Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Blizzard Unveils Custom StarCraft 2 Game Types, Encourages Map Design

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the my-pancakes-for-aiur dept.

Real Time Strategy (Games) 83

StarCraft 2 launched in July, and since most of the developers' efforts since then have gone into tweaking balance issues, fixing bugs and further developing Battle.net integration, the second part of the trilogy is still quite a ways off. So, in lieu of announcements about Heart of the Swarm, the devs are using Blizzcon to showcase the map-editing tools and encourage the community to get more involved with custom maps and game types. Using the map editor, they created internally four custom games for StarCraft 2, which they’ll soon be releasing over Battle.net for free alongside three fan creations that won a recent contest. Read on for more details.

The first of the Blizzard-made maps is a humorous creation called Aiur Chef, an eight-player free-for-all in which players collect “ingredients” from around the map that are required for recipes, which each grant various rewards, such as points, items, and special powers. You compete against an opponent for a high score, and while you can’t kill each other, you are able to hinder the collection of ingredients through effects like stuns and slowing effects. Each of the three rounds has a “theme ingredient,” and you can see units running around carrying pots and drumsticks and rolling pins. There’s a new UI window showing which ingredients you have left to collect.

Another custom game, titled Left 2 Die, is based on one of the missions in the single-player campaign where players were swarmed by hordes of zombies every night, using daylight hours to rebuild and go on the offensive. Blizzard received enough positive feedback about that particular mission that they decided to go ahead and make a standalone version (tipping their hat to Valve's Left 4 Dead in the process). It's a co-op game, and as you mow down zombies you collect Zerg Biomass to buy upgrades for your army (upgrades that are shared, so you don’t have to worry about competing with your partner). There are new zombie units to contend with, inspired by those in Left 4 Dead, but adapted so they make sense in an RTS.

Next is a game called Starjeweled, which sections off half of the UI into Blizzard’s interpretation of the popular Bejeweled puzzle game. When you match a group of similar symbols, they disappear and grant you resources to spend on units, which then go out and try to attack an enemy base.

Perhaps the most notable of Blizzard's custom games is what they call Blizzard DOTA, based on the hugely popular Warcraft 3 mod Defense of the Ancients. In teams of five, players will control Heroes that can buy items, gain experience and level up, while the map constantly spawns waves of monsters from both bases. The heroes will be a collection of notable Blizzard characters from various games.

During the panel about the map tools, the Starcraft 2 team was very focused on introducing map makers to the basics of development. They talked about the necessity of making the first few minutes of a custom game easy to understand for new players, since getting massacred while being utterly confused is not an experience most players will want to repeat. They also encouraged map makers to take a more active role in soliciting and responding to feedback. Blizzard relies heavily on iteration, and they think the community would benefit from doing so as well.

Blizzard was insistent that the custom maps they will be releasing are part of an ongoing process to keep making new maps and custom games for players. One of their big goals for the immediate future is to keep demonstrating what their map editor is capable of and getting assets in the hands of players to facilitate building. To that end, the custom games they’re building will be unlocked, so the community will be able to look at the internals and modify whatever they see fit. (And speaking of security, they're working on better safeguards to keep people from copying others' maps, should the creators wish to keep them private.) Another reason they built the maps was to see in what areas the editing tools were lacking, so they could continue to add and streamline functionality.

cancel ×

83 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

BNet 2.0 a disappointment (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997456)

The game itself is amazing and I have had a lot of fun playing it, throughout the beta and the release, but I am really sad at how Bnet 2.0 turned out. The so called "social experience" is not social at all. Hard to meet and talk to new people because there are no chat channels. There's no guild support. You can't name your own custom games (what the fuck????).

Facebook integration is great and all, but I hardly have any friends that play the game. Most of the people I played with in the original game I met on Bnet in.... chat channels. The whole thing is just so ass backards and feels like a hack.

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (1)

bgweber (1676858) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997542)

Did you really use the chat channels in the original?

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997568)

yes

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (2, Funny)

binarylarry (1338699) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997600)

yes (yes yes yes yes yes fuckdot filter)

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (2, Insightful)

GiveBenADollar (1722738) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997602)

Chat channels were useful. It was easy to make online friends who you enjoyed playing with. Also custom games made original Starcraft shine. I remember playing a lot of turret defense when I got bored with regular play. Now I can't even have a lan party. SC2 is lame on many levels. It seems the people that like it the most are people who never truly experienced the original.

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (0)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997818)

Did you really use the chat channels in the original?

kekekeke

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33998066)

Yes. It took some work to find good ones, but they were there.

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997666)

11 years ago i made several friends from SC BNet chats. Still today i play SC2 with them. And once a year we all get together for LAN Games... Not this year thanks to the removal of the LAN option.

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34019980)

Lol, what bullshit. Where would you have LAN games that you can't get online to create the game on bnet? Even Antarctica has internet.

Although to be fair, maybe you live in west virginia?

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (5, Interesting)

Kaboom13 (235759) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997778)

The big hurdle to custom games right now is they are region locked. Maps from one realm can't be played on any others, which has frustrated devs to the point many of them have given up. The new popularity system also means that 99% of maps never get seen, as the list itself is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Get on the top of the list, you get played a lot because you are on top, so you get played more, etc. Blizz has tried to help by choosing "featured" maps to force to the top of the list for a few weeks, but it's kind of an ugly hack to a broken system. When you make a game, you choose the map, and then slots are automatically filled and the game starts automatically, making announcing any sort of gametype impossible. So for games like Dota, which had dozens of game types, the only way to implement it in sc2 is to make different maps, which splits the player base and keeps the map from hitting the popular list. Oh and my personal pet peeve, when the game fills, it auto starts a 30 second countdown. If people leave during this time, the countdown doesn't stop. Theres no way to stop it and get a player to fill the slot without leaving, and starting over, and if you don't leave fast enough you are stuck hitting load screen. It was a known problem in wc3 and they actually made it 10x worse not better.

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (1)

flabordec (984984) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997800)

Weird thing, I have met more people in a couple months of Starcraft 2 than I did in all of Starcraft 1, because in SC we were always in the same channel and didn't really play with anyone else. This time around after some games I get a message or I send a message to one of the people who played and we chat a little about the game, sometimes we 2v2 and add them as friends so that the next time they are online I get a notification. There is not a lot of social interaction but I am playing the game to play the game, not to chat.

On the other hand, maybe what I experienced in SC was not the whole social experience and I missed on something really cool.

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997814)

Bliz has basically admitted their mistake. IIRC, chat channels are coming in patch 1.2.

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33998750)

1. Friend a good quickmatch opponent
2. Invite new friend to party chat
3. Rinse - Lather - Repeat
4. Stop whining

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (1)

hagrin (896731) | more than 3 years ago | (#33999124)

Not only do most of my Facebook friends not play SC2, I don't want most of my Facebook friends knowing that I'm a total dork and play video games still. I have enough problems keepings girls as friends, I don't need any help from Blizzard.

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (3, Insightful)

ildon (413912) | more than 3 years ago | (#34001018)

It's getting really old for every story even mentioning a Blizzard game getting half filled with people complaining about battle.net 2.0. You don't like it. We get it. There's no reason to make 20 new posts in every story about how you've been buying every Blizzard game for the past 20 years but now you're never going to buy one again because you hate DRM or whatever. The majority of the time these posts are completely off-topic, too.

Seriously, what does this post have to do with the new custom maps discussed at Blizzcon, or anything else discussed at Blizzcon, other than tangentially that they're both related to SC2? What part of the content of this post hasn't been posted 1000 times before in every story even mentioning SC2 -- or WoW -- in the past year? Not to mention the fact that one of the things you specifically mentioned, chat channels, is a feature they've been promising to add for almost just as long.

Get over it.

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (2, Insightful)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 3 years ago | (#34012444)

Seriously, what does this post have to do with the new custom maps discussed at Blizzcon, or anything else discussed at Blizzcon, other than tangentially that they're both related to SC2? What part of the content of this post hasn't been posted 1000 times before in every story even mentioning SC2 -- or WoW -- in the past year? Not to mention the fact that one of the things you specifically mentioned, chat channels, is a feature they've been promising to add for almost just as long.

Because instead of fixing real problems, Blizzard decides to focus on puff work?

I'm not a fan of b.net 2.0 (it sucks compared to the old b.net). Blizzard has made things better since SC2's release, but things have moved so slowly that I've not really played SC2 much (I had hoped SC2 would tide me over until Halo Reach, but my b.net 2.0 issues took TWO WEEKS to resolve. In the end, I played Flash games and SC2 has been collecting dust ever since. All that's happened is I played 20 minutes from mid-August until September 14 to verify that yes, my account was fixed.

There are still plenty of issues with b.net 2.0, so while new map types and such are cool, I'm sure a bunch of people would prefer Blizzard fix the issues so they can have a regular game of SC2 first rather than a buggy game with a new map.

Especially at something like Blizzcon - make a worthwhile announcement about common complaints. Of course they can't because the fixes to b.net are really in the form of "for an extra $10/month, you can play local LAN games" and "for $5/month you can play your friends in Europe" and such (thanks, Activision. Nope you have fun screwing up Bungie like you did Blizzard). And they can't do that because they haven't finished setting the rates yet.

I was seriously considering pre-ordering Diablo 3 when I got SC2. I'm happy I didn't considering most of the issues aren't with the game itself, but b.net. At least if I get back into Sc2, I have some new gametypes to play. Guess I should get that done before I get charged a monthly fee for them.

Re:BNet 2.0 a disappointment (1)

brkello (642429) | more than 3 years ago | (#34017394)

I am totally with you. It is impossible to read games.slashdot.org anymore. No one talks about the topic. They all have some reason why the corporation is evil and how everyone should boycott and pirate. Same predictable posts get modded up while interesting discussion goes no where. Slashdot is overrun with ideologues trying to out Libertarian each other. Please, we all know you think Blizzard evil. Just stfu and don't comment unless you actually want to talk about the game. If you aren't playing, your opinion is useless to anyone with a brain to think for themselves.

Not interested (3, Insightful)

Vicegrip (82853) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997516)

Not interested in being a slave to the Blizzard content masters.

Re:Not interested (0, Troll)

HBI (604924) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997560)

...or even buying it without LAN play.

Re:Not interested (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997810)

And you know what? It doesn't matter in the slightest, because for every person like you (and hey, me as well), there are 50,000 who don't give a shit.

It's a lost cause. Always has been. There aren't enough people who care to matter.

Re:Not interested (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34001174)

So then it's no matter if these people pirate it?

Re:Not interested (1)

sh3p (1716756) | more than 3 years ago | (#33999568)

I've already hosted a couple StarCraft II LAN Parties and everyone had a great time.

Re:Not interested (1)

Life2Death (801594) | more than 3 years ago | (#34016116)

Basically, this. With SC1 you had to do some iptables magic behind NAT if you lanned + online play, since not everyone can make it to lans.

QUIT.
WHINING.

Agreed - your content, their whimsy (4, Insightful)

nobodyman (90587) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997582)

All of your content gets loaded onto Blizzard's infrastructure. There is no local storage. If they don't like your map/gametype -- for any reason -- they can wipe it from existence. Why do they do this? Because they can [arstechnica.com] .

Because we can. Literally. We have a support department now of size and ability to enforce these types of things. --Bashiok, Blizzard Community Manager

Re:Agreed - your content, their whimsy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997856)

Well that settles it. I'm not buying Starcraft 2 if I can't play cockaaaa.

Re:Not interested (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997662)

Just make your own custom maps. Every game is like this.

Re:Not interested (1)

Entropy2016 (751922) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997832)

Sort of yes, sort of no. Some people live in rural or semi-rural areas where they have crappy ISPs. That means you can't play SC2 any way you like, any time you like. Much of this game requires a constant internet connection, especially since (and I learned this the hard way) it's prone to random deletion of your locally cached maps for no apparent reason (forcing you to redownload everything).

If you don't have an Internet connection to Blizzard's servers, you can't play maps you've created, even when they're already right on your hard drive.

Re:Not interested (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33999316)

I heard that when files were on your computer you could copy them and move them around. Some might even say "back them up".

Re:Not interested (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33999136)

Your reply sounds more like "Waaah, I hate all successful gaming companies.. waaah"

Re:Not interested (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34000994)

+1. I passed on this game as well. Will you be banned for "cheating" in custom games as well?

edit: Captcha: Filthy

Cool... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997550)

Sounds kind of like the mini games in PvZ

SOTIS (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997570)

Nevermind that there's already a good DOTA, Storm Of The Imperial Sanctum...

You can play as the M.U.L.E.!!

I'm really hoping that someone will come up with a version of The Elements. It was a hugely popular custom map during SC1's first few years.

Re:SOTIS (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997790)

Luckily, now that all maps are hosted and controlled by Blizzard, they could change that.

Re:SOTIS (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997850)

Original AC here.

So far blizz hasn't yanked any maps just for the hell of it. The few they have were indeed breaking the rules in one way or another, and once it was sorted out they were allowed to be put back up. Blizz knows that it would be ten kinds of bad to be pulling maps for no reason, so it's very safe to assume that as long as you play by the rules your maps will stay up and be available to whoever is bored enough to click "get more" enough times to find it.

The largest threat to custom maps is the shit interface for finding custom games. You could easily have the best map out there but it's buried under several hundred nothings that nobody will ever wade through. If there's anything to complain about, it's the lack of chat and the lack of a proper way to find/create/name custom games.

Re:SOTIS (2, Interesting)

Vaphell (1489021) | more than 3 years ago | (#33998636)

quite recently they outright banned a game called Nexus Wars. It is a words based game and has a dictionary with 30k words attached to it. Long story short the dictionary spewed 'dike' randomly and the game was banned with no warning (so creator could not remove the word from the pool) for inappropriate language. Their system has ambiguosity written all over it - nobody knows the full list of bad words and judging from the chat filters it's ridiculous if anything like it (chat filters out words: black, white, trans- rape but also grape...). Maybe they fixed the mess already and unbanned it but even if, if it took more than 2hrs to get it straight that's a huge fail on blizz' part.

Re:SOTIS (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33998746)

Original AC here again..

"more than 2hrs" wtf man this is a GAME, it isn't a cluster requiring five nines of uptime.

The creator retains full control of what's in the map, banned or not. Nexus Wars was back up the same day. Again, blizz hasn't yanked anything for the hell of yanking it. It's enough of a 'family game' that nobody wants maps with cussing in them, even me. I do find it a bit odd that they ban maps with the same foul language that is in their unit sounds and campaign maps; "Hell, it's about time".

I can't comment about the chat filter because that was the first thing to get turned off.

Re:SOTIS (1)

Vaphell (1489021) | more than 3 years ago | (#34001086)

some guy works his ass off to provide an added value to their game for free, his map worked its ass off to get strong following and climb the broken popularity system and it's ok to ruin his work with a single mouse click because some bored mod followed some loosely defined rules?

Maybe there is a new version but my bet is it was not unbanned but reuploaded with a different name and will have to gain popularity from 0, because the score of the old version doesn't count.
Add transferring any rights to the content to blizzard to that mess and tell me how exactly such things don't discourage mapmaking? Blizzard does their best to kill any enthusiasm left.
If all maps have to be uploaded to blizzard and are stored on their servers, their system can check the map code for inappropriate words and autogenerate a message to the mapmaker with warning. Even better - implement the filter in the god damn editor and update it if necessary (always online crap). How hard is that?

Re:SOTIS (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#34000270)

I wonder if the dutch know how obscene their system of sea-walls is?

Re:SOTIS (1)

IndustrialComplex (975015) | more than 3 years ago | (#34006134)

The few they have were indeed breaking the rules

Maybe we wouldn't have a problem with that if they weren't forcing us into a position where breaking 'the rules' matters?

Sorry, the few friends that I did play SC with never had any need for third party intervention in our games.

Genre Bender (1)

bgweber (1676858) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997606)

This is awesome news. There were several custom map types in SC1 that have become a genre in itself (tower defense, mass, impossible scenarios, etc). The SC2 map editor has much more flexibility and should provide many more interesting variants of the game!

I'd rather have OpenGL for Windows... (1)

emanem (1356033) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997616)

...so it would run better on wine.
Cheers!

Still not buying it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997640)

Throw in LAN play. That MIGHT convince me to. There are big LAN parties around the U.S., blizzard. You know this, right? Don't give us some lame "piracy" excuse, because it's not working.

I call lazy b.s.

Re:Still not buying it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34012070)

Actually it worked quite well, since sales for SCII are through the roof.

For every 1 person that cares about LAN play there are hundreds that don't give a shit. Get over yourself.

Why bnet custom maps fail. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997770)

the way custom maps are published has always been horrible in bnet 2.0 so far. you find a really good custom you like one of three things happen to it...

1.creativity in bnet is limited as if you try innovative controls bnet 2.0 lags any form of custom interface beyond fun playability.

2. The map maker deletes the map. thus preventing any one from ever playing it again.

3. It gets deleted by blizzard for random offensive content that isnt even offensive... thus preventing any one from ever playing it again.

thus every custom i have played and enjoyed has fallen into one of the two above categories, causing myself to not like any custom games any more on bnet 2.0 as the way blizzard handles it is horrible.

Too bad Blizzard is screwing their mod community. (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33997780)

Just review the EULA, not only do they stipulate that they own all content uploaded to battle.net. They also pass apple-esk divine judgement of randomness on what qualifies to be publically playable.

Basically they gave their would be mod community the a giant middle finger.

Re:Too bad Blizzard is screwing their mod communit (2, Insightful)

fishbowl (7759) | more than 3 years ago | (#33997872)

Bear in mind that for a while, Blizzard has been taking orders from people whose positions of power came from the success of the Shrek video game franchise and Guitar Hero. If you're expecting these people to understand the value of a grass roots developer community, think again. It's not just that they are hostile, it's that they just plain don't get it. And if you've ever been down the org chart from someone who makes decisions like this, you understand that you really don't get the opportunity to explain it to them, or if you try, they still don't get it (and you end up with even *less* power.)

I don't know, but I'm guessing that a lot of the talent that Blizzard had, moved on to greener pastures and we're seeing the consequences of that in their games.

The kicker is that these decision makers are probably right. They are probably driving a quarter or two of unprecedented growth for the company.

Re:Too bad Blizzard is screwing their mod communit (1)

JorDan Clock (664877) | more than 3 years ago | (#33998182)

I seriously doubt Activision has that kind of pull. There's a reason it was a merger and not a purchase. Blizzard could have given Activision the finger if it didn't think the terms of the merger left them with more control, not less.

Re:Too bad Blizzard is screwing their mod communit (1)

seebs (15766) | more than 3 years ago | (#33998310)

Yeah, that's not how the Real ID thing seems to have gone. People who know Blizzard employees regularly reported during the forums fiasco that it was essentially 100% opposed by Blizzard staff, but that Activision declared it was a "marketing" issue and thus under their control.

So far as I can tell, if Blizzard had a vote, Real ID would be a nickname-based system that people actually liked, not an adjunct to Facebook.

Re:Too bad Blizzard is screwing their mod communit (1)

IndustrialComplex (975015) | more than 3 years ago | (#34006202)

I seriously doubt Activision has that kind of pull. There's a reason it was a merger and not a purchase. Blizzard could have given Activision the finger if it didn't think the terms of the merger left them with more control, not less.

You assume that the concerns of those guiding the merger were gaining or maintaining control. How do you know they don't have less control, but more money?

Re:Too bad Blizzard is screwing their mod communit (5, Insightful)

znerk (1162519) | more than 3 years ago | (#33998210)

It's not just that they are hostile, it's that they just plain don't get it.

Yep, the same way they just "don't get" that removing the ability to play on a LAN breaks the game for many buyers.
The same way they "don't get" that they are killing the potential longevity of this game with their draconian control measures.
The same way they "don't get" their entire user base.

I have purchased several copies of damn near every game Blizzard has made for the last 2 decades. I haven't been on battle.net since the days of Diablo I.
I (and the other 3 members of my family) used to be huge WoW players.
I don't see any Blizzard games on the current (or near future) market that grab enough interest (now that I see what they did to StarCraft) to entice me to spend more than about $20 on anything they've got. $60 is ridiculous, especially since they're requiring me to go online to activate single-player mode, I can't just drop in at a LAN party and play, I can get banned (and locked out of single-player mode) for cheating in single-player... The list goes on. Blizzard, you really dropped the ball with this one.

If the problem is that your developers (or whoever is actually steering your company) "just don't get it", you better find someone who does... fast.

The kicker is that these decision makers are probably right. They are probably driving a quarter or two of unprecedented growth for the company.

... followed by an amazing swan-dive that will drag the entire company into the gutter. Good job looking at the short term, fellas!

--
"We'll show those pirates what for! We'll alienate our customer base, and bankrupt ourselves! Let's see them steal our intellectual property after that!"

Re:Too bad Blizzard is screwing their mod communit (1)

complete loony (663508) | more than 3 years ago | (#34000352)

$60 is ridiculous

USD $88.15 is even worse. Just because I live in Australia.

Re:Too bad Blizzard is screwing their mod communit (1)

indiechild (541156) | more than 3 years ago | (#34001840)

If anything, I bet Blizzard will go from strength to strength and become more profitable than ever.

A few people might not like it, but the rest of the world won't have a problem with it. If geeks on Slashdot rant about something being locked down and not open, you can bet that it's going to go on to be really successful.

Re:Too bad Blizzard is screwing their mod communit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33998264)

Yes I can see how it is horrible to not be able to release your own combined nazi-rape-penis map to the masse

So this is what it comes down to? (2, Insightful)

znerk (1162519) | more than 3 years ago | (#33998070)

Blizzard (over)charges US$60 for their new game, disallows LAN play, cuts off their player base (Seriously? Get caught cheating in SC2 and you're not allowed to play anymore? In single player?), can't deliver new product (what part of this, exactly, isn't just a rehash of the existing franchise, with newer graphics?), and now wants everyone to get excited about map editing? Back in the days of Q2 and Unreal, I could see that... map editors where new and exciting tech back then... but the current RTS market? Even for a huge franchise (but now shrinking, due to Blizzard's slipshod handling of this latest entry), a map editor is less of a "wow factor" than an obvious and expected component in an RTS. No map editor? Multiplayer lasts for a few months, then stops. Without new maps, your game lasts only as long as you are actively (and expensively) promoting it. Duh.

in lieu of announcements about Heart of the Swarm, the devs are using Blizzcon to showcase the map-editing tools

Right... Call me when they have something worth looking at, because as far as I can tell, StarCraft2 isn't.

Re:So this is what it comes down to? (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#33998354)

That's my feeling about that. I'd love to play it, but with Blizzard being so dickish about things which aren't that big a deal, I'm going to have to pass. And if Diablo III gets the same treatment, which it likely will, I won't be playing that either. Which is a shame since I was really looking forward to both games.

Re:So this is what it comes down to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33999714)

In all fairness the single player cheating was related to cheating in order to get achievements, which is why Blizzard took such a harsh stance. I also heard (disclaimer: I haven't verified this for myself so it may not be correct.) that the bans were for two weeks. I believe online multiplayer cheating results in a permanent ban, but that wasn't the case for this particular instance.

Re:So this is what it comes down to? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34004792)

Congrats on being gullible enough to get trolled by the "Banned in singleplayer" article.

People's Battle.net accounts were locked for cheating in the campign in online mode.

Even if your bnet account is banned you can still play the game in offline mode (by selecting "Play as Guest" from the login screen). The only difference is you can no longer uplock achievements (which if you got banned in SP you were cheating for anyway).

Re:So this is what it comes down to? (1)

ukyoCE (106879) | more than 3 years ago | (#34020092)

Blizzard charges US$60 for their new game, disallows LAN play, cuts off their player base [for cheating], ... is a rehash of the existing franchise

You just described every major game in the market. Sorry if I'm struggling to muster the anger to raise my pitchfork for business that became standard 5-10 years ago.

and now wants everyone to get excited about map editing? Back in the days of Q2 and Unreal, I could see that... map editors where new and exciting tech back then

No they weren't. Wolfenstein and Warcraft 2 were two of my first map editing experiences, quite a while before Q2. There was map editing before those games too.

But if you're going to call SC2 map editing "just map editing" you may as well call WOW "just D&D" or call Halo Reach "just an fps". Such a broad generalization is pointless and ignores vast progress and improvements in the genre, or in this case, RTS map editing functionality.

Re:So this is what it comes down to? (1)

anerki (169995) | more than 3 years ago | (#34022970)

This is the so-manieth post about cheating in single player mode gets you banned.

No, cheating in single player mode does NOT get you banned. It's allowed, been implemented and done.

Cheating to get ACHIEVEMENTS however, is an entirely different matter. Since you're bypassing the built-in system that when you cheat (which can be a hell-lot-of-fun) achievements are disabled for you ... It's honestly not _that_ hard to see the difference between those two.

Still no team melee (4, Insightful)

traindirector (1001483) | more than 3 years ago | (#33998628)

When I read they were introducing new map types and play modes, my first hope was that they'd bring back team melee [battle.net] .

And before someone says it's already in the game, it's not. It was a really innovative way to play RTS as a team, and it's a shame they haven't included it. If you don't remember the mode from the original, have a look at the thread on the forum asking for its return [battle.net] .

Re:Still no team melee (1)

JTsyo (1338447) | more than 3 years ago | (#34041850)

Back in SC1 it was fun picking 2 different races so you started off with both workers.

How about restoring missing units??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33998668)

It's really annoying that half the units from Starcraft 1 are only available in the single player mode. So what if there's capability/tech overlap. I want my Goliaths damnit!

ITT noobs complaining about SC2 (0, Troll)

locopuyo (1433631) | more than 3 years ago | (#33999504)

ITT: noobs complaining about SC2 On battle.net: about 1,000,000 players currently playing StarCraft II I think Blizzard knows what the users care about most.

Re:ITT noobs complaining about SC2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33999792)

Herp. You boob.

Re:ITT noobs complaining about SC2 (1)

Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki (895364) | more than 3 years ago | (#34000310)

Blizzard has removed features known to players of the original SC. New players aren't going to know these features are missing, so they aren't going to complain about them not being there. To these new players the lack of a feature they didn't know existed isn't a detriment to the quality of the game itself. It will only affect players who know how good the game COULD have been if the feature had been there. Ignorance is bliss.

The fact that the game is still popular despite having these features removed proves only two things:
1: The game is a good game anyway so people play it
2: The people who know about the feature are such a minority that any drop in sales they cause has no effect on the overall popularity

I think the lack of these feautres might hurt the longevity of the game, though, and it is possible that they plan to compensate for this by using the two expansions to support the long term popularity instead. That remains to be seen, however. It's certainly possible that Blizzard will still make changes to battlenet.

Re:ITT noobs complaining about SC2 (1)

TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) | more than 3 years ago | (#34001280)

The fact that the game is still popular despite having these features removed proves only two things:
1: The game is a good game anyway so people play it
2: The people who know about the feature are such a minority that any drop in sales they cause has no effect on the overall popularity

Having played neither starcraft, I don't know which features you're talking about, but the following are also possibilities:

3. Few people cared about the features anyway
4. Many enjoyed the game more without those features

Remember that measuring quality in a game is not just a matter of counting features. Sometimes not including features makes a game more balanced, more lean, or more focused. But again, I have no idea which features you're referring to, so you'd know better than me.

Re:ITT noobs complaining about SC2 (1)

tuxedobob (582913) | more than 3 years ago | (#34002678)

Once upon a time, you could play a Blizzard game over a LAN.

Once upon a time, you could install a "spawn" copy to play against a friend, allowing the two of you to play multiplayer off one install disc and CD key.

Once upon a time, you didn't need the internet to play single player.

Re:ITT noobs complaining about SC2 (1)

martyros (588782) | more than 3 years ago | (#34003036)

Once upon a time, you could play a Blizzard game over a LAN.

This annoyed me at first too. But the fact is, you can still get together for LAN parties. We played SC2 at our office last weekend, and it was a blast.

Once upon a time, you could install a "spawn" copy to play against a friend, allowing the two of you to play multiplayer off one install disc and CD key.

This is a bit more of an annoyance. In the past we had a couple of more hard-core people who would buy the game, and some less hard-core people who would play "socially", but not buy it. However, two things. First, we can still play big games of SC1 at our office -- it's still an extremely fun game. Second, though annoying, it will probably have the overall effect of boosting SC2 sales. The game is harder to pirate, and there's incentive for people to buy the game who otherwise wouldn't. I know it's likely that at least one of my friends, who wouldn't have bought it before, will probably buy it just so he can play with the rest of us.

Once upon a time, you didn't need the internet to play single player.

AIUI, If you can't connect to Battle.net, it will still allow you to play the single-player mode (assuming that you've connected at least once to validate the key).

I'd say the poster above is wrong about #3, but is right about #4.

Re:ITT noobs complaining about SC2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34006426)

This annoyed me at first too. But the fact is, you can still get together for LAN parties. We played SC2 at our office last weekend, and it was a blast.

But you DO need a net connection to play it. Your office has it, the place where my friends and I do our monthly party doesn't. Thus, 30 sales lost for Blizzard.

And the bastards deserve it.

Re:ITT noobs complaining about SC2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34006648)

Besides, how can you enjoy the game more without some features.

"Yeah, I'm having so much fun with this. It's so much better since they removed LAN support".

It's idiotic. Just like Blizzard.

Re:ITT noobs complaining about SC2 (1)

martyros (588782) | more than 3 years ago | (#34003086)

If you can't defend your opinions, on its merits, against a shill, then it probably means the shill has a valid point.

I think the "shill" accusation is akin to the "troll" accusation -- it questions your interlocutor's motivations. In a normal conversation, you assume that both people are making arguments for their positions because they truly hold their belief, and want to convince the other person, and (at least at some level) are willing to be convinced.

But a troll argues for something just to make people angry (or provoke some other response), not because he believes it. Similarly, a shill, although he may at some level believe it, argues something because it's his job (or for some other reason). You're not going to convince them to believe your way, nor are you going to get them to see that you have a reasonable point of view (i.e., "I still disagree with you, but I can see why you think that way.") On the contrary, arguing often ends up giving them exactly what they want: to see you wasting time / getting angry in the case of a troll, or raising the visibility of their argument, in the case of a shill.

Therefore, arguing with a troll or a shill is not only a waste of time, but often counter-productive.

Re:ITT noobs complaining about SC2 (2, Insightful)

TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) | more than 3 years ago | (#34004676)

So, how do you determine the difference between a passionate supporter of an idea and a troll? Or between a fan/apologist and a shill? Because, I gotta tell you, I've seen from first-hand experience that most slashdotters have traditionally got it woefully wrong. When I see someone being accused of being a troll or a shill, I do a cursory check the person's post history, to see whether their posts have a common theme. More often than not, the accusation of being a troll is misplaced, and I have yet to see an accusation of being a shill that has held any water.

If you don't want to waste your time on an argument, then don't reply, don't moderate, don't get involved. It's not really any of your business. It's business between those who do want to argue the point, and take it seriously. I don't care what trolls or shills want; a well-argued opinion not yet countered deserves the same respect as any other well-argued opinion not yet countered.

Re:ITT noobs complaining about SC2 (1)

martyros (588782) | more than 3 years ago | (#34007040)

Hmm. I think you've identified a third classification of people that it's not worth arguing with -- people who respond to an argument with abuse and ad-hominem attacks. :-)

For myself, I generally judge based on either the tone of the original post, or the way they respond if I answer. I don't think I've ever seen someone I thought was a shill either. I only call someone a troll if I'm taking the time to argue against their point (i.e, "OK, I'll feed the troll. [argument]").

But I admire that you've checked into it, and are trying to use your sig to influence Slashdot culture for the good.

Re:ITT noobs complaining about SC2 (1)

khchung (462899) | more than 3 years ago | (#34002542)

ITT: noobs complaining about SC2 On battle.net: about 1,000,000 players currently playing StarCraft II I think Blizzard knows what the users care about most.

That's funny. Apple sold 14 million iPhones just last quarter, yet you can find lots of /.ers here thinks Apple didn't know what the users care about (or rather, those users don't know what they should care about).

For me, after buying and playing WC, SC, WC2, WC3, I just have to say goodbye to Blizzard. Needing a net connection to even play single player is too much, even though I have a fast connection, I don't want to see the day when my connection is down and I find I cannot play stand-alone games.

I have an iPhone and also PS3, and have bought hundreds of dollars worth games/apps for them so far. It is not like I avoid walled-gardens out of principle, but at least in case of these two, I can see the value of those walled-gardens. In case of SC2, I can only find value for Blizzard, and none for me, from all those restrictions.

Blizzard s*cks! (1)

Britz (170620) | more than 3 years ago | (#34000522)

I am a pretty big rts fan. Even though I don't play all that much computer games and even though I run Debian on my desktops I actually purchased copies of Warcraft III and Starcaft. I believe those are among the very few games I ever bought. And the only Windows games I bought within the last ten years (I got myself Tribes 2 and Civilization CTP from Loki and UT2004, all for Linux). I was really looking forward to Starcraft 2 and even considered a Windows partition or a purchase of Crossover Games (Wine on steroids for money). Since I don't follow game news I never thought Blizzard would become one of THOSE companies.

I will definitely buy a copy of Starcarft 2 as soon as I can play it whenever and whoever I want. But now? I tell my friends not to buy Blizzard anymore. They are free to pirate that crap.
I thought Blizzard got it, when a recent (within the last two years or so) patch for Warcraft III removed the need to have an original cd in the cd drive bay. I guess I was wrong. Blizzard can kiss my behind.

Re:Blizzard s*cks! (1)

Darkfred (245270) | more than 3 years ago | (#34027850)

You are not an RTS fan. You are a linux guy. Can you be both? I don't think you can, not in today's game market. Perhaps you were an rts fan years ago and still have nostalgia for the genre, but you have chosen to remove yourself from the evolution of the genre and the pc game playing playerbase in general.
You can look down on us from your high, and game free ideological throne. But the pragmatic, actual game fans, have long since switched back to windows. Or at least dual boot. Or a hackintosh if you are willing to wait for your games and still want to make an OS statement.

If you prevent people from copying (1)

Snaller (147050) | more than 3 years ago | (#34000560)

You stifle creativity.

I wonder how popular this game will be in 10 years.

Re:If you prevent people from copying (1)

JTsyo (1338447) | more than 3 years ago | (#34041896)

the article says the Blizzard maps will be unlocked so people can can how it works.

cheap jerseys (1)

nfl jersey online (1901968) | more than 3 years ago | (#34001106)

Many football fans want to wear a jersey of their favorite team or player, but it can be difficult to shop for right size one. Typically, our ootball jerseys [nfljersey-online.com] fits different than a normal website, so your regular shirt size might not necessarily be the same size as an NFL jersey [nfljersey-online.com] . Using a measuring tape, it is easy to figure out what size red wings jerseys [nfljersey-online.com] [nfljersey-online.com] will fit you best. http://www.nfljersey-online.com [nfljersey-online.com]

Re:cheap jerseys (1)

Zero_Independent (664974) | more than 3 years ago | (#34002538)

Is this a joke? You're spamming selling football jerseys on slashdot? You realize most slashdotters think only niggers play football pretend dress up right?

I'm just glad.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34001206)

I'm glad I didn't listen to the guy on /b/ who said to "get this game" when I asked in a thread about whether its custom maps were up to snuff compared to WC3.

Captcha: Dietrich sucker

Custom game types (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34003388)

How about a Touhou-like bullet hell shooter [youtube.com] ?

Call me when they release the LAN mod (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34006380)

Until then, my stance doesn't change: FUCK YOU, BLIZZARD.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?