Well, it seems to me like you're talking very specifically of bad hold-out missions, which are, so to speak, no better or worse than bad any missions. If a mission is lame, then it's lame.
Really, all they need is some triggers and interesting twists. The whole premise of the hold-out is that you're losing forces and the enemy is gaining ground. If a hold-out is succeeding as a mission, you, the player, should be terrified. How many hold-outs have there even been, really? Desperate Alliance in SC1, March of the Scourge and Eternity's End in WC3, and... I mean, it'a short list. Only the last one even attempted to capitalize on what a hold-out should feel like, but even then I'd argue that it did so poorly. Compare to RPGs, which SC/SC:BW alone had like 10 of. Let's just say they've had time to perfect these.
I think you're not giving the concept enough credit and just dislike the executions we've had so far. Which is probably a valid point. But with SC2's approach of perfecting every single mission... I don't think that should be a concern.![]()




Reply With Quote


