|
On August 22 2009 21:29 intruding wrote:
Have automatisms been designed to ensure that SC2 drifts away from a Starcraftian quality and closer and closer to a "good game" to avoid that SC2 distinguishes itself too much in an ocean of "good PC games" released each year?
My palm has never hit my face so hard.
YES, that's EXACTLY what they're going for. The ONLY reason they put "automatisms" in the game is to make it different from "Starcraftian" quality. Oh and don't forget to make it look like every other game.
Seriously, weak.
|
ah man. SC elitest
SC2 will fail cause you can rally works and select multiple buildings and no skill required.
lul
|
As suggested by his quotes, I'd think that the OP is mocking "good PC games", implying that modern RTS games that are considered "good" by scrubs today are simply inferior in quality to Starcraft.
I'd like to note that successful marketing campaigns are marked by their ability to both differentiate and elevate the image of the product in the eyes of consumers. Conforming to competitors' images isn't inherently good or necessary unless your product is so bad it needs to meet standards before it can be portrayed as elevated.
|
Katowice25012 Posts
I play games because they are fun. When a game is not fun, instead of playing it, I play a different game that has the level of fun I am interested in.
I don't see the issue.
|
Bosnia-Herzegovina1437 Posts
On August 22 2009 21:36 Foucault wrote:
Well I hate the fact there is MBS and auto-mining regardless.
But I think it will be an enjoyable game, but not as competetive. But seriously, they have to release the goddamn game soon. This is soon becoming a farse
I can already tell its gona suck dick, I want kinda the same thing as bw, their just making it CnC
|
I fear it 'll suck dick. Regardless, I will play it anyway.
|
On August 22 2009 21:51 dhe95 wrote:
I hate the fact there's MBS. Auto-mining, not that important IMO. With MBS, you suddenly have the protoss and terran players who can hotkey all their production buildings in 1 hotkey and press one button to have units building out of all of them, which means a lot more hotkeys for units. As with zerg, you can do the same but zerg has such little production buildings compared to protoss and terran that it won't really make a difference.
Artosis said in some SC2 discussion video that you will need to press Z repeatedly to create zealots. So If I want 10 zealots from 10 different gates, its going to be "5zzzzzzzzzz".
Basically hand speed is the same (almost) but attention distribution being taken away as you can still keep an on your units.
|
On August 23 2009 03:20 heyoka wrote:
I play games because they are fun. When a game is not fun, instead of playing it, I play a different game that has the level of fun I am interested in.
I don't see the issue.
The issue revolves around competetive gaming, and the e-sports industry in countries such as South Korea.
Take this example: If all sprinters had rocket propelled shoes, what is the point of competing in the event. There is no point of practicing all day to be the best sprinters if everyone is wearing rocket propelled shoes... The hardwork, skill, and other factors related to competition are striped away.
MBS + Automine is like the rocket propelled shoes.
I hope this clarifies the issue for you ^^.
I have faith in Blizzard. The original starcraft beta looked like crap. They changed what they needed to, and now look where it is. I believe all we need is the beta. They will be flooded with complaints about MBS and Automisms, and it will become non-existant in the final release. From there, they will patch the game to make it perfect.
This is a gut feeling :/
|
there will be alot of skill in sc2 for sure. mbs and automine doesnt take away skill. Why should a strategy game come down to whose better by MBS and automine. two features that should be in ANY modern day RTS. Better players will win. lesser players will lose. also south korea pretty much started starcraft competition. there will be more tourneys and competition outside of korea for sc2 by a far far margin. Espots has evolved beyond SC outside of korea to a grand scope. and is still growing.
|
On August 23 2009 04:14 starPride wrote:
there will be alot of skill in sc2 for sure. mbs and automine doesnt take away skill. Why should a strategy game come down to whose better by MBS and automine. two features that should be in ANY modern day RTS. Better players will win. lesser players will lose. also south korea pretty much started starcraft competition. there will be more tourneys and competition outside of korea for sc2 by a far far margin. Espots has evolved beyond SC outside of korea to a grand scope. and is still growing.
Can you just clarify as to why MBS and automine (and other other automisms):
a) do not take away skill?
b) must be in any modern rts game?
|
On August 23 2009 04:29 Sharp-eYe wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2009 04:14 starPride wrote:
there will be alot of skill in sc2 for sure. mbs and automine doesnt take away skill. Why should a strategy game come down to whose better by MBS and automine. two features that should be in ANY modern day RTS. Better players will win. lesser players will lose. also south korea pretty much started starcraft competition. there will be more tourneys and competition outside of korea for sc2 by a far far margin. Espots has evolved beyond SC outside of korea to a grand scope. and is still growing. Can you just clarify as to why MBS and automine (and other other automisms): a) do not take away skill? b) must be in any modern rts game?
There will still be much multi tasking in sc2 just because theese features are not in. Your screen can be more focused on battles then spending time on ur base. More tactics will also be in sc2 cause of armor and damage types. More emphasis is on battle strategy in sc2 then the original. And as for taking away skill. Anyone is capable of doing it through mass practice its not like some genious feature. its just a mindless action that the interfce makes you do and is progressed through practice just like aim in a FPS. and the 2 are not synonomous just examples. Its a memory muscle which is aquired through mass games. Shouldnt rts be focused on the strategy and the micro? not going to ur base and clicking m m m m m m m
In my personal opinion SC2 will go beyond the original SC by far in terms of esports
i believe this because e-sports is much larger since then and the player base going to SC2 will be huge. there will be tournaments everywhere and tons of sponsors. top players will be from many nations.
|
Face it, many of the features of the game are built around having MBS and auto-mine, it ain't going nowhere.
I can see your reasoning behind MBS now, but there is no reason to keep auto-mining. Also, they could fix "your" MBS problem by simply adding an ability to some building (wherever you research warp tech, if you do research it), give the building as many charges as you have gateways, then add spells for "Summon Zealot", "Summon Stalker" and so on, then decrease the charge value by one every time you warp one in and give it a cooldown (I don't know how they handle it in SC2 right now, cooldown equal to the building time of the unit you built?), done. Unless I missed something.
I play games because they are fun. When a game is not fun, instead of playing it, I play a different game that has the level of fun I am interested in.
Battleforge was fun in the beginning. World in Conflict was fun in the beginning. Dawn of War 2 was fun in the beginning. Now I can't think of any of the other more recent RTS-hotshots, but none of these games have a skillcap nearly as high as SC (in WiC's case, I'm talking about your individual control obviously, since it's a team game it's hard to talk about that). Those games are fun for some time, but their micro/macro isn't challenging enough or they're figured out way too quickly, thus becoming stale, boring and "easy".
Games like that can possibly sell like hell, but they won't be played for very long, which doesn't damage the developer/publisher all that much probably (unless you are talking Blizzard longevity, of course). I'd like to think Blizzard isn't thinking that way, but they are out for making money first, them making a good game is (or should be, from a business standpoint anyway) only a secondary priority.
More tactics will also be in sc2 cause of armor and damage types.
Have you played Warcraft 3 before? It has those mechanics you are talking about and if anyone derives from their standard build order in that game, it's a huge surprise every time.
|
but there is no reason to keep auto-mining
If I rally my workers to a mineral patch, 100% of the time I want my workers to start mining from my mineral patch.
Since there's no actual decision-making on my part, all automine does is change making workers from 2 actions spread apart (make worker, set it to mine when it's done) to 1. Same as all MBS does is reduce the number of actions you need to do to make units.
Since in strategy games I'm interested in decision-making more than anything else....
Basically, if I wanted a game to challenge my mechanics for the sake of challenging my mechanics, I'd play Guitar Hero or something (an enjoyable game, but not what I want in an RTS). I don't want an RTS to force me to do extra useless non-decision-making stuff just for kicks.
What if you had to type in a random 10-letter sequence when your tanks were halfway done to keep them building? That's the same idea as removing automine imo ... and it seems ludicrous from here. Does it reward a certain skill? Sure, but the skill it rewards isn't one that I want my RTSs to reward in the first place, so it actually makes the game worse.
SC is not good because it lacks automine and MBS (I think SC would be better with both of those features). It's good because it very strongly rewards good decision-making.
|
On August 23 2009 08:02 crate wrote:If I rally my workers to a mineral patch, 100% of the time I want my workers to start mining from my mineral patch. Since there's no actual decision-making on my part, all automine does is change making workers from 2 actions spread apart (make worker, set it to mine when it's done) to 1. Same as all MBS does is reduce the number of actions you need to do to make units. Since in strategy games I'm interested in decision-making more than anything else.... Basically, if I wanted a game to challenge my mechanics for the sake of challenging my mechanics, I'd play Guitar Hero or something (an enjoyable game, but not what I want in an RTS). I don't want an RTS to force me to do extra useless non-decision-making stuff just for kicks. What if you had to type in a random 10-letter sequence when your tanks were halfway done to keep them building? That's the same idea as removing automine imo ... and it seems ludicrous from here. Does it reward a certain skill? Sure, but the skill it rewards isn't one that I want my RTSs to reward in the first place, so it actually makes the game worse. SC is not good because it lacks automine and MBS (I think SC would be better with both of those features). It's good because it very strongly rewards good decision-making.
I agree with this and i also propose no more MBS and automine discussion. It really does bring out the worst in the forum, as it says in the sc2 post guidelines. We can't really judge how SC would be without those features and how it will be in the future. But i am more then certain the better player will always win. Hell even in sc ret took a map off nada, and nadas mechanics >>>>>> ret
|
On August 23 2009 04:10 Sharp-eYe wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2009 03:20 heyoka wrote:
I play games because they are fun. When a game is not fun, instead of playing it, I play a different game that has the level of fun I am interested in.
I don't see the issue. The issue revolves around competetive gaming, and the e-sports industry in countries such as South Korea. Take this example: If all sprinters had rocket propelled shoes, what is the point of competing in the event. There is no point of practicing all day to be the best sprinters if everyone is wearing rocket propelled shoes... The hardwork, skill, and other factors related to competition are striped away. MBS + Automine is like the rocket propelled shoes. I hope this clarifies the issue for you ^^. I have faith in Blizzard. The original starcraft beta looked like crap. They changed what they needed to, and now look where it is. I believe all we need is the beta. They will be flooded with complaints about MBS and Automisms, and it will become non-existant in the final release. From there, they will patch the game to make it perfect. This is a gut feeling :/
lmao
they are going to be flooded by 100 players who like to click a lot?
|
On August 23 2009 01:50 Astray wrote:
WC3 failed as a spectator sport in South Korea.
After a few months of popularity, SC2 will probably fail as a spectator sport as well.
I really hope it does so SC can still be played by everyone.
|
On August 23 2009 09:41 arb wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2009 01:50 Astray wrote:
WC3 failed as a spectator sport in South Korea.
After a few months of popularity, SC2 will probably fail as a spectator sport as well. I really hope it does so SC can still be played by everyone.
so UMS and automine and better graphics = worse spectator sport. kk just checking
|
|
|
Also...people here are happy to claim that SC2 will still be a great, skilled game even with automining//MBS included and therefore they seem to be in favor of letting them in the game Yet you guys are all completely missing the point. I'm not disputing that automatisms won't kill the competition aspect of SC2 entirely. Yes, SC2 will be a competitive game. My thesis is simply that automatisms WILL REDUCE its competitiveness
I disagree, like I said above. Will it reduce the mechanical prowess needed? Sure, but I think that's a good thing since I don't like fighting the interface when I have an opponent to play against too. Does that reduce the "skill" needed in SC2? Well that depends on what you mean by skill.
I'd say the skill that should matter in an RTS is real-time decision making. This will not be reduced at all by automine/MBS (nor by smartcasting, nor by letting you select more than 12 units) so in that sense they don't reduce the skill required at all.
And I've not at all claimed that SC2 will be great; I've merely claimed that whether it is does not depend on MBS/automine. SC1 is great despite the fact I feel like I'm fighting the interface every time I get past 24 or so combat units. SC2 will be great or not regardless of MBS/automine, though I suspect I at least won't feel as much like I'm fighting the interface when I'm playing.
|
On August 23 2009 09:46 starPride wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2009 09:41 arb wrote:On August 23 2009 01:50 Astray wrote:
WC3 failed as a spectator sport in South Korea.
After a few months of popularity, SC2 will probably fail as a spectator sport as well. I really hope it does so SC can still be played by everyone. so UMS and automine and better graphics = worse spectator sport. kk just checking
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
