GDC 2012

Most Popular GDC 2012 Games

  1. 1. Street Fighter X Tekken
    no boxshot available
    • Capcom
    • Action
    • Release: 03/06/12
    Follow:
    1. Not Following
      Xbox 360: Follow
    2. Not Following
      PlayStation 3: Follow
    3. Not Following
      PC: Follow
    4. Not Following
      PlayStation Vita: Follow
  2. 2. Diablo III
    Follow:
    1. Not Following
      PC: Follow
    2. Not Following
      Macintosh: Follow
  3. 3. Max Payne 3
    Follow:
    1. Not Following
      PC: Follow
    2. Not Following
      Xbox 360: Follow
    3. Not Following
      PlayStation 3: Follow
  4. 4. TERA
    Not Following
  5. 5. The Witcher 2
    Not Following
  6. 6. Mass Effect 3
    Follow:
    1. Not Following
      Xbox 360: Follow
    2. Not Following
      PC: Follow
    3. Not Following
      PlayStation 3: Follow

Starcraft II: The making of an e-sport

GDC 2011: Blizzard lead designer Dustin Browder discusses design decisions for the popular RTS that were made on behalf of professional gaming.

Who was there: Released in 1998, the original Starcraft seemed to only grow in popularity in the decade leading up to Starcraft II's debut in 2010. The game's adoption by the e-sports community primarily fueled this popularity, and in a session titled "The Game Design of Starcraft II: Designing an E-Sport," Blizzard's Dustin Browder laid out the ways in which Starcraft II was designed from the beginning for competitive gaming.

What he talked about: Browder began his session by emphasizing that Starcraft II's development was heavily impacted by Blizzard's decision to cater to the e-sport community. For example, he said, e-sports answers such as questions as "Why do we only have a handful of units?" or "Why go with a comic book storyline?" or even the continued support of a Zergling rush, (which he called "famously the most imbalanced thing ever in video games").

Going back to when Starcraft II development began in 2005, Browder said he was a recently hired senior designer at Blizzard, and one of the first things they did was look at the competition. They noticed that Dawn of War had more than 60 units and four sides, and that Supreme Commander had more than 100 units and four sides.

However, Blizzard decided that it would be best if Starcraft II only had 45 units and three sides, which Browder thought was ridiculous, considering it was less content than the studio's competitors. As his thinking went, units offered more choice, and more choice offered more gameplay, and more gameplay equals more fun. However, they told him not to worry, as Starcraft II was being designed for the e-sport community.

His initial reaction, he said, was e-sport? That weird thing in Korea? A) Who cares about e-sports? and B) How is that fun? As to the question of who cares, Browder emphasized that the e-sport community is incredibly passionate, just as much as traditional sports communities. Further, the community is actually quite large, with some e-sports leagues estimating global figures to be in the millions.

So what are some of the key elements for designing an e-sports game? The first is, obviously, that it has to be watchable, which Browder said is just as important as playability.

OK then, so what goes into making watchability? Browder said that one of the most important things is that it has to be clear. Clarity, he said, is the reason why artists hate e-sports. He showed concept art of a the mighty ultralisk, with a to-scale Protoss zealot in the corner of the picture the size of the behemoth's toenail. However, in the game, the ultralisk has to be tiny because players need to be able to see clearly what's happening onscreen.

Clarity also hits special effects. While the graphic artists could, for example, create lightning effects that light up the screen, for the sake of watchability, the electrotechnics must be contained to only the units being affected by them.

Moving to simplicity, he said, this is the area that designers hate because of the limitations on their work. First, there can't be too many units because it would leave the professional gamers guessing too much. Part of the fun, he said, is building counters to the opponent's strategy, in addition to anticipating which counter will be needed. He also likened unit limits to football and the limited number of positions and roles on the field.

Browder noted that despite the unit limitations, Starcraft II still incorporates significant choice and complexity. These choices are come by the way units move and fight, as well as their stats, area-of-effect capabilities, and upgrades. For instance, Banelings are the effective counter to marines. However, if the marines have the stim upgrade, then they can easily defeat the Banelings. This is true until the Banelings get their own upgrades, which flips the relationship again.

Skill is the next component of the equation, and Browder said this facet is why new players hate e-sports. In the real-time strategy genre, micromanagement has become synonymous with a dirty word, but Blizzard believes it should be embraced because of the skill differentiation it affords. He also noted that micromanagement is incredibly entertaining to watch and instills a large degree of drama into battles, as well as degrees of success.

One example here is the force field ability of Protoss Sentries. At is basic level, the force field can be used to block a ramp up to a base. A more advanced use would be to erect several to form a wall around an attacking or defending force on an open battlefield. An even more advanced strategy would be to cut an enemy's army in half with several well-placed force fields.

Lastly, he said the uncertainty component that fuels watchability is one thing that everyone hates. However, uncertainty creates a good deal of excitement because anything can change without a moment's notice. Taking the example of a Zergling rush, Browder said that he's made games where they tried to delay the fast action, but it just ends up slowing the game down and taking longer for things to get interesting.

All of these decisions have a ripple effect through the rest of the game, he said. For instance, because units such as the Protoss mothership must necessarily be small in-game, they create intensive cutscenes for the single-player story mode featuring these units. That way, when players see them in a real scenario, they'll have an idea in their mind's eye of what they're actually looking at.

The same goes for character development in the game. Because units are the equivalent of ants in-game, they use the story mode to give important characters, such as Tychus, larger-than-life personalities. That way, when they are seen on a map, Blizzard hopes players will have more of a connection with that unit and will care if that unit lives or dies.

Quote: "Let's build this crazy thing."--Dustin Browder, on his initial reaction to building a game designed for e-sports.

Takeaway: Starcraft II stands out from other RTS games due to its emphasis on competitive gaming, where watchability is as important to gameplay. Watchability necessitates a number of design choices that are easily observable in the game, including a clear playfield and limited number of units. Also, whereas many games seek to combine the haves and have-nots when it comes to player skill, Blizzard embraces those differences to ultimately create a more exciting and dramatic experience.

Tom Magrino
By Tom Magrino

Tom Magrino has covered the games industry since 2006. He's been compared to Steve Martin by Ozzy Osbourne and Daniel Craig by Tim Schafer. His voice, heard largely on GameSpot's podcast, recalls that of Kermit the Frog. It ain't easy bein' Magreen.

125 Comments

  • KlnP1987

    Posted Mar 11, 2011 3:43 am GMT

    e-sports is cool and I dont understand y people hav such a problem with it, I mean COD is practically an e-sport in its own rite with truly massive followings in multiplayer. While I agree in the skill difference of the whole micro thing, it will alienate lots of new players who look at the Monumental task of becoming a "Master", along with the time it takes to get there. Meaning it will solidify its core competitive base but may not win over as many new converts tho

  • Gorge09

    Posted Mar 9, 2011 11:12 am GMT

    I will be brief the game is amazing and it has a very good campaign.

    But the hole e-sport thing is just a bunch of crap.

  • DitchyJ

    Posted Mar 9, 2011 3:26 am GMT

    Its cool that games like starcraft are in sports (as such)..but I generally only enjoyed starcraft (both) on a mild level (single player story mainly). Its taken very seriouslly for what it is as well, and generally I enjoy RTS games like company of heros, Sudden strike series, men of war, world in conflict, kursk etc.

    Its simple and encourages mass unit production quickly to rush the enemy with many clicks a minute...which people will argue is the best thing about it... but it wasnt for me.

    It doesnt mean I dont like it or hate on it btw, so fanboys put down your crucifix's. As mentioned, its good to see it successful.

    Keep smiling

  • anthonycg

    Posted Mar 8, 2011 10:47 pm GMT

    So I guess these guys will be payed in rediculously large sums of money to do mundane tasks as well. They just get a cool "e" in front.

  • lazycomplife

    Posted Mar 8, 2011 3:31 pm GMT

    GO KOREA!!! KEKEKEKEKE!!

  • simon1812

    Posted Mar 8, 2011 12:22 pm GMT

    #1 SC2 is an awesome game, the only thing ruining is that fixation with trying to make it an e-sport.
    #2 along with the never ending quest for balance between 3 different factions, there is not way the game will please everybody blizzard's mistake is thinking they can,and to that add the contain yet to be released (HotS and LotV) which once released will stir the players yet again in an outcry demanding more balance from Blizzard.

    I found few things wrong with SC2 when it was released, yet I enjoy the game, now a lot of thing seems to be wrong with the game after so many patches it is going to be more almost 2 months since I last played online,I just keep coming back for the campaign, wish the missions arrangement had more branching and the campaign overall was longer.

  • Gelugon_baat

    Posted Mar 7, 2011 5:21 pm GMT

    I would say to all those of you who are lambasting Starcraft II that the main reason you are doing so is very, very likely this:

    Starcraft II is associated with Activision.

    I personally know why this should be the case with you. This reason, and this reason alone, is why I have yet to play Starcraft II at all.

    You can say all kinds of things about Starcraft II and find every reason/excuse to criticize it, but if you just re-examine whatever you have said and written about Starcraft II, you are very likely going to notice at least one statement about Starcraft "being ruined" by Activision.

    That said, to those of you who like Starcraft II anyway, I commend you for being able to overcome any apprehension to Activision (if you had any in the first place at all) to still play this game. I can't.

  • SouL-Tak3R

    Posted Mar 7, 2011 12:32 pm GMT

    People like to compete, and some of these games take a lot of thinking and strategy so I see nothing wrong with this.

  • Mantiskilla007 posted Mar 7, 2011 11:39 am GMT (does not meet display criteria. sign in to show)

    Mantiskilla007

    Posted Mar 7, 2011 11:39 am GMT (hide)

    LOL e-sports? You kiddin me? Different strokes for different folks I guess. I'll stick to watching/playing real sports and keep games to a hobby/activity.

  • Bigamo posted Mar 7, 2011 10:10 am GMT (does not meet display criteria. sign in to show)

    Bigamo

    Posted Mar 7, 2011 10:10 am GMT (hide)

    Starcraft is past... All praise the emperor! Dow2: Retribution >>>>> Starcraft Thanks god i am free from ACTIVISION/BLIZZARD!

  • 2chase

    Posted Mar 7, 2011 8:37 am GMT

    A lot of over generalizing and narrow minded thinking in these comments. I think every SC game to date has been epic.

  • DAFTArticuno

    Posted Mar 7, 2011 5:22 am GMT

    Played the game and i can sit here and say the greatness of this game farrr out-weighs the over-hype on it.

  • lakers808 posted Mar 7, 2011 5:11 am GMT (does not meet display criteria. sign in to show)

    lakers808

    Posted Mar 7, 2011 5:11 am GMT (hide)

    of course this game was way over-hyped, and what did we get? only over-heated cpu's and gpu's..............

  • koominseo

    Posted Mar 7, 2011 3:54 am GMT

    sc II is the greastest pc strategy game ever after brood war. Millions of people watch gomtv n watch the pro gamers. So can't say people were let down. But I guess not every1 can agree.

  • AncientDozer

    Posted Mar 7, 2011 1:20 am GMT

    Of course people are let down. They let the hype consume them. They let themselves get built up for the fall. They were caught up in the name and the brand. Blizzard? Starcraft? CLEARLY NOTHING CAN GO WRONG.

    But of course it can. Blizzard is not infallible and is hardly perfect.


    Some of what Blizzard had going on was evolutionary but nothing about Starcraft 2 was revolutionary. Then again, none of the games Blizzard makes are revolutionary in any way. Blizzard's claim to fame is polish and evolving elements common to the genre they're working in.

    Battle.net 2.0 was a huge let down. They got rid of features that people clearly wanted and replaced it with nonsense like facebook and achievements. As for E-sports, I never understood the interest. I never liked watching people play. It's boring. I'd rather play. It's different with actual sports. I can't just run outside and play a professional level game of baseball. With a video game, there's nothing that really separates a "e sport" game and a regular game except the former is televised in some form or fashion.

  • Dynamo11 posted Mar 7, 2011 12:30 am GMT (does not meet display criteria. sign in to show)

    Dynamo11

    Posted Mar 7, 2011 12:30 am GMT (hide)

    Starcraft II: The making of an epic letdown

  • jacyp posted Mar 6, 2011 9:33 pm GMT (does not meet display criteria. sign in to show)

    jacyp

    Posted Mar 6, 2011 9:33 pm GMT (hide)

    Starcraft II: The making of an e-sport

    or

    Starcraft II: The making of an overhyped fraud.

  • flammable_zeus posted Mar 6, 2011 8:17 pm GMT (does not meet display criteria. sign in to show)

    flammable_zeus

    Posted Mar 6, 2011 8:17 pm GMT (hide)

    "As his thinking went, units offered more choice, and more choice offered more gameplay, and more gameplay equals more fun. However, they told him not to worry, as Starcraft II was being designed for maximum profit from future expansions/DLC."

    Fixed.

  • madsnakehhh

    Posted Mar 6, 2011 8:06 pm GMT

    @GameFan1983 You clearly don't even have a tiny clue about how popular is StarCraft 2, is not only about sales, it's about the whole community behind it, the leagues, the tournaments, the thousands of people who watch this matches on youtube, GomTv, etc, the incredible popular pro gamers, but yeah, don't believe me, so let's see what game is people playing in the future, i'll give you a hint, is StarCraft 2.