Category: News

The Gamasutra Job Board is the most diverse, active and established board of its kind for the video game industry!

Here is just one of the many, many positions being advertised right now.

Location: Austin, Texas

Mothership Entertainment is seeking an experienced Technical Director to lead our engineering team.  The Technical Director will take responsibility for developing, maintaining, and optimizing the next title in the award-winning Aven Colony franchise.

Mothership Entertainment is a plucky micro-studio located in northwest Austin, TX, in the Jollyville neighborhood.  We focus on creating highly polished strategy game experiences with a tiny team and a close-knit studio culture.

The Technical Director will be responsible for:

• Assisting in the development, maintenance, and optimization of the next game in the Aven franchise
• Spearheading the port of the next Aven franchise game to other desktop and console platforms as needed
• Setting and maintaining coding standards and code integrity
• Developing new features and refactoring existing tech as needed
• Refining the art pipeline and specifying and maintaining benchmarks and constraints for art development
• Assisting artists with technical issues as needed
• Managing and growing the engineering team

Desired skills:

• Excellent C++ programming skills
• Excellent communication skills
• 5+ years professional experience in the game industry
• 5+ years professional experience as a software engineer
• Strong debugging skills
• Strong optimization and performance profiling skills
• Strong multi-threaded programming skills
• Unreal engine and Blueprint experience
• Console development experience
• A passion for making and playing games
• Work well in a cooperative environment
• Excellent verbal and written communications skills.
• Self-motivated and willing to pitch in on many areas of development

Interested? Apply now.

Whether you’re just starting out, looking for something new, or just seeing what’s out there, the Gamasutra Job Board is the place where game developers move ahead in their careers.

Gamasutra’s Job Board is the most diverse, most active, and most established board of its kind in the video game industry, serving companies of all sizes, from indie to triple-A.

Looking for a new job? Get started here. Are you a recruiter looking for talent? Post jobs here.

“This has helped me understand the importance of inclusion and has greatly [influenced] my accessibility work.”

– Karen Stevens shares how her own experiences gave her perspective

FIFA 18 recently received an update that added in a host of new features geared at making the game more accessible. The new options gave players the ability to, among other things, enlarge clickable targets, remap controller sticks, bumpers, and triggers, or toggle an on-screen pause button that can be used with only a mouse on PC. 

Following that update, Waypoint spoke with some of the key players behind EA Sports’ growing focus on accessibility about how those changes have been reflected in games and the company since.

The story is one example of how developers can (and should, when feasible) implement new features and options to help make their games playable by as wide of an audience as possible.

Karen Stevens, once a rendering engineer at EA, leads the charge as the company’s first accessibility lead. Her efforts started during an internal game jam and yielded the addition of accessibility features like resizable icons for Madden NFL 17. She now heads the company’s accessibility drive and EA’s Accessibility Portal where she solicits feedback on features from players.

“I once asked a friend if he was looking forward to the next Madden NFL, as he is a huge Raiders fan,” Stevens told Waypoint. “He told me he can’t play Madden due to vision problems; he couldn’t see anything that moved quickly and was small — like the pass icons. I decided that if I ever had the chance, I would try to improve the game so a wider audience could play Madden.”

Waypoint’s full story has more information on Stevens’ efforts, as well as a look at how accessibility options in EA Sports games have evolved in just recent years.  

The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutra’s community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.

---

It was to become more than just a simple port of our debut project Pressure, and it quickly evolved into a full-time project that posed new challenges for our team at Chasing Carrots.

[embedded content]

In the summer of 2017 we released our fun-racer Pressure Overdrive, the definitive version of our debut Pressure from 2013. Both games form the framework of the creation and development of our studio itself, from day one to right now. It was an exciting journey, albeit a rocky one, along which our team learned a lot and acquired a wealth of experience. We’d like to share these experiences, and in doing so we not only want to provide a look at the actual development of Pressure Overdrive but also to discuss what was crucial to the process.

The vision behind Pressure was to develop an arcade game with a unique touch. A shoot-’em-up in which you are steering an expandable buggy as you fight your way through a sloping steampunk world. The pressure from which the game takes its name serves as the buggy’s fuel. The vehicle uses pressure while driving/firing and has to be topped up after enemies are finished off, otherwise you are literally left in the dust.

We were totally won over by the idea, so our small team got to work. We were well equipped from a technical standpoint, but after some time it became clear that we needed a little help in some other areas. At Gamescom 2012 we became acquainted with German publisher TopWare, who offered their support.

Since we were able to finance ourselves at the time, our work with TopWare was about marketing and QA, as well as publishing for consoles. TopWare presented us with an impressive range of services, and in turn, TopWare was to receive royalty shares from the profits generated by Pressure. But the marketing machine that had been advertised soon proved to be a whole lot of nothing. There was hardly any communication about the game to speak of, and instead, TopWare whispered listlessly along well-worn channels. Too few players were learning about Pressure. That was presumably fine as far as the versions for PS3 and Xbox 360, which had also been advertised, were concerned because they were not to be released at all. We had completed those versions, paid for the engine licenses, and taken care of everything else that had to be done in that regard, but TopWare clearly did not believe in the success of the title enough to secure a release for these platforms.

An assembly scene in Unity where all enemy vehicles were placed in for a better overview.

Of course, we tried to figure out why things were going the way they were. In essence, the communication between TopWare and us was often a farce. Inquiries from our end sometimes went unanswered for weeks. It was a hard time in which we began to question everything that had moved us to create this game in the first place: our idealism, our creativity, everything. We were just about to throw in the towel. On March 26, 2013, TopWare published Pressure on Steam at the very least, but too quietly to end up on any radar. We ultimately requested to terminate the contract with TopWare. We wanted the rights to Pressure back and to save what could still be saved. Better late than never.

What followed was a legal back-and-forth that only ended in 2015. We ultimately got back the rights to Pressure through a settlement out of court. Anyway. In autumn of that year, we published Cosmonautica, a space commerce simulator with Sims elements. This time we had no extra support, but sadly there were other unexpected problems. In order to somewhat make up for the consequences of those problems, we decided to belatedly release Pressure on the Xbox One and PlayStation 4.
 

It was a sensible move not to simply port Pressure, of course. We had to dismantle the entire game anyway after changing from our old engine (Vision) to Unity. Plus we knew which aspects of the gameplay we could improve. We wanted to take this opportunity to give Pressure a whole new sheen, and new attention as a result. With that, the idea for Pressure Overdrive was born. It was an important step for us even though it took much longer than we initially thought. We had planned four months for the whole process, which then stretched out over two years of negatives and positives that we now want to give you a closer look at.

Not only the weapon system got a huge overhaul for Pressure Overdrive.

1. Overdrive

Early on we had to make sensible changes to the gameplay, and we also focused on the shop. In the original many of the buggies’ weapons behaved similarly. For the new version, we wanted to offer more synergies between the items, allowing for individual playing styles.

The revised equipment in Pressure Overdrive makes a significant difference. The new weapons and items supplement each other much better and invite the player to experiment from one level to the next. Along with the new equipment, we also revised the pressure system. Whereas in the original the pressure was the fuel for the buggy, now it acts like stamina. The player has to equip and use their buggy in a balanced manner, but without any annoying breakdowns in the middle of the track.

We also optimized the steering. Pressure Overdrive plays a lot more fluidly with the twin-stick input, which is most compatible with the other improvements. We are very happy to have addressed the right aspects. Pressure really earned the Overdrive in its name.

2. Tools

Unity has many strengths, but the peculiarities of one project often necessitate many aids. If you can’t find the right ones, you write them yourself.

For example, importing all of the assets from the original Pressure would have gotten out of hand without our “Importer”. Or the “Progressor”: with a few clicks we were able to simulate, change and test the distribution of gold in the game to determine which weapon combinations the player can afford after a certain degree of progress. The in-game console was an invaluable all-rounder, in particular when it came to testing, and the “Balance Reporter” compiled extensive data of the route, opponents, and players for each level.

Our localization tool saved us the most work (and mistakes). Pressure Overdrive doesn’t include a novel’s worth of text, but enough material came together with ten translated languages. Our easy-to-use Python tool plus database and export function made it exponentially easier to work with the translation company.

This tool helped a lot for establishing a good gold coin progression
throughout all levels and difficulty settings.

3. Certification

Through Pressure, we had become acquainted with the certification processes at Microsoft and Sony, but because of the circumstances at the time, a lot of it went right past us. So we rediscovered this part of the production for Pressure Overdrive, and mastered it with surprising independence and deftness!

Both platforms have their idiosyncrasies for processing the various challenges of a game title. From the very start, we focused on the testing. After viewing all of the tests that Pressure Overdrive had to pass to be certified for PlayStation 4 and Xbox One, we compiled a comprehensible and organized to-do list so we could face the challenge.

We split up into specific teams and set to work on the individual “use cases”. Per console one person tested the respective version down to the core, one programmer analyzed and fixed any problems that were detected. This helped both versions through the certification process pretty quickly. The organizational discussions also went without a hitch thanks to the good contact between our producer and our contacts at Sony and Microsoft.

4. Gamescom
​
As part of the Indie Arena booth, we were in the company of lots of great titles, but the layout of our stand enticed a lot of visitors to our game. We tried to make optimal use of the space given to us: with a large television on an old wooden cabinet, pleasant lighting and two comfy sofas we provided the perfect setting for relaxed couch sessions in the middle of all the chaos.

We also used noticeable signs (hand-painted, of course) and a direct approach to invite visitors to achieve the best high scores of the day and win Steam keys in Pressure Overdrive’s Endless mode. Most didn’t need to be asked twice. It was immense fun and our yellow sofas were occupied almost constantly. Sometimes we even had a line.

Aside from the enjoyment, our visitors also provided us with some useful feedback that resulted in ideas for small updates and patches on site. With this, Gamescom was an experience that left smiles on our faces for days to come, and some new fans left with memories of Pressure Overdrive.

People had a lot of fun playing Pressure Overdrive, and we received
valuable feedback at Gamescom 2017.

1. Physics simulation

The physics simulation had to be rebuilt in Unity, but the difference between Havoc (Vision) and PhysX proved to be a problem, in particular, the so-called WheelCollider, a PhysX-specific abstraction for the wheels of vehicles, because it had a major effect on the driving behavior of all vehicles in the game. Lots of extra code had to be written for the vehicles to act the way our game design intended. There were obstacles for the weapons and effects in this area as well, some of which made the project structure more complex than it needed to be.

We would have had to test alternative approaches for the physics, e.g. more 2D physics, and then maybe we could have retained the online multiplayer mode from the original. But under the circumstances, it was extremely difficult to synchronize the game on two computers. There are techniques for expanding the simulations of the physics engine on the server, and they are often used by AAA titles in such situations to compensate for lags in the internet connection. Unfortunately, this method isn’t possible in Unity with the standard physics engine PhysX. Abandoning online mode was no easy choice, but sadly our situation required it.

2. Graphics optimization

Pressure Overdrive was supposed to run on both the PS4 and Xbox One at 60 fps with a resolution of 1920 x 1080, which ultimately not only required optimization of the physics but also of the graphics. While “profiling” it became evident that we had too many draw-calls per frame, which resulted in optimization of the textures, meshes, and materials.

Our primary focus was on objects that frequently appear, like enemies or environment assets. For example, with smaller vehicles, we combined the mesh of the wheels with that of the chassis. The rotating movement of the wheels or treads was implemented by shader (UV scrolling), whereby the UV scroll speed is proportional to driving speed. This saved three draw-calls per vehicle for the enemies, who often appear on the screen at the same time in large numbers.

For the tree assets, the two textures for leaves and trunk were consolidated into one texture. The meshes of leaves and trunk were also combined. This saved only one draw-call per asset, but in some areas, up to 100 trees have to be rendered simultaneously, and a penny saved is a penny earned.

New equipment in the shop allows for better synergies and playstyles.

3. Finalization

Pressure Overdrive was the first commercial product that we developed with Unity. In some aspects, this left us on uncharted territory. Even when the tasks were very clearly distributed among the team, certain project structures became too complex over time, too entangled, and that came with consequences. As we were gearing up for finalization, bug fixing became a hot issue. We not only learned that many bugs that had already been fixed were popping back up, but some fixes resulted in new bugs. Instead of shrinking, our Trello lists temporarily got longer. It took a lot of time and was simply frustrating. At this point, all we could do was accept and maintain a certain level of chaos.

We also should have planned out our playtesting better and earlier on. We managed to recruit some students from the local game studies program for playtests in the studio, and lots of players on Steam volunteered to thoroughly test the beta version. In the end, however, they all confirmed that the innovations in Pressure Overdrive functioned and were fun. This was important feedback for us, of course, because after such a long development period we were suffering from tunnel vision. Despite all of the tests we missed details that would have improved the game experience even further. It took a little step back, some surprisingly analytical let’s-plays, and the abundant sessions at Gamescom to open our eyes to some aspects.

4. Marketing

Steamspy reports a rather surprising number of owners of Pressure: over 700,000. This seems to contradict the story first described by TopWare. Unfortunately not: until their rights to Pressure expired, TopWare mass-distributed keys throughout the entire world for almost nothing. That left a bitter taste in our mouths. But we wanted to approach the players, regardless of how much they paid for the original. That’s why everybody got an 80% discount off the launch price for the release. Pressure Overdrive is an “enhanced version”, so we thought this was a reasonable step to take.

Regardless we also took other avenues in the time leading up to it, such as providing international publishers with a nice gimmick for the test version. There was also a lot of activity on Facebook and Twitter, of course. A competent PR firm also helped out by letting their contacts play and drafting press releases. The reception among journalists was good. Reviews for all platforms confirmed that Pressure Overdrive is a lot of fun and an absolutely solid arcade title with its own unique touch.

The current sales numbers are loud and clear: just over 15,000 units is a disappointing figure. We used our opportunities and circumstances as well as we could, but a lot of it fizzled into nothingness. We are still looking for the answer to the “why”.

Sadly, our story-related, hand-crafted give-aways for selected journalists
and streames did not help our marketing much.

We had to show incredible endurance during development. Even after Pressure Overdrive was released, we couldn’t kick back. Because even if our latest game has a good public reception by all indications, the sales are what make or break us as a small indie studio.
The development of a game always provides opportunities for the studio to develop itself. It binds the team together and shows where it can and must improve, be it project planning and structure or marketing skills. Yet Pressure Overdrive also showed us what we’re capable of. Porting to a new engine, including many optimizations and a multi-platform release is no walk in the park. We’re very proud of that, and of course of the game itself.

Now it’s about being consistent. We want to stay true to our standard and keep developing games that we ourselves like to play. But we also want to strike out on new paths to improve ourselves and survive as a studio. Independent, on our own feet, and without having to bow to anyone. After the game is before the game  ̶  let’s go!

Chasing Carrots are (from left to right): Josef Vorbeck, Daniel Karner, Dominik Schneider, Chantal Horeis, Sebastian Kahl, Patrick Tejada, Mr. Carrot Mascot, Patrick Wachowiak and Paul Lawitzki

Developer: Chasing Carrots
Publisher: Chasing Carrots
Publish date: July 25, 2017
Platforms: Windows, Linux, macOS, PlayStation 4, Xbox One
Team size: Two in the first year, then eight people
Development period: About 28 months
Development tools: Unity, 3D Studio Max, Shaderforge, Photoshop, Microsoft Visual Studio, Google Docs, Trello, Slack, Hansoft

The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutra’s community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.

---

The success of The Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild from last year is absolute at this point. The game took home multiple game of the year awards and received high marks from most reviewers. Yet despite the accolades, I noticed that people didn’t talk about one major point: This is a mature game from Nintendo.

E for (Not) Everyone:

There have been two criticisms that Nintendo receives often from critics. The first is that they only develop games for kids, and have older games as an afterthought. The second is that they stick to the same designs for their core franchises.

While Breath of the Wild’s overarching story remained the same, its design is anything but. Starting from the very beginning of the game, Breath of the Wild goes in a different (and aimless) direction.

Hey Listen:

If you’re a Zelda fan, you’ve probably heard the words above more times than you can count. Previous Zelda games have always been about the tutorial preamble before the world opens up around the halfway point.

During this time, the player is guided around from dungeon to dungeon and given very clear instructions on how everything works. Breath of the Wild goes with one of the most organic tutorials I’ve seen in a game, by removing all guided instructions.

After one screen that shows you how to move and control the camera, there is no further on-screen tutorial. What the game does instead is turn the first area into a tutorial. On top of the plateau, you are given a microcosm of the Breath of the Wild experience.

Without any guidance, the player will be taught how to fight, cook food, climb, survival the elements, and use the tablet to mark locations for exploration. Each of the temples available will teach the player how to make use of one of Link’s rune powers which form the backbone of the player’s options.

Speaking of the player’s options, let’s talk about one of the more radical concepts that Breath of the Wild does to game design.

Emergent Gameplay:

The most surprising thing I found playing Breath of the Wild is that this is one of the best examples of Emergent Gameplay/Design I’ve seen, and coming from Nintendo no less.

Going forward, I think I’m going to use this game as the example to explain to new people. Each one of Breath of the Wild’s mechanics is designed around a specific use, but has utility in the grand scheme of the world. The ability to climb up almost any surface is the simplest example.

You can use it to get around enemies, find hidden treasure, set up for some epic gliding, and much more. Even the cooking system is an example of emergent design, as it allows players to create whatever buffs they want given the ingredients they have.

We haven’t even spoken about Link’s runes yet, and the complexity therein. People have found interesting ways of combining the various runes to create new strategies. Each rune has unlimited use; allowing the player to always have them available for experimenting with.

One of the more understated elements of the game’s brilliance is that it’s not that deep mechanic-wise. Within the first few hours of play, Link is given all the abilities that he’s going to need to solve the game’s various puzzles and dungeons via the runes.

Everything else is built on the player’s ability to take these elements and figure out how to use them.

That kind of design of making it about the player takes me to my final surprising point: This is a hard game.

The Legend of Dark Souls:

Going back to the first point, many people find Nintendo games on the “kiddy” side. I don’t know what their plan was with Breath of the Wild, but this is the hardest game I’ve played from Nintendo since the NES era.

For the first time in forever, this is a Zelda game that does not hold back on the player. Enemies can routinely hit you for more health than your starting max right out of the tutorial. The complete freedom to explore also means the complete freedom to get in over your head.

Outside of the runes, you will have to earn any further abstracted progression slowly. This is a Zelda game that makes you very excited to get another heart container or stamina point. Acquiring new armor and the perks within can feel like a major step forward.

There is no guidance on where to go or how to find things. It’s up to you to look at the horizon, check your map, and listen to the general advice of everyone you meet.

One of the biggest changes compared to previous Zelda games is that the dungeons don’t give you new tools to explore. Instead, they provide you with powerful advantages designed to supplement what you already have.

At the end of the day, this is the first time that a Zelda game feels like legitimate adventure. You and Link will start out barely able to do much in the world. If you can push forward, you will get to be a part of one hell of a hero’s journey.

Taking my Breath Away:

Is Legend of Zelda Breath of the Wild a perfect game? No; I do have complaints about some of the design systems that I’ll talk about in my review of it. With that said, I haven’t been this impressed with a Nintendo-designed game since playing Super Mario Galaxy.

I don’t know if this is a turning point for the company or just for the Zelda franchise, but if this is their new concept for the series, then I am all for it.

[embedded content]

The original StarCraft was a phenomenon, a game that changed the real-time strategy landscape in startling ways and whose influence would ripple out across a huge number of other genres and formats.

Released 20 years ago this month as the science fiction successor to Blizzard’s own breakout real-time strategy kingmaker, Warcraft, StarCraft did more than take a successful format to a different setting.

Instead, it was a generation-defining title, and the game responsible for much of what we consider modern esports. But during development, the game’s fate was uncertain; development happened at a haphazard pace, and use of the Warcraft II engine early on earned the project a dubious nickname among some members of the press: “Orcs in Space.”

Of course, the game went on to become much more than that. To mark the passing of StarCraft‘s 20th birthday, Gamasutra reached out to a number of the people who built this seminal work and those whose lives were affected by it to get a sense of the game’s enduring legacy.

The dream of the ’90s

“In late 1995, a small group of developers, led by Bob Fitch, were working on a new game to be called ‘Shattered Nations,’” StarCraft’s senior programmer, Collin Murray, told us. “We had been working on it for about 6 months, when Bob and I were approached by Allen Adham with the opportunity to work on a proposed sci-fi RTS game that sounded exciting. We decided to proceed, and work on StarCraft began in earnest.”

“The most notable change was from the Warcraft II style to a more 3D rendered sci-fi look…our original design mimicked the art style of Warcraft II, and was quickly tagged in the press with the nickname ‘Orcs in Space’, which was a less than flattering moniker.”

Blizzard was understandably keen to follow up on Warcraft’s runaway success, but the team wanted a diversion from the sort of work they’d been doing for years.

“Work on StarCraft began off the heels of the success of Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and its expansion pack, Through the Dark Portal,” says Chris Sigaty, an executive producer at Blizzard who was lead tester on StarCraft.

“Going back to the original Warcraft: Orcs & Humans, the dev team had already spent a number of years working on strategy games in a high fantasy setting. I was very excited for StarCraft because I was such a huge Star Wars fan growing up and the StarCraft characters and setting represented our own science fiction playground. While we all love the Warcraft setting, moving from fantasy to sci-fi was an exciting change for many of us in the company at that time.”

While the original design hewed quite closely to the template established by the Warcraft franchise, a public showing demonstrated to the team that a new direction was called for if Blizzard wanted StarCraft to truly shine.

An early look at the game that became StarCraft, circa E3 ’96, where it earned the nickname ‘Orcs in Space’

“The most notable change was from the Warcraft II style to a more 3D rendered sci-fi look that took place after E3 in 1996,” Murray says.

“Our original design mimicked the art style of Warcraft II, and was quickly tagged in the press with the nickname ‘Orcs in Space’, which was a less than flattering moniker.  Seeing all the other new games being demoed at E3 that year made us realize that our sci-fi game needed a 3D rendered look to feel right. After the show, we refocused and completely redid all the art in 3D, which our artists would render into sprites and touch up by hand.”

A prototype of what became StarCraft, after the engine was rewritten and the art was redone

For Sigaty, it was a turning point in StarCraft’s development. “Rather than being offended or distraught, the team took the feedback in stride and effectively gained strength from it. I was so impressed with the developers’ grit and determination. The engine was completely rewritten and the ambitions for the project were reset to something much grander. From my perspective a big portion of the ‘commit to quality’ core value we have today as a company was forged through this experience.”

Finding success

After years of hard work and a major redesign, StarCraft launched to an eager public. The pivot in development seemed to pay off in spades, as the game found tremendous critical and popular success, becoming the best selling PC game of 1998 and going on to move over 9.5 million copies across its lifetime.

Notably, StarCraft was also instrumental in growing Blizzard’s Battle.net multiplayer service, which expanded more than 800 percent following the game’s release. It was a significant achievement, and inspired more than one young developer, including Uber Entertainment’s Jeremy Ables, an associate producer on Supreme Commander and producer on Forged Alliance at Gas Powered Games.

“Without the precedent of StarCraft, no current esport would have been nearly as ambitious as they have been; it’s only by standing on the shoulders of both Jim Raynor and bonjwa like Flash and BoxeR that we could think to build out our own studios.”

“My group of friends were big fans of Warcraft 2 and I ended up playing StarCraft the first time at a friend’s LAN party,” Ables says. “Bought it after that and played through the campaign, which blew me away with the 3 factions and how differently they played. We were playing a lot of Total Annihilation at the time, so this was a great change of pace as it allowed us to choose between the mass unit swarms of TA and the more tactical decisions of StarCraft. Also cool that the folks who just swore by TA had Zerg to play and get at least something they felt familiar with on it. Made it easier to get the groups to play together.”

For Ables, the key to StarCraft’s success was the exquisite balance between three asymmetrical factions: the cold steel and deadly firearms of the Terrans, the high technology and graceful energy weapons of the Protoss, and the overwhelming swarms of the Zerg hive.

It’s a refrain you hear a lot when you talk about StarCraft and what established it as a blueprint for everything that followed. Jesús Arribas of Numantian Games, director and lead designer of They Are Billions, talks about how the factions were a key differentiator between StarCraft and Blizzard’s previous work.

“I got to play StarCraft quite late. My first RTS was Warcraft 2 and I really enjoyed it and let me wanting more. I found playing StarCraft was a much more rewarding experience. In Warcraft, both of the factions were quite similar, the differences were so subtle that I found myself using the same strategies when playing either faction. In StarCraft, by contrast, Blizzard managed to create three really unique factions with their own aesthetics, play style, story and personality.”

His thoughts are echoed by Chris Hopper, the head of North American esports at Riot Games. Hopper was an established RTS fan who was drawn by StarCraft’s sci-fi setting and by the possibilities presented by a third playable race, which he says Blizzard executed masterfully.

According to Hopper “it made RTS non-binary; previous to that, most games either felt like there weren’t substantive differences between the races you played (Age of Empires, for example) or there were only two options (Warcraft). By introducing the third race, it became an exponentially more complicated decision to determine what race/army/build would be optimal in any given situation.”

Of course, a third playable option was a big step for the development team, and one that required a tremendous amount of careful balancing.

“One of the things that I think made StarCraft different from other games at the time was the fact that the 3 playable races all had such distinctly different strategies, yet all had a sort of “rock-paper-scissors” counter for one another’s abilities,” says Murray. “This was a significant challenge to balance. We spent a lot of time playing the game to get it right.”

“StarCraft was one of the first strategy games that featured three asymmetric factions and still came out balanced,” Sigaty chimes in.

“RTS was a growing genre in the PC gaming space back in those days, but back then most games featured factions that had more of a mirrored symmetry to each other. We were very proud of the fact that StarCraft had three races that both built and fought completely differently to one another. Designing the three asymmetric races leveled up our balance chops considerably. We weren’t sure that asymmetric factions would work, but through a lot of experimentation, feedback, and learning, it ultimately did. I believe this was critical to our long-term confidence as developers, giving us more self-assurance to tackle larger, more complex games and designs as we moved forward.”

While StarCraft has been lauded, rightfully so, for its sprawling, epic science fiction narrative and its important contribution to making online real time strategy a viable concept, the consensus seems to be that its biggest contribution was in gameplay, in its three deftly balanced factions. But it also had a wider impact on the state of competitive gaming, and shaped the future of esports in a number of critical ways (evidenced in part by the fact that, of the 9.5 million copies StarCraft eventually sold, 4.5 million of them were in South Korea).

Hopper, who helps oversee one of the world’s largest current esports, League of Legends, says it’s difficult to imagine the scene without StarCraft grandfathering it. “It’s hard to overstate how important StarCraft was to esports; it’s entirely possible that without Brood War and StarCraft 2, LoL, CSGO, and other titles would never have achieved nearly the success they have. StarCraft enraptured an entire nation in South Korea, and showed the world that a massive population of fans could not only unite behind a new sport (made from a video game, nonetheless!), but could do so quickly and profitably for hundreds of companies, investors, players, and organizers.”

StarCraft no only provided the basic tools to create an esports phenomenon, but Blizzard’s support and commitment created a template for success that is still replicated to this day in almost every major esports tournament and league.

“Without the precedent of StarCraft, no current esport would have been nearly as ambitious as they have been; it’s only by standing on the shoulders of both Jim Raynor and bonjwa like Flash and BoxeR that we could think to build out our own studios, run high-quality leagues, and host Worlds in venues like the Staples Center or the Sang-am World Cup Stadium. StarCraft and StarCraft 2 were the first games that made me want to practice to get better, and if that’s not a clear validation of the competitive mastery these games allowed to be displayed, I’m not sure what is.”

Pro StarCraft players Lim “BoxeR” Yo Hwan and Bertrand “ElkY” Grospellier at the 2001 World Cyber Games

The growth and intense popularity of esports, especially overseas, had a rebounding effect on Blizzard, which Murray says taught the company a great deal about how to operate as an international venture.

“StarCraft’s success in Korea had a profound effect on how we thought of ourselves and how we operated. It helped pave the way for Blizzard to become a global game company. “

Sigaty agrees, and also talks about the power of StarCraft as a vehicle for massive celebrity.

“Obviously, the massive scene that was created in South Korea in the 2000s with the Brood War pro scene will be remembered as a pioneering expression of esports in the world. The pro players there achieved national fame, and the teams earned corporate sponsorship with matches televised on multiple cable networks.“

An enduring legacy

“No matter what style of RTS you prefer, StarCraft is just ingrained into the DNA of the genre. No matter what subgenre of RTS you play, most likely something from StarCraft inspired part of it.”

&”The development of StarCraft taught me a few things, primarily that long crunches are bad in general. And in the end, extended crunches don’t actually get the game out much faster.”

Able’s words are echoed in almost every conversation about StarCraft’s legacy. Few games, particularly those that were effectively spin-offs of existing franchises, have made such an indelible mark on games, from design to online play to the way real world events are arranged around them. For Arribas, who is currently deep in the throes of crafting his own real-time strategy, StarCraft is a beacon lighting the way forward.

“StarCraft has become the RTS ‘gold standard’. Its execution, pacing, way of playing, controls and handling, are perfect. For our RTS game, They Are Billions, StarCraft has been the reference for the controls scheme. We are not trying to reinvent the wheel. Most RTS players have already played StarCraft and they feel at home playing They Are Billions. StarCraft was the nexus between hardcore strategy games and action games, and was able to attract that big mass of action game players towards the strategy genre.”

For those that worked on the game, the legacy is even more personal and intense. For Murray, the intensity of the StarCraft dev cycle meant a lot of lessons piled up in a relatively short time-span.

“The development of StarCraft taught me a few things, primarily that long crunches are bad in general. And in the end, extended crunches don’t actually get the game out much faster. And another important lesson I learned is: avoid demoing your product to the public before it is ready. No matter what you may say, ‘we’re 50% complete’ or whatever, the public will always judge the game as a finished product,” Murray says.

“Also, it is easy to get caught up in the temptation to do temporary work to put together a demo, but this should be avoided at all cost. Any throw-away work is time lost to the final product. We made the mistake of showing StarCraft too early. That committed us to a longer series of press and marketing demos than we expected, which I personally believe slowed down our development process.”

For his colleague Sigaty, one of the biggest lessons StarCraft taught was how to deliver story in a way that didn’t feel flat or stuffed into fat capsules outside of the gameplay. StarCraft demonstrated some of the possibilities of a story that was delivered alongside play and how that kind of storytelling could keep players consistently engaged.

“As simple as it sounds, adding portraits to the mission briefings where characters appeared to explain situations, give orders, threaten, etc. made for a much more immersive, character focused experience,” Sigaty explains.

“I was especially excited about how we began to tell more story during the missions themselves. Rather than having almost everything explained as text at the beginning of missions, we were now incorporating lines from characters before and during missions. Characters like Raynor and Kerrigan were much more front and center than anything we’d done in the past and this allowed players to fall in love with them in a more meaningful way. This would continue to evolve how we told story as we moved forward into our next games.”

The net result of all of these lessons, some of which were painful or cost the studio dearly, was a singular game that has withstood the test of time.

“StarCraft was a labor of love,” Murray says. “All of us that worked on it truly believed in what we were making, and we put our heart and soul into our effort to make it the best RTS ever made. Now 20 years later, we’re still talking about it, and people are still playing it. Its diverse, yet balanced, strategies and easy to learn, but hard to master, fast-paced gameplay have set a standard for all similar games to follow.”

BONUS FUN FACT: In researching this story, we checked in with Blizzard to find out why the “C” in StarCraft is capitalized after the “c” in Warcraft was not. The answer, as you might expect, is simple: the company wanted to ensure the game wasn’t confused with the extant Starcraft Bus company.