Why isn’t Starcraft?
Where is the meaninful content drops to keep the playerbase engaged, and the game relevant?
Warcraft 3 Reforged also was a huge missed opportunity to introduce new stuff to the game.
Blizzard has many lessons to learn…
1 Like
Maybe because SC2 is over a decade old?
Age of Empire 2 is 2 Decades old. It was 15 years old when it got it’s second expansion, and Microsoft has made bank ever since.
1 Like
The version which is getting the expansion is not 15 years old though. Its got a completely new game engine and everything, and they had to do that specifically because the old game engine just wouldnt cooperate with modern stuff.
So why did they not add new content to Reforged, with sights into expanding it?
Why not add new stuff to Starcraft2?
RTS is definitely not dead. A good RTS still makes money. C&C Remastered made money, and has gameplay from 1995-1997.
Blizzard has no excuse.
No, the engine is exactly the same, Genie2.
Because its reforged, which is A: still basically the same engine, and B: a remaster, not a sequel.
AoE2 and 3 DE both got new content, and balance that added or changed content.
I am sorry, but that is no excuse. Reforged is dead because it did not change, because it added nothing.
So are the DE for Age of Empires franchise. They are all still on the same engines the games launched on way back in the day.
So first:
WarCraft 3 reforged suffered backlash from the player-base who didn’t want the game to change much. Originally Blizzard intended to redo the entire campaign along with other changes instead of just changing one level of each campaign.
Blizzard also kept WarCraft III compatible for people who didn’t pay for the updated graphics and new campaign; whereas Age of Empires II Definitive edition is an independent executable.
Second:
There was no intention to add new factions into WarCraft III; where they would be a mess to balance considering the game’s asymmetry.
Adding factions to Age of Empires II is much easier because the factions are all essentially reskins of each-other distinguished by limitations on which parts of the tech-tree they have access to, and a handful of unique units/upgrades/bonuses. The shared tech branches (barracks/archery/stables/monestary/siege) also have plenty of built-in counters to interact with each-other; so even if a faction is missing a tech branch or weak in that particular area the faction has ways to play around that.
1 Like
Not an “expansion” is probably a better way to put it.
When you upgrade you are still playing the Frozen Throne expansion with the same match-making and balance. There are no new units or factions; and balancing such things would be much harder in WarCraft III than AOEII anyway.
I think the AoE devs made the better decision, in this case.
It allowed some customers to keep their legacy game if they prefered it, and other customers to get the new version.
It was just wiser, to me.
Which is an issue, because the game’s MP is dead anyway, so they may aswell as have added in new stuff.
Again, i think this is better design, to be honest.
It is not like they could not add subfaction to Starcraft 2! They would still play similarly to the parent factions, but with divergent elements, like ALL the civs in AoE1 and 2 do.
You could build a new faction/subfaction in Starcraft 2, and still make sure it has all the counters, and can be countered, towards all the elements already in the game.
But letting new factions aside, why no new Campaigns?
Why not expand the storyline further?
That’s debatable. It is definitely nice to be able to play the game on Reforged graphics with players who are playing classic.
Even if Blizzard added an extra expansion with new units/factions specifically for reforged players they would still like that option.
WarCraft III’s multiplayer is still going strong and was still receiving regular patches the last time I checked.
You seem to have misunderstood:
WarCraft III and StarCraft are asymmetrical: As in the factions do not share the same units and tech-trees. If you made a “sub-faction” of Terran, Protoss, or Zerg and manage to balance it to a reasonable degree against the base faction; you would still have a mess of work to do to balance the faction against the other two races. In those non-mirror match-ups the sub-faction will either lack tools that are normally necessary or it will have units that the other factions simply are not equipped to deal with.
Age of Empires I & II are symmetrical games where the factions are all built on the same units and the same tech-trees; so the balance is inherently easier:
- All factions build up in a similar way, so even their economic bonuses can be reasonably balanced against each-other.
- Every unit has a list of potential counters such that no matter what faction it is up against; the opponent has (usually multiple) units to handle it.
Well, there was a mix of the time limit, the budget, and what they set out to do.
1 Like
haha I played AOE1 but didnt like it just because the economy in that game is so much more involved, like you have to chop wood, go fishing, hunt deer, etc…so many things before you can actually build up your forces. But in SC2 its just mineral and vespene gas, economy is so much easier…
1 Like
Never played any of these. Been watching it a couple times on twitch. One time they had a huge tournament on twitch, they started the games at a fixed point.
Any new RTS content is good.
1 Like