Post by Steve Farrelly @ 06:15pm 18/11/11 | 15 Comments
Kaeo then revealed to us that they tried something entirely new with the development of StarCraft 2 where, in fact, both sides of the game would be treated separately so that the team could focus on making fun, engaging units for single-player that would never work for multiplayer. The end result is a game that is less a coherent on the whole, but far more engaging on both levels, regardless of your interest in either single-player or the e-Sport-powered multiplayer.
"We kind of took a new approach to this in our RTS games for Wings of Liberty and we’re carrying that into Heart of the Swarm as well," Kaeo told AusGamers. "Because historically, the multiplayer units had been featured prominently in the campaign and we used campaign as a training ground for multiplayer. But for Wings of Liberty and for Heart of the Swarm, we’ve given ourselves the liberty to disconnect that a bit more, which has been kind of cool actually."
The full interview covers feedback from pro-gamers for balance, where the narrative is headed next and just what we can expect from the former Queen of Blades.
Click here for the full interview feature.
Latest Comments
15 Comments
Show
Follow Us
Advertisement
Log In
Posted 06:44pm 18/11/11
Posted 08:20pm 18/11/11
Although I'm not exactly complaining, I'm just stating that it's difficult for a person to enjoy the whole game without previous training grounds like sc1, bw, wc3/tft, and perhaps more updated RTS's like 40k games.
Overall I do personally find that the game is excellent with amazing after-sale support in patch and updates adding balance and game fluidity and the single player enhanced by all the optional achievements as well as the rather enjoyable storyline.
Posted 08:39pm 18/11/11
Posted 08:52pm 18/11/11
Posted 09:09pm 18/11/11
Posted 02:50am 19/11/11
If you're saying that "SC2 has a very easy to learn, hard to master" which is a pretty large mantra from blizzard in general, I'd say this clearly is the mindset of games like WoW, but not as strong with SC2.
I'd call SC2 uncompromising. Which is perhaps the reason of it's current e-sports success.
Posted 07:16am 19/11/11
Posted 10:38am 19/11/11
I am not really sure of the point of your original post - are you talking about MP or SP or just the game in general?
I didn't finish the SP campaign, not because I wasn't really enjoying the gameplay, but I just find it basically impossible to pay attention to SP games any more (since, oh, December 1993 this has been a problem for me). I got maybe 6 missions in and then just gave up and moved over to MP.
Posted 03:40pm 19/11/11
Posted 09:18am 20/11/11
Posted 12:40pm 20/11/11
Posted 10:56am 02/12/11
SC2 is the only remaining RTS that retains the essential RTS qualities of the original and the best RTS games that have ever been made.
Command and Conquer, the original SC, Warcraft,
All these modern RTS games have completely lost their touch, like DOW2, it is not an RTS at all, neither is C&C4.
I love SC2 because of how easy it is to play, and how simple it is. It is EXACTLY like the RTS games of the mid-late 90s that I hold so dearly.
Posted 10:59am 02/12/11
I do not understand all the hate on SC2 in these comments. I am not even a hardcore SC2 player, i love the game and play as often as I am able, but I am not like those people who do it for a living.
SC2 Multiplayer is all about having the right strategy, not only for building your own base, but for countering the strategy of your opponents, and unfortunately, in team games, a lot of it depends on your team also having a good strategy.
If you think you can just jump into MP and start pumping out whatever comes to mind with no thought at all, then you will not last 5 minutes.
Posted 11:06am 02/12/11
alot smaller field than others, and almost a dark reign but much pretty and based in WW2 feel