Okay, okay...
pinback wrote:RetroRomper wrote:if taken as a game I don't actually enjoy SCII to a great extent but as a product, the redefinition allows a less narrow perspective on the issue.
I don't know what any of this means, and don't remember you discussing it with me.
Lets differentiate between...
Reasons I do not like Starcraft II
1) Not a single person nor "game outlet" pointed out how the narrative structure of the single player portion of SCII changed from the first. It went completely overlooked that they decided to shift the focus from the player to the cliche set of characterizations that were embodied in the storyline. Though I had fun and enjoyed the experience, Blizzard wasn't pushing the envelope and actually regressed in their ability to weave a tale.
2) The unit and planet choices in the single player game were basically a weird mutation of the Dune II formula.
DUNE II. There wasn't a single new, creative or exploitative concept in that part of the game. Blizzard polished it beyond belief, the presentation and execution were top notch, but the way they told the story in SCI and Diablo II were completely absent and replaced with the bland, normal archetypes I expect from a Baen science fiction novel or blockbuster film.
3) MLB bothers me: it feels as if nearly twenty years of development in the competitive video game arena was tossed away for a clone of the NFL and MLB (major league baseball.... They even duplicate the bloody colors). Part of the fun of the old Doom, Quake, and SCI days, was the low cost of entry to be part of the spectacle. SCII doesn't exemplify this, Blizzcon isn't Quakecon: it has divided the scene into either players or spectators - its tiring.
4) SCII isn't a game per se: its a product. Its barely a rehash, not a reinvention nor evolution, just a few concepts distilled to sell to an audience. World of Warcraft has firmly entrenched in Blizzard this mentality of seeing their games as vehicles to create a product that can be continually monetized - all predictors are pointing to the next incarnation of B.net, Diablo III surely, maybe even SCII to have stronger "micro-transactions" built into their dynamics.
Sorry, but if I want to feed quarters into a game I'll go to an arcade.
5) At some point, it stopped being a game and became a skill. Pinback's three games a day exemplifies this and its difficult to see beyond feeding into an environment, sowing the seeds for a harvest that Blizzard will reap, along with a very specific skill set that can't be applied beyond a single instance.
6) Blizzard is relatively inflexible or at least a bit more short sighted than they used to: this will be the first time in any of their expansions (and rarely in any in the industry) that they will be removing units to balance and readjust the abilities of the races.
Lets move onto...
Reasons I do not play SCII
1) Two hours at the gym every other day, coupled with an hour of yoga, martial arts and a half hour of walking on off days, coupled with the fact school has begun, leaves me very little time.
2) As I said, its a specific skill set and though one I'm willing to indulge in, the commitment to develop it is staggering. I have better things to do.
3) The game basically revolves around playing the same maps over and over... Less of a hassle in vanilla SCII, but after playing "Bunker Wars" for a few hours two or three weeks ago, I realized that this wasn't something I'd want to spend my time constantly working on.
Conclusion: the game is fun, enjoyable but its moving into a Pavlovian experiment, one I'd rather be left out of. Regardless, I'm willing to play with friends (this includes you, Pinner) but its just a game and honestly, not a very strong one.