Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Yes, I find original Starcraft more enjoying too, as there is no implicit or explicit time limit in most missions as in SC2, so player doesn't have to rush through all the game and has time to explore the map, try various units and strategies without load/save loop, enjoy the humour, music, look&feel of the units/buildings etc.

This "war against the time" approach was my deal breaker for SC2. The general idea may be fine for training people to fight online, but for single player mode/campaign it's just inappropriate.

Typical SC1 mission is "destroy all enemy bases when you like it and how you like it", typical SC2 mission is "disarm the ticking bomb in time". It's OK to have 1-2 such missions in the campaign, but when entire campaign is made of time-bomb missions, there is no satisfaction from the game.




I thought the SC2 missions were great and had a lot of variety. The missions were very original compared the usual you get from RTS campaigns.

On the other hand, and I can't explain why, the atmosphere of the SC1 was a lot better. I don't know if it's the music or the graphics but it really had a great feeling of "you are alone in space and everything is hostile".


Same with Diablo II compared to more modern RPGs. It's just like low-resolution (yet masterful!) graphics and absence of effects for effects' sake make you think up the details of the game universe.


Exactly. That was my feeling when I played also. I think it may be part of differentiating single player from pvp - but the problem is I don't have the time and energy to be competitive in pvp either. So I still play SC, single player a lot.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: