able to create a warp in zone anywhere with practically instantaneous reinforcement), dragoons (duh, but the gameplay showed how they will actually play like), reavers (and based on david kim's recent update hints, the disruptor may become a reaver 2.0, thus a clan option vs auir's reaver.)

[Drake Clawfang]

You know what would be a fun mode for them to come out with after LotV releases?

Campaign Melee.

ALL campaign units and upgrades unlocked and available in melee. Would be horribly imbalanced but be a lot of fun.

[The_Blade]

I would foster more an occasional meta shift, like Husky did on Imba League and Blizzard did with the Hearthstone brawl.

Having all the units from the campaign would be amazing, for a while. Then, a meta will be created and the competitive side of SC2 will try to appropriate it. This, I believe, is what has removed the fun for every new/casual player out there. Even Arcade games are scrutinized and have "build orders" (hello squadron TD!).

I don't blame Blizzard for the lack of support on the Arcade, because they are working with 6+ AAA games. However, I can definitely imagine them creating content for Allied Commanders with the help of community designers. That's a start for indie game support. Moreover, if this effort is independent from the Arcade, further tweaks can be made to transfer the platform to the Battle.net App.

[TheEconomist]

One of the things I miss the most about early Brood War days is the imbalanced Blizzard maps, the nonsensical on-the-fly build orders, and random placements. They are the antithesis of competitive gaming, but incredibly fun.

[Sheliek]

Dunno if anyone's address this already, but if they have, whatever, here's my take.

StarCraft still makes a lot of money. Even if a sequel's a long way off, they can still milk that with DLC. We already know they're planning post-launch Allied Commanders additions -- new units, missions, commanders. If they make those even reasonably cheap, it could result in more of a reason to actually pursue a sequel sooner rather than later. It would also benefit fans, who'd get more and more replayability in that mode as time goes on. I figure 5$ for a full commander, with all the units and abilities that comes with, is fair. Mission packs of 2-4 missions could be 5-10$ depending on scale. So that's that.

Custom map-making could use a lift too. DLC and free patching can of course promote continued customs. Tilesets are obvious. I'd also suggest fully functional unit packs. New art, new portraits, new animations, new spells and abilities. I can see a few ways of going about doing this. One unit for a small fee would work, of course. Grouping those same units into bundles for a slight discount would be a good call too (IE say they come up with four new barracks units. 2$ for one, or 6$ for all four). So there's that, makes the game financially viable, betters the chance of a sequel sooner. As for ensuring fairness with this, I have a few methods, not sure how well they'd do though. You buy the assets, you can publish a map with them. Anyone can play that map, but no one can edit it unless they have those assets unlocked on their account. People can get around this, but I'm sure Blizzard can get around those workarounds if they care to.

In the same vein of unit packs, retro reskins of the SC1 units to have the quality of SC2's models but be more faithful to the original specifics (Hydralisks with one blade per arm comes to mind immediately, as does the old-school Carrier). I figure they can slap a 5-8$ price tag on each race's unit arsenal.

The best idea I have, however, is DLC mini-campaigns of 3-10 missions in length, with an appropriate price for them. Apparently, according to a Korean interview, this is actually being considered -- epilogue campaigns aren't out of the question at the moment. I'd also like to see concurrent campaigns -- what was the Dominion doing while Kerrigan was traipsing around Char, Kaldir and Zerus? What were the Raiders or Umojans doing during HotS? What were the non-major factions do during LotV or the other games? Enhanced, SC2 style remakes of SC1 could've even be viable with this DLC system, as could making campaigns out of the novels for a similar fee (then people can finally stop bitching about how they shouldn't have to read books to know the full story, yes?).

Imagine Brood War and Vanilla with a story-mode. No extra missions, no extra units. Just lore-fluff between each. It'd be cool. Enslavers could follow suit -- fully voice-acted and actually well-written (Enslavers 1... sucked), that'd be a treat. I can see each campaign going for 20$, 15$ if you buy them in threes (Vanilla or Brood War) or 12$ if you buy the whole remake, though that's just pulling numbers out of my ass.

Even new multiplayer modes, if AC and Archon Mode work out, would be great. If they did a Brood War remake on the arcade, a Brood War ladder would be likely as well.

So those are my thoughts on financial viability.

[motter28218]

Well, I couldn't even get too much into StarCraft 2, I was just incredibly frustrated with having to make an online account and not being able to play offline, then the slow loading times and all that, I just gave up.

On top of that I just didn't like the way many of the characters were written. I wasn't totally in love with Raynor in the first one, but he at least had a charm, frankly I never cared much for the cheesy B-movie action style of the Terran, along with all the silly and cliche one liners, I mean really "Let's kick ass" lost it's impact about 15yrs ago at least.

Not to say the original was perfect, I said the same about the human players in that one, you had the Zerg who were really creepy, the Protos so noble and ethereal, and then the Terran just had too much of that silly, over the top military type stuff going on, kind of a shame since people generally would tend to relate to the human race more, and they were the worst personality wise.