How to play classic Blizzard games on Mac OS X Mountain Lion

Posted in Uncategorized on November 6, 2012 by marzzbar

Since the release of Lion, Apple has discontinued its Rosetta software for OS X, which allowed PowerPC Mac applications to be run on Intel computers. This means that some legacy Blizzard games can’t be run on the latest Intel Mac computers. Annoyingly, Blizzard have said that they don’t currently have a timeline for Intel compatible releases of these games.

Fortunately, through the use of free, open-source tools, one can still play these classic games on a modern Apple operating system. This post will demonstrate how one can install and run Warcraft 3: The Frozen Throne, Diablo 2: Lord of Destruction and Starcraft: Brood War on OS X Mountain Lion using Wineskin, a program that allows one to run Windows programs. This tutorial can probably work with Lion, though it’s untested.

1. Install Wineskin

Wineskin is essentially a way of installing Wine applications for Mac OS X, and makes it easy to turn Windows applications into Mac applications. You can specify application specific settings, including which version of Wine you want to use, which will be useful for our Blizzard games. You download an application called Wineskin Winery, which will allow you to create wrappers for our programs. Get the latest version of Wineskin Winery here. I used 1.7, but the latest should work fine.

2. Create a wrapper

To install a Windows program via Wineskin, you need to create a wrapper. Open Wineskin Winery. The first time you start the Winery, you won’t have any Wineskin Engines. A Wineskin Engine is basically a version of Wine. Unfortunately, Wine is a very complex program, and subsequent updates seem to suffer regressions, meaning a program that worked with an older version of wine may not work with a newer version of Wine. Wineskin will allow you to specify which version of Wine you’d like to use for each application. The following lists the versions of Wine that worked for me:

  • Starcraft: Brood War: WS8Wine 1.1.35
  • Diablo II: Lord of Destruction: WS8Wine 1.4
  • Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne: WS8Wine 1.5.19 (latest)

Press the ‘+’ button in the bottom left to install an engine.


Once you’ve installed an engine, click “Create New Blank Wrapper”. You may be prompted to install a Gecko and/or Mono engine, just click OK and let it do its thing.

You should get a prompt once this is done. Make sure you click “Show Wrapper In Finder”. You should get something like this:


This is showing the contents of ~/Applications. The Warcraft III file is the application itself, and is what will eventually be dragged into your main Applications folder. Before we do this though, we need to install the Windows program and configure it.

3. Install software

Right-click the application file (in this example Warcraft III) and click “Show Package Contents”. You should see a Wineskin file like so:


This is the tool that will allow you to configure the Wineskin application. Double-click on it.


You’ll now need to Install Software, so click on the relevant button.


Click “Choose Setup Executable”. I installed my games using installers downloaded from Battle.Net. If you create an account and enter a unique cd-key, you can download installers from there. You could probably install the game from the cd using this method as well, but you’re on your own there.

NOTE: If you ARE using the installers from, it’s important to know that you first have to download a separate “downloader” application, which will then download the actual installer. The good thing is, the Mac downloader application will download both the mac installer AND the windows installer, which is good news, since the windows downloader doesn’t seem to work so well under Wine. So, when you’re getting the games from, click on the Mac icon to get the Mac downloader, and then run it. Once the downloader’s finished, you’ll see that you’ll have downloaded the windows .exe installer, which you can open with Wineskin as above.

The installer should run just like it would on a Windows machine.

TIP: Don’t change the default install directory, and uncheck the “Create desktop shortcut” checkbox.

TIP: If you’re copy-pasting a cd-key, remember that you use CTRL-V (not command-V) to paste from the clipboard in Wine applications

Once you’re done, you’ll get a prompt asking for the .exe for the program.

  • If you’re installing StarCraft, you’ll want /Program Files/StarCraft/StarCraft.exe
  • If you’re installing Diablo II, you’ll want /Program Files/Diablo II/Diablo II.exe
  • For Warcraft III, it doesn’t really matter at this point, since you’ll have to change it later anyway.

4. Install expansions and patches

Don’t run the game yet. Run the Wineskin utility again and navigate to the expansion installer as before. You can also do this with the patch files, but most people find it much easier to just update the game within the game by connecting to Battle.Net.

  • The installer for StarCraft includes the expansion, but you’ll probably still want to patch it
  • Sometimes Wineskin will have issues where the Installer won’t start. I had this problem with installing the Diablo II expansion. Also, sometimes the app won’t close properly, and will stay in the taskbar. I found that by killing the app via Activity Manager and trying again seemed to work anyway.
  • After installing a patch, it’s probably best just to quit the installer with Command-Q, rather than clicking OK and running the game, since there might be a bit more configuration to do

5. Configure the wrapper

  • If you’re installing StarCraft, and you want to play on, you’ll need some extra fonts. Open the Wineskin utility, click Advanced, click the Tools tab and click the Winetricks button. Make sure Winetricks is up to date by clicking “Update Winetricks” down the bottom. Once that’s done, expand ‘fonts’ and check ‘allfonts’, then click the Run button on the right. Once that’s done, you should be able to access in-game without crashing.
  • If you’re installing Diablo II, I couldn’t get it to run fullscreen, but it works fine in a window. Open the Wineskin utility, click Advanced. Under Configuration, add ‘-w’ to EXE Flags.
  • If you’re installing Warcraft III, you’ll need to go to the same page, and make sure the .exe path points to “/Program Files/Warcraft III/Frozen Throne.exe”. ALSO, the cutscenes don’t work. To make sure the game skips them, you’ll have to navigate to the the Warcraft III folder and rename the Movies folder to something else. You can still watch the cutscenes using VLC or something though.

Rename the Movies folder to “DisabledMovies” or something so that the game can’t recognise it.

Click “Test Run” and check it runs. I did find that sometimes Warcraft III would get stuck on the splash screen, but quitting and trying again worked.

6. Finishing touches

  • Drag the application (found in  /Users/[your-username]/Applications) to the main Applications folder, and it should run like any application
  • In the Advanced options in the Wineskin utility, check “Option key works as Alt”. Comes in handy in Diablo II and Warcraft III.
  • You’ll probably want to set a nice icon for the application. I just searched for an image and then used to convert it into a .icns file. You can replace the icon via the application’s Wineskin utility (open your Applications in Finder, then right-click the Application icon and click “Show Package Contents”)

That’s it!


Awesome game experiences – Nethack

Posted in Gaming, Uncategorized on April 17, 2012 by marzzbar

Rarely have I been so obsessed and engrossed with a game as I have been with Nethack. Despite its age and simple graphics, it’s often listed amongst the greatest games of all time.  Although technically a linear game, its strength lies in its ability to generate entertaining situations from scratch, and allowing the player to do pretty much anything, ensuring no two playthroughs are ever the same.

In Nethack, I’ve been killed by a vault guard, who was attracted by the commotion made by my pet gray dragon and ice troll running around in said vault, whilst I stood outside naked and unarmed, allowing a nurse to hit me in an attempt to bring my maximum hitpoints up.

I’ve been swallowed by a giant eel who was lurking in the river near the camp of the Duali tribe,  but since I was wearing a Ring of Slow Digestion, its stomach couldn’t handle me, so the worm spat me out.

I’ve almost killed a succubus by swinging a cockatrice corpse at it to turn it to stone, only to have her seduce me into taking off my clothes, including my gloves, stoning me instantly.

I’ve eaten lembas bread, and found to be extremely tasty, so tasty in fact that I ate too much of it and choked to death.

I’ve created a gremlin in a swamp level, which then proceeded to reproduce itself multiple times by throwing itself in the abundant water, creating a chain reaction and filling the whole screen with gremlins. And yet, this is what it looks like most of the time:

And sometimes this:

Or this:

Despite its difficulty, I completed the game after about four months and dozens and dozens of playthroughs, and I enjoyed just about every minute of it.


The premise of Nethack is deceptively simple: you are an adventurer on a quest to find the Amulet of Yendor from the bottom level of the Dungeons of Doom, and bring it back to the surface. The reasons for doing this differ depending on your race and class, but the backstory doens’t really matter. Along the way, you’ll come across a wide array of creatures and items, all randomly generated. Quite a simple premise, but it’s jam-packed full of creatures and items and spells drawn from many different parts of geek culture, from Lord of the Rings to The Hitch-hiker’s Guide To The Galaxy to The Invisible Man. You’ll never quite know what you’ll run into.

Nethack is what’s known as a “roguelike” game, a genre lending its name to the first game of its kind (“Rogue”, 1980). Although it’s debatable what a roguelike game actually is, they are typically turn-based role-playing games, have ASCII graphics (objects and creatures are represented with character symbols), only allow you to die once and are quite difficult. Really difficutt.

The gameplay mechanics are quite simple, although the controls can take a little while to learn at first. Being a roguelike game, Nethack is turn-based, meaning when you perform an action, such as moving in a direction, using an item or casting a spell, all other creatures perform actions as well. Combat involves simply trying to move into another creatures square, although you can also cast spells/zap wands at creatures from a distance. There are a large number of actions you can do at any one time, such as Kick, Cast Spell, Search, or Force, and all of these are performed via a key on the keyboard, possibly with a modifier (CTRL, SHIFT or ALT).

There is a huge amount of items and creatures to interact with, some of which are incredibly useful, some of which are useless, or will actually harm you. Each time you play Nethack, all the levels and creatures in it are generated randomly (within certain parameters). For example, you start off with a pet dog, cat or pony, but you can turn them into other creatures using a wand of polymorph. If you turn it into a dragon, you can attach a saddle to it and ride it. Or you could use the wand of polymorph to turn yourself into a giant worm, for example, digesting any creatures you see. There are dozens and dozens of things you can interact with, and dozens of ways you can interact with each of them. If you feel like you should be able to something with a certain object, chances are, you can. Part of the challenge of Nethack is working out which actions are beneficial, and which you should avoid, and hence being ready for any crazy situations the game throws at you.

Despite this open style of gameplay, Nethack is actually quite a linear game. At the beginning, the player is prompted to create a character. This involves choosing a role from a possible 13 (ranging from Barbarian and Mage to Archaeologist and Tourist), a race from a possible 5, and a gender. As expected, each role and race lend themselves to different styles of gameplay. The basic premise of the game is pretty simple. You start at the top of the dungeons of Doom, and you must retrieve the amulet of Yendor located at the bottom, and bring it back to the top. Although the player does come across some side quests, they are usually done as soon as they are found, and the player always makes their way back to the main path.


Nethack is open source, which means a few things.

It definitely doesn’t mean it’s a bad game. People often say that the open-source model is not suitable for games, since the amount of effort expended in creating most games today is so large, too large for people to give up willingly for free. However, this is simply not true for certain games, particularly games that are less focussed on the creative process and more on the underlying gameplay.

Indeed, the fact that the game IS open source is a large part of what makes it so great. The reason it was called “Net”hack was because it was distributed and developed over Usenet. Whilst there has been one core development team (which has changed over the many years of development), many fan-made versions of the game have been made. Often the development team will take suggestions from the game’s players, and even incoporate additions made in other mods. Over the 20+ years of development, the result is a game with more creatures, items and surprises than you can shake a Blessed Wand of Death at.

It also means that there are no secrets. Every creature, item, statistic, probability, hidden chamber, stat booster, fantasy reference, and hidden ending is exposed in the code. Whilst it’s not necessarily easily accessible to the average player, it’s there, and those that CAN and DO read the code (known as source divers) share what they find in a more legible format. In the olden days, this meant word of mouth via forums and chat rooms. Nowadays, there is a well-maintained wiki at .

This sort of information is known as ‘spoilers’, and at first it seems to be an appropriate term. In a game where a lot of the enjoyment comes from discovering new things and surprises, why would you want to read about what happens next? And what about the satisfaction that comes with finding out yourself how to progress further?

These are fair points to be sure, but one has to realise that whilst Nethack is a single-player game, it is also a very social game, and the game evolved with this in mind. The game was often played via clients on shared servers, and players would discuss strategies on message boards and chat rooms. Whilst anyone dedicated enough could gleam knowledge about the game’s secrets directly from the source code, realistically people would learn these things second hand from other players. Relying on the advice and ‘folklore’ of other players was expected, even encourged. Players would post detailed accounts of their victories (known as ascensions) as well as their failures on forums. The game keeps track of any players that have died, and any future games played on the same computer or server had a chance of coming across the graves (and possibly the ghosts) of these dead players. Even today there is an active server that players can telnet to ( and an accompanying chat room that is constantly active, and full of people sharing stories and giving advice. Indeed, Nethack is by nature a very social game.

Nethack is incredibly difficult, and near impossible to win without some knowledge. Whilst it could be argued that one could attain this knowledge through trial and error, it would take many many playthroughs to make any headway, even if you played in the invincible “Wizard” mode. Whilst I would recommend the use of spoilers if you wish to make progress in the game and discover what it has to offer, I wouldn’t suggest reading up on absolutely everything to give yourself an advantage. My general rule of thumb was to look something up when I came across it. I still found the game incredibly challenging, as I was placed in situations that I couldn’t predict or prepare for, and I still had that thrill of discovery and amazement.

As mentioned previously, Nethack’s main game mechanics stem from Dungeons and Dragons. I haven’t played much Dungeons and Dragons, but what struck me about the game was the detail in the game system for determining what happens, and how whilst the mechanics of the game provide the details, your imagination paints the picture of what happens. What you see and what you interact with are basically a crude representation of the physical aspects of the world, but somehow your brain takes all these details and creates a very real world. The same is very true in Nethack. Whilst it is possible to play with a tileset, I played in the traditional ASCII mode, as is common with most Roguelikes. In this mode in particular, the interface is quite sparse, only showing the details necessary; the location of walls, objects, creatures, short descriptions of objects, noises, smells, feelings. You give commands one at a time, actions are shown incrementally, and yet your imagination builds a very real scene.

What’s also fascinating is that, unlike Dungeons and Dragons, the descriptions of the environments, items and creatures are quite short. You are left to not only create the scene from the meagre details, but to fill in the gaps as you see fit. Add to this the algorithms in the code to simulate the actions of creatures in the game, and what you have is an incredibly immersive experience totally absent in modern games.

I remember my first pet dragon in the game. It was originally a cat, but it had wandered into a polymorph trap and turned into a big white “D”: a baby white dragon. I tried talking with it using the “#chat” command, and it snarled back at me. I named it Manky, and it was a fierce animal, fighting everything it came across. I made sure to protect him from too much harm, killing the more powerful enemies and leaving the worker Dwarves for him to kill, and then waiting patiently for a few turns while he feasted upon the corpses. Eventually Manky grew more into an adult dragon, and became an incredibly strong fighter. Whilst in a shop, I contemplated taking the items and teleporting away to steal them. My dragon came looking for me, took one look at shopkeeper and started clawing at his face. Before long he had killed him and was chewing on his remains.

Eventually I found a saddle, and put it on Manky’s back. I mounted him and rode him into Fort Ludios over the moat. He mauled my attackers whilst I held on and cast spells from on top.

He didn’t fight all my battles for me though. Once we had cleared a room full of enemies, and I could tell there was a crowd of soldiers on the other side of a locked door on the other end, thanks to my character’s infravision. I decided to stand in the doorway and hack at them one by one with my blessed Cleaver, reflecting their Death Bolts with my reflective Silver Dragon Scale Mail. My plan seemed to be going well, with me creating a pile of soldier corpses at the door and Manky picking up and dropping various items around the room. But then, after about a dozen soldier had been decimated by my Cleaver, and while Manky sat behind me gnawing at a Goblin corpse, the game gives me the following message:

“You hear a bolt whizz by you! You have a sad feeling for a moment, then it passes.”

What it didn’t tell about was Manky’s cry of shock and pain, my character’s roar of anguish and fury, and his avenging rampage resulting in the decimation of the remaining two dozen soldiers. More importantly, it didn’t tell me about my genuine sadness and longing for my capital D, controlled by code and algorithms to fight other letters controlled by other code and algorithms. The game had provided mechanics, my brain had provided the story.

I cannot stress how powerfully immersive this game is, and it’s owed entirely to the mechanics of the game. It gives you just enough information for YOU to create the story and environment. This is a very powerful and unique way of interacting with the game’s world.

The turn-based nature of Nethack, and indeed other Roguelikes, creates quite a unique experience. Whereas tun-based games are usually all out strategy games controlling multiple units at a time, in Roguelikes you’re controlling one person, one action at a time. This means that the game essentially goes at your own place. You can speed through passageways you’ve been through before to find that locked chest you kept potions in on the other side of the level, or you can take minutes agonizing over whether to cleave the goblin hacking at your face with a dagger to your left, or whether to death bolt the Shaman shooting firebolts a few spaces in front of you, or whether to quaff a potion to try and bring your health points up, or whether you should shoot your Wand of Digging at your feet and risk facing possibly even more dangerous creatures on the level below. You’ll find that the game can provide some truly tense situations that require good knowledge, tactical thinking and even a bit of luck.


It took me a couple of attempts to really get into Nethack. I had heard about it years ago, given it a quick go, but was overwhelmed by the amount of things in the game, the sheer difficulty of it, and I wasn’t patient enough to learn the controls. Generally, I’m pretty turned off by games with too much content and too steep of a learning curve,such as DOTA, or Civilization. As mentioned, there is a LOT to learn about Nethack in order to play it successfully.
However, play it successfully I eventually did. I think there are a few reasons for this:

1. The game is turn-based, and single-player
This means I could play it at my own pace. This is a contrast to DOTA, where playing with and against bots is really no substitute, and playing with and against other humans results in ruining their game and you getting yelled at. Indeed, as mentioned previously, part of the beauty of Nethack lies in its sense of discovery. You’re not SUPPOSED to know much when you first start. Part of the fun is the bewilderment of the game, the awe at the possibilities, and the sheer amusement of dying in stupid ways. You find yourself want to learn more about the dungeons, and with the help of the folklore of other players, and the mere curiosity of the quirky and unique envirnoment, the game lures you in. Each time you play, and die, you get just a little bit closer, learn a little bit more, get a little bit better at remembering to prepare yourself for eventualities. In a way, my journey from first playing the game to ascending was a journey in itself, parallel to the journey that my character takes into the Dungeons of Doom, and in fact almost the same thing. Through its incredibly immersive (yet scant) interface, you feel yourself actually partaking on this incredible journey, made all the more epic by the long-term investment into the game. By the end of it, you really do feel like you’ve been on a massive adventure.

2. The game has massive scope for possibility and complexity, but it is ALSO linear
What turns me off games like Civilization is the incredible amount of complexity. You have to manage all these different aspects of your civilization at the same time. Yes, it’s turn-based, but I just couldn’t be bothered learning it all. Nethack is much simpler. You control one character, and you learn about things as you come across them. Also, you have a definite goal, something to work towards, even if you probably won’t make it there. Unlike more ‘sandboxxy’ games, or games with multiple objectives, your objective is clear, and any subobjectives are just ways to work towards that one objective.
Also, I just love games where anything can happen. Generate a world randomly with certain parameters, code up some algorithms for behaviours, give the player a ton of possible actions and see what happens. Since its inception in 1987, people have found ways to stretch the game to its limits, from permanently turning into a black dragon and completing the game as a dragon, to being illiterate and vegan (can’t read scrolls or eat animal products), to farming the game for gems and enlisting giants as pets to carry bags of gems for you. The possibilities are amazing.

3. It’s tactical.
Not a huge amount, but just enough to force you to make some important tactical decisions. To be honest, your success is probably determined mostly by how much you know about the game, followed by how careful you are and whether you made the decisions you should’ve made. I think it was more the experience itself that I enjoyed, rather than the mental challenge.

4. It’s open-source
Obviously I’ve already mentioned why this is awesome for Nethack, but it’s awesome in general. It means it will never die, never have compatibility issues over time. Although there hasn’t been any new official releases, the team releases ports for new system (they recently released a version for OS X Lion). It also means that people can make their own games from the existing code (link to SLASH EM and UNNETHACK).

5. It’s extremely light on requirements
All you need is a terminal screen and a few megabytes. It’ll run on anything.


I guess I didn’t like how winning is basically dependent on how much you know about the game, rather than your skill level. Also, there’s a high luck factor. However, this wasn’t the focus of the game for me. It was more the experience that counted, and these things are essential to that experience.


Nethack is an absolutely incredible experience. If you can get over the small learning hurdle at the beginning, you’ll be lured gently the rest of the way, and you’ll find an incredibly immersive, entertaining experience.


– Diablo: Cite Nethack as a direct influence, and it shows. I’ve played this, and will have to do an article on it sometime.
– ADOM (Ancient Domains Of Mystery): Another epic Roguelike, but it’s Closed Source, and has more of an “Overworld/Dungeon” feel. I haven’t played this much, but would like to.
– Dungeon Crawl: Stone Soup: Another Roguelike, I think it’s open-source. This one seems to be a bit more focussed on tactics and gameplay, rather than immersion. Haven’t played this one either.
– Dwarf Fortress: Also uses simple graphics and complex mechanics, but is much more “sandboxxy” and less roguelike. It’s actually not turn-based. I haven’t given this game a proper go yet.

Starcraft, and why I’m dreading Starcraft 2

Posted in Gaming with tags , on December 28, 2009 by marzzbar

Well, maybe dreading is too strong a word, but it’s true that I’m not really looking forward to the release of the sequel to one of the greatest PC games of all time.

I haven’t always been a fan of starcraft. In fact, it’s only in the last few months that I’ve been playing it fairly frequently (albeit against the computer). Growing up, the only RTS games I played would’ve been Age of Empires 1 and 2, and the underrated spin-off Age of Mythology. However, I’d never play these games multiplayer. I figured they were just competitions on who could click the fastest, and there was no real strategy. It’s only when I saw this video a year ago that made me realise just how competitive these games were:

At the time, I was just amazed and awed by the South Korean culture, and the way they embraced video games in general. At around the same time I found this excellent article that explained the phenomenon in detail:

About a few months ago I discovered my friend was playing starcraft regularly over, and regularly losing. I told him it was probably because he was playing against South Koreans, and I showed him the above video to demonstrate. He then informed me that the video was an old one, and then proceeded to send me videos of his favourite player Jaedong with English commentary, including this one:

The intensity and passion of the commentators and their knowledge of the game overwhelmed me. My friend told me that he’d been following the proleague for years now, and I soon discovered and The more I read, and the more I watched, the more I realised just how deep the game was. There was so much to learn, so many things to practise, so many elements that decide victory or defeat. Yes, clicking fast, or APM (Actions Per Minute), does make a difference, but it’s just one of many factors. Strengths and weakness of build orders are discussed, just like chess openings. I found there was much more to this game than I originally thought.

So I decided to try the game out for myself. I played through the single player missions, but I eventually grew tired of that, wanting to get straight to the multiplayer. Since then I’ve been trying to adapt to the system, learning the interface and the best way to use it. I don’t think I’m quite ready to face an opponent on iccup yet, but I’m learning :).

It’s arguable that Starcraft is the best RTS game of all time, but it’s definitely the most popular. There are a lot of RTS games out there, but it’s the three different races that makes Starcraft stand out. Blizzard have worked hard to keep the races balanced by releasing regular patches over the 12 or so years since its release. Despite being played by millions of people for so long, no-one has found a strategy that can’t be countered. The fact that the game still remains competitive after so many players have played it for so many years shows just how amazing the game is.

So why am I dreading the release of starcraft 2? I’m not really sure. There are a few good reasons why starcraft 2 will be a good thing:

1. Better graphics. The original starcraft had a very low resolution and 2-dimensional sprite graphics. Needless to say, they’re a bit dated by today’s standards.

2. Better interface. In the first game, only 12 units could be selected at a time, only 1 building at a time, and SCVs needed to be directed to mineral patches manually when they were created. All these things, and of course a few more, will be improved in the new game. Obviously the resolution will be higher, so you’ll be able to see more units onscreen.

3. More single player campaign. This isn’t something I’d personally play, but obviously a lot of people will be looking forward to this.

4. Better multiplayer features. This would include better replays, spots for observers, rankings, ladders etc.

5. New units. Arguably, since Blizzard are creating this game with the intent of making it multiplayer and esport friendly, by picking appropriate units from the beginning, it’ll be a better game overall. The first starcraft wasn’t originally to be as great as it is now. It only got to be so balanced by patching  it over time.

6. The potential to bring the world of esports to a wider audience. For me, this would probably be the best thing about starcraft 2.

These are all great things to be sure. So I ask again, why do I feel worried about the release of starcraft 2?

I think one of the reasons is that Starcraft represents the triumph of simplicity and pure gameplay over graphics when it comes to games. I may go into this further in another post, but since Starcraft is played at such a competitive level, graphics no longer matter so much. All that matters really are the interface and the mechanics. And since graphics aren’t important, the game can be played on just about any computer today. There is no need to have to purchase a computer worth a certain amount to play the game. Something about its accessibility really appeals to me. Although the game is still being sold in stores, it’s quite easy to obtain. In fact, iccup (a “battlenet” alternative that provides rankings and is frequented by serious starcraft players) actually offers a link to a free download of starcraft on their website, albeit with single player missions removed ( I think I just like the idea of being able to have an engrossing, mentally stimulating, challenging experience with something so simple, basic and cheap. Or maybe I just don’t like spending money. After all, the game probably won’t be able to run on my current computer, and the game will be released in three full-size instalments, so including the cost of a capable computer means that I’m going to have to spend a lot of money for something that, arguably, isn’t going to be a whole lot better in terms of gameplay.

Also, Blizzard have announced that there will be no LAN functionality in Starcraft 2, probably to reduce piracy, since programs such as Tunngle allow you to play a game over a virtual LAN, thus not requiring a unique cd key to play online. This compromises the game’s accessibility, since now you can’t play with your friends unless you both have an internet connection. And you both must have a legal copy of the game as well. It seems as though Blizzard are trying to milk as much cash from their fans as they can.

It’s fantastic that Starcraft has only become more and more popular over the years, despite being over a decade old. The competitive game is constantly changing, as players create more strategies and counters. I feel like there is more to be ‘discovered’, and it would be a shame if Starcraft 2 took its place. It’s as if players have to start all over again, learning a whole new game.

I think I also like the idea of standards. Although it wasn’t necessarily the best RTS out there, if you want to play an RTS game at a competitive level, starcraft is the best one to play, since there are more people playing it than any other RTS. Now, even if there are still people playing the first starcraft once its sequel is released, the community will be smaller. The more people playing the game, the more it can develop, and the more competitive the scene becomes.

What else…I read somewhere that each new release of the 3 starcraft 2 games will include new units. If this is true, then I don’t think that’s very good for the game, since they essentially have to spend more time and effort maintaining the delicate balance between the races, which was so difficult to do with the first game. It’s almost as though they’re reinventing the wheel each time.

Another interesting point is how 3d polygon graphics aren’t as effective or clear as 2d sprites. Again, this is arguable. Sebastian Sjoberg at the polygon revue makes a good point of this in his article:

So I guess there are a whole bunch of reasons why I’m not looking forward to the next starcraft. My dream scenario would be that the original starcraft is considered the better game. Sort of like how Counterstrike 1.6 is considered to be better than Source. In fact, the release of CS:S annoyed me in the same way. In any case, they’re putting in a lot of work and playtesting to make starcraft 2 a really good game. It’ll be interesting to see what happens. I probably won’t buy it though.