BW General Discussion - Page 262

On December 20 2018 19:12 Burned Toast wrote:
There's an ASL 7 Wildcard match going on right now between Rain, Sharp, Action and Mini. Anybody got any news about this ?

On December 22 2018 08:39 InfestedNeurone wrote:
A French personality is playing BW with 12k+ viewers

On December 21 2018 01:17 Alpha-NP- wrote:
Do you guys thing SCR will possibly rekindle some interest in the RTS genre? Do you think we might see another AAA big budget RTS game in the next year or two?

On December 29 2018 02:40 GGzerG wrote:

Grey Goo got me hyped and then let me down, we can all hope for one but they already tried to make a BW RTS Clone into an eSport, it was called SC2.

On December 29 2018 04:19 Cele wrote:

Except it turned out to be very different from bw.

On January 02 2019 05:24 Chef wrote:

Can you be more precise what you mean by BW's game mechanics? Do you mean like the QoL features that were better than WarCraft II but not yet multiple building selection or infinite unit selection?

To be honest I think BW would have been just another game if it weren't for Battle.net and being one of the first games with very good and easy to use multiplayer online services. It was hitting at a time when people were just barely starting to have their own computers at home, and just barely had good enough internet to sort of play online. Its longevity stemmed from the unexpectedly strong communities that built themselves on top of that service. The game itself had just the right level of polish and wackyness to it that players felt good about the interface. Diablo II was a quite similar phenomenon, it just lacked a truly e-sport competition side to it. To say nothing of the circumstances in Korea that made StarCraft practically the only game worth playing for a few years.

I usually find the argument that people want games to be easy these days or whatever to be pretty suspicious. I would say though that although BW does have some finger intensive mechanics that are part of what make it interesting and what it is, I kind of think anything that reduces RSI is important, especially as games are sold more and more to an aging gaming population (as in all us people who played StarCraft as teenagers are hitting 30 or well past it). I don't think I'd want to play a new game as intensive as BW on my hands, and I loved BW to bits. Teenagers would probably still tolerate a lot of clicking though. I would also mention that for the first few years of StarCraft, pretty much no one had 300 apm and we did play the game at a fairly relaxed, high concept strategy kind of level. The mechanics that would win people games really grew on top of an increasingly sophisticated level of strategic understanding, first by seeing what people could do to win key battles with great micromanagement, and later by seeing how people could get very far ahead with increasingly good macromanagement. StarCraft really did not start out as the wrist destroying game we know it as today. We were eased into it lol.

On January 02 2019 22:57 ggsimida wrote:


lol i always wondered how this sort of argument arise, probably from low apm players who got pwned in too many games in a row. 'holy fuck i lost because my goons got stuck on a ramp waaa, this is strategee game we should not fighting against da systemmmm". to me one of the satisfactions of BW is THE mechanical aspect. that high apm can present distinctly remarkable results on the battleground. my 200-300 apm i can make the goons go smoothly up the ramp. the 50 apm dude gets his stuck and wandering, he deserves it and gets punished short and sweet.

in sc2 for instance i actually hated how the units move, everything is too smooth and the units move around like hivemind sardines in a perfect ball thats its mildly disconcerting.

i know its obv a mindset from players in the top % of the playerbase but thats a inkling on its appeal from the hardcore perspective. the perfect mix of mechanics and strategy while most games often lean towards one side (rhythm games) or the other (chess)