Zinegata wrote:Starcraft had always required a lot of micro. There were moves to significantly reduce the micro in SC2, but complaints from Korea forced the micro levels to increase again.
To some degree that stuff is justified.
Part of what made SC1 a good game was that it required a lot of speed and skill. That was part of its niche. It was a game that you could always be doing better. Whether it was remembering to build SCVs while you microed your tanks or learning to pick up your reaver in a shuttle and micro it away when it was under attack, you always had places to improve.
And that's actually important and good for a game because it means nobody plays perfect. The moment someone hits perfect play, your game has basically reached it's maximum depth-level. And for anything that you're trying to make into an e-sport, that's kinda crucial that that doesn't happen.
The koreans have a lot of good advice to make the game good honestly. If they listened to most of the people in America, they'd end up with a lame generic strategy game that everyone would forget in a year or two. Yes, those Koreans that practice 8 hours a day should rape you at Starcraft, because they are better than you. Taking measures to make you more even with them is probably a bad idea, because it involves removing skill from the game.
Now that being said, I don't really have a problem with removing that stuff from the campaigns, which are generally less micro based anyway. But as far as multiplayer goes, it really is essential that SC maintains its reputation as a skill game, because that is part of what makes it so good. I mean you can't name one other RTS that people still play that was made before the year 2000 other than Starcraft pretty much.