If Blizzard did: Starcraft the MMO, or Warcraft 4

[Deleted]

Warcraft 4. I'm one of the few people(vocal at least)on these forums who still massively enjoy Blizzards story telling. I believe a Warcraft 4 could be done alongside a wow expansion to introduce a bunch of new lore characters.

I played wc3 campaign through again last week. It's still awesome

Think I would enjoy a Warcraft rpg much more tho. RTS games really isn't a genre that I ever spends a lot of time on. I like playing vs the computer because you can exploit it and it's consistent. I get super stressed out vs human players.
This coming from someone who has played competitive LoL since it's release and the original dota before that

[Restors]

i kinda prefer Starcraft the MMO over Warcraft 4. Im so over RTS games, hence why i never played Starcraft II.

[Aquinan]

Warcraft 4, without a doubt. I've wanted a standalone Warcraft game since III came out 15 years ago.

How would you tie it into the MMO though?

[Schattenlied]

Did you read any of the attributes of the units? They counter all kinds of different situations.

Yes, just like in any other RTS.

You can spawn your units anywhere on your half of the board, so even units if you spawn on one lane can move to the other lane if a closer unit or structure is higher on their priority list based on type. (Like if your enemy spawned a cannon and you made a hog rider, the hog rider goes to the closer canon on the other lane rather than to the enemy tower.) Positioning of spawning and the timing of spawning is important in combination of all the attributes like attack speed, movement speed, AoE/single-target attack, to counter different weights and powers of units.

Ok, it's still just RTS but with only 2 lanes of attack and no need to command your army in real time.

For a "simple" game it has its own level of complexity.

No, it doesn't, all the complexity you listed is present in any other RTS, it's in fact less complex in those ways because units auto target things on a priority list for you.

you can win based on remaining number of towers or remaining tower health when the timer runs out - so if two players are really not giving or taking, there's still a way to decide the winner rather than just destroying the core tower.

Oh boy, RTS on an egg timer to decide the victor instead of actually winning. Even less strategy, no playing the long game.

Easy To Pick Up And Hard to Master is desirable because

Hard to Master

LOL, no, no it's not hard to master, it's easy to pick up and easy to master.

Mechanical skill is physical. Strategy, again like chess, can be endlessly complex because by nature you're still fighting a person and have to think about what the other person is doing rather than just running around them in circles and not caring because woop-de-doo you out-micro'd them so who cares what they built who cares what units they have out-maneuvering all day every day like a jock throwing a kid in a locker who made an elaborate trap down the hallway

If you can outmicro them that hard, and "run around them in circles" it's because you built faster units, they built the wrong units, that is a strategy victory. They didn't scout well enough, or you were able to deny the scout, etc, that is all strategy.

- but it didn't matter because muscles. It's also really unsatisfying as a viewer to see the "winning" side winning only because he keeps engaging, poking for a splinter of health, running away, and then repeating the process endlessly.

It's really unsatifying as a viewer to watch units mindlessly run down either lane 1 or lane 2 based on a priority checklist

You knew what they were building, and planned for it, but because they have more practice with clicking, they can do whatever strategy they want and still come out on top and not care anything about what you're doing and win anyway.

Yeah, that doesn't really happen if you actually built units that counter theirs. Sounds to me like you are just looking for a catch-22 for all your losses.

Also, how exactly are you concerned with this type of game butchering Warcraft at all? Elaborate, please. (More specifically, how the same RTS story events COULDN'T be played through if it were made in a Clash Royale fashion.) Is Clash Royale just not your aesthetic? Because we're talking about building a new accessible game type, not changing art direction or tone or even story.

You are suggesting we take a Warcraft RTS, a game established in a certain type of gameplay, that already has an audience, and absolutely mechanically ruining it for the people who already like it, just to appeal to an entirely different group of people.
Do it to a new IP or an IP that has never been an RTS before (like Overwatch), don't butcher Warcraft with it.

By the way, you can make extremely complex and in depth strategy games without devolving them down to 2 lanes of attack, they are called turn based strategy, and they seem like they would be more your speed with all your chess talk. Civ says hi, probly won't run on your phone though.

Even Turn based Tactics games (like X-Com) would be a better choice than Clash Royale for this.
- - - Updated - - -

How would you tie it into the MMO though?

exactly like this

There's all kinds of stuff going on in books between expansions, I don't see why they couldn't fit an RTS in there to set up for a big, gamechanging expansion... Say they wanted to do an expansion that would take longer than usual, complete engine overhaul, the works, basically a new game without losing our characters to try and breathe new life into the game. Throw WC4 in there to tide Warcraft fans over for a bit and setup the story for the expansion. Since the RTS team is completely seperate from the WoW team it wouldn't take dev time away from the expansion, hits the Warcraft fanbase and the RTS fanbase all at once too, maybe drags some RTS fans who never tried WoW into the new WoW expansion, and then they can use WC4 expansions to set up further WoW expansions.

We're gonna need a new villain after the Void is taken care of, I can't think of a better way to introduce them than through Warcraft 4.

[Tome]

Yes, just like in any other RTS.
Ok, it's still just RTS but with only 2 lanes of attack and no need to command your army in real time.


No, it doesn't, all the complexity you listed is present in any other RTS, it's in fact less complex in those ways because units auto target things on a priority list for you.

Oh boy, RTS on an egg timer to decide the victor instead of actually winning. Even less strategy, no playing the long game.




LOL, no, no it's not hard to master, it's easy to pick up and easy to master.

If you can outmicro them that hard, and "run around them in circles" it's because you built faster units, they built the wrong units, that is a strategy victory. They didn't scout well enough, or you were able to deny the scout, etc, that is all strategy.

It's really unsatifying as a viewer to watch units mindlessly run down either lane 1 or lane 2 based on a priority checklist
Yeah, that doesn't really happen if you actually built units that counter theirs. Sounds to me like you are just looking for a catch-22 for all your losses.




You are suggesting we take a Warcraft RTS, a game established in a certain type of gameplay, that already has an audience, and absolutely mechanically ruining it for the people who already like it, just to appeal to an entirely different group of people.
Do it to a new IP or an IP that has never been an RTS before (like Overwatch), don't butcher Warcraft with it.

By the way, you can make extremely complex and in depth strategy games without devolving them down to 2 lanes of attack, they are called turn based strategy, and they seem like they would be more your speed with all your chess talk. Civ says hi, probly won't run on your phone though.

Even Turn based Tactics games (like X-Com) would be a better choice than Clash Royale for this.
- - - Updated - - -



exactly like this



We're gonna need a new villain after the Void is taken care of, I can't think of a better way to introduce them than through Warcraft 4.

So what godly creature do we need to follow up the story?

It's not like we can return to villains like Edwin VanCleef.

[Deleted]

So what godly creature do we need to follow up the story?

It's not like we can return to villains like Edwin VanCleef.

Do you have trouble with the difference between the terms new lore and reused lore?

[Deleted]

I don't see SC working out as an MMO so Warcraft 4 as there is no option for neither. I'd like Warcraft to continue as an MMO though.

[Lochton]

Do you have any info about that fan-made SC please? I'd like to give it a shot ^^

Sorry, I don't. It was featured on the front page a while back. I've hunted soem links, the bold link is the website for it.

Update:
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/a...craft-universe
http://kotaku.com/fan-made-starcraft...hes-1784419111
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7pVSqfCFps
http://upheavalarts.com/

[Deleted]

I picked Warcraft 4 as I have never played Starcraft, and I did enjoy the run throughs I had with Warcraft.

Would be highly curious if it was happening in as to when it would take place!

[Deleted]

Both genres are rather unpopular among gamers these days so neither seems very likely :-/

[Deleted]

The SC story is basically finished, they rushed it quite fast in the last Xpac. I don't see a decent MMO play after that. Generally Sci-Fi MMOs aren't my thing and also other people probably feel the same.

WC4 would be nice, but I'm not sure if it would be a pure RTS because RTS isn't that popular anymore. Also WoW would have to end before that (at least the main story).

Diablo MMO was canceled by Blizzard, actually D3 should have become more like a MMO but it didnt work out so I dont think they will give it another try.

[Viikkis]

I'd love to see both but a new MMORPG from Blizzard could be interesting.

[glowpipe]

If they go all out focus on pvp in warcraft 4, then starcraft mmo all the way. I want a wc4 with a giant campaign and expansions. Fuck pvp. if i want to play pvp i play bf1 or OW.

Starcraft mmo would also work i guess. But just not sure if they manage to get enough bosses and shit to keep it relevant, out of the lore for that game

[Tome]

Do you have trouble with the difference between the terms new lore and reused lore?

And in a Warcraft setting, what can we be up against next which isn't going to be ridiculous since we've literally killed gods? What can top that? New lore or not, it's going to be grey and lane since nothing can surprise us or defeat us.

"Oh shit Sylvanas turned bad we must stop her."

Yeah... what makes her so special compared to a Void Lord? Get Godfrey and shoot her again.

Can literally be said about anything which isn't going to be one step above Void Lords.

WoW is finished in terms of story. Nothing they throw at us is a big of a threat as the Void Lords.

[Deleted]

Starcraft MMO, I want to be a zerg queen. Being an overlord/overseer would be fine too.

[Flurryfang]

I really don't think that Blizzard can have 2 competing MMOS going and compete with each other, and still be profitable. While i love the starcraft IP, i believe it needs to stay RTS and not go into other genres.

Warcraft 4 is a thing, that while having the potential to be amazing and which have a great legacy, it would be really hard to make it work with the Warcraft IP. WoW have really taken the story side of Warcraft and explored it in a billion directions, making it hard for Warcraft 4 to have its own identity and work within the universe. Warcraft 1 was an original IP and Warcraft 2 and 3 were either a direct sequel or an exploration of not yet explored content in the Warcraft world. I don't think warcraft 4 can work in either of these ways, since WoW both have a story going in a non-RTS direction and because of the map being very much filled up on Azeroth.


In the end, i do believe, that the Warcraft 4 game would have the biggest chance to be a good game, so hopefully they would pick that if they had to choose. But to be honest, i don't think that they will ever make another RTS again.

[Deleted]

How would you tie it into the MMO though?

Tell the same story; just more focused on NPCs from the games. Heck... could always even go with player-made WC4 hero replacing the WoW-character. (See battle for middle-earth 2 for refference).

[Deleted]

Both are done already, closed lore. Nothing to see. I hope they get some new franchises out there - overwatch world proved they still have a hand for it.

[Zarc]

I voted Warcraft 4. That's what I'd tell Blizzard if they'd ask me.

If they are smart, to paraphrase the likes of Henry Ford and Steve Jobs, they will know that the customer doesn't always know what they want and so they would disregard what I told them and make Starcraft the MMO instead. That would probobly bring me and many others into the Starcraft franchise for the first time and raise the value of that IP a lot, much like World of Warcraft did for the Warcraft IP.

[Soon-TM]

I'd really like to see a turn-based strategy game by Blizzard. But I guess it would have to be a completely new IP, since neither SC nor WC could get turn-based sequels without massive fan outcry. A hypothetical WC4 could also have a Skyrim format, now THAT would be glorious