I saw a video and also i know that sc1 was a lot more popular than sc2 and in the video i saw that it was absolutely the most selling video game in the world in it’s time but sc2 never was so popular, why?
Better game is better.
For me personally, what made sc2 the most unpleasant was stupid terran bio spam. Absolute cancer from day one.
And it’s what they built the game around it feels, so definitely not for me.
There’s other factors but that’s my main dislike about the game.
4 Likes
You may notice that MMM spam consists of 3 Ms. Therefore much more units than zerg compositions like roach ravager and ling bane.
And before you go “but me add corruptor”, yes, terran adds many more units such as viking/ghost as game goes on too.
2 Likes
sc1 rewarded high skill well and punished low skill severely
narrowed skill gap of sc2 killed Korean Deity,allowing others to easily catch up with them
sc2 is easy to play, sc 1 is not
2 Likes
What does that have to do with what I said exactly?
Because at the time of BW release, there was a limited amount of video games to choose from, and hardly any good RTS games.
When SC2 came out, the choices of video games were endless, so it was going to be harder to market it up to BW standards.
My opinion, because BW sure as hell isn’t as fun to me, or as fun to watch. But I bet other people enjoy it.
2 Likes
sc2 was popular AF,remember that the streaming service twitch,started with the idea of watching starcraft2 games (and gaming in general), tournamenta back in the day probably hadd more than 500k viewers,its said that even some mlg was watched by a million-800k viewers. I dont know the numbers now,bit i remember the numbers of copies being sold around the 10-11 million range and that alone wol,probably the franchise has an overall of 16-18 millions of copies sold (at least).
And then look at where are we now,posting on a 10 years old game that today had two different big tournaments viewed by thousand of people all around the world.
Now think,what game do you think was more sucessful?,sc2 a game played by many around the world for a lot of years with a healthy pro scene or a game which after some few years was just a big thing in Korea?.
1 Like
Yes, and also the intentional dumbing-down of the game generally. SC1/BW due to unit-design and engine-limitations to some extent was a harder game to play and rewarded the “real” better player. It was a chess with some ping-pong, SC2 is mainly ping-pong with a shadow of chess.
The S part of RTS was important in SC1 and marginal in SC2.
Also, maybe without knowing they had an antiwhine built-in in the fact that they did not do multi-patches to reach change for the sake of change.
Balance was achieved with Maps that were abundant.
If no change is expected whiners are suffocated in their own vomit.
There is no cause to whine when no-one will change units depending on a game of some nobody.
2 Likes
In 1998 SC1 vanilla no medivac no medic…imagine the terran whine today. What made SC1 beautiful was it was balanced (with a few exceptions) but it was challenging. Each race had strengths and weaknesses. Also SC1 had something called “better if massed” units such as wraith and scout. Everybody cries about those units saying they suck. Do you really think that or did NEWBLIZZARD brainwash that into you? Those units were actually good if massed. Now in SC2 you have units like Thor, Collussus, Queen, etc…which you can kill entire armies by just building one. Basically hero units. Also starting in HOTS NEWBLIZZARD went nuts with spells for protoss and zerg. As we saw with SC1 its fine to have spells in the game but the question is what does it do and does it have counters? The problem with SC2 is it had some spells that literally didnt have any viable counters. And some abilities were insanely broken like parasitic bomb, oracle, thor, etc…and of course tactical jump and liberator. SC2 also had a genius idea where you dont even have to input the ability it is auto cast for you!!! Here’s hoping Blizzard learns from their mistakes in the future.
1 Like