The Concept

PhD in Craftology

No one has done the real-time strategy game better than Blizzard. The sales numbers and staggering amount of gamers on battle.net speak for themselves. Cases can be made for C&C, the Homeworld games, Dark Reign, and Ground Control but in the end there has only been one title that captures the hearts of so many gamers – Craft. Be it WarCraft or StarCraft, its fans are legion, rabid and completely loyal. Zerglings would be a good name for them, come to think of it.

Blizzard games are always evolving. There is absolutely no doubt that Diablo II is a Diablo sequel yet it is so much more developed than its predecessor, so refined, that it is a unique title. The jump from WarCraft to WarCraft II was similarly immense yet subtle. WarCraft was little more than an evolved Dune II clone – right down to having to connect buildings together with road. WarCraft II introduced capable multiplayer, the ability to build beyond your network of roads – expansions, multiple production buildings – the works. What seems basic and natural today was revolutionary seven years ago.

Cutscene-o-rrific!

She's supposed to be the hottie

They give all the strategy away in cutscenes

StarCraft took away one theatre of war – the sea – yet managed to be a deeper game with more involvement. Strategies went beyond lusted ogres and blizzarding peon lines with an invisible mage. There were three completely unique yet balanced races, and a campaign full of cinematics, heroes, anti-heroes, understandable villains and blatant stupidity. StarCraft cemented the Blizzard pattern of continuing evolution while retaining a small, clear core of what remains a “Craft” game.

RPS

Roleplaying Strategy was to be the name of the game with WarCraft III (WC3). Units and heroes gained levels, where production was minimal and micromanagement reigned supreme. Whether that was too difficult to implement, too revolutionary to be accepted or if the end product was simply not fun, Blizzard pulled the plug. There would be roleplaying elements and a focus on tactics in WC3, but nothing as extreme as what was initially proposed. Production would still be a major part of the game as are expansions. Blizzard was determined to stick to their guns however, and the focus on putting tactics over strategy would be secured by three major additions to the game.

'tis war!

Ugly skellies

They shatter :)

First is the very low food limit of 90. That doesn’t mean that 90 units can be built, as many take up considerably more than 1 food. Next is the idea of upkeep, which works in tandem with the food limit to keep unit count down. The more units you have, the less gold you gain. Should a player go over 40 food, it means that instead of gaining ten for every peon mining, only seven comes to your coffers while the mine is still drained of ten gold units. Going over 70 food cuts that even further to four gold out of every ten! Even with expansions (which have to be manned and defended) this is a heavy price to pay.

Finally, to keep people from simply producing units and rushing them en masse with only the most basic instructions into an enemy base, Blizzard has given us heroes. Heroes are unique units – every race has three heroes, each different from the other two. They are physically tough even at level 1, and quite overwhelming at level 10. But even so, they require careful use in battle since they are the most important target and most powerful weapon a player has. A hero’s physical abilities are nothing compared to their spells and auras. Resurrecting the 6 most powerful dead units to fight on your side, casting powerful heals and damaging spells – it is the side with the best-controlled army that wins, not the one which receives the most reinforcements.