Header image

Starcraft II

PC preview by Benjamin Sullivan on 3rd June 2010

Chess is a thing of the past. In terms of strategic board games there are none who can rival its popularity and appeal, but today’s gamer yearns for more than the little wooden pieces of old. Today’s strategy gamer looks instead for swords, magic, blood, aliens, and above all else, the Blizzard logo. It’s true that since the original Warcraft real-time strategy title, Blizzard has maintained a comfortable but vice grip on the genre, and when the mega-title Starcraft landed on shelves in 1998, the world and its strategy gamers would be forever changed.

screenshot

Starcraft was a hit, big enough to warrant tournaments world wide, and in some cases, even so popular as to justify having a television channel or two dedicated to watching the game played non-stop – I’m looking at you, South Korea. It was a simple mechanic, really. Players chose between the trigger-happy Terran, (or humans), the shadowy Protoss alien race, or a malicious race of insects called the Zerg. Each of these three races had their own unique style of play in terms of resource gathering and combat, and the rest, as they say, is history. Millions of people would arise to challenge their friends and strangers worldwide, and before long, Starcraft would have its place amongst one of the best selling computer games in the world. With that, Blizzard’s announcement of Starcraft II - which will consist of three different titles, each geared towards a different race’s story progression – turned some heads. Even more so, when the company announced that a beta-opt in would be available during the spring of this year.

The specifics of the beta have been clear and unfaltering since its release: only online matches will be supported (sadly, none of the campaign is present), computer opponents are only available on an easy difficulty, and matches against other players in real-time rank each player as they play, effectively placing him/her into a category or skill level of similar players to even the playing field. The skill ranking mechanic itself is ingenious, and keeps random matches online from becoming too frustrating. Needless to say, if you’re new to the world of marines and aliens, you won’t find yourself facing off against too many pros until the game’s ranking system determines that you’re a fit challenge for someone of that caliber.

screenshot

My first impressions of the beta were good, and they only kept getting better as the bug-fixes and unit balance issues were mended over the weeks. Though I’m more of a sword and magic guy, and thus a dedicated Warcraft III player, I couldn’t help but feel that the sci-fi sibling to Blizzard’s fantasy monster was brilliant. Gorgeous, and brilliant. The initial release of the game left a sense of overwhelming visual beauty. Truth be told, line up the original Starcraft next to its new predecessor, and the result of time’s changes will leave you speechless. There is simply no way to stress how stunning this game is – and with an overview of the war-torn terrains and battle-ready units you’ll be playing with, your eyes will find little to be desired as you run head-long into a pack of pissed off aliens. Point and click controls, macros, and key-bindings are all present as one would expect, and as such there is little to comment on beyond the specific changes to each race. The formula for Starcraft itself remains unchanged.

Each of the three distinct race choices remain loyal to their previous reputations. The Terran give off an aura of gruff, cigar-smoking soldiers that care little for the aesthetic beauty of their steel structures and never go into the field without a heavy arsenal of rifles and explosives (or the occasional mech). Protoss remain geared towards the idea that “less is more”, and boast units that are, singularly, more effective than units of opposing factions. And last but not least, the Zerg feel like something of a middle-man this time around, with less units and a “hive mentality” where sheer numbers overwhelm skilled opponents. I was a little disappointed with the Zerg this time around, as their entire play style on the whole felt downgraded and more of a chore to progress with. Fans of using this particular race will have no trouble wiping the floor with me, but I couldn’t shake the feeling that the Zerg weren’t nearly as fun to play as they once were and could’ve been. Each race has had some units removed and some new ones added, and generally any unit-based balance issues that surface during the online beta are quickly addressed by Blizzard.

screenshot

All in all, Starcraft II looks and feels like a very attractive product that is constantly being refined and sharpened by the beta process. If you weren’t fortunate enough to receive access to the beta, take it upon yourself to call up a friend who has, and experience the process for yourself. Blizzard really knows how to make em’, and Starcraft II will not disappoint when it hits the shelves. Be sure to get your hands on a copy if the real-time strategy scene is home to you.

Spread the word

About the author

Picture of Benjamin Sullivan

Benjamin Sullivan is a Staff Writer at Thunderbolt, having joined in November 2008. Born into a family of math majors and athletes, he was the outcast, dedicating long hours of the night to catching Pokémon and reading about any world that wasn’t this one. Truth be told, we’re not sure he ever came back.

Comments

  • Delapidated escapism

    4th June 2010

    Gravatar

    StarCraft is better than Chess ? Don’t be an idiot . Chess players can reconstruct their previous matches with a clockwork precision, outcome is purely decided on tactic, and planning 10-12 steps ahead, like Mozart who always had completed his pieces inside his head before writing the down, and has nothing to do with action-per-minute. Game journalists need to stop embarassing video game industry by saying retarded things like ‘Shadow Of The Colossus is comparable to Citizen Kane’ or ‘Chess is more strategic than StarCraft’ .No wonder Roger Ebert is making fun of video games, we have it coming.

  • roksta

    5th June 2010

    Gravatar

    Damn do I love me some Shadow of the Colossus! Citizen Kane has absolutely nothing on it. What a BORING film, holy god. ROSEBUD! Oops, spoilers. Seriously though, coming in here all high and mighty thinking that your humble opinion is the end all; “well I play chess and watch bad movies, so obviously they are superior”

  • SoulEye

    19th June 2010

    Gravatar

    Chess is better than StarCraft? Don’t be decieved. StarCraft players can reconstruct their previous matches with a clockwork precision using replays, outcome is decided on strategy, tactics, planning 10-12 steps ahead, like Mozart who always had completed his pieces inside his head before writing the down, and also has something to do with actions per minute, much like having your hands play an instrument with great precision, requiring not only the brain, but also your hands to work in synchronicity. Certainly a different challenge than chess.

    Roger Ebert is poking fun of video games because he just wants to put “fine art” on a pedistal that games can’t enter into, just because he doesn’t like games and thinks that letting games be called art would lower the status of the people who like “real” art… Like him.

  • Delapidated escapism

    20th June 2010

    Gravatar

    You can’t plan 12 steps ahead in starCraft because it is real-time , doofus. ‘Steps’ are implemented exclusively in turn-base games.

    If you think by playing games, you are studying the depth and intricacies of the emotional impact games have on you instead of calling your peers online with homosexual slurs, you’re an idiot.

  • Cpt Olimar

    21st June 2010

    Gravatar

    as much as I anticipate SC2, chess is certainly NOT a thing of the past…. just look at all the attention it gets, world tournaments, Olympic attention etc.

    It’s a silly comparison. Chess is a timeless game, something that even Starcraft has not come close to achieving. Nor will its sequel.

  • Calvin Kemph

    21st June 2010

    Gravatar

    I agree with the part about video game journalists using too much hyperbole at times and using comparisons to Citizen Kane, but I think comparing the most popular strategy board game to what could become the most popular strategy video game is valid, if not only to put the competitive nature of the title into perspective.

    I wish my PC could run this game. StarCraft is one of the few PC games I continue coming back to years after it’s release. Much like Chess, StarCraft is timeless.

  • Delapidated escapism

    21st June 2010

    Gravatar

    Don’t be a crippled idiot. StarCraft does not even have strategic depth of football (The real one, not the garbage American one) , let alone chess. Elements like finding natural ressources in StarCraft and numerical advantage of your troops are there to support realism, but from strategic point of view, it doesn’t even have something that comes close to attack-defence transition and offside trap. Capturing a piece in chess is even considered losing tempo, building your strength is more fundamental , in StarCraft on the other hand, destroying everything and depleting health bar is the objective . Abstract games like sports and board games will always have more elegance than realistic games like paintball or StarCraft. Live with it.

  • Frawg

    25th June 2010

    Gravatar

    Like Tic-Tac-Toe, for one.

Show the five other comments

Add your own comment »

You may also enjoy