EPTPC gamer column [LR/SOG charged with rape] - Page 3
| Blogs > ATeddyBear |
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
| ||
|
Centric
United States1989 Posts
It's a real-time strategy game because it is in real-time. You're not supposed to have hours on end to think out what strategy you want to use to counter your opponents'. Any idiot can figure out how to beat what your opponent is doing if he's given an ample amount of time. What he wants is not strategy - it doesn't even happen in real life. The most truly "strategic" thing in the world, the one that all strategic games are based off of, is real-life war. If real-life commanders applied his "give-me-a-couple-hours-to-think-this-through" philosophy, I'm sure that the results of many battles would have changed. | ||
|
Ancestral
United States3230 Posts
I don't know why you'd want to play a game badly, so I just assume everyone would want it geared towards a competitive style of play. I have no idea what these people would do with SC2, play campaign? Play a 2v2 once or twice a week with their friends on normal speed? I guess they can do that, and there will always be a normal speed. It's silly to complain that people who are (or try to be) good at the game play on fastest, they'll always do that, and you can play your casual games on normal with your friends. But slow game speeds are never going to played competitively. | ||
|
MarklarMarklar
Fiji1823 Posts
| ||
|
MiniRoman
Canada3953 Posts
| ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5767 Posts
| ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
Maybe you should stop playing your crappy gta and come 1v1 some more on hamachi dodger. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
"Sun Tzu and Hannibal weren't great generals because they could yell orders faster than anyone else." Actually, they were. That wasn't all they did, they prepared excellently outside of battle as competitive RTS players do, but a large portion of their brilliance came from their ability to make quick decision. The double envelopment at Cannae would not have been successful had Varro been given more time to view and understand what the Carthaginians were doing. In fact, nearly every lopsided military defeat has happened because one side could not adequately comprehend and react to the situation they were given. Time and speed are important parts of tactical decisions and don't be so foolish as to think different armies use radically different formations and equipment. Since the author somehow wants to talk about realism in a fantasy game, if you remove the fast pace from warfare, then it would simply become a beancounting exercise where whoever had the superior numbers and equipment would win.Now why don't we consider a reductio ad absurdam view of your argument. If slowing down the game requires more strategic thinking, then why don't we slow it down even further like to SC64 speeds? Playing the game on slowest would offer the most strategy oriented experience possible, and isn't that what we want? Of course this would be ridiculous, and in general we can say that after some time, giving us extra time to think about strategy and tactics really doesn't benefit us anymore. For you, extra time starts to diminish around the Normal speed setting or slower. Now when you talk to good players, not professionals, just good amateurs, I can almost guarantee you that they're going through an excess of strategic calculations in their head, so for them, time diminishes around the Fastest speed. Well then isn't it just great that Blizzard offers us different speed settings, for you to play slower and for the quicker thinker to play faster?! Yes, I did call the good player a quicker thinker, just as a brilliant child can finish a math test in 10 minutes and it might take the better part of an hour for a less intelligent child to finish. This is a game, not a test however, so everyone should get a chance to play as you'd like and you absolutely do. | ||
|
jimminy_kriket
Canada5529 Posts
| ||
|
naventus
United States1337 Posts
He doesn't understand anything about a game, but decides that rather than admitting he doesn't understand it, he would rather claim that other people are playing the game incorrectly. This is the worst filth of the planet. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On May 02 2008 05:50 jimminy_kriket wrote: I signed up and posted. Hope i did good because im not good at arguing my point on message boards ;; Please post what I said. <3 Actually, gimme 1 sec I'm gonna add some more. | ||
|
jimminy_kriket
Canada5529 Posts
SHIT THEY'RE EVERYWHERE | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
| ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
| ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
| ||
|
omgbnetsux
United States3749 Posts
| ||
|
Late
Latvia418 Posts
| ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On May 02 2008 06:51 fusionsdf wrote: also, one reason for France's stunning defeat in WW2 was because they were unused to the pace of war, and expected it to be slow strategic maneuvers Stop to compare real life to broodwar.... Seriously if you think that Savior would make a good general you are an utterly retarded fanboy dork. Make comparisons with other RTS, but please stop this bullshit it is terrible to read. Seriously how can you dare to compare France defeat to a fucking whiner who dont know how to play video games ? | ||
|
omgbnetsux
United States3749 Posts
| ||
|
Ancestral
United States3230 Posts
On May 02 2008 07:09 Boblion wrote: Stop to compare real life to broodwar.... Seriously if you think that Savior would make a good general you are an utterly retarded fanboy dork. Make comparisons with other RTS, but please stop this bullshit it is terrible to read. Seriously how can you dare to compare France defeat to a fucking whiner who dont know how to play video games ? Do you know for a fact he wouldn't (after extensive military training, that is)? | ||
| ||
