Campaign Creations

DarkPrimus wrote: Having to learn all the new shit in WarEdit with WCIII was a daunting task, but the real reason I didn't make a campaign for it was because I had simply lost interest in the story and setting of WarCraft.

ditto. when i first that one teaser for WC3 with the footman and grunt fighting, then the Infernal crashes in, I thought that there were gonna be three factions, Alliance, Horde, and Badasses from space. I don't like the Night Elves. I don't like the undead. Not as a faction anyway. The game, the direction of the world, the story, the characters, everything fell short of what I expected. As a result, modding sort of died along with that.

DarkPrimus wrote: Having to learn all the new shit in WarEdit with WCIII was a daunting task, but the real reason I didn't make a campaign for it was because I had simply lost interest in the story and setting of WarCraft.

Ditto here as well, I sometimes have posted a campaign story on here and it turns out good and I'll start working on it, but there is so many of these complicating triggers and variables unlike StarEdit that will still confuse me, and when I test one of my maps and then I view one of Blizzard's and its totally better and I'm like forget it. At first when WC2 just had the high elves I though okay this will be cool, but the Night Elves I didnt like at first, the only reason why I play them in WC3 is because their end mission against Archimonde is fun.

StarEdit just has a limitless possibility though modding could be probably tougher like new graphics and stuff, but you can do anything "a new Zerg army warps to a desolate Protoss planet" or anything, WarCraft you cant do that because all you could do is on Outland and itd be like The Burning Legion comes back to Azeroth from Outland... again.

When I read all of it, it makes me realize something ...

While we pretty much agree that campaigns don't have to fit with the game's universe at this point ... I believe we should remember in a crystal clear fashion that they don't have fit the game's "default" gameplay(s).

What I mean is that the campaign's gameplay can be something else than B&D or the "usual" RPG (as in heroes that mop the map over time) as the main gameplay of a Warcraft 3 campaign. I believe we are so used that a campaign must be either of them as the main gameplay that we are not even considering other gameplay possibilities (except for mini-games) and thus we are lacking a LOT of mental flexibility in that regard.

A campaign example for Warcraft 3 could be a pirate leader with its crew on a pirate ship. The pirate leader found a strange lady at one of the lands they docked with the information of an item of great power to start the story.

The gameplay would that you control your pirate ship on the sea "world map". You can board other ships (usually merchant ships) or to get shot by other ships ("town guards" or "merchant guards"). When you board a ship, you basically got all your crew as battle units, any units you lose cannot be used again for the next board battle. You win a battle to get the ship's treasure and you move on.

Ricky brought an important point, the one of campaigns not necessarily following the standard "melee" gameplay for SC, and either "melee" or "walk around with heroes and level up" gameplay of WC3. I don't anyone here needs to be remembered that the majority of the most popular SC campaigns (Legacy of the Confederation, Celestial Irruption, Fall from Grace, Life of a Marine, Flame Knives, the whole VotF saga and so on) feature gameplay as different from the original "build and destroy" aspect as possible, and I believe the SC2 community will value the same original aspects in a campaign.

The only exceptions I can think of right now are Antioch Chronicles, but it was one of the very first campaigns made; The Bob Levels which is a comedy campaign, therefore being original in an entirely different aspect; and parts of the VotF saga which had B&D gameplay but with plenty of twists, such as many custom heroes, triggers, aggressive AI and an entire new race.

Once again, I have no reason to believe most players will value something else when SC2 comes around. The community does accept a lot of stuff, but as Oracle said, there are trends.

Not to throw a wrench in the whole thing, but if I didn't like B&D I wouldn't have played Starcraft to begin with.

hahahaha good point

RazorclawX wrote: Not to throw a wrench in the whole thing, but if I didn't like B&D I wouldn't have played Starcraft to begin with.

Yeah, it's just that most B&D maps are too similar, but one can do some really interesting stuff if some variety or small twists are added to it.

doesn't stop people playing countless "fastest" games on b.net

then again that's different to playing against the standard BW AIs

...you'd need a custom AI to make it dumber to fit the average b.net noob


so yeah the stuff I just said means nothing; but even having a more interesting AI (ie. an actual human opponent) could make B&D more interesting

Taeradun wrote: ...but even having a more interesting AI (ie. an actual human opponent) could make B&D more interesting

Yeah, but the pojnt of a campaign is that there's a fixed storyline. If two human players were battling, the best one would win, so there'd have to be at least two storylines.

Legion wrote:

Taeradun wrote: ...but even having a more interesting AI (ie. an actual human opponent) could make B&D more interesting

Yeah, but the pojnt of a campaign is that there's a fixed storyline. If two human players were battling, the best one would win, so there'd have to be at least two storylines.

I've always wanted to try and run a multiplayer campaign, setting it up as a Risk-like thing with different territories to conquer.  Battle for control of the planet, or even run the classic 'invaision by an outside force' plot if you don't have alot players.

You really can't do a good B&D level in WC3. Even if you trigger the AI to make it not completely retarded, the player has such an absurd advantage that the odds have to be immensely stacked against you for you to lose.