EPTBut I'm not sure that Browder is the problem so much as Blizzard, having transformed since the '90s into a very different company with a very different set of values, ones at odds with the qualities that made BW a phenomenal e-sport. Browder's task was to make a game that was not only balanced at all skill levels, but fun and varied at all skill levels. So a game quite unlike BW, which is a mess at lower levels, and that's exactly what he made.
Dustin Browder, you are doing it wrong. - Page 6
| Blogs > Newbistic |
|
Rococo
United States331 Posts
But I'm not sure that Browder is the problem so much as Blizzard, having transformed since the '90s into a very different company with a very different set of values, ones at odds with the qualities that made BW a phenomenal e-sport. Browder's task was to make a game that was not only balanced at all skill levels, but fun and varied at all skill levels. So a game quite unlike BW, which is a mess at lower levels, and that's exactly what he made. | ||
|
iSometric
2221 Posts
| ||
|
AeonStrife
United States918 Posts
| ||
|
OpticalShot
Canada6330 Posts
I will say this though, I watched Blizzcon 2011 @ the Toronto Barcraft (chromate and GohgamX are such ballers) and SC2 matches were real exciting. It wasn't a huge turnout at the bar, but I'm pretty sure the atmosphere played a big part. Still, the GSL finals and the Blizzcon Finals were both awesome and you know what, that was good enough for me. 5/5 for the blog by the way. =) | ||
|
TheGlassface
United States612 Posts
On October 24 2011 14:10 Azzur wrote: I disagree - whilst I liked BW alot, I feel that SC2 is a superior game. In SC2, I found that there was a great focus on army control (e.g. positioning, jockeying for a superior concave, etc), whilst BW was a test of multi-tasking mechanics. In SC2 players need to make split-second decisions that will easily affect the outcome of the game. I didn't like some of the gimmicky micro-intensive units in BW (e.g. reaver). I prefer TvZ in SC2 - I consider MM overpowered in BW since medics are so powerful marines can just stim all day. In SC2, stimming is a major decision. I didn't like the muta-stacking in BW because I find it counter-intuitive how mutas can just smack turrets all day. I didn't like science vessels in TvZ because it essentially allowed allows terrans to trade energy for armies, and how it essentially hard counters mutas tremendously. Contrast with TvZ in SC2 where a single unit doesn't make something totally obsolete. In BW, I don't like the air balance - valkyries/devourers were not good enough and scouts are the BM units. Valkyries/devourers should've been the masters of the skies (e.g. counter even carriers / BCs) since they only serve 1 purpose (air-to-air). SC2 has done very nice micro - stutterstep, marine splits, army maneuvers to obtain a better concave. However, I do agree with the OP in that I'm not sold on the direction of HoTS yet - where the move is towards gimmicky / flashy units. Max rank in BW? Because this reads like someone who has a very flawed view of the TvZ matchup. In fact, a bad view of the units/matchups in general. | ||
|
TheGlassface
United States612 Posts
On October 24 2011 17:08 Azzur wrote: I watched BW near the start of the Boxer dropship-era (pre-1.08) till when FEs became the norm. During this time, I was recording vods using a 56k (!) modem (at around 5k/sec). Before TL even existed, I followed BW from www.broodwar.com (wow, that was a amazing website for it's time). I continued to watch now and then but it was a bit too hard. Thus, I missed the Nada, iloveoov and Savior era. I returned around 2008 just before Flash because super-dominant. What I found interesting was that strategy advances was still made despite the game was 10 years old at that time. I watched alot of BW (thanks to jon747) until SC2 came out. Still, I was a BW elitist until I started playing and watching SC2. Slowly, I began to see many of the fine points of SC2 and now prefer it. Now, I only watch OSL and MSL finals for BW, but almost all GSL matches. Disregard my earlier post but my point still stands. The way you described the units and interactions shows me, as far as playing goes, you missed some of the key ideas present in the atchups. Stim is very important and I can recall several JvF games where J forced F to stim in order to eventually overrun the force with mutaLing. Just for one example. Also, medics can't keep up as well in BW vs a flying medic in SCII, which makes unit control, splitting of marines/medics and positioning paramount to success. Again, just a few examples. There are hundreds more. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On October 24 2011 00:30 EvilTeletubby wrote: Very well written sir, good way to articulate not just HotS issues, but basically SC2 issues altogether. SC2 is definitely flashier, but lacks what Brood War had in terms of substance.  It's always been that way unfortunately and I've been saying it since day 1. Look, Dustin is a great guy and all as a person but his philosophy on game design, especially for RTS games is flawed. He's said it many times as well; he goes for what would look cool first opposed to their viability, which should be priority number one of any game designer. | ||
|
insanet
Peru439 Posts
| ||
|
Arthemesia
United States292 Posts
| ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
| ||
|
Treadmill
Canada2833 Posts
But I mostly agree. Its weird, the units in sc2 seem both a little too niche AND a little too general in their role - or rather, the units are all very niche but the races end up very generalized. On sounds, sc2 DOES have some great sounds to it (banelings, SNIPE, and I love the dull thud of Brood Lords personally) though some of them are worse then they were in BW (tanks and psi storm primarily, imo). i think part of the problem is that if a race gets something thats super powerful but specialized (ie if terran got BW-level siege tanks) then people bitch about how OP they are, and Blizzard nerfs them (sc2 tanks). But to compensate the race gets more generalized so they aren't UP. | ||
|
DEN1ED
United States1087 Posts
Also, despite what bliz says about wanting SC2 to be an esport, I still think they are primarily concerned with the casual crowd. They are a business after all and the casual crowd makes them the most money. The entire HotS panel was just "look how cool and awesome these units are." David Kim talking about the mega-thor was very sad. "This is awesome, late game, A-move ultimate unit." And whenever I watch a BW vod and hear a tank siege up I want to play BW | ||
|
Kal_rA
United States2925 Posts
| ||
|
Kal_rA
United States2925 Posts
On October 24 2011 14:10 Azzur wrote: I didn't like science vessels in TvZ because it essentially allowed allows terrans to trade energy for armies, and how it essentially hard counters mutas tremendously. Ghost, EMP + snipe? | ||
|
Osmoses
Sweden5302 Posts
Anyway, you weren't really talking about the sound effects, even though they are really important and are currently lacking. You were talking about unit design. And I agree with everything you said, but unfortunately you are not the first person to say it. I remember what I think was an article by some TL staff having just gotten back from a first-hand play of WoL talking about how the units seemed to be pigeonholed into roles. Someone made the likeness of BW units being a ball you could toss around and have fun with whereas the SC2 units were on a rail going to a fixed destination. The reaper came up. It is a unit completely designed to harass from the start. Get that shit out of the game, let me be a little innovative myself please. My point is, this has all been said before but whoever's in charge is obviously still of the opinion that he/she knows best. | ||
|
Ricjames
Czech Republic1047 Posts
| ||
|
Geovu
Estonia1344 Posts
On October 27 2011 02:58 sGs.Kal_rA wrote: Hydra spitting sound. 1 think that blizzard completely fucked up. I miss the spits The SC2 hydra attack sound should be replaced by the SC1 siege tank blast. Seriously they do a ridiculous amount of damage. | ||
|
pandaBee
United States251 Posts
he was talking about irradiate man. as in irradiate costing energy | ||
|
EchOne
United States2906 Posts
On October 27 2011 05:42 pandaBee wrote: he was talking about irradiate man. as in irradiate costing energy And so Kal_rA responded with I think what he felt was an example of "trading energy for armies" in SC2. ...the entire line of argument that "trading energy for armies" is somehow a.) literally what happens and b.) poor design is questionable. Energy is just another resource, another numbered dimension to account for in the vast network of numbers that is an RTS. Since the assets are all connected (minerals to units, unit speed to space and time, time to energy, etc.) having energy be relevant at all to the game state is in essence always going to result in energy affecting armies. | ||
|
Grovbolle
Denmark3805 Posts
I don't feel special playing this game anymore, but I did feel special when i got to yell "BOOM HEADSHOT" in to my friends ear during a LAN when I popped his head with a god damn Arctic Warfare Magnum (god CS-LANs were good, BW as well) | ||
| ||
