And what influence does it have on games? Most popular doesn't mean it was the best. TA was a far superior product, both technologically and gameplay-wise. The Army is using countless games for training. There's much to say about the Asian obsession for Starcraft and MMOs, and it's all reduced to insularity. And being one of the first competitive games... well, it was just one game in an era characterised by the rise of online gaming.
It's a completely unoriginal but very solid product that stands in its own niche because nobody managed to polish their clones as much. Balance is what Starcraft is mostly praised for, and that was only achieved after three expansions and many, many patches. A list based on popularity and social influence would put GTA at the top. It's undeniable that other strategies achieved more than Starcraft gameplay-wise. I don't think we choose what games to play based on whose "national sport" it is. By the way, I noticed that many people really think Starcraft is South Korea's national sport:lol:
PC Gamer's list is obviously taking context into account, not just the game's quality, otherwise GTA4, Portal and Dragon Age shouldn't even be mentioned there. It's a constantly shifting list. I think the 23rd place fits it perfectly considering the situation today.Check out their 2007 list, you'll have some surprises.
TA was revolutionary, and I think someone here has a signature with 40 reasons why it's better than Starcraft.
I didn't like World of Goo to much, neither Braid. I mentioned Braid above because both these games are milestones of indie developement.
PC Gamer's list is obviously taking context into account, not just the game's quality, otherwise GTA4, Portal and Dragon Age shouldn't even be mentioned there. It's a constantly shifting list.
Baranga
What influence does SC have on games?
Balance among completely different races, with completely different gameplay mechanics and completely different units?
Something that most, almost twelve years after SC's release, struggle to reach, yet what every competitive RTS should strive for?
Replay value, being one of the most played games online even with its outdated graphics fixed at 640x480, "inferior" to so many other games "both technologically and gameplay-wise"?
StarCraft only has one expansion, not three. The "other two" aren't official and do not count when analyzing its balance "issues", or lack thereof. Get your facts straight. Even without patches it would STILL be the most balanced RTS with three completely different races.
Yes, it's completely unoriginal and has cloned units.
It was THE best, that is why it became popular. A game doesn't become a national sport or part of a USAF Aerospace course because of hype. The "popular doesn't mean it's the best" argument is completely irrelevant.
If Total Annihilation would be even closely as good as SC it would have overshadowed SC, not the other way around. In every possible field except for AI pathfinding, I may add.
Certainly, so many games have achieved more than Starcraft gameplay-wise. It's too bad NONE of them is still played nearly as much more than a decade later.
The "40 reasons why TA>SC" are ridiculous. I read that list, entirely. It has something like 3 or 4 valid points, the rest are either false, half-truths or repeated things. If the guy with that list in the sig minds posting here, I'll gladly show you.
I did not mean to "attack" Braid of World of Goo. But to put them above SC, well that is something that stinks.
Log in to comment