WarCraft, StarCraft & Diablo.

[AJ]

Blizzard has spun for us not one, not two, but three different and distinct worlds and within each they've multi-million dollars series' of games which have become not only parts of our daily lives but a part of modern culture.

I've two thoughts/questions for you.

First, do you see Blizzard as being able to sucessfully branch off from their 3 worlds at any point in the future, or have they wrote themselves into a position where only further development on these three worlds are their goal, focus, drive -- what have you. (Perhaps another reasoning Flagship's staff found reason to leave the Blizzard Team)

Secondly, while each game has its avid fans and diehards, etc. Which game do you truly prefer? And not just which game, but what series? What world of adventure has really struck it home for you? Do you enjoy the individual character development that they grant in Diablo? Or is it the rich storyline and deep plotlines they created in the WarCraft series? Perhaps you find that StarCraft interface and mixture of macro and micro management is best for your personal tastes?

Share. And in sharing evoke those memories of Blizzard that you cherish the most. I for one will always remember Blizzard for their WarCraft series and countless hours of LAN play on WC2 before BNE had been released.

[Moser]

Personally, I don't think Blizzard can do much more then continue the story lines of their games. It would be pretty hard to make a whole new series or anything. (I really didn't understand the question, so i just wrote down what I thought.)
Secondly, my favorite series would have to be Diablo, just because I like that style of game where you go around; hack-n-slash and character development.
I also like the StarCraft series because I am a fan of any strategy games like that, as long as they are more futuristic (sp?).
I don't like the WarCraft series though. Just seems to boring for me. :concern: I also don't like the fact that it is all based in "old times" with the bows and stuff. I mean, we've already seen that in real life history, why play it?

I think thats all I have to say, but chances are I forgot something. :P

[UED77]

For your first question, AJ, I personally think that Blizzard — provided that the company will exist long enough — will continue with the further development and refinement of their preexisting worlds, all the way up to the point when each storyline has had an MMORPG game. After this, further development of RTS / RPG games will not be possible because of possible clashes with the dynamic storyline of the MMORPGs. At this point, I find it very likely that the creative directors (Chris Metzen in particular) will think up a new game world, hopefully as captivating, or even more so, than their current three. Eventually, I think, after the MMORPGs, the fans will demand another RTS game and as I forsee it, the first game in their new game world will be an RTS. Likewise, this thread will probably continue all the way until they cap it off with yet another MMORPG.

For the second question, I can really not say much about the Diablo series, for I will admit that I never played them. I find the RPG genre less attractive than RTS, so needless to say I prefer Warcraft and Starcraft. However, deciding between which of these two I prefer the most is not an easy thing.
There are several reasons why I am captivated by Starcraft. Its Sci-Fi storyline is appealing to me, mainly because it's not overdone or overfuturized, unlike most Sci-Fi books / movies / games are. Most of the technological advances that the Terrans have achieved seem realistic, and it seems reasonable that humanity will eventually reach that level of advancedness. The storyline is intriguing and the campaign is enjoyable.
Starcraft is a favorite of many because of its multiplayer mode. I'm not a huge fan of this, since I admit, I'm horrible at the actual game itself. However, the Use Map Settings mode is a wonderful feature. I consider myself reasonably proficient at the triggering language Starcraft uses, and I sometimes make a trigger-driven map. I am also a member of Starchitects, the Warboards Starcraft Map Development Team, and I currently hold the position of a triggerster. I enjoy using the Campaign Editor to make fun UMS maps.
Unfortunately, there are some things I don't like in Starcraft. It's a relatively old game, which means that the triggering language and the Campaign Editor is not as advanced as Warcraft III's, for example, which really limits Starcraft mapmaking. Another thing is that the level of customization that can be done on Starcraft without sacrificing Battle.net support is extremely limited.
Nevertheless, I still continue to play and make maps for Starcraft. When they ask me what my favorite game is, I always say Starcraft, with a certain amount of pride; knowing that I've been part of this community for 2 years, and played Starcraft from 2000 January.

Warcraft III is also an awesome game. What I really love about the Warcraft Universe is the amazing depth of detail. I know the map of Warcraft Universe better than I know the streets of my home city. You can easily identify with the characters and heroes who appear in the story, partially because Warcraft III plays more like a movie than an actual game. Blizzard has done a wonderful job blending RTS with RPG. I wish Starcraft had this type of detail.
The Warcraft III World Editor is fantastic. It's easy to use for new and basic users, while at the same time it provides a robust way for expert users to create triggers, cameras, and modify almost every possible game data by importing a file into the map MPQ. The fact that you can use MPEG Layer-3 audio files instead of WAVEs opened a new chapter in the world of maps with custom music and sound. I love all the improvements the World Editor has over the Starcraft Campaign editor.
Despite all this, however, things that I do not like in Warcraft III exist as well. Probably the one I like the least is that you can use heroes in multiplayer games. I personally think this is a bad idea. Sometimes I half-jokingly say “It takes the ‘War’ out of ‘Warcraft’”. The other thing that comes to my mind is the way the characters (especially their portraits) have cartoony looks — this is a huge downstep from Starcraft's high-tech looking video portraits. But other than these, Warcraft is an amazing game which I frequently enjoy playing, especially the campaigns; even over and over again.

Now that I collected all the pros and cons of these two games / game worlds, I have come to the point of having to decide which one is better… But I cannot make a choice that applies to all points.
In some regards, Starcraft is better, whereas in others, Warcraft III wins.
Were Starcraft a more recent game, and had it an engine as powerful as Warcraft III's, I would consider Starcraft a better game. But since this is not the case, I am forced to admit that in more respects than not, Warcraft is a better game than Starcraft is. But since this is a bit hard for me to accept, having been so faithful for Starcraft for 4 years, I will continue playing it and making maps for it, up until the point — if I live long enough — when Starcraft 2 is released. At that point, I will most likely put my Starcraft and Brood War CDs on the shelf and forget about them in my daily life.
But someday, when my glance ever sweeps by those two CDs again, I will remember a time; and a part of me that will then be lost forever.

UED77

[Moser]

+ Karma for you. :P

[spastic-ninJa]

Very fine post, UED. It wasn't biased (as most WC vs SC posts are), and was very deeply thought over.

In answer of AJ's questions:

1) All of Blizzard's games have revovled around either RTS or RPG (or a mixture of both: Warcraft 3), and all have been very successful in these genres. I find it hard to imagine that Blizzard would move away from these genres, and also, I think that they have very little room to create new storylines. However, they will have to develop an additional series, if they wish to be a strong gaming company for many years to come.

People will get tired of seeing more Diablo, Warcraft, and Starcraft games. Why? Because, in the not-to-distant future, the technicality of games will even out, meaning that most games produced will have similar graphics/ audio/ artistic capabilities. Therefore, a good game will require a superb storyline, as well as being unique. When this time comes, I believe that Diablo will have been killed over several different games, the Burning Legion will have been banished from Azeroth by the combined forces of the Night Elves, Humans and Orcs a few too many times, and Kerrigan will have been a backstabbing bitch in many Starcraft remakes. Who will want to see this again? After all, the games will have similar storylines, graphics, and gameplay to their predecesors.

In conclusion: it is essential for Blizzard to get their creative heads together and create a new, unique series. I have no doubt that they can do it; they have successfully warped the genres of RPG and RTS by all of the games that they have released thus far for the better.

2) Before answering this question, I have to state that if I own a game that is online-capable, I will play it online. Keep this in mind for my answer.

This is such a hard question; I enjoy all of those games immensely. What's really strange for me, is the fact that I enjoy all of these games Single Player or as a LAN in comparison to Battle.net. Sure, you can log on and play with random people from across the world, and meet friends and whatnot, but this always seemed boring to me. Which is not good, considering I enjoy online-play a lot.

The thing is, once you start to play online, you can't stop (or at least that's how I feet), and playing Blizzard games online always leads you to gimped strategies. The one thing I hated about the Blizzard games was that everything got gimped. Character-builds, build-orders, etc. I hated that. You could experiment with new tactics, etc, but it never seemed to work as well as the gimped version. (I commend those who created those unique strategies, but the only strategies I could ever work out for myself were a 'Garg-a-pult' strategy for Warcraft 3, and an Elemental Pally for Diablo 2.)

That being said, my favourite Blizzard game is a stand out. Diablo I. No strategies to gimp. Pure fun. You could wander around with your Archangel's Staff of Armageddon and your level 30 Fireball and have some hillarious PvP battles. Sure, everything got hacked, which, in a way, is GOOD. You will agree that most games get hacked in some way, right? Picture this: you will be playing some hardcore Diablo 2 legitimately, lets say you're doing a Baal run, when you get hacked by a party member, who is using some nasty PK teleport hack, and die instantly after he rips you to shreds with a few guided arrows. Makes you feel so gutted. In Diablo 1, this didn't matter. You would get back to town, and whoop their asses with a stack of fireballs and elementals.

For me, the only things that matter in a game are the multiplayer functionalities and the gameplay. Diablo I had them both in my mind. Diablo II almost had it as well, but the skill tree system got so gimped that the game wasn't playable after a couple of months (who wants to make a 5th bowazon with the same skills, after all?). Also, the fact that I enjoy playing RPGs more than RTSs is a large factor in my conclusion (strategy is very fun, but not when all of your tactics are gimped or not good, ya know?).

[TheBB]

First, do you see Blizzard as being able to sucessfully branch off from their 3 worlds at any point in the future, or have they wrote themselves into a position where only further development on these three worlds are their goal, focus, drive -- what have you. (Perhaps another reasoning Flagship's staff found reason to leave the Blizzard Team)

As modestly sized as Blizzard is, I don't expect them to be able to juggle a lot more than the current 3 series. It's quite possible for them of course, but I'd rather see a tight core of developers making few but good games, rather than a megalomaniac company spewing out crap. Which is what I see Blizzard as currently (the former...), and I do hope and think they stay on that path.

Secondly, while each game has its avid fans and diehards, etc. Which game do you truly prefer? And not just which game, but what series? What world of adventure has really struck it home for you? Do you enjoy the individual character development that they grant in Diablo? Or is it the rich storyline and deep plotlines they created in the WarCraft series? Perhaps you find that StarCraft interface and mixture of macro and micro management is best for your personal tastes?

Starcraft, starcraft and starcraft :D. I don't care if I'm biased, I like it better, and that's just about it. I have a thing for rich and well thought out storylines, and SC fills that niché perfectly. It also just happens to be the game I played first, so maybe things would've turned out differently if I had struck on WC first. I don't know. WC3 also have a few features that really don't appeal to me. The heroes, for instance. Don't like 'em. :)

[Shad0]

As most of you guys know, the core development team for Diablo II and Starcraft isn't quite together anymore, and currently there is barely any work being done for any of the 3 branches....

I played all 3, and I enjoyed all 3. The thing about these games, isn't so much the story line and single player mode that attracts most gamers. I think its the fact that you can go online. I probably played about 20 or 30 so hours of single player sc missions, and then played about 3000, 4000 games on bnet ^^

DiabloII also was tons of fun, I've played every single character class, and built different builds with em, some more effective than others -.-

The beauty of these games is Blizzards attention to detail, especially in Starcraft. No game ever goes the same, and if you keep some basic principles of building and microing efficiently, there are many strategies that you can use and have fun with.

With that said, I like all the games, but it seems as if I'm still spending all my time playing sc -.- Not to mention all the friends I met on bnet play sc...

[Killphill]

I love starcraft, because of the hours and hours of replayablity. Even though I never got good at melee, UMS filled that gap. But. Warcraft 3 is fun, and it has and awsome campaign, and its fun to play on Battle.net, but I still like Starcraft better. That is till I get a better comp so the graphics run better and the campaign editor works, when that day comes I don't think Starcraft will be able to stand up to Warcraft 3.

What does MMORPG stand for?

[Stonehand]

Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game

[Calibur]

Persona;y i feel That Blizzard for now try to work on and extend its current project to the point where can start developing themselves such as WoW which is ment to do this very thing.
But eventually Blizzard will have to come up with a new series that hopefully lives up to the legacy of its predecesors.

As for the Blizzard series i enjoy most, it would defenitly be starcraft mainly because its the first one I've ever played and i love coming up with new strategies and testing them against different opponents.
Still WC3 does have a certain appeal to seeing as how its features are more advanced such as the world editor. I also like the idea of implementing heros as regular units to an army since it gives more of the sense of a real battle in which a strong leader can turn the tide.
As for diablo if only played it about two times and it was good from what i saw but i cant really get into depth with it.

[Magmaniac]

sc 4 lyfe
diablo is good but is too easily hackable and too much of the people who play it hack, whereas not as many people who play sc hack, and even though its pretty old it's still (in my opinion) a better overall game then wc3 and d2.

[WarZone]

I think the best game they made is Starcraft, it's great game and i like it. It's very original game for it's all kinds of tactics and strategy. Warcraft is great game too but i liked more the single player than battle.net... But im really sad to see that Warcraft is the main blizzard product although Starcraft easily beat them at selled copies.. Diablo is really interesting game it's original. I think one of the best it's kinds game. But they all we're the best than they came out... And because of they're differenct it's really hard to compare them....

[Darkslayer633]

I'd have to say that starcraft is the best, cause unlike warcraft each race is completly different, yet balanced. as well their combination of 2/3d graphics is fantastic, perfect for people with sucky computers.
Diablo is good if you like that sort of thing, but that is not for me
I haven't played warcraft3 but i love playing warcraft 2 and having an all out water war now that is fun.

[Scauthra]

First, do you see Blizzard as being able to sucessfully branch off from their 3 worlds at any point in the future, or have they wrote themselves into a position where only further development on these three worlds are their goal, focus, drive -- what have you. (Perhaps another reasoning Flagship's staff found reason to leave the Blizzard Team)

Yes, I do think they will continue with a new series in the future. People have been wanting a Starcraft2 for years now, and that hasint happened at all. They came to make Starcraft Ghost. Now that isint what the hardcore Starcraft RTS fans want, but(!), it's what thier fans wanted all along. To see the storyline evolve and continue past what he already has. There are two things Blizzard does, and does well with all thier games.

They make a qaulity game to play, which you find yourself playing over and over and enjoying. And what really makes them great, is the great story lines in all three series. I have played a lot of RPG'
s and RTS games. And aside from maybe Command and Conqure, I have not find anotehr game that really matches.

And I would like to add, I do not believe all three series will make it to a MMORPG setting. Diablo is better to stay an RPG, because that is what makes it so, and really, it would just be like WoW except with a Diablo feel. As for Starcraft, it would work, it would be nice, and I am sure Blizzard would make it way more fun then Planetside, and not barren like SWG. But in the end, I do not think they will take it over to MMORPG setting either. Blizzard could very possibly take a good portion of the MMORPG market if they did this, but, they are good and content enough with WoW. In my eyes.

So anyways, yes, I do believe Blizzard will branch into a 4th series. They can make... a Blizzard East (Hehe ^^; ), add in storyline from Chris Metzen and the rest, and then have A+++ developers create it.


Secondly, while each game has its avid fans and diehards, etc. Which game do you truly prefer? And not just which game, but what series? What world of adventure has really struck it home for you? Do you enjoy the individual character development that they grant in Diablo? Or is it the rich storyline and deep plotlines they created in the WarCraft series? Perhaps you find that StarCraft interface and mixture of macro and micro management is best for your personal tastes?

Now while Diablo has a interesting storyline to it, and I am one of the fans that want to be able to play in the post-destructive world, it left me feeling just a bit empty.

Starcraft as well was a GREAT storyline and I will admit I played through the stroryline for both Stacraft and Brood War at least 7 times each, it had a great feel to it, was great to play. The real first Sci-Fi game I enjoyed playing, and still do.

However, Warcraft is my top game. I played Warcraft back when it came out, I didn't know what I was doing, but I loved it. I played Warcraft 2 every chance I got, and I only played the campaign over and over again. It was marvelous.

What really got me with Warcraft 3, aside from the depth and feel of the storyline, was the unique style or RTS and RPG gameplay mixed into eachother. It's easy to control, but still takes time to get good. And it's always fun to play around and try to create new strategies in multi player that seperate from the normal ones.

And after I got to Stress Test WoW... holy... Being able to PLAY in the world of Azeroth, seeing thiese places you have played with on maps or in the campaign in the Warcraft RTS line.. is simpling... love. The quest system is what makes the game so great for me, and every class really has a purpose and is not boring to play. (IE Warrior.. hit Taunt and Kick. Taunt the mob that attack the Cleric... *Yawns*) EQ made me feel like it was a job to level, but when I played WoW, the leveling was slower, but goodness. I didn't eveb care! Doing a quest was hellofafun, doing tradeskills is hellofafun. Gah, I love it.

WoW really tops the series, the storyline. <3

[tb473]

hey all,

Yes, it would be hard to create sequals for any of these games w/o absolutely killing them. That's where the difficulty of creating sequals and expansions comes. But I dont think Blizzard will have that many problems they can't fix.

I like Warcraft 3 best right now, only cuz im better at it than the other 3;). But other than that, I think Starcraft is the best game they have out now. It was the game that Blizzard got it's fame from, and it still selling copies like wildfire. The replay value is great (as is all there games) but SC is probably they're best game out, considering when it came out (1997ish?) and how successful it is today without graphic updates and many huge additionns (other than the expansion).

P.S. Does anyone have any clue when SC2 or WoW is coming out??? Cuz I'm clueless.:confused:.

[spastic-ninJa]

There has been no sign as to whether SC2 will be developed or not, but most SC fanatics feel as though they are "owed" a SC sequel ;)

WoW comes out on something like the 18th or 19th of November, supposedly. It may be a bit later though, seeing as they have only just begun the second stress test.

[Basan]

I stick 2 what UED stated in his 1st post here.
But I'm biased in2 SC... later in2 Diablo (only played the 1st) and at last WC 2. These are the 1's I've played, but not exactly in the same order. 4 me WC1 was easily detroned by the 2nd sequel (WC2)... :P
And maybe I'll buy a Diablo 2 as well. I tried a friend's copy (very shortly) and liked it's 1st impression... but I could be wrong.

I also believe that WC3 as a lot 2 offer, altough I don't review myself in the WC universe lately, and when I have the time I'll check upon it, even more with the Project Revolution thingy (that prob'ly will be the reason I'd buy it)... ;)

[Centreri]

Well, overall, I would probably say Warcraft III is the best game of the three.

Diablo is a very good rpg game, and all the different multiplayer type games are interesting, but from what I've seen it could be duplicated and improved using the Warcraft III world editor.

I like the futurism of Starcraft and it was the first game I played, but ever since I got my new computer which could handle Warcraft III and have again tried the many different UMS style games for WCIII it just doesn't appeal to me; The starcraft editor is so primitive in all areas compared to the WCIII editor.

So I choose WCIII. The many different game styles, from the unique RPG style games, saving systems and hero arenas to the bounds, defenses and the like, it overmatches the other games. I do get rather annoyed by the cartoonishness, though.

And I should mention that I overall, when reading, enjoy Fantasy more then Science Fiction, and certain heroes in WCIII, such as Illidan are very well made.
And Illidan is my favorite hero in all three games :).

[GrimTerror]

Can you really call Starcraft a series? Sure, there are the speculations of Starcraft 2 and the development of Starcraft: Ghost (which can be argued wither way) but can Starcraft be called a series with only the original and expansion available to play? Ghost seems a bit awkward. It's set in the Starcraft universe but doesn't seem to follow in order. It's really obvious that Ghost will be nothing like Starcraft on the PC and it most likely will not continue the story that was left off from Brood War.

I could picture Blizzard trying to release a new universe, but whether it will be as successful as it's previous releases I can't really say. They will have to try it eventually because Starcraft, WarCraft and Diablo will all end in due time and they will not last forever. I think their success in game making is deeply rooted into these three games so when the all the ends have been tied for good for the three games they may become less-known if they don't produce another legendary game to top them.

I really don't think it's hard for anyone to tell which one I like best:) Truth be known, I've never actually played Warcraft or Diablo, yet Starcraft (as well as Starcraft.org) has continued to keep me entertained and occupied. What actually impresses me is that Starcraft has been around for so long and has still been able to go on strong. I'm not quite sure about this, but I think out of the three games I think Starcraft has had the least development. About 8 years later, Blizzard have only just started to release the next StarCraft game. WarCraft has had it's sequels, as has Diablo. Like I said before, Ghost is a bit awkward and I don't really consider it to be a suitable follow up for the original/Brood War game. It seems that the only similarity between them is the universe it is set in and if the current storyline isn't continued on then it can just be considered as a "one off" as opposed to a part of the SC series.

Who could possibly say which one is best? The three games are all legendary in themselves and naturally they all have their pros and cons. Everyone could say which one they prefer, but I don't think anyone could say which one is best...

Edit: Oh and top of all of that, there's so much user created material for Starcraft. I think Starcraft is supreme in it's mapping, modding and fanfiction submissions for such an old game.

[Neo]

Centreri, welcome to Warboards. But please make note that it is not cool to reply to threads that are more then a year old.

This thread is VERY VERY old =/ Almost 2 years? Ick.

Sorry but I am going to have to close this. o.o

-Neo