I thought so too. The way it was described in the manual as each brood hyperspecializing for particular directives sounded amazing to child me (even if the gameplay didn't reflect that at all), and I still think it holds up reasonably well today. Ditching that in favor of generalist homogenous interchangeable queens feels like a huge waste IMO. We've already seen queens competing for control, it's a well trod scifi trope. Even the 2000s RTS Conquest: Frontier Wars did it before SC2 did. Numerous subsidiary swarms hyperspecialized for their tasks was a novelty then and still is now. In fact, I think it's more advanced than the competing queens.
In theory, sure. I don't think the games executed this well. They could've been at least as interesting and complex as the vorlons and shadows from Babylon 5 (or what have you), but instead we got a generic evil church oppressing the poor space romani. It doesn't even fit its own lore: according to the backstory the rogue tribes nearly destroyed their homeworld and the taldarim are monsters who prove the Conclave's fears completely justified. Their backstory also had unused elements like the protoss having alien allies and client states who never show up in the games, but if they had then their feel would've been completely altered. Can you imagine? They'd be a bit like the Covenant from Halo, I guess.
There's also the position of the queens in the zerg psychic hierarchy. Pre-Kerrigan zerg went Overmind>Cerebrates>Overlords>everything else. Even if the Overmind and the Cerebrates are no more, and Kerrigan is somehow able to handle all of that on her own, the next rung in the ladder of psychic control is the overlords. Of all the solutions Blizzard could have gone with, they chose queens as the replacement for the cerebrates. It's like if Defilers suddenly went off and started their own broods. I know this is a nitpick when they shit all over the lore in many other ways, but it's also an example indicative of the generally sloppy attitude taken toward lore consistency.
That sloppy attitude has been there from the beginning. Take a gander at the original manual. It has many inconsistencies with both itself, the game script, and the battlenet strategy compendium.
They want F2P (but not P2W) SC2 but with less hardcore UI
I want it to be less gook-clicky, and all about APM, and more about macro strategy. And to have a fun singleplayer campaign and map editor.
Sure I agree. Starcraft 2 was already a big step up in terms of casual play vs starcraft 1 tho. Alot of stuff in Starcraft 2, the pros hated, cos it was EZ to apm.
Some of it was, yeah. But then you'd play against some 16 year old Adderall junkie playing Zerg, who seems to individually issue commands to each zergling or baneling, and your boomer body would give up trying to compete.
I guess this type of game is not for you, you can always play Age of Empires X if you are too slow for hard competitive games.
I am a bit doubtful. I don't really like playing competitive sc, but as I see it one of the big problems with sc2 from a pro perspective is that it's just way too easy to play, what with all the fancy perfect pathfinding and responsive units and smartcasting and what not. This lead to units and spells being less impactful, because you can't have sc1 storms in sc2 without completely breaking everything. And it also made "just create a huge blob of units" a dominant strategy, because of course it's good when 100 units control just as well as 10 units. I also always hated spawn larva ability from queens. Feels like a chore. Just let me autocast that shit.
It also made Sc2 have a ton on units with abilities. Most units now have some ability you need to activate or manage.
I think you misunderstand what I'm trying to say. I don't mind that it is fast and hard/impossible to play perfectly. I just think that SC2 would have a high enough skill ceiling even without these pointless mechanics. It also felt to me that they just added these to compensate for the better interface. And just for the record: I hate Age of Empires and was a Diamond player back in the day.
Campaign is going to be shit but competitive parts can be good. Also the cooperative 3vAI modes.
F2P is unavoidable in today’s market. You can’t compete otherwise, especially with such a huge budget. Blame the industry for creating perverse incentives and indoctrinating consumers.
