|
On February 15 2013 16:58 eu.exodus wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2013 16:10 deathly rat wrote:
Man, there are so many people who are spoilt, self important and delusional in this thread (not OP). What big RTS title was there before SC2 came out? Nothing, for years. What other major RTS has been released since SC2 came out? Nothing. Face it. If you like RTS, it's either SC2 or go back to playing BW or WC3.
How can you say they haven't listened to the community or balanced the game? Just because they haven't balanced exactly to how you would like it, means they don't care or haven't supported their game? Really?
Oh shit, a company actually wants to make money. What a crime that is.... just because sc2 was the only big rts in years doesn't make it a good game. It isn't. Its okay but not the game it should be. That said Ill probably buy it for the campaign and to try the multiplayer but Im not hyped for it.
SC2 is sort of a love hate relationship.
On one had the gameplay flaws are inexcusable for a competitive game at this point, you don't need a diploma in game design to realize this (is that even a thing?).
But on the other hand every other similar RTS in recent memory is so horrible that it pretty much gives Blizzard an undeserved monopoly on the market by making SC2 the best RTS of this decade.
SC2 will continue to be mediocre until a proper competitor steps up.
|
I think your criticism is well placed and definitely an issue, but there is always the tension in SC between imperfect information mechanics ( 'the strategist') game control mechanics ( 'the tactician') and unit control mechanics ('the micromaster'). If you make the game too far to one end, then it becomes a game that is only enjoyable and interesting for one specific kind of player, an issue broodwar suffers from. It doesn't matter how good you are at strategy and tactics, if you're down 50eapm on your opponent, you're probably going to lose. I'm not saying that strat/tactics don't enter into it, but you can only afford to invest in them once you've honed your mechanics to the point of stupidity.
I have to admit I agree with you that the unit design and overall factional alterations in HoTs are the most clumsy, inelegant and unexciting I have seen in years, but blizzard is really stuck between a rock and a hard place, with no talent to pull them free.
|
Yarr, love HoTS, will buy. Great work on korhal.
|
The funny thing is if Blizzard had just made an updated Brood War, and soberly so, they could practically print their own money and it would cement the game's status as the classic/greatest RTS of all time. Everybody would buy it. They already had a huge eSport scene and I have no doubt that a "pretty" version of BW would have been just as popular in the western world as SC2 has been: The hype for a new version of SC was so huge at the time. BW with SC2's matchmaking system, updated graphics, pathing, etc. but *the same mechanics* (limited control group size, etc.) would have been godly and they'd be selling it ten years from now just like they were still selling BW for years and years.
Their decisions make no business sense.
Now, don't get me wrong, I've had a lot of fun with SC2. But I still remember when I was playing my first game (practice ladder game) on release day and on the phone with my brother and I was like ... there are tripods attacking me, WTF is this shit? I expected there would be vultures, firebats, goliaths, all of that because those were the Starcraft units in my mind. I was disappointed, but the match-making is really the games killer feature so I've had a good time laddering all along. But not enough to keep me from getting bored with a so-so game after a few years. I'm still not bored with BW today.
Don't know where I'm going with this except that I really wish Blizzard had smart people making decisions and not folks out for glory. No doubt Browder and co. wanted to make a name for themselves, and it is a more humble and quiet decision to update an old game than to create new units, suddenly huge balance arguments again, and whoopdeedoo you're in the first row of live events, everybody knows who you are, etc. etc. Great for their careers, shitty for us.
|
I think you are overreacting a bit. I get the map making complaint. But as far as balance I am sure blizzard will keep balancing the game, its just they are pretty fail at it, but they will make things right. At the end of the day the game will sell really well because people believe blizzard will fix the issues. Sure I have my own complaints about balance, but I try to figure out how to deal with them because it is fun.
|
On February 16 2013 00:46 HeeroFX wrote:
I think you are overreacting a bit. I get the map making complaint. But as far as balance I am sure blizzard will keep balancing the game, its just they are pretty fail at it, but they will make things right. At the end of the day the game will sell really well because people believe blizzard will fix the issues. Sure I have my own complaints about balance, but I try to figure out how to deal with them because it is fun.
Will it though? There's no doubt that BW (or packages including BW) sold far more copies than SC did before BW was released. I seriously doubt HotS is going to come anywhere near outselling WoL.
|
I will buy HotS wihout a doubt.
Also, I fucking hated Korhal Compound.
|
Slovakia116 Posts
On February 16 2013 02:57 wongfeihung wrote:
I will buy HotS wihout a doubt.
Also, I fucking hated Korhal Compound.
With this guy on both counts.
One thing I like about HotS is the expanded early pressure options that don't force a player to be allin. CC first/1rax FE/1gate FE/15 hatch etc. may not be the only build we ever see that opens games other than allins and cheeses. I don't know about you, but I can pretty much skip the first 4-6 minutes of any game in the GSL and not miss anything while early-game HotS has a lot of action.
|
Definitely buying hots. I would comment on how the new unit design alleviates some of the issue with reliance on sentries, but given your map I guess you wouldn't know what I was referring to...
Just kidding - good map! <3
|
Canada13389 Posts
On February 15 2013 12:12 monitor wrote:Hey all, I've been a SC2 fan (player, viewer, and mapmaker) for a couple years. I was most involved in the scene when I made Korhal Compound and played in masters on NA. That said, I'm not going to buy Heart of the Swarm. Like many other mapmakers, I have been frustrated at Blizzard's game design. Usually I just ignore any problems I have with the game and keep trying to make better maps. But I just can't see my self continuing in HotS. There are two reasons- The first reason that I won't buy HotS is the design of some of the new units. I'm not a fan of "this unit is good if the opponent isn't prepared for it". The oracle is good at destroying a mineral line in only a few seconds, but the opponent can stop it by having anti-air in position (turrets, vikings, etc.). Hellbats do a ton of damage, probably too much, if the opponent doesn't stop them. Swarm hosts are great if the opponent doesn't have detection or he can't move safely out of his base. This kind of unit design doesn't help the game in my opinion. What I am a fan of is "this unit will only do a lot of damage if you micro it well". These are units that are fun to see in the hands of a good player, raise the skill cap, and make the game more interesting. Examples are the mutalisk, blink stalkers, and the slowing bubble on the mothership core. I'd like to see units that require more micro at the top level. Otherwise, I'm not very interesed. Of course, I'm not saying every unit has to be hard to use, just that the design "this unit is good if the opponent isn't prepared", isn't doing it for me. The second reason I won't buy HotS is the lack of a highground advantage. There have been threads on Teamliquid, Battlenet, and Reddit about this issue. Blizzard seems to think it will take away from player skill, but they are wrong. Some fans think it will encourage turtling; they are also wrong. Basically, it gives a lot more variety to maps and increases the skill cap of the game by encouraging positioning, micro, and strategic army movement. It improves the game in every way. Mapmaking would be so much better. Watching the game would be so much better. Players would appreciate the change because it increases the skill cap. Until one of these things changes, I won't buy the game. Will you?
These are all kind of pointless reasons. Let's be honest here: HotS isn't BW, its not WC3. Its a new RTS. If you don't enjoy it thats fine. If you aren't having fun anymore thats fine. Its a game, you are supposed to enjoy it while playing it since its not like your career is built around it. You don't need to justify buying or not buying it but to blame blizzard is kind of ridiculous imo.
|
On February 16 2013 00:46 HeeroFX wrote:
I think you are overreacting a bit. I get the map making complaint. But as far as balance I am sure blizzard will keep balancing the game, its just they are pretty fail at it, but they will make things right. At the end of the day the game will sell really well because people believe blizzard will fix the issues. Sure I have my own complaints about balance, but I try to figure out how to deal with them because it is fun.
I'm not really trying to say that it's imbalanced, just that I don't agree with the design.
On February 16 2013 02:57 wongfeihung wrote:
I will buy HotS wihout a doubt.
Also, I fucking hated Korhal Compound.
Heh, agreed. Korhal wasn't a good map. I won't make excuses, but I did make it 9 months before implemented into the game (so the metagame had completely changed- protoss wasn't taking thirds against mass roach).
On February 16 2013 05:34 ZeromuS wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2013 12:12 monitor wrote:Hey all, I've been a SC2 fan (player, viewer, and mapmaker) for a couple years. I was most involved in the scene when I made Korhal Compound and played in masters on NA. That said, I'm not going to buy Heart of the Swarm. Like many other mapmakers, I have been frustrated at Blizzard's game design. Usually I just ignore any problems I have with the game and keep trying to make better maps. But I just can't see my self continuing in HotS. There are two reasons- The first reason that I won't buy HotS is the design of some of the new units. I'm not a fan of "this unit is good if the opponent isn't prepared for it". The oracle is good at destroying a mineral line in only a few seconds, but the opponent can stop it by having anti-air in position (turrets, vikings, etc.). Hellbats do a ton of damage, probably too much, if the opponent doesn't stop them. Swarm hosts are great if the opponent doesn't have detection or he can't move safely out of his base. This kind of unit design doesn't help the game in my opinion. What I am a fan of is "this unit will only do a lot of damage if you micro it well". These are units that are fun to see in the hands of a good player, raise the skill cap, and make the game more interesting. Examples are the mutalisk, blink stalkers, and the slowing bubble on the mothership core. I'd like to see units that require more micro at the top level. Otherwise, I'm not very interesed. Of course, I'm not saying every unit has to be hard to use, just that the design "this unit is good if the opponent isn't prepared", isn't doing it for me. The second reason I won't buy HotS is the lack of a highground advantage. There have been threads on Teamliquid, Battlenet, and Reddit about this issue. Blizzard seems to think it will take away from player skill, but they are wrong. Some fans think it will encourage turtling; they are also wrong. Basically, it gives a lot more variety to maps and increases the skill cap of the game by encouraging positioning, micro, and strategic army movement. It improves the game in every way. Mapmaking would be so much better. Watching the game would be so much better. Players would appreciate the change because it increases the skill cap. Until one of these things changes, I won't buy the game. Will you? These are all kind of pointless reasons. Let's be honest here: HotS isn't BW, its not WC3. Its a new RTS. If you don't enjoy it thats fine. If you aren't having fun anymore thats fine. Its a game, you are supposed to enjoy it while playing it since its not like your career is built around it. You don't need to justify buying or not buying it but to blame blizzard is kind of ridiculous imo.
I don't want HotS to be BW! I just want more dynamic gameplay and a higher skill ceiling. At one point I was considering trying to pursue a career around it... but anyway, who else would I blame?
|
I was starting to get bored, finally, until I got my beta key. There is some shit in there I think is lame, but at least for now the strategies you can use is waaaay more varied than WoL. The game feels a lot different.
|
Buying HotS, because I played in the beta, and it's fun, which is the basic requirement for any game I buy. Blizzard tries to make things fair, and I'm not precious about what I think the game should be - that's "design your own game" thinking, which will make you crazy - and is (in my opinion) self-defeating on the path to entertainment/enlightenment.
|
France12904 Posts
I haven't tested it yet, nor do I know all the new units skins/names because I didn't watch enough streams. I don't know yet if I'll buy it (if it's 30€ I'll buy it for sure but if it's 60€ I'm not too sure), I didn't notice there was no high ground, it kinds of suck if it's the case.
The added units without more micro annoy me a lot as well, I feel like they are still casualizing the game even more (number of units on minerals/gas and auto sending to mine seriously?).
The lack of new terran units is kind of sad too...
I don't think they will change the two things you talk about though, they kind of do their own thing without listening to the players so there is not much hope.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
