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
    Follow
  5. 5. The Witcher 2
    Not Following
    Follow
  6. 6. Mass Effect 3
    Follow:
    1. Not Following
      Xbox 360: Follow
    2. Not Following
      PC: Follow
    3. Not Following
      PlayStation 3: Follow

The state of the strategy genre

By Tor Thorsen

GDC 2011: Veteran developers from Blizzard, Stardock, EA2D, and Robot Entertainment discuss what's wrong--and right--about today's strategy games; Starcraft II: Heart of the Swarm is coming in "six months to a year."

Who was there: Ian Fischer (Robot Entertainment), Soren Johnson (EA2D), Dustin Browder (Blizzard Entertainment), and Jon Shafer (Stardock).

Starcraft II: Heart of the Swarm is coming in

Starcraft II: Heart of the Swarm is coming in "six months to a year."

What they talked about: After a brief introduction in which he praised the current era as a golden age for strategy games big and small, the moderator asked each of the panelists what is wrong with the strategy genre. Browder said he worries that strategy games will "lose their souls." He used the History Channel as an example: "It used to be about history. Now it's about Ice Road Truckers!"

Johnson thinks that strategy games need to be simpler. He frets that games don't get their message across. "Don't be afraid to cut to the chase," he said. He said that designers shouldn't be afraid to cut down on content, since "more isn't better." He thinks that AAA games are too expensive and that middle-tier titles--even ones that sell 1 million--don’t interest blockbuster-hungry publishers anymore.

Fischer disagreed, saying that he wants strategy games to offer more features like Paradox's World War II title Hearts of Iron, not less. Shafer also disagreed with Johnson, saying that there still is market for "middle games." That was a reason he went to Stardock, and he held up Sins of a Solar Empire as an example.

Browder then explained the thought process behind splitting up Starcraft II into three parts. He said the team felt that the game was too grand in scope, with 90 missions in total. He said the next installment in the series, Heart of the Swarm, would be coming out in the "next six months to a year."

Fischer said it used to be simple making strategy games: A studio ships a game, and then its dev team splits in two to work on the sequel and expansion packs. Now, "It's the Wild West" with downloadable content, free-to-play models, and microtransactions. Johnson said League of Legends was an example of a microtransaction-driven strategy game, with players spending money for just a tiny bit of boost and other minor upgrades.

Johnson was asked about his Facebook game, Dragon Age: Legends, which the moderator called "The Facebook game for people who hate Facebook games." He said the powerful draw for his game is persistence, as it is a turn-based tactical role-playing game. The game will also encourage players to share characters, which can be grouped into parties.

The moderator then asked if publishers should spend a lot of money developing enemy AI. Shafer said that it doesn't make a lot of sense financially, but Browder disagreed. He said the Starcraft II AI was very carefully designed so it can't cheat, since it doesn't know the player's location.

Quote: "I don't think we need to innovate on the business side. I just want to make great games."--Shafer.

Takeaway: Although all four developers have plenty of experience and credibility, the recurring disagreements between them suggest the strategy genre will continue to be shaped by a number of different approaches and philosophies.

By Tor Thorsen

58 Comments

  • randomtext

    Posted Feb 9, 2012 11:39 pm GMT

    Does it surprise anyone that the EA guy wanted to simplify things and cut back on content?

  • ragnar320

    Posted Feb 4, 2012 1:36 pm GMT

    @farukcorreia yea i wish they would too red alert 3 was pretty fun and new.

    AND FOR EVERYONE ELSE THERE MAKING A C&C GENERALS 2 AND IT DOSENT LOOK LIKE THEY GONNA F$%& IT UP LIKE C&C TS 4

  • cccp3000

    Posted Nov 28, 2011 1:16 am GMT

    I think that strategy games have two essential aspects:
    The story line, which should be either realistic or CONVINCING. And the tactical experience, which is to be fun and mind moving, which lets the players try different tactics and still keep the game enjoyable, so that each time the players play the game over and over again it would to be a new experience and not boring, so that the players can explore new ways to play and reach high states of mind, and personally I think THAT is the main challenge for game developers.

  • farukcorreia

    Posted Nov 13, 2011 5:05 pm GMT

    I miss Command and Conquer Red Alert series... One of the best most fun games I ever played. Ea please revive Red Alert... please...

  • abess55

    Posted Jun 19, 2011 10:49 am GMT

    i look at the game of Rise Of Nations as a great example here, the game may not have much of a story line but it does allow for some great strategy and has more than one res. now lets look at the CC world, C&C RA2 you still only have ore but you have ore collectors and you have different levels of oar, C&C RA3... set ore collecting spots, thank goodness some one piled all this gold into a box for me. O and dont get me started on the idea of adding "generals" to that game... what was that all about

  • mrmime777

    Posted May 31, 2011 10:22 am GMT

    I think he means simpler like Creative Assembly meant simpler going from Empire to Shogun, in that the focus should be to cut away bloated "features" and focus on what you're there for, the tactical gameplay. Too many impressive but unnecessary features often take away from the strategic element rather than enhancing it. If they made an Age of Empires IV as elementally enjoyable (yet relatively simple) as the first I'd probably be playing that right now - it's simple but deep strategy, and that's always been the most addictive and successful formula. Like a car, easy for anyone to pick up and drive but really hard to master everything under the hood.

  • SauhlGood

    Posted Apr 28, 2011 4:21 pm GMT

    omg johnson should just go make games for toddlers, hopefully he'l be relegated to making no name ip's...or just stick to his turn based games... Civ series... which is good, but not in the slightest difficult.

  • FMD129

    Posted Apr 17, 2011 3:12 pm GMT

    @lakers808

    Totaly agree man, no matter the discussion between these CEO's about its rights and wrongs Strategy is not going anywhere. As long as there are tactitions waiting to command armies, there will be strategy pushing it.

  • RTSgamer32

    Posted Mar 17, 2011 4:46 am GMT

    "Johnson thinks that strategy games need to be simpler."
    That's retarded, that defeats the whole purpose of Strategy in the first place

  • RTSgamer32

    Posted Mar 17, 2011 4:42 am GMT

    lindallison
    yeah, thats why im starting to play TBS games like GalCiv2, Civ4, Heroes 3 and other games

  • RTSgamer32

    Posted Mar 17, 2011 4:40 am GMT

    CarlosY2Jericho

    is AoM any good, im willing to try it,

    never really got into AoE tho, i hated AoE3 but i do have AoE2 tho but i rarely play it

  • RTSgamer32

    Posted Mar 17, 2011 4:38 am GMT

    pudgexd

    I don't think that would be the only reason why they removed LAN of the game, it might also be the fact that Browder wanted the players to use their Battle Net system to have a great Multiplayer Experience. However this doesnt make much difference for me because im more of a Single player guy when it comes to RTS's and TBS's.

  • gradux

    Posted Mar 15, 2011 2:08 am GMT

    @madcat46 lol i completely agree with you see what they did to C&C franchise? very disappointing.. well just as long as it makes money who cares about us?

  • vernholio

    Posted Mar 9, 2011 10:22 am GMT

    @ZakMcKracken

    With you 100%... Here's to hoping that Stardock keeps their moniker as an Indie house (even though they probably aren't all that "Indie" anymore). Their constant desire to better their games at the request of their fans -- not to mention just having such open ears to us -- is a testament to their products, and the way the market should be!

    Yeah, I know, I know... "Elemental: War of Magic". But, not every game can be a gem (even though I still play it, anyway!)

  • brunorr

    Posted Mar 9, 2011 7:13 am GMT

    My favorite strategy game is the original CnC. It was slow compared to the modern games but it allowed you time to analise and plan what to do. Battles were much more calculated. I still like Starcraft2 for example but today's games are as much action games as strategy.

  • boarwar

    Posted Mar 8, 2011 9:41 pm GMT

    Strategy games dont need....

    1. impressive graphics (good and ok are good enough, your a general not a foot solider)
    2. UNIT CAPS (ruin the game, just when your kicking ass, you stop building units and play out a mediocre match)
    3. weak strategy (rushing and strong units are fun, but it should take longer to destroy a base the size of a large city)

    I hated warcraft 3 when all my friends where sweating it, it was cartoony and reminded me nothing of the classic. The CNC games were amazing, now their graphics are great, but kill frame rates, and unit caps are a terrible terrible idea.

  • shakmaster13

    Posted Mar 8, 2011 7:27 pm GMT

    Paradox Interactive is my favorite publisher/dev. The games they push out can be a bit rough, but with an active community and dev-player discussions on their forums many things can be accomplished, and that is how they have been able to pump out so many good grand strategy games in little time.

  • klitfelt

    Posted Mar 8, 2011 10:38 am GMT

    Just give us a new CnC game as they use to make them.

  • ZakMcKracken

    Posted Mar 8, 2011 1:25 am GMT

    I thought the History Channel/Ice Road Trucker comparison was spot on. Publishers will go for the easy to digest strategy titles that appeal to a wide audience. I am afraid true strategy is in a decline. My hope lies with Indie developers.

  • yeah_28

    Posted Mar 7, 2011 10:56 pm GMT

    i like turn based strategy games like galactic civs and total war's turn based map, but my heart is in classic real time strategy games, and those have been dissapearing, the last ones i loved were warhammer 40000 and act of war, and they changed the warhammer sequel into a different genre, company of heroes was great too but already loosing the feeling a little bit, i need something like age of empires, and i dont like much the science fiction style of starcraft, so what can i play? if a new classic styled RTS of world war 2, modern war, or ancient times came out now, with the old base building and resource gathering, i think it would be a huge succes