In the week since it's release, I have seen surprisingly little from my friends about the new Zerg expansion to Starcraft 2, the Kerrigan-focused Heart of the Swarm. Probably because they're all so busy playing it. If you know any Starcraft franchise fans, you know that they're probably knee-deep in empty Coke cans whenever the newest game comes out - especially when this one has been so long in the making.
This new installment in the well-beloved series revolves around Sarah Kerrigan, freshly rescued from being the Queen of Blades by our well-known and lovable hero Jim Raynor. She wakes up alone in a cell under the scrutiny of Valerian Mengsk. They want to make sure she won't return to the Swarm. That she really has become human again.
First, let me just say that this game is beautiful. We've come to expect this from Blizzard - and games in general now - but still, it is definitely worth noting that this game is gorgeous to look at. I wish they made animated films that looked as wonderful as this. Dramas, action-thrillers, westerns - anything could look good with the animation they use in this game's cut-scenes.
What I also very much like is it creates more characters within the Zerg swarm, such as those on board Kerrigan's ship. Abathur, for example, who is the resident Swarm editor. He is terrifying and robotic and familiar and wonderful from his dialogue to the voice acting to the model.
And not to mention the veritable bevvy of named Hive Queens that Kerrigan meets.
What's even more interesting, is that by having these characters, it humanizes the Zerg somewhat, which I suppose was the point - especially in Kerrigan's "re-education" of a certain Hive Queen.
One thing that I fear is that the game will be all too short and perhaps even a little bit too easy, but then again I haven't reached the final missions yet, being too distracted with that time-consuming and money-providing endeavour called "work".
The price was also right for this game, set at a nice $44 (AUD) which marks it as an expansion in the same vein as the old Brood War. If you liked Wings of Liberty, you'll like this. The only bad part so far, is they haven't fixed the whole "we don't do LAN anymore" thing. And also, the annoying thing that buying the game in hard copy doesn't mean you get to install the game from the disc, it just has the downloader on there so you don't have to download it. It still installs the game by downloading it from online. You've been warned.
Mahalo.
Showing posts with label starcraft 2. Show all posts
Showing posts with label starcraft 2. Show all posts
Monday, March 18, 2013
Thursday, June 2, 2011
On Dreams
I recently read an article written by a friend of mine about his adulation, joy and love for the Duke Nukem franchise and the finally-being-released-after-a-14-year-delay Duke Nukem Forever. He talks about the hope, the knowing, the faith that Forever was always going to come, no matter how many delays or how much mud the name was dragged through.
Even after 3D Realms - the Apogee company responsible for Duke - closed down, he held fast and it was picked up by Borderlands' Gearbox. And now, after all these years - more than half his life - the game is being released and he has joyfully played the demo after all that waiting.
Despite having never really talked about it before, that is exactly - exactly - how I felt about Starcraft 2.
Starcraft was one of those games that defined my childhood. Besides some fairly unknown games like Gizmos and Gadgets, Treasure Mountain, Operation: Neptune and some more known games like the Worms franchise, Fury 3 and Myst, Starcraft was the game I played with my brother every week; the game I had LAN parties, inviting a dozen friends over to play; the game I loved but (if I'm to be honest) was never very good at. But I didn't care. It was so much fun.
This was, of course, back when a game's story mattered a lot. Sure, the graphics may be a little dated now, but still amazing for its time, but damn was that story engaging with characters I loved. I still remember how I felt when Sarah Kerrigan got merged with the Zerg. I to this day regret the death of Fenix and his subsequent rebirthed Dragoon form. I still identify with James "Jim" Raynor. And, at the end of Starcraft's amazing expansion pack Brood War, I knew that Starcraft 2 was coming. I knew it. I felt it.
I liked to dream that it was coming just around the corner, and we'd finally meet the Xel'naga, the ancient race in the Starcraft universe. I finished Brood War in 1998. And then I waited and I waited.
There was no word that there would ever be a Starcraft 2, but I knew. There had to be. They wouldn't leave the story like that, begging to be finished, begging to be continued, heard, seen. Internet and PC Magazine rumours abounded about this game. "It's coming!" They cried. "Just you wait!"
There was fan-made art and all sorts of things to keep our hopes up that the game was coming. It became a joke amongst my family and friends. The game was coming, we knew, but it also wasn't. It gave us something to look forward to. Something to want.
Then there was Blizzard's biggest game delay mess-up. If you know Blizzard, you know I'm talking about Starcraft: Ghost. The game was going to be a third-person shooter-style game, sort of like a Splinter Cell in the Starcraft universe. We would finally see the inside of the battleships, see the Zerg up close, see what every character really looked like and how they lived. It would have been like what World of Warcraft did to the Warcraft universe - you can see it, experience it, be in it.
Delay after delay after delay. The came never came. There were press releases and exhibitions, "It's coming," they said. "It is. We promise."
And it didn't.
Then, disaster struck. Blizzard changed development companies over some dispute or another and all of the work that had been done - pretty much the entire game mind you - was deleted, erased and made as if to start over. They never did. The game development never recovered and Ghost was dust in the wind.
A light, though, a light came through. It happened in May, 2007. We got it. Released at E3 and then on the word-spreading web, we got the first teaser for Starcraft 2. It was simple. A man - a criminal - being unleashed from his chains and bolted tight into the overwhelmingly large suit of marine armour.
"Hell," he said, a smirk and a cigar. "It's about time."
Yes. Yes it was.
From then on, art and gameplay trailers came and finally, on the 27th of July, 2010, we got it. We were given Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty. And we loved it. Sure, there were problems - lots of them. No LAN capabilities, only online play, regioned multiplayer, but hot damn, we had something. The story continued and it was glorious.
To be released in 3, 40-hour gameplay installments, starting with our future selves, the Terrans, the game promised to be an epic of immense proportions. In between missions you got to explore the battlecruiser on which Jim Rayner took residence. You saw the models, moving and speaking, of these characters, not just small talking faces in a war-room or short cut-scenes - these were people, damnit!
It finally came. And now, we wait on part 2. And part 3.
Even after 3D Realms - the Apogee company responsible for Duke - closed down, he held fast and it was picked up by Borderlands' Gearbox. And now, after all these years - more than half his life - the game is being released and he has joyfully played the demo after all that waiting.
Despite having never really talked about it before, that is exactly - exactly - how I felt about Starcraft 2.
Starcraft was one of those games that defined my childhood. Besides some fairly unknown games like Gizmos and Gadgets, Treasure Mountain, Operation: Neptune and some more known games like the Worms franchise, Fury 3 and Myst, Starcraft was the game I played with my brother every week; the game I had LAN parties, inviting a dozen friends over to play; the game I loved but (if I'm to be honest) was never very good at. But I didn't care. It was so much fun.
This was, of course, back when a game's story mattered a lot. Sure, the graphics may be a little dated now, but still amazing for its time, but damn was that story engaging with characters I loved. I still remember how I felt when Sarah Kerrigan got merged with the Zerg. I to this day regret the death of Fenix and his subsequent rebirthed Dragoon form. I still identify with James "Jim" Raynor. And, at the end of Starcraft's amazing expansion pack Brood War, I knew that Starcraft 2 was coming. I knew it. I felt it.
I liked to dream that it was coming just around the corner, and we'd finally meet the Xel'naga, the ancient race in the Starcraft universe. I finished Brood War in 1998. And then I waited and I waited.
There was no word that there would ever be a Starcraft 2, but I knew. There had to be. They wouldn't leave the story like that, begging to be finished, begging to be continued, heard, seen. Internet and PC Magazine rumours abounded about this game. "It's coming!" They cried. "Just you wait!"
There was fan-made art and all sorts of things to keep our hopes up that the game was coming. It became a joke amongst my family and friends. The game was coming, we knew, but it also wasn't. It gave us something to look forward to. Something to want.
Then there was Blizzard's biggest game delay mess-up. If you know Blizzard, you know I'm talking about Starcraft: Ghost. The game was going to be a third-person shooter-style game, sort of like a Splinter Cell in the Starcraft universe. We would finally see the inside of the battleships, see the Zerg up close, see what every character really looked like and how they lived. It would have been like what World of Warcraft did to the Warcraft universe - you can see it, experience it, be in it.
Delay after delay after delay. The came never came. There were press releases and exhibitions, "It's coming," they said. "It is. We promise."
And it didn't.
Then, disaster struck. Blizzard changed development companies over some dispute or another and all of the work that had been done - pretty much the entire game mind you - was deleted, erased and made as if to start over. They never did. The game development never recovered and Ghost was dust in the wind.
A light, though, a light came through. It happened in May, 2007. We got it. Released at E3 and then on the word-spreading web, we got the first teaser for Starcraft 2. It was simple. A man - a criminal - being unleashed from his chains and bolted tight into the overwhelmingly large suit of marine armour.
"Hell," he said, a smirk and a cigar. "It's about time."
Yes. Yes it was.
From then on, art and gameplay trailers came and finally, on the 27th of July, 2010, we got it. We were given Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty. And we loved it. Sure, there were problems - lots of them. No LAN capabilities, only online play, regioned multiplayer, but hot damn, we had something. The story continued and it was glorious.
To be released in 3, 40-hour gameplay installments, starting with our future selves, the Terrans, the game promised to be an epic of immense proportions. In between missions you got to explore the battlecruiser on which Jim Rayner took residence. You saw the models, moving and speaking, of these characters, not just small talking faces in a war-room or short cut-scenes - these were people, damnit!
It finally came. And now, we wait on part 2. And part 3.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Official Verdict: StarCraft 2
Well, well, well. So the date came and went for the release of the much anticipated (for some fans, 12 year wait) StarCraft 2: Wings of Liberty. And lo and behold were we not disappointed.
While I sure had strong opinions on what Activizzard had done regarding the multiplayer system of the game, the single player mode is better than I hoped - if not slightly easier than I expected.
The story continues the story of the all favourite Jim Raynor four years after the end of Brood War. Kerrigan is mysteriously silent and Arcturus Mengsk is still in control of the Terran Dominion. The fight goes on in it's normal fashion and then Zeratul returns bearing grave news.
StarCraft 2's campaign allows for a varied and interesting form of play, allowing and disallowing certain units and creating intriguing choices for the player - allowing for moments of role play.
Also, while I may complain about the multiplayer system - and the integrated RealID (which was NOT removed) Facebook friend finger - the multiplayer games are fun and really are nostalgic of StarCraft 1. It is most definitely not "an online experience so good you won't want to have a LAN party", but it's fun - which a game this good should be.
Now I just need to wait for the two expansions to see if this praise is at all founded.
While I sure had strong opinions on what Activizzard had done regarding the multiplayer system of the game, the single player mode is better than I hoped - if not slightly easier than I expected.
The story continues the story of the all favourite Jim Raynor four years after the end of Brood War. Kerrigan is mysteriously silent and Arcturus Mengsk is still in control of the Terran Dominion. The fight goes on in it's normal fashion and then Zeratul returns bearing grave news.
StarCraft 2's campaign allows for a varied and interesting form of play, allowing and disallowing certain units and creating intriguing choices for the player - allowing for moments of role play.
Also, while I may complain about the multiplayer system - and the integrated RealID (which was NOT removed) Facebook friend finger - the multiplayer games are fun and really are nostalgic of StarCraft 1. It is most definitely not "an online experience so good you won't want to have a LAN party", but it's fun - which a game this good should be.
Now I just need to wait for the two expansions to see if this praise is at all founded.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
The Internet Spoke and Blizzard Listened
Well, it's a small victory, but one nonetheless. According to this article, the Real ID thing for both WoW and the upcoming Starcraft 2 forum launch has been scrapped because of the incredibly negative responses on the internet by fans. They have decided that "now is not the time" for the Real ID system and that in SC2 we will be able to post under our character name.
It's happened - we've been listened to. Now, hopefully, they'll know we mean business and maybe try and change some of the other things that have rubbed us the wrong was as long-time Blizzard fans? Who knows.
It's happened - we've been listened to. Now, hopefully, they'll know we mean business and maybe try and change some of the other things that have rubbed us the wrong was as long-time Blizzard fans? Who knows.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
A Gaming Adendum
I think this needs to be stated outside of my earlier post about Activizzard and StarCraft 2. Let's face it, as gamers, gaming companies have us by the balls. They create the games that we want to play, we buy them and that's it. They dictate the rules, the code of conduct and the fashion in which it is to be played and, outside of official patches and unofficial fan creations, the game more or less stays the same. And they always will have the same formula.
We may, as gamers and internet users, sit idly in front of glowing screens and rant about the things that are important to us - this is the only power we have to change ANYTHING. This is important to note. The only way things get changed is by speaking out - whether this be as a protest on the street or a well-meaning blogpost to and about the right people or thing.
What will NOT get things changed is flame wars. We need to be more eloquent with our anger, explaining WHY this kind of things simply won't do anymore. More eloquent than, "yur a fag lolz" and "this is fucking shit, ffffffuuuuuuuu blizzard!11!!!" These outbursts of nonsensical jabbery won't get you anywhere. In fact, they will set back the cause.
The world already sees gamers as ineloquent, infantile, useless leeches of human decency, and when I look at some of the bastards on forums and MMORPGs, it's hard to not agree - sometimes. Most of the time, however, when you have people like my friends or Husky and HD and the professional players they host in their StarCraft tournaments, or just that one nice guy in World of Warcraft who helped you find your way to Orgrimmar rather than shouting at the top of his virtual lungs, "NOOB FAG! ORGRIMMAR IS EASY TO FIND LOL".
Gamers are, actually, intelligent and thoughtful folk but they are often the quieter ones. The louder gamers, the ones Jack Thompson and the angry media latch on to like leeches at a blood party, are the ones who do not represent us. I don't know if I can stress any of that enough. If we want gaming companies to take us seriously when we ask for change, we need to do so not only en masse, but eloquently and thoughtfully. Then, and only then, will they take what we have to say seriously alongside their educated and competent game designers. Mahalo.
We may, as gamers and internet users, sit idly in front of glowing screens and rant about the things that are important to us - this is the only power we have to change ANYTHING. This is important to note. The only way things get changed is by speaking out - whether this be as a protest on the street or a well-meaning blogpost to and about the right people or thing.
What will NOT get things changed is flame wars. We need to be more eloquent with our anger, explaining WHY this kind of things simply won't do anymore. More eloquent than, "yur a fag lolz" and "this is fucking shit, ffffffuuuuuuuu blizzard!11!!!" These outbursts of nonsensical jabbery won't get you anywhere. In fact, they will set back the cause.
The world already sees gamers as ineloquent, infantile, useless leeches of human decency, and when I look at some of the bastards on forums and MMORPGs, it's hard to not agree - sometimes. Most of the time, however, when you have people like my friends or Husky and HD and the professional players they host in their StarCraft tournaments, or just that one nice guy in World of Warcraft who helped you find your way to Orgrimmar rather than shouting at the top of his virtual lungs, "NOOB FAG! ORGRIMMAR IS EASY TO FIND LOL".
Gamers are, actually, intelligent and thoughtful folk but they are often the quieter ones. The louder gamers, the ones Jack Thompson and the angry media latch on to like leeches at a blood party, are the ones who do not represent us. I don't know if I can stress any of that enough. If we want gaming companies to take us seriously when we ask for change, we need to do so not only en masse, but eloquently and thoughtfully. Then, and only then, will they take what we have to say seriously alongside their educated and competent game designers. Mahalo.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
The Uphill Battle
I've avoided this for long enough, I think. Normally I don't complain all that much here and just stick to personal writing and reviewing, but I cannot simply stand by anymore. As those who know me know, I am an avid and long-time gamer - I will happily admit that I like all sorts of computer, console and tabletop games. But it seems remaining a gamer in the new market is becoming more and more difficult, with certain gaming companies taking what can be seen as an anti-gamer stance, or more specifically, non-loyalty to their long-time gamers. I'm looking at you Blizzard/Activion...Bliztivision...Activizzard. Whatever.
My first and foremost complaint comes with the release of the long awaited and anticipated (for seriously over a decade) game of StarCraft 2. I, like most other gamers, loved and continue to love StarCraft 1 and still play it, enjoying it's more or less perfection of the RTS (real-time strategy) gaming model. Not only that, but you were guaranteed to be able to play with your friends whenever you wanted. After Blizzard merged with Activision, it seems to have turned its back on us ever-trusting fools and royally flipped us the bird.
One of the top priorities of an RTS (or what SHOULD be a top priority of an RTS) is multiplayability. That is, playing with more people other than yourself, whether in the same room, house or country. StarCraft 1 had LAN support which allowed computers, connected in the same house or room via wireless or direct-cable connection, to play in the same game with one another without having to be connected to the internet. One benefit of this is the epic fun that all gamers know, known as LAN Parties. You and your friends bring your computers and play a lot of games together, simple as that.
Blizzard (or, more accurately I believe, Activision) has made the direct and forceful choice to remove LAN capabilities from StarCraft 2 for good. That's it. Period. The reason given by Activision CEO Bobby Kotick, is that they want to give a gaming experience so good, that people "won't even want to have LAN parties". I'm sorry, what? Have you ever PLAYED games? That's one of the benefits of being a gamer! Here is H-to-the-usky-Husky talking about all these issues in a video accompanied by kittens. I know it's 25 minutes, but if you're interested in the issue, it's worthwhile.
But "Ah," I hear you cry, "surely without this, you can still play online?" Of course, but another thing being removed is the chat and unique game names from the new Battle.Net service - the online multiplayer system for Blizzard games. This makes not only chatting with your friends difficult, but organizing games with your friends a huge pain. With no unique game names, how are we to know which "4v4 [Map Name] Melee" are we supposed to join? There will be hundreds!
Ah but wait, maybe there won't be. In the old Battle.Net system, you could choose which region to play in (Asia, US East, US West and Europe) and could therefore meet a whole bunch of new people. No longer! Your StarCraft region will now be chosen for you depending on the address given in your Battle.Net account - say goodbye to all those friends you made in StarCraft 1, you won't be able t play with them anymore unless you falsify your address, or buy multiple copies of the game - something which I'm sure Activision's CEO would love.
Another rumour circulating the web is that the previously free service of Battle.Net will now become a 'pay by the month' service similar to Xbox Live. This will definitely make being a gamer even harder, and once more limiting the scope of the multiplayability of a multiplayer game!
What strikes me most, out of all of this, is that Blizzard have always been a gamer-loyal company, always releasing top-quality games that are loved by all - what gamer doesn't have fond memories of Diablo, StarCraft, Warcraft or WoW at SOME point? All these games are great and, despite the fact that they often took FOREVER to be released, they did so because it was to make the game better, to make sure it was perfect. It seems to me that now they are releasing an unfinished, sub-par sequel. Despite the decade-long wait for a game which looks in Beta to be possibly one of the most fun RTSs of all time, I could wait a little longer for them to get this baby right.
What is frustrating is that, through all of this, I know I will still buy it - hell, I preordered it. I WANT to play that game. Desperately. And Activizzard knows that. They know we gamers will fork out the necessary money to play the games we want to play, even in spite of all their glaring flaws. And that goes double - if not triple - for StarCraft 2. The only way we can get things to change is if we stand up and say, "Hell no, no more, we aren't buying your games unless they are done right and are made loyally for your fans". But, unfortunately, I cannot see that coming.
My first and foremost complaint comes with the release of the long awaited and anticipated (for seriously over a decade) game of StarCraft 2. I, like most other gamers, loved and continue to love StarCraft 1 and still play it, enjoying it's more or less perfection of the RTS (real-time strategy) gaming model. Not only that, but you were guaranteed to be able to play with your friends whenever you wanted. After Blizzard merged with Activision, it seems to have turned its back on us ever-trusting fools and royally flipped us the bird.
One of the top priorities of an RTS (or what SHOULD be a top priority of an RTS) is multiplayability. That is, playing with more people other than yourself, whether in the same room, house or country. StarCraft 1 had LAN support which allowed computers, connected in the same house or room via wireless or direct-cable connection, to play in the same game with one another without having to be connected to the internet. One benefit of this is the epic fun that all gamers know, known as LAN Parties. You and your friends bring your computers and play a lot of games together, simple as that.
Blizzard (or, more accurately I believe, Activision) has made the direct and forceful choice to remove LAN capabilities from StarCraft 2 for good. That's it. Period. The reason given by Activision CEO Bobby Kotick, is that they want to give a gaming experience so good, that people "won't even want to have LAN parties". I'm sorry, what? Have you ever PLAYED games? That's one of the benefits of being a gamer! Here is H-to-the-usky-Husky talking about all these issues in a video accompanied by kittens. I know it's 25 minutes, but if you're interested in the issue, it's worthwhile.
But "Ah," I hear you cry, "surely without this, you can still play online?" Of course, but another thing being removed is the chat and unique game names from the new Battle.Net service - the online multiplayer system for Blizzard games. This makes not only chatting with your friends difficult, but organizing games with your friends a huge pain. With no unique game names, how are we to know which "4v4 [Map Name] Melee" are we supposed to join? There will be hundreds!
Ah but wait, maybe there won't be. In the old Battle.Net system, you could choose which region to play in (Asia, US East, US West and Europe) and could therefore meet a whole bunch of new people. No longer! Your StarCraft region will now be chosen for you depending on the address given in your Battle.Net account - say goodbye to all those friends you made in StarCraft 1, you won't be able t play with them anymore unless you falsify your address, or buy multiple copies of the game - something which I'm sure Activision's CEO would love.
Another rumour circulating the web is that the previously free service of Battle.Net will now become a 'pay by the month' service similar to Xbox Live. This will definitely make being a gamer even harder, and once more limiting the scope of the multiplayability of a multiplayer game!
What strikes me most, out of all of this, is that Blizzard have always been a gamer-loyal company, always releasing top-quality games that are loved by all - what gamer doesn't have fond memories of Diablo, StarCraft, Warcraft or WoW at SOME point? All these games are great and, despite the fact that they often took FOREVER to be released, they did so because it was to make the game better, to make sure it was perfect. It seems to me that now they are releasing an unfinished, sub-par sequel. Despite the decade-long wait for a game which looks in Beta to be possibly one of the most fun RTSs of all time, I could wait a little longer for them to get this baby right.
What is frustrating is that, through all of this, I know I will still buy it - hell, I preordered it. I WANT to play that game. Desperately. And Activizzard knows that. They know we gamers will fork out the necessary money to play the games we want to play, even in spite of all their glaring flaws. And that goes double - if not triple - for StarCraft 2. The only way we can get things to change is if we stand up and say, "Hell no, no more, we aren't buying your games unless they are done right and are made loyally for your fans". But, unfortunately, I cannot see that coming.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)