In May 1997, Computer Gaming World magazine featured a cover that would prove to be deeply controversial among real-time strategy fans. It featured StarCraft's trademark Hydralisk alongside the caption "Best Strategy Game Yet!", a proclamation that raised the ire of everyone from Command & Conquer diehards to Civilization enthusiasts. Even internally, the magazine's staff shared a heated debate over the headline as well. It was a dangerous bold statement, especially given that StarCraft was still more than a year away from release.
More than a decade later, however, StarCraft is hailed as one of the finest real-time strategy games ever made. It has long since become synonymous with gaming in Korea, and its sequel is one of the most hotly anticipated games of the year. The real-time strategy genre is arguably at a crossroads, but the StarCraft brand is as strong as ever.
StarCraft II lead producer Chris Sigaty credits the game's success to BLizzard's long-term drive to perfect the competitive game, as well as the continued interest of the fans. "Keeping it difficult to master is the motto we live by. It's the dedication that we still try master it; the truly unmasterable game in some sense. You play and think you have the answer, but someone will be there to show that you don't and denies that answer."
That "unmasterable game" has kept millions playing over the years, from professionals to casual fans. To understand how it's reached this point, one needs to begin by looking at StarCraft's single most defining characteristic: The careful balance between its three factions.
Blizzard began development on StarCraft shortly after WarCraft II: Tides of Darkness launched in 1995. Tides of Darkness had been Blizzard's breakout hit, the real-time strategy masterpiece that helped to popularize the genre alongside Command & Conquer. For the follow-up, Blizzard opted to create a sci-fi RTS, leading some to derisively refer to the game as "Orcs in Space." The garish colors and familiar-looking user interface depicted in early screenshots only lent further credence to that description.
While the game's graphics were much improved when it was finally released in 1998, it seemed quaint in comparison to Chris Taylor's ambitious Total Annihilation. As the first real-time strategy game to feature 3D graphics and terrain, TA was a technological marvel. Planes swooped and banked as they launched attack runs, and ground units could dynamically scale terrain and use obstacles to their advantage. It also boasted one of the first instances of downloadable content, regularly offering brand new units for free.
Loyal fanbases soon coalesced around Total Annihilation, StarCraft and Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun, which were released in succession over the course of roughly three years. StarCraft partisans pointed to Blizzard's customarily excellent storytelling, fast-paced gameplay, and three unique races. Detractors focused on the relatively simple graphics and its seemingly conservative approach to the genre.
Raptr CEO Dennis "Thresh" Fong is best-known for his exploits playing Quake and other first-person shooters, but he remains an avid StarCraft fan. A quick glance at his profile on Raptr shows that he has played more than 800 hours of StarCraft and its expansion pack. He says he was drawn to Starcraft because he was a fan of WarCraft II, but that it has more in common with a first-person shooter than some might realize.
"Both games are ultimately more about using your head than they are about reflexes, although the latter of course is important," he says. "The best players in both games are able to predict what their opponents are doing before they even know it. Both games require a high level of precision with the mouse and keyboard. And both games have specific moments in matches where one mistake could cost the whole game," he says.
There are a number of considerations that go into the basic StarCraft match, and having a good build order in mind is only the beginning. A good player can determine troop deployment and economic expansion on a macro scale, then micromanage those troops in such a way as to maximize their effectiveness. As in Chess, they're always thinking ten steps ahead, ready to switch gears at a moment's notice and pounce on an opponent's mistake.
