I've never played Starcraft before... What's so GREAT about it?

Starcraft was one if not the first to bring 3 well balanced races together. It offers massive armies without hint of slowdown. It also gives newbies a fighting chance vs anyone. Professionals will defniately dismantle you quickly since they are very fast at what they do and can micro units incredibly.

The single player story really captivated a young audience when it was first released. For many people I think, they never really imagined the things that Starcraft brought to them. Maybe they weren't into Sci-Fi all that much till Starcraft. The online component was also a welcome addition at a time where free online games were few and far between.

This was the late 90's and Blizzard was crafting it's role as a great developer in the world. Starcraft has a large Korean following as well as the rest of the world because it did things and did them well. The game was solid and it has had a decade of free patches, unheard of in the game industry.

Starcraft sets the bar up so high that the only developers that can truly reach it are few and far between. Starcraft 2 perhaps can succeed in reaching and maybe even surpassing the original Starcraft.

The strategies you can employ in the game really are only limited by your own imagination. Many small battles take place in a Starcraft match that impact the overall war and determine the winner. Macroing is very important in Starcraft. (Building your bases up right and maintaining them as well as expansions) 

Yep, Starcraft is a classic game because it was one of the "Big Three" RTS games to come out that made RTS games popular back in the day (C&C, Total Annihilation ("prequal" to SupCom), and Starcraft were the big three).

It had diverse sides and was surprisingly balanced (as was said).  The actual gameplay is cuthroat, to the point, and simple if you count gameplay mechanics only.

Bascially its so popular just because the first one when it first came out in the 90's was somthing big and new at the time (now its old and used), which is partly why its still being patched and played (mostly by Koreans though ^_^ )

Starcraft has been around for almost a decade and the multpilayer still supports alot of people. Also there are many games in battle.net you could play such as 1v1, 2v2 3v3 or use map settings whihc is like you jsut fool around. Pretty hard to explain.

There are many tournaments for starcraft such as Pro League, and i forgot... It is a very big tournament in WCG. There alot of pros playing this game. All over the world.

Teh campagin is great. It has a very good storyline. And Starcraft is the msot balenced RTS game ever ive ever played. Blizzard really put it all out to make this game onr of the best RTS games out there and it is. Nothing will compete with this game. (besides starcraft 2)

One of mu favorite reasons i love this game is... is that there are countless strategies in this game. There are  many counters for a specific group of units. There are alos many varietes your could do to outsmart your opponent. thsi requires alot of fast thinkig and its a very fast paced. 

 you should check it out youtube or buy starcraft battlechest so you get an idea of what starcraft 2 would be like. 

As you can tell from the title I have never played Starcraft before but because of all the hype the game has I'm pretty excited for Starcraft II. I was just wondering about the style of play the game offered. Is it very fast paced? Tactical? In other words, what is it that makes the game/series so great? By the way, I really loved Company of Heroes, are their any similarities?d_eM_s

You can get the battle chest for $5-$10 bucks. I suggest you run out and get it, Its the Half-Life of RTS games. 

Large amounts of people still play it even though its 10 years old, its that good. 

Its OK, I'm not a fan of RTS style games though, too much zerging (guess Starcraft is where that term came from) :P

But yeah, Starcraft is the game to play if you want to play a RTS.

why its good. 

its fast paced.

massive resource gathering or slow resource gathering, up to the player.

not only gathering resources matter but how you protect it.

placing structures actually matter in this game.

its all about speed, how quick you can do things, how fast you can bring down the opposition.

the only imbalance part in this game is probably massive tanks/marines/medics and carriers/bcs when u least expect it, unless u have an army to fight against it otherwise its gg for u. 

Is is still worth getting? It's $24.99 CDN at Future Shop. And look at the graphics... it seems to have aged really poorly. d_eM_s

Aged poorly? You must be a graphics wh*re if you think that. Compared to all other games released in its time, starcraft has aged extremely well.  

I don't know if this has been said.. but what makes starcraft so great? In on word...

BATTLE.NET

Starcraft's singleplayer missions are very very boring, and the storyline is good but barely redeems it.

Personally I dont get the whole balance thing either.  You create a cool looking unit, then build it up or break it down so that it overpowers one unit of the opposing army, but is vulnerable to a different unit of the opposing army.

And 2D graphics do age.  While I agree that Starcraft's graphics are very appealing, it has definately aged.

Starcraft is good the first time through, but after that not so much.  Unless of course you love multiplayer mode, then it is the holy grail I guess.

Starcraft's singleplayer missions are very very boring, and the storyline is good but barely redeems it.

Personally I dont get the whole balance thing either. You create a cool looking unit, then build it up or break it down so that it overpowers one unit of the opposing army, but is vulnerable to a different unit of the opposing army.

And 2D graphics do age. While I agree that Starcraft's graphics are very appealing, it has definately aged.

Starcraft is good the first time through, but after that not so much. Unless of course you love multiplayer mode, then it is the holy grail I guess.

mrbojangles25

Eh, you must be one of the 12 guys who think the SP was bad. Which RTS has a good SP in your opinion?

And SC's 2D graphics had reached the peak where they didn't age anymore. Can you name a 2D RTS with better graphics?

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

Starcraft's singleplayer missions are very very boring, and the storyline is good but barely redeems it.

Personally I dont get the whole balance thing either. You create a cool looking unit, then build it up or break it down so that it overpowers one unit of the opposing army, but is vulnerable to a different unit of the opposing army.

And 2D graphics do age. While I agree that Starcraft's graphics are very appealing, it has definately aged.

Starcraft is good the first time through, but after that not so much. Unless of course you love multiplayer mode, then it is the holy grail I guess.

Erlkoenig

Eh, you must be one of the 12 guys who think the SP was bad. Which RTS has a good SP in your opinion?

And SC's 2D graphics had reached the peak where they didn't age anymore. Can you name a 2D RTS with better graphics?

RTS games with better singleplayer campaigns:
-THe entire C&C series (excluding generals)
-Act of War
-Dune 2
-Earth 2140, 2150, and even 2160
-Ground Control 1 and 2
-Force 21
-Warzone 2100
-Dark Reign



...and those are just a few games.  Just about the only game with a singleplayer campaign worse than Starcraft is Supreme Commander and Total Annihilation at the moment, although I am sure there are more out there.  But like I said , Starcraft's SP game is tolerable due to the awesome story it tells; I've pretty much loved every single character Bliizard comes up with, good or bad (especially bad though:twisted: )

And I didnt say Starcraft's graphics were bad, I merely said they were starting to show their age a little bit.  I love Blizzard's art work however so I guess youre right...they dont age anymore.  Dare I say its appearance is timeless?

Good thing Supcom and TA have the best Multiplayer in RTS then huh Jangles :) Are you really still playing and enjoying that train wreck CNC 3's multiplayer? :lol: In the latest interview the guy who heads the balance for the game was even joking about just how awful the games balance is :lol: (funny a month ago he couldn't shut up about how great it was)ARGSmith

It's a bit harsh, calling C&C3 a "train wreck". I thoroughly enjoy that game. Oh well; to each his/her own. 

I've never played Starcraft before...d_eM_s

*head explodes* 

Is is still worth getting? It's $24.99 CDN at Future Shop. And look at the graphics... it seems to have aged really poorly. d_eM_s

So... I see someone's been living under a rock or perhaps some isolated island somewhere in the Pacific for the past 10 years eh...?  Well, welcome back mister!

[QUOTE="d_eM_s"]Is is still worth getting? It's $24.99 CDN at Future Shop. And look at the graphics... it seems to have aged really poorly. zero9167

 noob, dont bother with Sc2, if you wont play sc cause of graphics

Good thing Supcom and TA have the best Multiplayer in RTS then huh Jangles :)  Are you really still playing and enjoying that train wreck CNC 3's multiplayer? :lol: In the latest interview the guy who heads the balance for the game was even joking about just how awful the games balance is :lol: (funny a month ago he couldn't shut up about how great it was)ARGSmith

Ya, as a matter of fact I am.  I think "balance" is an excuse people use whenever their strategies fail them.  "Oh dang I lost...well, my opponent is Scrin I think I will blame it on balance."  To me that is like hitting a 250 yard drive in golf and having the ball landing in the fairway next to you, then blaming it on the wind.

[QUOTE="Erlkoenig"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

Starcraft's singleplayer missions are very very boring, and the storyline is good but barely redeems it.

Personally I dont get the whole balance thing either. You create a cool looking unit, then build it up or break it down so that it overpowers one unit of the opposing army, but is vulnerable to a different unit of the opposing army.

And 2D graphics do age. While I agree that Starcraft's graphics are very appealing, it has definately aged.

Starcraft is good the first time through, but after that not so much. Unless of course you love multiplayer mode, then it is the holy grail I guess.

mrbojangles25

Eh, you must be one of the 12 guys who think the SP was bad. Which RTS has a good SP in your opinion?

And SC's 2D graphics had reached the peak where they didn't age anymore. Can you name a 2D RTS with better graphics?

RTS games with better singleplayer campaigns:
-THe entire C&C series (excluding generals)
-Act of War
-Dune 2
-Earth 2140, 2150, and even 2160
-Ground Control 1 and 2
-Force 21
-Warzone 2100
-Dark Reign



...and those are just a few games. Just about the only game with a singleplayer campaign worse than Starcraft is Supreme Commander and Total Annihilation at the moment, although I am sure there are more out there. But like I said , Starcraft's SP game is tolerable due to the awesome story it tells; I've pretty much loved every single character Bliizard comes up with, good or bad (especially bad though:twisted: )

And I didnt say Starcraft's graphics were bad, I merely said they were starting to show their age a little bit. I love Blizzard's art work however so I guess youre right...they dont age anymore. Dare I say its appearance is timeless?

How can you leave out one of, if not the best RTS ever in Company of Heroes? 

[QUOTE="Erlkoenig"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

Starcraft's singleplayer missions are very very boring, and the storyline is good but barely redeems it.

Personally I dont get the whole balance thing either. You create a cool looking unit, then build it up or break it down so that it overpowers one unit of the opposing army, but is vulnerable to a different unit of the opposing army.

And 2D graphics do age. While I agree that Starcraft's graphics are very appealing, it has definately aged.

Starcraft is good the first time through, but after that not so much. Unless of course you love multiplayer mode, then it is the holy grail I guess.

mrbojangles25

Eh, you must be one of the 12 guys who think the SP was bad. Which RTS has a good SP in your opinion?

And SC's 2D graphics had reached the peak where they didn't age anymore. Can you name a 2D RTS with better graphics?

RTS games with better singleplayer campaigns:
-THe entire C&C series (excluding generals)
-Act of War
-Dune 2
-Earth 2140, 2150, and even 2160
-Ground Control 1 and 2
-Force 21
-Warzone 2100
-Dark Reign



...and those are just a few games. Just about the only game with a singleplayer campaign worse than Starcraft is Supreme Commander and Total Annihilation at the moment, although I am sure there are more out there. But like I said , Starcraft's SP game is tolerable due to the awesome story it tells; I've pretty much loved every single character Bliizard comes up with, good or bad (especially bad though:twisted: )

And I didnt say Starcraft's graphics were bad, I merely said they were starting to show their age a little bit. I love Blizzard's art work however so I guess youre right...they dont age anymore. Dare I say its appearance is timeless?

How you can say those games' SP are better than SC is beyond me. I'll give you C&C and redalert/redalert2 which might be just a hair better but the Force 21? warzone? dune2? act of war? come on.... 

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"][QUOTE="Erlkoenig"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

Starcraft's singleplayer missions are very very boring, and the storyline is good but barely redeems it.

Personally I dont get the whole balance thing either. You create a cool looking unit, then build it up or break it down so that it overpowers one unit of the opposing army, but is vulnerable to a different unit of the opposing army.

And 2D graphics do age. While I agree that Starcraft's graphics are very appealing, it has definately aged.

Starcraft is good the first time through, but after that not so much. Unless of course you love multiplayer mode, then it is the holy grail I guess.

Zam

Eh, you must be one of the 12 guys who think the SP was bad. Which RTS has a good SP in your opinion?

And SC's 2D graphics had reached the peak where they didn't age anymore. Can you name a 2D RTS with better graphics?

RTS games with better singleplayer campaigns:
-THe entire C&C series (excluding generals)
-Act of War
-Dune 2
-Earth 2140, 2150, and even 2160
-Ground Control 1 and 2
-Force 21
-Warzone 2100
-Dark Reign



...and those are just a few games. Just about the only game with a singleplayer campaign worse than Starcraft is Supreme Commander and Total Annihilation at the moment, although I am sure there are more out there. But like I said , Starcraft's SP game is tolerable due to the awesome story it tells; I've pretty much loved every single character Bliizard comes up with, good or bad (especially bad though:twisted: )

And I didnt say Starcraft's graphics were bad, I merely said they were starting to show their age a little bit. I love Blizzard's art work however so I guess youre right...they dont age anymore. Dare I say its appearance is timeless?

How you can say those games' SP are better than SC is beyond me. I'll give you C&C and redalert/redalert2 which might be just a hair better but the Force 21? warzone? dune2? act of war? come on.... 

Why?  Because Supreme Commanders singleplayer took me about 6 hours to beat (yes, all three campaigns), had a horrible story, and the mission design was horrible....it was always "capture this then wipe out all enemies" or "do this and wipe out all enemies."

I guess I just associate a good singleplayer game with a good story and varied mission objectives.

7 vs 1 comp stomp no BSin

SC multiplayer was a blast back in the day.  I haven't played it in a very long time but had some great memories from playing that game online.  That and the story that Blizzard put together is why I personally think the game is great.

The really great thing about Starcraft was how fun it was to play. there is the perfect mix of macro and micro. The skill level is insane. A great player can destroy your army with a few units played perfectly. The mix of units is perfect. It is so fun to use seige tanks, and then next game use templar to storm, and then next game drop lurkers on your enemy and burrow in his mineral line. The variety of tactics and unit abilities make the game play just FUN. That is basically all I can say about it.

The other factors are critical mass (so many people play it actually makes the game more fun, like WoW, because you can talk about it with random other people and you can find games and dedicated communities), and the fact that playing well feels GOOD. It's like chess.... it's so pure that you can actually feel yourself get "better" at it and know you made literal improvements in your game that are never going to be lost.

I really think Starcraft = Chess for the new generation.

The really great thing about Starcraft was how fun it was to play. there is the perfect mix of macro and micro. The skill level is insane. A great player can destroy your army with a few units played perfectly. The mix of units is perfect. It is so fun to use seige tanks, and then next game use templar to storm, and then next game drop lurkers on your enemy and burrow in his mineral line. The variety of tactics and unit abilities make the game play just FUN. That is basically all I can say about it.

 

The other factors are critical mass (so many people play it actually makes the game more fun, like WoW, because you can talk about it with random other people and you can find games and dedicated communities), and the fact that playing well feels GOOD. It's like chess.... it's so pure that you can actually feel yourself get "better" at it and know you made literal improvements in your game that are never going to be lost.

 

I really think Starcraft = Chess for the new generation.

 

ElronofDarktide

You make me want to go back and try it again!  I think I will too.

[QUOTE="Zam"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"][QUOTE="Erlkoenig"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

Starcraft's singleplayer missions are very very boring, and the storyline is good but barely redeems it.

Personally I dont get the whole balance thing either. You create a cool looking unit, then build it up or break it down so that it overpowers one unit of the opposing army, but is vulnerable to a different unit of the opposing army.

And 2D graphics do age. While I agree that Starcraft's graphics are very appealing, it has definately aged.

Starcraft is good the first time through, but after that not so much. Unless of course you love multiplayer mode, then it is the holy grail I guess.

mrbojangles25

Eh, you must be one of the 12 guys who think the SP was bad. Which RTS has a good SP in your opinion?

And SC's 2D graphics had reached the peak where they didn't age anymore. Can you name a 2D RTS with better graphics?

RTS games with better singleplayer campaigns:
-THe entire C&C series (excluding generals)
-Act of War
-Dune 2
-Earth 2140, 2150, and even 2160
-Ground Control 1 and 2
-Force 21
-Warzone 2100
-Dark Reign



...and those are just a few games. Just about the only game with a singleplayer campaign worse than Starcraft is Supreme Commander and Total Annihilation at the moment, although I am sure there are more out there. But like I said , Starcraft's SP game is tolerable due to the awesome story it tells; I've pretty much loved every single character Bliizard comes up with, good or bad (especially bad though:twisted: )

And I didnt say Starcraft's graphics were bad, I merely said they were starting to show their age a little bit. I love Blizzard's art work however so I guess youre right...they dont age anymore. Dare I say its appearance is timeless?

How you can say those games' SP are better than SC is beyond me. I'll give you C&C and redalert/redalert2 which might be just a hair better but the Force 21? warzone? dune2? act of war? come on....

Why? Because Supreme Commanders singleplayer took me about 6 hours to beat (yes, all three campaigns), had a horrible story, and the mission design was horrible....it was always "capture this then wipe out all enemies" or "do this and wipe out all enemies."

I guess I just associate a good singleplayer game with a good story and varied mission objectives.

I was talking about Starcraft (SC) 

I must be a graphics *** because I like my graphics to be more than flat, simplistic 2D bimaps in 640*480.

Why don't you try the demo? It's only 28 MB and you'l ba hard pushed to find a PC that doesn't meet the minimal requirements :16 MB RAM, 1 MB VRAM, 80 MB disk space

[QUOTE="ARGSmith"]Good thing Supcom and TA have the best Multiplayer in RTS then huh Jangles :) Are you really still playing and enjoying that train wreck CNC 3's multiplayer? :lol: In the latest interview the guy who heads the balance for the game was even joking about just how awful the games balance is :lol: (funny a month ago he couldn't shut up about how great it was)mrbojangles25

Ya, as a matter of fact I am. I think "balance" is an excuse people use whenever their strategies fail them. "Oh dang I lost...well, my opponent is Scrin I think I will blame it on balance." To me that is like hitting a 250 yard drive in golf and having the ball landing in the fairway next to you, then blaming it on the wind.

Thats a bunch of crap, you can keep telling yourself the game has good balance, but you would be lieing to yourself.

Haven't you noticed the CnC 3 community shrinking dramatically? Haven't you seen every single CnC 3 forum flooded with threads of balance issues? You can't avoid it the shadow team/scropions are completely imbalanced right now.

No the people leaving and the people whining about the games abysmal balance aren't just a bunch of babies looking for an excuse as much as you'd like to paint them to be.

You could ask every single person on the top 10 of that ladder and I bet all of them would tell you the balance is a joke at the moment.

I don't know if you've been to the forums for other RTS games like WC3 Starcraft Dawn of war age of empires supcom etc.

But I can tell you none of those forums have hundreds of threads complaining about the games balance, sure you may find one or two here or there, but you goto a CNC forums and your probably going to find an abnormal amount of threads on it.

Hate to break it to you jangles, but their are Unbalanced RTS games, and in CnC 3's current state it is probably the most unbalanced RTS out there.

There is a reason that the online traffic for the game has gone down more then 10x what it was a month ago.

The game has crap balance! Even the games most hard core fanboys will admit it, hell the lead balance designers poping jokes about it. 

[QUOTE="Erlkoenig"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

Starcraft's singleplayer missions are very very boring, and the storyline is good but barely redeems it.

Personally I dont get the whole balance thing either. You create a cool looking unit, then build it up or break it down so that it overpowers one unit of the opposing army, but is vulnerable to a different unit of the opposing army.

And 2D graphics do age. While I agree that Starcraft's graphics are very appealing, it has definately aged.

Starcraft is good the first time through, but after that not so much. Unless of course you love multiplayer mode, then it is the holy grail I guess.

mrbojangles25

Eh, you must be one of the 12 guys who think the SP was bad. Which RTS has a good SP in your opinion?

And SC's 2D graphics had reached the peak where they didn't age anymore. Can you name a 2D RTS with better graphics?

RTS games with better singleplayer campaigns:
-THe entire C&C series (excluding generals)
-Act of War
-Dune 2
-Earth 2140, 2150, and even 2160
-Ground Control 1 and 2
-Force 21
-Warzone 2100
-Dark Reign



...and those are just a few games.  Just about the only game with a singleplayer campaign worse than Starcraft is Supreme Commander and Total Annihilation at the moment, although I am sure there are more out there.  But like I said , Starcraft's SP game is tolerable due to the awesome story it tells; I've pretty much loved every single character Bliizard comes up with, good or bad (especially bad though:twisted: )

And I didnt say Starcraft's graphics were bad, I merely said they were startingto show their age a little bit.  I love Blizzard's art work however so I guess youre right...they dont age anymore.  Dare I say its appearance is timeless?

i disagree with almost all of what you've said. inheriting the gritty epic of warhammer 40k ( the tabletop game, we know that's what SC universe is based on ), SC campaign revolves around a number of instantly attractive characters, whose personal struggles echoe with the perils of their factions. even the Zerg campaign, whose leader ( the Overmind ) was distinctly emotionless, is not without its share of drama. the lines are very well written ( definitely better than the games you mentioned ), and the entire campaign reveals the bloody stalemate that is not just about victory and defeat.....but the nuances within the characters and the values they strive to protect. most of the games you mentioned ( Dune 2, Force 21 and Dark Reign excluded, coz i never played them ) do pack nearly as enough dramatic moments as SC does -- instead, their storylines are often just there to excuse the hi-ho-silver parade of massacre.

as for the graphics, i barely care. i like it, i think it's beautiful, and that's all i got to say about it.

Its the Half-Life of RTS games. 

superkoolstud

Well put.

RTS games with better singleplayer campaigns:
-THe entire C&C series (excluding generals)
-Act of War
-Dune 2
-Earth 2140, 2150, and even 2160
-Ground Control 1 and 2
-Force 21
-Warzone 2100
-Dark Reign

mrbojangles25

oh my, it is beginning to stink in here, cuz you're pulling stuff out of your butt. why not just name all the rts ever made and claim that they all have better sp than starcarft? i don't think anyone would agree with you on any of those games (except maybe c&c and red alert). 

• The races are extremely well balanced even when they are so distinct.
• The campaign is epic.
• Not tons of micromanaging. Thats why I love Starcraft but don't like WC3 as much.
• the list could go on and on.

[QUOTE="ARGSmith"]Good thing Supcom and TA have the best Multiplayer in RTS then huh Jangles :) Are you really still playing and enjoying that train wreck CNC 3's multiplayer? :lol: In the latest interview the guy who heads the balance for the game was even joking about just how awful the games balance is :lol: (funny a month ago he couldn't shut up about how great it was)mrbojangles25

Ya, as a matter of fact I am. I think "balance" is an excuse people use whenever their strategies fail them. "Oh dang I lost...well, my opponent is Scrin I think I will blame it on balance." To me that is like hitting a 250 yard drive in golf and having the ball landing in the fairway next to you, then blaming it on the wind.

Well then I guess hacking should be A-okay for you then?