|
I've decided to write this blog due to the unforeseen, the blasphemous thing that is BW puritanism. It's been reeking into the pores of everyone's pubic hairs and ear canals like some gooey monster that can force itself inside of you and then explode you from the inside out. You try to grab it and pull it out but no it's liquid. It seeps in and HOLY CRAP. Yes, this is the evil that is BW puritanism.
Someone whines "omg sc2 so ez pz omg no skill diamond= D- rank" just no. stop. "Oh mah gersh multi building select and automine that's some whack poop brah it's like you're hacking. LOL ROFL I got to masters in 5 days. Masters is good enough to beat the pros heh.". It's not hacking. I just....if you think tedious tasks like telling your workers to mine and selecting buildings 1 at a time and having only 12 units per control group is what made StarCraft 1 good.....then you're absolutely right and I tell you to carry on the good word.+ Show Spoiler +
A lot of what made things that people love in BW so good were the hindrances in technology. That's what limited people to only 12 units per control group, that's what made the unit pathing so abysmally bad. It was so bad the Blizzard team worked on it for an entire month JUST to work on the pathing yet it still sucked abominably. Yet, the terrible pathing ended up being a happy accident almost since it effectively nerfed units like the dragoon or the goliath that were already powerful and would be OP with good pathing.
The people at blizzard when they made the game didn't think of mutalisk micro being a thing, they didn't think of terrans making wall ins with a barracks so they could lift the barracks off later, they didn't think of really abstract building placements so they could be zealot, ling tight, air unit stacking, or hundreds of meticulous things. None of that. These were all just happy accidents, unforeseen factors in game design that would make a big difference later on in the game. The developers didn't go "Let's make it so that players have to meticulously memorize certain building layouts, and oh, let's make sure some wall ins are zealot tight but not ling tight." No.
The developing road of StarCraft was with much rockiness and difficulty, so difficult the developers slept at their workplace. Then they woke up to code an already terribly clustered piece of software, yet they couldn't scrap it and use some more efficient way to develop, it was already months into development and every little thing that was wrong was....it was like if you had to go back and fix one thing that'd make 10 other things go wrong. Just the lines of code used to develop starcraft was astronomical since they were basically piling on layer after layer of clean newspapers over a layer of newspapers already soiled with cat feces and urine(idk I guess?) not bothering to clean the already soiled layer in an attempt to fix problems and make things barely functional as a working product cuz lo and behold they had competing RTS games like Total Annihilation and Dominion Storm(lol wut?) coming out. I read about this stuff in this blog by some lead designer for blizz. http://www.codeofhonor.com/blog/tough-times-on-the-road-to-starcraft Even when the game was released to the public there were still many problems to fix, oh so many. Floating gas drone anyone?
The Carrier is a nice example of what came to be from the haphazard coding. Every unit moved in a similar way, yet the developers had to write hundreds(exaggeration?) of code just for the carrier for every action that another unit had because it just did....everything differently, and that's why carrier micro in BW exists where you can send interceptors to attack while moving the carrier continuously. It'd be hard to replicate this in the sc2 engine because it was just so....miraculous.
Again, happy accident.The sc2 development team however weren't faced with such difficulties and they were given the ability to have 225 unit select, multi building select, and really crisp unit pathing. I mean, it's not like back in the BW days when if they had the ability to do this they probably would've done it. They didn't which is why it has the limited interface. The unit pathing for bw was just....a humongous mess. The way units interacted with the terrain was just...terrible. It's like you'd have to have the sc2 team make a really terrible piece of piled coding just to be like BW. I don't know. Maybe they could've replicated BW in a cleaner way? Anyway, the unit pathing differences actually are a large part of what makes Starcraft one StarCraft one and what makes starcraft 2 starcraft 2. Everything just works so...differently. It's in this beautiful TL blog post. http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/429573-broodwar-and-starcraft-2-pathing
They're very different games and please, stop the hate.
Rant has completed.
Edit: Apparently there's lots of misinformation that slipped in. I won't edit this though because....I'm a man and I stand by my mistakes. What have I done.
Edit 2: Yo. It seems like I didn't get message across and all I wanted to say was I'm not arguing that sc2 is better or worse than BW. They're just different.
Edit 3: FOR THE LOVE OF MERCY STOP BUMPING THIS BLOG POST.
 
|
|
|
On September 15 2014 12:02 hellokitty[hk] wrote:
1／5
Why .-.
|
If you read that same blog more carefully you would know that things like single-building select and max-12 unit selection were design choices, not technology limitations. The developers intentionally made it more difficult to play than they could have otherwise made it, as it made it more fun.
BW is pretty miraculous, given the "problems" you stated (many of which are emergent gameplay, not bugs per se). And it's a lot more fun than SC2 for a lot of people, which is why it has lasted as long as it has and has still many thousands of players. It's more challenging and more visceral, cleaner and easier to watch, bigger skill gaps between players, better sound design, and runs on more PCs. These things and others make it appealing to a certain type of person, with an appeal that SC2 does not have.
|
On September 15 2014 12:20 Birdie wrote:
If you read that same blog more carefully you would know that things like single-building select and max-12 unit selection were design choices, not technology limitations. The developers intentionally made it more difficult to play than they could have otherwise made it, as it made it more fun.
BW is pretty miraculous, given the "problems" you stated (many of which are emergent gameplay, not bugs per se). And it's a lot more fun than SC2 for a lot of people, which is why it has lasted as long as it has and has still many thousands of players. It's more challenging and more visceral, cleaner and easier to watch, bigger skill gaps between players, better sound design, and runs on more PCs. These things and others make it appealing to a certain type of person, with an appeal that SC2 does not have.
Oh my bad. It's been a few years. Thanks for letting me know.
|
On September 15 2014 12:16 DepressedOne wrote:Why .-.
Because he always gives 1/5.
But also, 1/5 for me as well. There's nothing "wrong" with the pathing in StarCraft, and if there are, you have given no examples of how "The unit pathing for bw was just....a humongous mess. The way units interacted with the terrain was just...terrible." Is it because you tried to send a drone up a ramp and then it turned around because the ramp was blocked? If I were in a similar dire situation here's what I'd do: Control my fucking drone.
|
I dunno where you gather the hate from, BWers in general are reclusive nerds who stick to their forum and their events, the only time there is conflict is when people discuss both games in a BW/SC2 thread from what I've seen o.o
Anyway 1/5 for not bringing up anything new and not making it over the top.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
While there have been some unintended consequences of some programming that have lead to amazing BW tricks, things like 12 unit selection were purposely chosen so that you feel more in control of the game. Your blog doesn't really bring anything new and it's mostly just empty statements without anything to back them up, not that it matters much anyways. Also, don't really understand the purpose of this blog. I haven't seen a BW vs SCII argument in at least a year (likely more) so it's completely random and I visit both forums though a bit less SCII in the last bit of time. Also:
goliath that were already powerful
:S No doubt the goliath is great for AA against units like the mutalisk and it fills that role well in mech but to say they are really powerful isn't right at all. Their micro potential is through the roof though so you see the skill differential between two players depending on their use. Anyways, I agree with everyone else: 1/5
|
You don't even wee BW vs SC2 anymore, why bring it up, now?
|
I'm unimpressed, not only are your facts wrong but even if they weren't your rant seems to lack any solid structure or sound logic in its conclusions. Frankly I feel you did not even deserve the one star.
|
|
|
Had to log in just to give 1/5.
Three strikes for this terrible sc2 vs bw blog: Wrong, incoherent, and hostile. Out!
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES50107 Posts
did I just go back to 2010?
what the fuck?
|
2014. A blog finally unites BW and SC2 fans. For that alone you deserve a 5/5. But not from me.
|
I think if you ask BW players things they would change in BW they could come up with a laundry list of problems like gas issue, dragoon attack command bug, unit stack glitches (esp on ramps), lack of built in backwards ramps (had to be faked using a special tile editor with existing tiles).
I think that a lot of the more experienced players would not touch unit pathing much if at all, though. Controlling an army carefully that will otherwise act clumsy is one of the enjoyable parts about gameplay. Setting up large scale attacks and managing many different groups is part of the intensity of the game. Maybe if the game were made today all the units would move like schools of fish, as they do in SC2. It would be a much less interesting game for it.
Same with MBS and infinite unit select. You take away decisions the player has to make about what to do with his or her concentration when you automate these functions. You could patch in being able to rally peons to minerals if you wanted, but it would make harass techniques and lots of the interesting concentration-attacking-oriented styles nerfed. Such a change can't make BW better--it just makes it simpler.
I think what bitterness still exists in the community is caused by the same thing it was 2 years ago, which has nothing to do with the games themselves and much more to do with the business surrounding the games. BW fans miss their pro-scene, yo!
|
On September 16 2014 03:40 Chef wrote:
I think if you ask BW players things they would change in BW they could come up with a laundry list of problems like gas issue, dragoon attack command bug, unit stack glitches (esp on ramps), lack of built in backwards ramps (had to be faked using a special tile editor with existing tiles).
I think that a lot of the more experienced players would not touch unit pathing much if at all, though. Controlling an army carefully that will otherwise act clumsy is one of the enjoyable parts about gameplay. Setting up large scale attacks and managing many different groups is part of the intensity of the game. Maybe if the game were made today all the units would move like schools of fish, as they do in SC2. It would be a much less interesting game for it.
Same with MBS and infinite unit select. You take away decisions the player has to make about what to do with his or her concentration when you automate these functions. You could patch in being able to rally peons to minerals if you wanted, but it would make harass techniques and lots of the interesting concentration-attacking-oriented styles nerfed. Such a change can't make BW better--it just makes it simpler.
I think what bitterness still exists in the community is caused by the same thing it was 2 years ago, which has nothing to do with the games themselves and much more to do with the business surrounding the games. BW fans miss their pro-scene, yo!
new pro scene exists yo
|
On September 15 2014 11:51 DepressedOne wrote:
Someone whines "omg sc2 so ez pz omg no skill diamond= D- rank" just no. stop. "Oh mah gersh multi building select and automine that's some whack poop brah it's like you're hacking. LOL ROFL I got to masters in 5 days.
SC2 is easy compared to BW. And Diamond might not be equal to D- but to low D probably. I dont know any BW player (even the worst) who were placed in a league below Diamond. Most even got instant to Masters with no training or knowledge.
Try to get to C- on ICC (which is even a really low rank) in BW and tell me again that SC2 isnt the easier game of those two.
1/5
|
What have you DONE?! You have awakened the GRACKEN!!!!
Wait, this is 2014?
No, seriously if there is some random troll on SC2 forum or something just repprt him.
|
Also, was expecting SC2BW mod
1/5
|
On September 16 2014 19:42 chrisolo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2014 11:51 DepressedOne wrote:
Someone whines "omg sc2 so ez pz omg no skill diamond= D- rank" just no. stop. "Oh mah gersh multi building select and automine that's some whack poop brah it's like you're hacking. LOL ROFL I got to masters in 5 days. SC2 is easy compared to BW. And Diamond might not be equal to D- but to low D probably. I dont know any BW player (even the worst) who were placed in a league below Diamond. Most even got instant to Masters with no training or knowledge. Try to get to C- on ICC (which is even a really low rank) in BW and tell me again that SC2 isnt the easier game of those two. 1/5
Well that's untrue. I played both at the same time, putting roughly the same amount of effort into both got D+ in BW and diamond in SC2. Later I dropped SC2 and peaked at C, and now I probably suck again since I haven't laddered in half a year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
