Sam Bass - "StarCraft II A Boon To RTS Genre" Options

[Sonic]

While speaking with Gamasutra as part of a larger interview to be released in the coming weeks, Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight designer, Sam Bass praises Blizzard's long time in development RTS, StarCraft II. Despite it being a competitors product. He feels it will be a positive to Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight and hopefully educate gamers in modern RTS play, and get back online and start playing the games. These are certainly some interesting comments. Here's more from the article.

"It's great," Bass said of Blizzard's upcoming title, speaking to Gamasutra as part of a larger interview to be released in the coming weeks.

"Hopefully [StarCraft II] will sell a bazillion copies, and a bunch of people will become much more educated in modern RTS play, and get back online and start playing the games," he explained. "I think, in the end, it’s a good thing."

Along with WarCraft, which has in some ways been overshadowed by its MMO successor, StarCraft and Command & Conquer are arguably the most well-known RTS brands in the world -- so with both series seeing new entries this year, the genre is likely to generate more attention than it has in quite some time.

In fact, Bass pointed out, familiarity with Command & Conquer outstrips its actual player base. He said he frequently encounters gamers -- and even non-gamers -- who are aware of series mainstays like Joe Kucan's Kane character, but have not traditionally dipped their toes into RTS waters. That gives the C&C4 development team the chance to bring new audiences into the fold on the back of existing awareness.

Click here to read the full story. This is sure to provide some heated discussion.

[Silverthorn]

Yes, it is going to be a heated one.

As we can see, SC2 is gaining more praise while C&C4 gains more boos. Even if newer audiences will buy it, but the veterans will not. As usual, similar to today's TV shows, particularly Disney, hardcore Disney fans hate its poor reputation for investing a lot in live action & produce poor cartoons, for the newer generations, they have no idea at all since they will not bother Disney's history that much. That's what I saw of what the marketing team is trying to do, their aim is more on the newer generations, veterans are a much smaller targets and they are easily ignored.

As for the whole online thing, that's alright, we know we'll move on, MW2 ditched LAN before and I'm sure some other future games might do the same. I'm worried that LAN will become obsolete and a thing in the past.

[sith_wampa]

Despite it being a competitors product. He feels it will be a positive to Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight

I've been thinking this recently as well, and I've even seen it. Many of my FPS junkie friends are all hyped up about SC2, and over the past couple months have been asking me alot about C&C4 and C&C in general.

Anyway, SC2 isn't coming out for months, so I don't think too many people will be forced to choose between one or the other.

[Silverthorn]

We won't be sure of that either, I am not convinced that SC2 may come out sooner like in June, as usual, there isn't any official deadline, I don't believe those game sites' deadlines, they keep on putting guesses or predictions that this game will come out this year. But I believe it will and it should, if not, Korean fans might have to fly all the way to the US and to protest.

[eXCheez]

Firstly, those are not Sam Bass's actual words; don't take another website's headline out of context.

Secondly, this is all really just extremely idealistic of Sam Bass - nothing more. Tiberian Twilight will be out in a few weeks, I don't see how the sales of Wings of Liberty will affect it in any way when it's released in 4-5 months' time.

[[NE]Fobby[GEN]]

Although I'm a much bigger C&C fan than Starcraft fan, I'm looking forward to building some bases

[gben]

Sam is just speaking of the genre... more people playing in the *genre* will keep our beloved franchise alive.

[Silverthorn]

Sam is just speaking of the genre... more people playing in the *genre* will keep our beloved franchise alive.

I know, but the sad part is C&C4 is NOT the original C&C we know. Starcraft keeps many traditional things in its roots, so it was not much changed other than pure physics and great graphics.

[mirza044]

Although I'm a much bigger C&C fan than Starcraft fan, I'm looking forward to building some bases

I know, but the sad part is C&C4 is NOT the original C&C we know. Starcraft keeps many traditional things in its roots, so it was not much changed other than pure physics and great graphics.

[Sonic]

I don't really like this Gamasutra article. As eXCheez pointed out Gamasutra have written it like Sam Bass said those words. To keep things simple. This is nothing but another media based attempt to start the whole C&C vs StarCraft rivalry again.... there is no rivalry in the case of C&C 4 and StarCraft II. Similar things happened years ago with Tiberian Sun and StarCraft, media put the 2 game head to head, Westwood vs Blizzard etc.... I didn't give a **** then so I don't give a **** now.

Both games a different, both games are being released months apart. So there are never going be competing against one another.

I know, but the sad part is C&C4 is NOT the original C&C we know. Starcraft keeps many traditional things in its roots, so it was not much changed other than pure physics and great graphics.

Well that's all StarCraft II is to me, the same game from 1998 with a fresh coat of paint. No innovation, no change to the gameplay mechanics. And based on the the communities feelings towards C&C 4 since it was announced, perhaps that's what EALA should have done. Simply make a cheap rehash of C&C 3, with the same old stale gameplay.... deploy MCV, build a PP, then drop a REF, collect Tiberium. I'm a C&C fan but after 15 years of the same game a change is welcome thing you know.

And mirza044, a little more effort in your posts please. I'll let that one slide for now but in future posts like your last one will be deleted.

[Troopzor]

Well, having played Starcraft 2, it's much different from the original in certain aspects. While it keeps what worked.

Many of the units now how secondary effects/abilities. The economy has been revamped enough to better balance the game, most of the units are entirely new with their own special feel. Yet, even though there are more similar things to the original compared to the new stuff, the game still feels like an entirely new experience; yet it keeps the same, slightly nostalgic, feel.

Honestly, I can't really explain it, but I feel that SC2 is a step in the right direction for RTS's as a whole. C&C4, contrary to popular labeling, is not a RTS, it is an RTT which are drastically different really...

[Nmenth]

And based on the the communities feelings towards C&C 4 since it was announced, perhaps that's what EALA should have done. Simply make a cheap rehash of C&C 3, with the same old stale gameplay.... deploy MCV, build a PP, then drop a REF, collect Tiberium. I'm a C&C fan but after 15 years of the same game a change is welcome thing you know.

Your arguments on this seem crazy to me. Is it your honest opinion that Tiberian Sun was only a "cheap rehash" of Tiberian Dawn with the same gameplay?
If not, then sequels are not predestined to be cheap rehashes. Making it the company's fault, not the game.
And if TS was a cheap rehash, then why are you running this fan site?

You speak of the same gameplay, I point out what you said in the Developer Q&A #15:

Other than destroy, defend, escort and capture what else can you do for a single player mission anyway?

So basically, a genre is limited by itself. To make C&C4 different, they had to, as Troopzor indicated, make it an RTT instead of an RTS.
Apparently you aren't sick of destroying, defending, escorting, and capturing yet, but is that not part of gameplay? Looking at C&C3, the additions of support powers doesn't seem to interest you, the continuation of the story isn't enough, not even the unique Nod defensive hubs can be considered something new?

But the story is continued in C&C4, with the same storyline. The factions are still GDI versus Nod. Most of the units are returns from previous game. So what is it then that makes this no longer stale? It would seem we are left with the fact that it is an RTT instead of an RTS.

Ultimately, this means you are not sick of the way C&C was going, you are sick of the RTS genre. Further proof of this is the fact that you heap SCII in with what C&C4 could have been had they not messed with the formula.

The community you reference that doesn't like change are the ones that still like the RTS genre. We can see the innovations and changes that exist because we still like the genre, as such, we do not see any cheap rehashing or old stale gameplay. Any genre that you don't like will always appear to be the same old thing.

[Mighty BOB!]

I think you read into that wrong Nmenth. From what I've seen of Sonic's various opinions, he is glad that EA is changing up the formula with C&C4. He's just saying that most people seem to have reacted positively to SCII (a "stale rehash") while most people seem to have reacted negatively to C&C4 (something new), so if EA had wanted a more positive reaction instead of mixing things up they "should have" just made a rehash.

I haven't played the SCII beta, nor have I been following it much, but it looks like a good extension of the old game. I never played SCI as much as C&C though, and it also has the benefit of not having a dozen titles to its name so they can get away with it more than EA can.

[Nmenth]

I think you read into that wrong Nmenth. From what I've seen of Sonic's various opinions, he is glad that EA is changing up the formula with C&C4. He's just saying that most people seem to have reacted positively to SCII (a "stale rehash") while most people seem to have reacted negatively to C&C4 (something new), so if EA had wanted a more positive reaction instead of mixing things up they "should have" just made a rehash.

Where does what I said differ from what you just said? I know Sonic likes the changes because he thinks the series was getting stale, my point was that the series was not getting stale, he just lost interest in the RTS genre.
To clarify, I am against the changes C&C4 present, I think Tiberium Twilight is a dreadful game and an insult to its namesake. At least Generals was fun, even if it didn't deserve the C&C name.

[Troopzor]

Where does what I said differ from what you just said? I know Sonic likes the changes because he thinks the series was getting stale, my point was that the series was not getting stale, he just lost interest in the RTS genre.
To clarify, I am against the changes C&C4 present, I think Tiberium Twilight is a dreadful game and an insult to its namesake. At least Generals was fun, even if it didn't deserve the C&C name.

At least generals was still an RTS

[Sonic]

Sorry Nmenth I refuse to answer the points you made. Not because I don't care. But lets just say that Mighty BOB! is the right track.

[NODSOLDIERGIRL]

I can't comment on the SCII side of this, since I have never played SC. But I have to agree with Sonic, Change for C&C is welcome. You don't want to just keep playing the same old game just with new units do you? that would get really old fast. The only thing I really think EALA should have done differently is they should have made a whole new game to try out this new, no base building game with. I really wanted to see the Tib Universe end the way it all started but since that didn't happen, I'm willing to give C&C 4 a chance.

This post has been edited by NODSOLDIERGIRL: Monday 8th March 2010 3:12 AM

[Silverthorn]

The only thing I really think EALA should have done differently is they should have made a whole new game to try out this new, no base building game with.

That's what I'm talking about, NSG. I did mention before that EA should had put all of these new changes onto a brand new non-C&C game as an experimental test. But since it's already done, they just take the suicide route, expecting..., well, let's just say it won't turn out very very well and I don't want to provoke the fanatical EA fanboys here. I hope they better regret of what they had done rather than feeling happy about it. I'm sure the staffs who got axed also do feel regret about the whole C&C4 project & its bad reputation.

This post has been edited by Silverthorn: Monday 8th March 2010 3:34 AM

[sith_wampa]

Sam is just speaking of the genre... more people playing in the *genre* will keep our beloved franchise alive.

NEED MOAR FOLLOWERS!

I'm a C&C fan but after 15 years of the same game a change is welcome thing you know.

I don't understand how you could possibly think TD, TS, and TW are all essentially the same game. Surely you don't believe that. There has been plenty of innovation introduced in each game. I can only assume you know that.

Sorry Nmenth I refuse to answer the points you made.

Disappointing.

I can't comment on the SCII side of this, since I have never played SC. But I have to agree with Sonic, Change for C&C is welcome. You don't want to just keep playing the same old game just with new units do you? that would get really old fast. The only thing I really think EALA should have done differently is they should have made a whole new game to try out this new, no base building game with. I really wanted to see the Tib Universe end the way it all started but since that didn't happen, I'm willing to give C&C 4 a chance.

You definitely need to play Starcraft. It is one of the only games I play as much as C&C.

Things would be so much better if EA had tested this on another game before. Then the community and EA could have a little reassurance about how C&C4 will be received. But EA doesn't need that reassurance, because they know stupid, loyal fans like me will buy the game anyway.

[Silverthorn]

But EA doesn't need that reassurance, because they know stupid, loyal fans like me will buy the game anyway.

As usual before, friend, EA is always on the money and only care for themselves & their company's own survival. Other game companies like Blizzard or Nintendo or whoever else are all for the fans, if they die due to bankruptcy, they'll be honored by their fans. But in this case, if EA dies in the future, no fans (Except pure hardcore EA supporters) will honor them in return. Just like why should you honor a serial killer like Jack the Ripper, but you honor a great person like Abraham Lincoln who did great things in the past.

This post has been edited by Silverthorn: Monday 8th March 2010 3:41 AM