Why did SC1 retail not have Gateways and Replays?

[Crazy_Jonny]

This might belong in the BW section, but is relevant to the Bnet 2 discussion, and I hope to keep nerd rage to a minimum.

A majority of the fanbase is loathing the absense of some features not present in Bnet2 such as chatrooms and LAN. Personally, the lack of cross region support is the most important of the bunch.

Looking back at SC1's release -
- Ladder system was different/many maps were absent.
- No Replays
- No Gateways (US WEST/EAST etc)

What was the reasoning behind this is the first place? Because I'm pretty sure they just didn't think of it at the last second.


Here's why I think this is so (but I'm making a thread so someone might correct me):

StarCraft at the time went through 2 revamps, and took a lot of money to keep development on. They include the features the game needs to sell, then later include features they want in the game when they get the revenues to do so.

So what I think it comes down to:

Aside from LAN, we probably will get most of the features we're hoping for. It will just come later in a patch. Right now they're first priority is gearing Bnet2 for casual play, since most of the revenue comes from them.


So yeah, probably not a genius observation (I couldve summed it up with $$$, although the comparison I'm trying to make shows this isn't new), just seeing if I'm right in thinking this.

[Kimera757]

Right now they're first priority is gearing Bnet2 for casual play, since most of the revenue comes from them.

I'm a little confused by this statement. Many of the missing features, like chat, has nothing to do with casual vs elite.

Although I agree their focus on an AMM is probably to serve casuals more than elites. (The latter group tends to care less about what essentially amounts to smurfing.)

[Dalarsco]

I'm not one of the people who are all up in arms about those features, but your logic is flawed. Those features were added to SC after launch, but Diablo II and Warcraft III launched with gateway selection and WC3 launched with replays. As each game came out more features were added to B.net as a whole. This is the first time we had a new game with features missing.

[Norfindel]

Yeah, that was more than 10 years ago. Then, they added gateways, so isn't it sort of common sense to have them on the second part of the game?

I mean, the original SC didn't even have TCP/IP LAN, let alone gateways. It's THAT old.

[Crazy_Jonny]

I'm a little confused by this statement. Many of the missing features, like chat, has nothing to do with casual vs elite.

Although I agree their focus on an AMM is probably to serve casuals more than elites. (The latter group tends to care less about what essentially amounts to smurfing.)

A lot of the people who give a crap are not casual gamers.

I'm not one of the people who are all up in arms about those features, but your logic is flawed. Those features were added to SC after launch, but Diablo II and Warcraft III launched with gateway selection and WC3 launched with replays. As each game came out more features were added to B.net as a whole. This is the first time we had a new game with features missing.

I'm not in arms either, I just want to see this game succeed.

But yeah, those games came after SCI, so there was less development time.
Chatrooms aren't that important to me, but I look at it this way. If they want to bring them back, it'll happen when they find a way to prevent spam bots. It might take some extra $$$ to do that. I don't know this for sure but its my guess. Another possibility would be for copyrights, since there were spammers advertising their sites. So chatrooms are still kinda up in the air.

I'm almost sure this thing with cross-realm play won't last though, seeing how it's crucial to everything Bnet2 is about.

[Skyze]

The sole reason for not having gateways is because they didnt think so many people would be on, it would split their server so bad (remember when you had to reconnect to bnet and pray you got on the same server as your friend just to play a game??)

Replays also was something invented WAYY WAYY later.. It wasnt a fact of "Oh we will put that in after release".. It was the fact that no game at that time had even heard of the concept of a replay in a game.

Very different things, comparing a game not having those features because they wern't needed/unknown at the time, to SC2 where we NEED these features but they dont want to add them because they want to add facebook and a crappy ladder system that rewards newbs into thinking they are #1 due to stupid "divisions"..

[Arachnyd]

... crappy ladder system that rewards newbs into thinking they are #1 due to stupid "divisions"..

We get it...you are gosu.

I am getting really tired of all the bashing coming from the upper divisions as if they are the only legitimate players in the community. So what if people in the lower divisions haven't developed their skills and what not. They are legitimate players within their own divisions and leagues.

There is a large consensus that the AMM system is quite impressive, it doesn't cater to them, it works very well to keep the head to head game play as fair as possible. This condescending attitude that has been developing only hurts the community as a whole.

How does calling someone a 'newb in a stupid' division' encourage anyone to strive for something better? Why would anyone want to keep playing to get better if all they are going to run into are arrogant jerks?

On topic: The technology just wasn't developed yet at the time that SC:V was released. I think this should be an eye opening thing for us all: It doesn't have to be 100% right at release: I don't want to wait another 6 months to play the campaign just because someone feels the need to have chat channels and gateways- sorry, those are taking a back seat to the single player campaign for me at the moment.

in case you are wondering...I was in gold division most of my time in beta

[Hammy]

It's not about skill Arachnyd. It's about being realistic. SC2 is meant to be a competitive game, which means that the top players need to be catered too as well as the lower level players. That doesn't mean bronze leaguers and casual players shouldn't get anything, but it's just dumb to let a low level player delude himself into thinking that he's great when in fact he isn't. That'll hinder his progresssion if anything. I know that when I reached the top of my division I was actually demotivated from playing more, because you can't move up anymore, although you know hundreds/thousands of players could demolish you.

Right now the balance it tipped. The game caters way too much to the masses and too little to the top players, and it's not like the diamond league is being held back because of something awesome for everyone else. Diamond could just become one division and that problem is solved for everyone.

It's not about bashing, it's about wanting Blizzard to cater to all audiences, and right now they haven't been doing that very much. Which is a dumb choice imo, because a lot of money will come from the masses watching the top players battle it out ==> ESPORTS.

Although Skyze is raging and being condescending towards new players, he's right that blizzard needs to make some adjustements to encourage competitive play.

How does calling someone a 'newb in a stupid' division' encourage anyone to strive for something better? Why would anyone want to keep playing to get better if all they are going to run into are arrogant jerks?

Yes because all skilled players are jerks... come on Even some of the top10 players worldwide are awesome guys.
I hope you don't use that logic for all of the fields in which you strive to improve


I think the OP's question has been answered but I'll just agree with the above statements:
SC:BW's development is very different from SC2's since Blizzard's got over 10 years of competitive gaming an esports to rely on and excede. Expectations are high of course, and their work is cut out for them.

[bigmiddy]

I'd say the reason SC1 was not released with the Replay feature is because back in 1995/96 the pro gaming community (for RTS anyway) was virtually non-existent. The replays are geared towards professional players that want to put effort into improving their skills. The casual player, which solely existed in 1996, would have had very little desire to watch replays.

As with the gateways well I'd say that is B.net usage was no where near the level of B.net usage once patch 1.08 came out. Thus there was no need to divide the world into quarts. Pretty much what was said above.

[Raif]

Hammy: I totally agree with you, that sc need a top league, with all the top players in it.

But you are a diamond league player right? I think that you might look at the lover divisions the wrong way.
Try to look at them, like they are in normal sport, lets take football/soccer.
Every country has it own leagues or divisions and the best of the best get to play in the top league (aka diamond) the weary best from this league (the super league in Denmark) gets to play in champions league! witch I'm sure Blizzard will make when sc2 goes live.

If my team plays in, lets say in the 2 division, and we get on top this year, I in no way in hell think that we can beat anyone in the super league or in 1 division for that matter, I hope we can survive long enough in 1 division to learn and maybe stay.

If I'm a top silver player, I won't think that I can beat a gold player, 1 out of 10 games I might, but not in the long run.

That doesn't mean bronze leaguers and casual players shouldn't get anything, but it's just dumb to let a low level player delude himself into thinking that he's great when in fact he isn't.

Please don't dumb us down, we don't get deluded that easily!

It's not about bashing, it's about wanting Blizzard to cater to all audiences, and right now they haven't been doing that very much. Which is a dumb choice imo, because a lot of money will come from the masses watching the top players battle it out ==> ESPORTS.

We are still in beta, and this is not a key point to test, you can't have it all at once