Seite 3: Starcraft 2 - Exclusive interview with lead designer Dustin Browder

Weiter mit GameStar Plus

---

Wenn dir gute Spiele wichtig sind.

Besondere Reportagen, Analysen und Hintergründe für Rollenspiel-Helden, Hobbygeneräle und Singleplayer-Fans – von Experten, die wissen, was gespielt wird. Deine Vorteile:

Alle Artikel, Videos & Podcasts von GameStar

Frei von Banner- und Video-Werbung

Einfach online kündbar

Jetzt weiter

Inhaltsverzeichnis

1

Einleitung

2

Ganze Seite

3

Ganze Seite

4

Ganze Seite

5

Ganze Seite

---

GameStar:
Why did you decide to improve the terrain in that way? Did you think that the maps were too boring in the initial Starcraft?

Dustin Browder:
We only have so many directions we can go with Starcraft 2 while still being true to the legacy of the original title. So we wanted to add more gameplay and more choices for the players, but we didn't want to add more complexity. We have added some automation which allows us to add a little bit more complexity because the game is doing more for the players in certain areas. But we didn't want to have 20 units per faction because that would be too much to memorize. So adding more gameplay to the terrain was an option to add more choice and more strategy without making the game to difficult to control or manage.

You can clear the fog of war by capturing watchtowers.

GameStar:
You mentioned the automation which brings us to our next topic. Why did you implement automining?

Dustin Browder:
We saw that as a basic thing to keep up with the rest of the industry. Physically moving a worker does not create an interesting choice for the player, because it's the same all the time. We are comfortable with that kind of automation. We want to focus the player on making interesting choices and not just a bunch of different klicks.

GameStar:
But professional players don't like too much automation.

Dustin Browder:
That's why we don't over-automate if we can avoid it. And we certainly don't automate if that would lead to dumb decisions by the player. For example, when you select barracks you have to toggle between those with tech labs and those with reactors. If we hadn't done that, it might encourage players to make bad choices. They might hit the »build Marine« key over and over and over again, so they get a bunch of marines though they maybe intend to get Marauders. That's different from the automining, where it's clear what a player wants nine out of ten times. And if you want to move a worker to build or repair, you can easily do that too. Our automation is used to give the players good decisions instead of just a lot of klicks.

The Terrans attack a destructible rock.

GameStar:
You already mentioned that players can select multiple buildings. Does this rule also apply to that?

Dustin Browder:
Absolutely. When we first experimented with multiple building selection, you could select nine Hatcheries and all their lava and just hit the »z« key to get a thousand Zerglings. That was the simplest version of it. But when we started playing we realized again that this level of automation was useful but was leading to bad decisions by players. It was very difficult to build five Zerglings, three Overlords and ten Roaches. So now you can still select all the larva. But you also have to make an individual selection per larva what you want to build.

GameStar:
Though we've got automining and multiple building selection, it feels like there is more micro management in Starcraft 2. Or are we imagining things?

Dustin Browder:
We haven't done a study to determine how many klicks are happening. With automining, you click less. At the same time, we've got a few more unit abilities than we had in the original Starcraft, so that makes a little bit more clicking. With multiple building selection, it's less, with our new economy mechanics it's more ... I don't know what the sum total is. Starcraft 2 is definitely a difficult game to master. But is it more or less than the first Starcraft? We have to wait and see.