Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

StarCraft: The past, present and future

polygon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 104 posts

Re: StarCraft: The past, present and future

#51

Post by padobson »

rtehfm wrote: post #38
padobson wrote: post #15

Interaction design is a craft, and gaming is the subcategory of interaction design that most often ventures into the world of art. But the thing that most constrains the artform is this "little brother" mindset. Instead of waiting for society to understand and comprehend the medium, those who craft video games work to make their medium more like film or novels or music or other "high" artforms. So I get a little twit…

I partially disagree with you. Some of my most memorable moments are the stories of various games. Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy VII, Zelda: A Link to the Past and so on all, with their great gameplay for the time, above average to great story lines that captured its audience. Now on to games like StarCraft, DoDA, Quake 3, and Counter-Strike were all hailed as some of the greats, not because of the story like you p…

This sort of brings us to a philosophical problem of determining where game design ends and writing begins, sort of how movies have often had difficulty delineating between the responsibilities of a writer, director, and producer. The actor was ad-libbing in that scene, should he get a writing credit? The director picked his own DP, Editor and half the cast, should he get an executive producer credit?

When Miyamoto invented the Goomba and made him the first enemy in Super Mario Bros, was he writing or designing?

Certainly he was writing because he was creating a protagonist and an obstacle for the protagonist. But certainly he was also designing, because he described a system for the gamer to control the protagonist and rules for how Mario could interact with the Goomba.

Metal Gear Solid and A Link to the Past are great for the sake of comparison. How many cut scenes could you tear out of MGS and still have the exact same gaming experience? How many from LTTP?

I don't know what the answer is, but I know that the answer for MGS is higher than 0. I'm less certain for LTTP.

Does that make Miyamoto more pure as an artist than Kojima? At least where these games are concerned, I lean toward yes, but there's quite obviously gray areas here.

Re: StarCraft: The past, present and future

#52

Post by MadManE »

rincebrain wrote: post #31
tareqak wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blizzard pretty good recent track record with supporting OS X. World of Warcraft, StarCraft 2, Hearthstone, and Heroes of the Storm all run under OS X. Unfortunately, Blizzard's latest game, Overwatch, will not be coming to OS X. That question happened to be the first one asked by a member of the audience in the first Overwatch panel on Friday, November 6 at the BlizzCon 2015.

I wonder why not - they've always been pretty aggressive about Mac support, as you observed. Maybe the overhead required for developing a new FPS engine (which, AFAIK, Blizzard's never done in-house before, even SC:Ghost was another developer) was too much for them to have OS X support in the initial timetable.

The reason that I heard was something about OpenGL. I was very disappointed about this, mostly from what implications it has on the future of their other games.

Re: StarCraft: The past, present and future

#53

Post by ansible »

oldmanjay wrote: post #46
padobson wrote: post #15

Interaction design is a craft, and gaming is the subcategory of interaction design that most often ventures into the world of art. But the thing that most constrains the artform is this "little brother" mindset. Instead of waiting for society to understand and comprehend the medium, those who craft video games work to make their medium more like film or novels or music or other "high" artforms. So I get a little twit…

one trouble with game stories is that 99.999% of the time you know exactly where they're going because you're the protagonist and you will win or die. the second problem is that there are only a few good writers of the correct style out there and they're all in television. (total hyperbole but the point should be evident) the third problem is that video game makers refuse to accept their actual demographics and they…

one trouble with game stories is that 99.999% of the time you know exactly where they're going because you're the protagonist and you will win or die.

In Halo: Reach, you win, and then you die. Halo 4 didn't have what I'd consider a happy ending either.

Re: StarCraft: The past, present and future

#54

Post by mattlutze »

padobson wrote: post #51
rtehfm wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I partially disagree with you. Some of my most memorable moments are the stories of various games. Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy VII, Zelda: A Link to the Past and so on all, with their great gameplay for the time, above average to great story lines that captured its audience. Now on to games like StarCraft, DoDA, Quake 3, and Counter-Strike were all hailed as some of the greats, not because of the story like you p…

This sort of brings us to a philosophical problem of determining where game design ends and writing begins, sort of how movies have often had difficulty delineating between the responsibilities of a writer, director, and producer. The actor was ad-libbing in that scene, should he get a writing credit? The director picked his own DP, Editor and half the cast, should he get an executive producer credit? When Miyamoto i…

And blurred lines like you illustrate above are a good argument why we can't say video games should be primarily considered performance art pieces in the realm of interaction design, as well as why we can't say video games should be primarily considered story delivery mechanisms.

The video game is both interactive and passively consumed.

Machinima exists because of how enjoyable experiencing a story through a video game environment can be. Spectating video games is a Billion Dollar Industry (TM), with Twitch and international professional gaming leagues getting ESPN coverage.

There's value in the mechanics and human interaction as story, on one level, and the fiction in the game itself as a story.

As well there's value in how the interactions make us a part of the game and a part of the story. Sure I know I'm not the lovable Italian plumber, but after a while my brain stops making that distinction, at least a little bit. I know I'm not a Guardian defending the remnants of earth from big brutish aliens, but after a while I stop consciously identifying that barrier, letting it become translucent.

The closer and closer we get to immersive 3D gaming, the blurrier that line becomes. So there too ^^, the story is incredibly important as a driving motivation to play and enjoy video games.

And really... the closer we get to putting the human inside the game, the more important that story is going to become. The interaction mechanics are important because when they're done right, when they're executed beautifully, we stop thinking about the game and form a more consciously transparent symbiosis with the technology. The COD games were fantastic because the FPS controls Just Worked.

What happens when we continue progress and get to neural interfaces, where the designer builds a realistic-enough-feeling environment that you can engage with the characters and elements in it? Story, I guess.

So... to summarize too many words for a simple counter-point: it's all a part of the whole, and inappropriate to say games are just a subset of interaction design.

Re: StarCraft: The past, present and future

#55

Post by debacle »

chongli wrote: post #47
padobson wrote: post #15

Interaction design is a craft, and gaming is the subcategory of interaction design that most often ventures into the world of art. But the thing that most constrains the artform is this "little brother" mindset. Instead of waiting for society to understand and comprehend the medium, those who craft video games work to make their medium more like film or novels or music or other "high" artforms. So I get a little twit…

Instead of waiting for society to understand and comprehend the medium, those who craft video games work to make their medium more like film or novels or music or other "high" artforms. Yeah, seriously. For hardcore StarCraft fans, the narratives they REALLY care about involve characters such as Greg Fields, Lim Yo Hwan, Lee Young Ho, and Lee Jae Dong; not Jim Raynor and Kerrigan.

Does it really matter, when Blizzard ruined both sides of that equation? The story of the Koprulu Sector is a complete joke, and competitive Starcraft II is one of the biggest gaming letdowns in recent memory.

Re: StarCraft: The past, present and future

#56

Post by roymurdock »

padobson wrote: post #15

Interaction design is a craft, and gaming is the subcategory of interaction design that most often ventures into the world of art. But the thing that most constrains the artform is this "little brother" mindset. Instead of waiting for society to understand and comprehend the medium, those who craft video games work to make their medium more like film or novels or music or other "high" artforms. So I get a little twit…

You're talking about two different types of games: Games of Sport vs. Games of Immersion

The difference: Context

Starcraft multiplayer is a Game of Sport, where character and story are nonexistent and mechanics/"interaction" are all that matters in a game of chess completely removed from any context other than the tournament you are playing in.

Switch over to campaign mode and the context becomes the story line and plot. Sure, the game still relies on mechanics but you advance through different scenarios where you meet new characters, form alliances, explore new worlds, and even switch sides and play as a different race based on the plot of the story. Solo play is a Game of Immersion.

The Dark Souls franchise has a good balance of the two. You advance across the world (semi) linearly in a movie-like fashion, learning about the various NPCs and lore of the world. You are also regularly invaded by other players, and then the game becomes completely mechanics/interaction-based until one of you wins the duel.

You're basically arguing that video games are/should be more like a football game than a movie. They can span both forms of entertainment, and people will choose to engage with one or the other based on personal preferences.

Re: StarCraft: The past, present and future

#57

Post by anmilo »

debacle wrote: post #55
chongli wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of waiting for society to understand and comprehend the medium, those who craft video games work to make their medium more like film or novels or music or other "high" artforms. Yeah, seriously. For hardcore StarCraft fans, the narratives they REALLY care about involve characters such as Greg Fields, Lim Yo Hwan, Lee Young Ho, and Lee Jae Dong; not Jim Raynor and Kerrigan.

Does it really matter, when Blizzard ruined both sides of that equation? The story of the Koprulu Sector is a complete joke, and competitive Starcraft II is one of the biggest gaming letdowns in recent memory.

I see the IMO very dismissive "competitive Starcraft sucks now" sentiment being repeated all over the internet. While it is smaller than say DOTA/LoL, I would encourage you to check out the Blizzcon finals from this past weekend, which I think shows that it is still just as compelling as any of the other eSports out there.

Re: StarCraft: The past, present and future

#58

Post by chongli »

debacle wrote: post #55
chongli wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead of waiting for society to understand and comprehend the medium, those who craft video games work to make their medium more like film or novels or music or other "high" artforms. Yeah, seriously. For hardcore StarCraft fans, the narratives they REALLY care about involve characters such as Greg Fields, Lim Yo Hwan, Lee Young Ho, and Lee Jae Dong; not Jim Raynor and Kerrigan.

Does it really matter, when Blizzard ruined both sides of that equation? The story of the Koprulu Sector is a complete joke, and competitive Starcraft II is one of the biggest gaming letdowns in recent memory.

Nothing lasts forever. Sports go through cycles like this. Tennis was in quite a down cycle before the emergence of Roger Federer. Competitive RTS is in a down cycle now. The real tragedy here is how much more power large corporations have over esports as compared to traditional sports.

Re: StarCraft: The past, present and future

#59

Post by robwilliams »

venomsnake wrote: post #25

Blizzard's initial offerings were surprisingly dark and mature - both diablo, warcraft I&II and starcraft. Only starcraft's tone has not been degraded much so far (although the writing is weaker). I guess legacy of the void concludes a chapter of the company history. They are a e-sports company now. Their three latest games are gameplay driven with barely any story at all. Overwatch, HoTS and HS. Diablo III got a pas…

They're planning to release a graphic novel, web comic series, and animated shorts to support Overwatch. Metzen announced it at BlizzCon just a couple days ago, so I think a lot of the writing talent has moved to Overwatch.

Re: StarCraft: The past, present and future

#60

Post by knd775 »

Fiahil wrote: post #12
steckerbrett wrote: post #2

It's unfortunate how much the original game has rotted, the online servers are up but the program itself is becoming more are more unplayable. The OSX versions have been dead for a long time, on windows it seems to be getting harder and harder to run as well. The recent job posting hopefully indicate they're interested in de-breaking them, couldn't care less for a HD remake, just a version that actually works again.…

I play blizzard games on a MBP, and they're working quite fine; but, I'm not expecting alienware-like performance either.

What do you mean by "alienware-like performance"? Even the higher end alienware systems offer subpar performance.
Post reply on HN