Bored of SC2

[Wankey]

No, I am complaining that that the units and mechanics are boring. Hurray for reading comprehension. Do the units and mechanics change when you play a person? No? Than STFU. I was hoping for a little more bang. I think the community really stifled the development of this game. Don't get me wrong, I am part of that community. I just wish we would have given Blizzard a little more license to experiment. Sure, you can say they could have just did it anyway, it's pretty hard to ignore your core audience. Time and time again, I saw people shoot down ideas that they had only heard about, and Blizzard responded. So many units were brought back because of there nostalgic factor, especially when the community QQed in outrage at the idea of SC without them. The problem with catering to the community is that you can't give us something we don't already have. We want more of the same and /cry at anything new.

No, you misunderstand. Read above. I was simply quoting my experience with the AI as proof that I have experience with the units and mechanics.

So you're just a gimmick player... next! It's how you play the units that make them good and we haven't even hit close to creating new strategies yet.

[Triceron]

Blizzard is essentially doing what Bungie did with Halo. The first game was ground breaking and incredible. The 2nd game was a lot more refined, striking out the bad, and adding some new. The Third game further refined the second. The problem with Blizzard following this path is that Bungie pumped out 3 games in 6 years. This is an eleven year wait, granted they weren't designing for 11, but you no longer can rest on your laurels at this point. You have to break ground again and innovate. You have to wow us. Otherwise, you will produce a game that will be popular upon release, and die out a year later.

Imagine if Nintendo never made a sequel for Mario 1. Now imagine they began making Mario Galaxy, but tried to stay as close to Mario 1 as possible. This is essentially what Blizzard has done. You can call me a Troll because I don't suck this games dick, but non-hardcore fans will lose interest quickly.

I find it interesting you used Mario as an example because there has been a huge gap between the 2D Marios and New Super Mario Bros/Super Mario Bros Wii, which they recently made. This is pretty much the same thing in that kind of example. Granted the new 2D sidescroller isn't at all comparable to the Galaxy series, this is the direction Blizzard is taking and it's perfectly fine. What about the Galaxy elements? SC2 Campaign and custom maps is what you should really be looking at. If not that, then maybe try another RTS series like Company of Heroes or Supreme Commander for your RTS fix.

I find it too often that people are faulting SC2 for lack of innovation when really the game has already done quite a number of new changes while trying to maintain the classic "Starcraft" feel. Anything else and it would be akin to what War3 was to War2; and War2 did not ride on the crazy competitive E-sport balance that SC did (Yes, it was imbalanced even as a mirror-match RTS).

[Operatoring]

So you're just a gimmick player... next! It's how you play the units that make them good and we haven't even hit close to creating new strategies yet.

Nice try. I'm not someone you can just put into a box and brush aside with childish insults. My concerns are valid.

I am an avid SC1 player, as I have stated. Since I am a "gimmick" player, I guess SC1 is a "gimmick" game.

This blind defense of SC2 is fan boi non-sense. You want to like it so much, you can't see the obvious. SC2 is pretty lack luster at the moment. I hope they add some more optional multiplayer features. I can think of a couple ideas that would add immensely to the strategic play of SC2. As it stands now, the strategy and gameplay exactly matches that of SC1. This is great if you are a fan of SC1, like me. But I was really expecting some more advanced and innovative features. Call them gimmicks. I'll call them revolutionary, something this game isn't. It's SC1 with updated graphics.

I find it interesting you used Mario as an example because there has been a huge gap between the 2D Marios and New Super Mario Bros/Super Mario Bros Wii, which they recently made. This is pretty much the same thing in that kind of example. Granted the new 2D sidescroller isn't at all comparable to the Galaxy series, this is the direction Blizzard is taking and it's perfectly fine. What about the Galaxy elements? SC2 Campaign and custom maps is what you should really be looking at. If not that, then maybe try another RTS series like Company of Heroes or Supreme Commander for your RTS fix.

I find it too often that people are faulting SC2 for lack of innovation when really the game has already done quite a number of new changes while trying to maintain the classic "Starcraft" feel. Anything else and it would be akin to what War3 was to War2; and War2 did not ride on the crazy competitive E-sport balance that SC did (Yes, it was imbalanced even as a mirror-match RTS).

Let it be known that I have said nothing of the Single Player. I eagerly await it and think it will truly be incredible. I expect the innovation that was barred from multiplayer will be thriving in the campaign. My comments are aimed directly at Multiplayer and how it is a re-hash of an 11 year old game.

[SlickR]

Nice try. I'm not someone you can just put into a box and brush aside with childish insults. My concerns are valid.

I am an avid SC1 player, as I have stated. Since I am a "gimmick" player, I guess SC1 is a "gimmick" game.

This blind defense of SC2 is fan boi non-sense. You want to like it so much, you can't see the obvious. SC2 is pretty lack luster at the moment. I hope they add some more optional multiplayer features. I can think of a couple ideas that would add immensely to the strategic play of SC2. As it stands now, the strategy and gameplay exactly matches that of SC1. This is great if you are a fan of SC1, like me. But I was really expecting some more advanced and innovative features. Call them gimmicks. I'll call them revolutionary, something this game isn't. It's SC1 with updated graphics.

Let it be known that I have said nothing of the Single Player. I eagerly await it and think it will truly be incredible. I expect the innovation that was barred from multiplayer will be thriving in the campaign. My comments are aimed directly at Multiplayer and how it is a re-hash of an 11 year old game.

I'll simplify things for you: Don't buy the game and move on.

[KadajSouba]

We must remember we are playin a Beta version, no a Demo version.

I'll simplify things for you: Don't buy the game and move on.

Wow did you use 3 supercomputers to come with this?????

[protoswarrior]

Operatoring... go on the TL.net website and check out their first ever SC2 invitational tournament, and look out specifically for a player named "TheLittleOne".

You may call this game boring after you watch these plays, but I doubt that...

An alternative source for those games is on Youtube.

[Justamonster]

So ok, TheLittleOne: One of the most spectacular and creative SupCom players, which transferred his play style to SC2 (he’s famous for his creative and unconventional plays). And he often loses because of this.

Watch his 4th game against WhiteRa – TheLittleOne tried to do the same trick to save himself and got crushed effortlessly, because WhiteRa was prepared. Face it – his creativeness at that tournament is based on one trick gimmicks, which want fly the second time (as WhiteRa effortlessly proved). As for another example: Banelings bust Dimaga used recently led him to the finals and was easily stopped by Nazgul, etc.

So to the point, taking into account that practically all current creative SC2 builds – are one trick gimmicks, they not here to stay, i.e. exceptions which prove the rule:

SC2 multiplayer is uncreative, non-innovative, heavily limited, dry peace of gaming production with godly PR behind it, even if you compare it with its own reveal state (not even mentioning SC1).

It IS boring as hell from player’s perspective and sadly even more from spectator’s point of view by one simple reason:

---------- I don’t need handicapped SC1 in 3D after 11 years of wait ------------

P.S. And for people which will say something like “you’re not everyone, so it doesn’t count”: there are many people even on this forum (from all other places) which aren’t pleased with the game as it’s now, so please…

[ArcherofAiur]

So ok, TheLittleOne: One of the most spectacular and creative SupCom players, which transferred his play style to SC2 (he’s famous for his creative and unconventional plays). And he often loses because of this.

Watch his 4th game against WhiteRa – TheLittleOne tried to do the same trick to save himself and got crushed effortlessly, because WhiteRa was prepared. Face it – his creativeness at that tournament is based on one trick gimmicks, which want fly the second time (as WhiteRa effortlessly proved). As for another example: Banelings bust Dimaga used recently led him to the finals and was easily stopped by Nazgul, etc.

So to the point, taking into account that practically all current creative SC2 builds – are one trick gimmicks, they not here to stay, i.e. exceptions which prove the rule:

SC2 multiplayer is uncreative, non-innovative, heavily limited, dry peace of gaming production with godly PR behind it, even if you compare it with its own reveal state (not even mentioning SC1).

It IS boring as hell from player’s perspective and sadly even more from spectator’s point of view by one simple reason:

---------- I don’t need handicapped SC1 in 3D after 11 years of wait ------------

P.S. And for people which will say something like “you’re not everyone, so it doesn’t count”: there are many people even on this forum (from all other places) which aren’t pleased with the game as it’s now, so please…

Starcraft is the most uncreative game, except of course for all the other games.
-Winston Churchill

[Iceman_jkh]

Operatoring... go on the TL.net website and check out their first ever SC2 invitational tournament, and look out specifically for a player named "TheLittleOne".

You may call this game boring after you watch these plays, but I doubt that...

Just as exciting as watching SC1! Not any moreso.
So whats your point then? All this proves is that SC2 is not worse to watch than SC1 - and some on here might even dispute that.

[Gifted]

Warning: Small wall of text incoming.. just a small one.
Operatoring: First, unlike the majority of posters in this thread trying to say "your opinion is wrong, you should change it". I'll simply say that I disagree with your opinion on a few matters. You can hold your opinion while I hold mine and I think we can respect each other being on different sides of the fence. I'd like to share why I disagree with your opinion overall and don't take offense to this please.

1. The "expirience" of playing in the new battle.net.

I've mentioned before that playing online has become rather fun for me in a sense that in every game you can see progress of some sort. It's no longer a game where you play a game and change from "12000" to "11850" ranks... You now have a way to make your own push from 100 to 1. I know it's just a numbers deal, but the ability to push hard against people who you get to know and play against, and in some cases, create rivalries with in your own mind, is rather fun. When reading/talking/hearing about it it sounded cool. I won't say it's mindblowing, but it's definately improved my fun regarding the game. Between battles I theorize "If I win and earn this many points, I gain x positions." One game I actually thought "If I win 3 points, I beat out on Walrus!".

In fact, this point alone the most prominent reason that ICCUP was able to succeed. They have a truly successful ladder ranking system which grades people against other people on their ability. People can walk around and say "Your C-? That's a slightly less skill level than I."

I liken it to stop and go rush hour traffic. You always wonder if you pick the right lane.. so you take a car in a lane to your left or right and see if you jut on forward ahead of them, are watch them go off in the sunset. It's one of those things, where the grind becomes more enjoyable and personalized to you.

I also recognize that you've admitted that you've only had a chance to play the game versus the AI through a non-official means. This means that all of your gameplay is absent of this expirience which seriously "feels" better than it "sounds". It will get better as you play people of your own skill without such a fast "Expanding Players" situation when the official game comes out.

2. I disagree with "The game will have a relatively short life span"
Note: I thought I saw this in your quotes, I can't find it now to link. If you indeed didn't say this, please accept my apology for a mistake

It's my opinion that game is currently incomplete, custom games will extend the life of this game for those who don't want to compete while it's more user friendly online playing leagues will hold people who would have otherwise not stuck around.

First, it's important to remember that custom games are an engine instead of a map making system now. Some may call it semantics, but the level of customizability will be ready off the bat. This alone has extended WarCraft III to it's extended lifetime today, and it didn't have the dedicated fanbase behind it like StarCraft does. And the fanbase that it obtained from StarCraft may even shift to this game. It may take a handful of months, but before you know it, but as people explore the ways to use it, and indy/corporate companies come on board to make professional feeling games we will see the potential on this part alone.

The game is also more accessable to new players (in it's full form, not the current one) with the challenge/training maps, a more verbosely used "practice area", and more playerbase in the copper league. We will also have 2 influxes of new blood as the expansions come out.

3. This game has a lack of innovation

There was an entire thread regarding this subject and I think you took part in it. I'll be breif with my opinion on the matter and state it slightly more refined than I did in there. Instead of speaking on innovation as a subject, I'll merely address what I perceive as innovative in this game.

League/Ranking System is a massive innovation that many of us don't realize cause we've had it before.

First, in the multiplayer aspect, the most innovative thing is the league/ranking system. Many people may not be impressed with it because it's rooted from Blizzard's most prominent quality, taking something and making it better than it was previously. I'm referring to the ranking system of ICCUP. They took it's A/B/C/D/-/+ rankings and put them into an automated queue system. Any time you felt like you could say "I'm a D+ player" is because of this innovation that was improved upon. People can now be placed where they belong (as the system gets more people and exits beta, it will work better) and enjoy competitive gameplay no matter how new or hardcore they are. It's important to know that while the hardcore StarCraft community is VERY aware of ICCUP, the majority of the world is unaware of it who would consider this game. This is an innovation that would be VERY new to them and would strike at their competitive nerve to play better.

Gameplay Innovations exist, but are minor by a design decision. The Design decision was "Be true to the original while providing something new.

Inside the gamplay, I will cocede that there's no massive innovations because StarCraft: Brood Wars is an anomaly. No other game in the market has had the same situation as this game but I don't need to educate you on that. eSports cornerstone, Korean Sport, blah blah blah. Let's skip that lecture.

The Xel'naga Watch towers is an innovation that works within the realm of StarCraft 2 while adding "capture points" that exist in other games. They give a commodity which truly adds to the main gameplay aspects, knowledge/scouting. The metagame regarding these hasn't been fully recognized yet but as time goes on you'll see these swapped and held often in pro games, even changing entire gameplay styles, such as map direction flow to accomidate things.

The destructable rocks, though incredibly innovative, is also something we've very familiar with in the StarCraft community. They emulate Xel'naga temples and Icon Cannons which are destroyed in many of the competitive maps today. This innovation, while old to us following the eSports and maps that come with them will be very new and enjoyable to those who aren't used to playing on maps with them.

Line of Sight Blockers, while as innovative as a cliff with no one way sight and no movement impedement, can play very interestingly in maps, but I don't think the current ones utilize them in ways that show their true potential. That will come with time I guess.

Units which allow for Cliff walking is innovative, even if other games have done it before. But ultimately it's something that was acceptable to the design decision of StarCraft II.

The simplification of macro to a "reward" from a "requirement" may be viewed by some as a simple UI improvement, but I have to admit that in some small way it adds a level of skill that Blizzard is known for "easy to learn, lifetime to master". People who mastered the old "requirement" of sending SCVs to minerals on time aren't going to find this innovative at all, merely improved... but people who come from WarCraft III will find it as a way to expand their gameplay further in terms of resources. Granted, this idea is debated and I'm only adding it here for completeness as a portion of the community feels it's innovative while the remaining portion don't appreciate it.

I'll admit, compare this to almost EVERY OTHER ASPECT of the game and it's innovation is definately less, maybe even far less, in comparison. I think you've been rather clear to say that this is the part that lacks innovation that you were looking for. In that point, I agree with you that it's not as innovative as it could be.

What I hold a different opinion on, however, is that innovation on this point would have been a risk, and a large risk. Every innovation they add that "Changes" the game would have been potentially game-breaking in terms of eSports. Instead, they found things that could "add" to the game, but in that aspect, innovation will be percieved as small... because it is. These innovations could have been made in the Galaxy Editor. Likewise, other innovations we have yet to see could also be created in the editor. Only time will tell.

4. Where does the innovation lie?

It will lie in every aspect of the game, in my humble opinion, than the multiplayer gameplay. Singleplayer, custom maps, league play, marketplace, tournaments, eSports integration, cloud technology, anti-cheating technology, battle.net integration TIGHTLY within their games, etc.

Again, I don't think we disagree on these points though, you've said multiple times that you're speaking on Multiplayer only, not about other aspects like Singleplayer.

5. Some final thoughts

I hope my wall of text didn't kill your eyes man, who knows, I hope you didn't skip it. Ultimately, in typing I think we may be near the same page, but a few points we may view differently. While it sounds like you're bored of SC2 (by the title) I think that part of that reason is the same that's been said over and over, you aren't really in StarCraft II. And even if you were in the Beta, the parts which make it entertaining will be evolved/improved in Release over time.

I admit that I find this game not boring in the least to play on battle.net. Many of the changes to the abilities to improve deception are really nice to use, such as the new hallucination, that would do nothing to a computer player. In fact, I personally feel that StarCraft 2 has more opporunity for "mind games" which is also part of what I enjoy about it. Unfortunately that portion of the game is robbed by playing against an AI and I hope that you get an opportunity to expirience this moreso when the game comes to your hands. I also find that this is how I feel even without the innovation. I personally wanted a "StarCraft 2", not an "innovated StarCraft". I know I don't have too many who share that opinion, but I think I had a clear expectation in my mind that was met. It looks like you were looking forward to a StarCraft II MP expirience with more innovation than currently exists. Nothing wrong with different expectations at all, but it can easily explain why I'm satisfied with it and you would be less satisfied. ^_^

Remember, SC1 isn't innovative at all by today's standards, but when you put it beside other games such as Company of Heroes, WarCraft III, Halo's RTS, Dawn of War 2 and so many other "innovative games" which are out there, I get the impression you still play StarCraft despite it being less "innovative" than the other options. This shows a love of the gameplay.

The following question a lot of people don't truly understand: In the case of a person who already chooses to play StarCraft: Brood War over other "innovative games". Can the new gameplay of StarCraft II pull you in enough to make you want to play it more than the original StarCraft: Brood Wars while simultaneously allowing you to choose it over "innovative" games" still?

I hope I've provided an interesting read man... I've found your posts interesting at least. ^_^