|
On May 22 2018 17:23 Navane wrote:
First, OP is a whiner. Every opinion disagreeing with yours is just pointless whining. Never heard that argument anywhere before.
Second, this is not a major QoL thing that will make the game significantly easier for anyone, or draw in anyone who is now appaled by the harsness of broodwar. It is such a small nuicanse I can't even think of any feature that would compare to it in futility. Tell me: Why then, for every new foreign map that was always used for a tourney, were there always players demanding a FOW free version of the map? Obviously it makes a notable difference to quite a few people. Learn to see perspectives but you own!
Third, it's not just about remembering the map layout. When you play on a new map you should actually go in there and try out building placements too. Do you want an imprint on the map where you should build your rax/supplys for walls on each spawning point? (I have one for hunters, its great!) The same for pylon/forge/gateway walls? Do you want a blueprint of the simcity of your race? So all you have to do is fill in the coloring picture? Maybe put in small numbers to correspond with the supply or order you have to build them in? Do you want a couple of arrows that show what locations are in range of siegetanks or psionic storm? Maybe a pulsating purple pedestal to tell you where you should perform your drops? Yeah, one it totally like the other @_@.
If you just want to play a map and simply know where the expansions and what the rough terrain features are, non-black unexplored FOW can actually go a long way.
If you want all the fine details, such as wall-ins and other building placement, you probably think you'd have to play the map for hours and develop some "skills". That's because you are doing it wrong. Just get SCMDraft and use its fabulous analyzer and debugging features to learn everything you ever need to know in 10 minutes or so.
All this is knowledge you should build up for each new map. Adding your petty fog of war idea simply moves the wall one step further away. So new people bash there heads against it one step later. The fact that you have to send your scvs to the minerals, that's the thing that's hard for new people. True story. That you'd have to learn anew for every new map how to right-click workers on minerals is a true revelation to me. I seriously did not know that before. I think you should complain to Blizzard about it – sounds like a seriously bad design feature.
|
And yet I still meet people wondering why there aren´t more new people playing BW ...
|
The SC2 system is pretty good for new players and/or new maps. Meaning a "dark" fog of war on the entire map. The player would have to explore before building tho. It should be adjustable, maybe not by the player but in the map settings. If you play a campaign or some UMS, the classic black area should fits better.
(Also why Bisudagger has been warned for this post? xd)
|
Freakling,
I always like your opinions on map making details and I especially liked your input in the "Total Recall" thread.
Also, I did word poorly when I said "OP is a whiner." Without context, you are very right in your reply to that. However, I would like to add that op is a proven whiner: he has been banned before because of it.
The thing is, part of me just doesnt want to partake in this particular discussion because it is such a petty one. I think everyone who doesn't want the fog of war changed, thinks its a petty discussion and therefore doesn't partake in it. But that results in the ever skewed internet representation, where the most vocal are seen as the majority.
I remember beeing a young padwan and starting a thread about playing on normal speed instead of fastest, with the same apeal to noobism. "Who has time to learn to click that quick?" "This way everyone has time to do all their actions." It was foolish; the struggle is the game. Nobody plays broodwar for fun. There is no casual broodwar player. If you explain the game to a layman he'll think you're explaining a tedious job that should be automated, that you're some kind of chineese factory worker.
And then you always get this argument of "you people don't like change." We don't change paintings, do we? We don't change songs, do we? We don't add gratituious cgi to movies, do we?
edit: i forgot my favourite argument against: "people don't like change": use it in the climate change debate.
|
Calling something petty, just because you personally don't agree or care, is still pretty disrespectful. And whether the OP actually had a good motivation or convincing arguments to offer does not really matter when the debate is actually being carried out by others already. Argue about the thing, not people.
And then you are comparing apples and oranges all the time (or rather apples and orange goo from outer space). If some one wants to play the game at a slower speed, guess what: They already have the option to just do it.
Arguably, the people who do play broodwar are doing it for fun… It's just that people have very different ideas about what constitutes "fun".
We don't change paintings. But many paintings have been recreated various times, often by the same artists, with minor and major changes on the original design. Songs don't change? Ever heard different versions of the same folk songs? Renditions by different interprets of the same art song? Any cover version ever? Big budges movies are flooded with gratuitous CGI these days. As for old movies, if it's a popular franchise (like Star Wars) and budged allows, remastered versions actually do come out (they even changed Darth Vader's ghost out for young Anakin's in RotJ, which does not even make any sense).
And the issue with some people and global warning is not whether they like it or not but whether they know enough, want to know or even care.
None of these examples have any bearing on the topic at hand, though.
|
The only reason I feel I'm opposed to it is because I dont necessarily feel like it would make casual players that much more optimized.
A poll for the entire playerbase would be so appropriate here, and actual performance numbers before and after changes because you could see hard evidence for it, instead of biased speculative talk.
If you're unable to find an opponent's base in reasonable amount of time, you're simply bad. I never had any issues or thought it was problematic and I played new maps every so often.
Acting like absolving the blackened FoW will solve the badness all of the sudden, because now you magically can find the opponent's base in a reasonable amount of time and "adapt strategies because you understand the map" is delusional.
I would like input from high level players, because lower than B level players have much more to work on than just their understanding of the map and how to play that map. So much so that I'd argue it's actually irrelevant for them.
Or maybe I simply don't understand what's trying to be accomplished here. My argument is that changing it won't matter for the player experience (it's simply an illusion of it mattering while playing the game), so why change it? Your argument is: if it doesn't matter that much (or might potentially matter a lot for people) why not change it?
If the FoW is changed and the evidence turns out that performance across to board (but especially for lower level players) becomes significantly better and more players are drawn to the game and map diversity is upped, then I gladly conceed my point. If not? People are pussies and fundamentally need to change their own mental state because it wouldn't matter if you played on a dark map or not (performance wise).
But then you can come in again with the: why not just change it if it calms people down and gives them the illusion of helping them?
+ Show Spoiler +My answer is: stop spoonfeeding people illusions. It's bad for them for all sorts of reasons. I don't want to go further but it becomes a lot less BW related and much more societal at large related with this.
|
So i wasn't incorrect? You have to see a buildable terrain in order to create a building?
Then i would oppose to the change it would affect the game.
|
I actually wouldn't mind the "black fog" to be removed so we can see the map. I also wouldn't mind if you could order buildings on top of it. It is a small facilitation to your macro but I guess doesn't matter that much. It is also very annoying to send a a worker or unit to a place and find out it didnt go where you wanted as you clicked on a black map "ridge" so it's stuck on the other corner of the map.
|
fog of war dick would not happen anymore.
|
On May 22 2018 18:25 Navane wrote: Nobody plays broodwar for fun. I play broodwar for fun.
If you don't find playing broodwar fun, go and struggle at something you enjoy instead.
|
The arguments for removing it kinda makes sense and I guess I'll get used to it if it happens. But emotionally it tears me up that it's necessary to remove in the first place. Sure, it's good to make it more accessible for newer layers, but it also really sucks that everything has to change to make things easier.
Everything has to be so easy nowadays and "on my terms". Why not just be exposed a bit to the brutality of BW? Life is brutal, therefore BW is life. Don't give up on life! (Totally logical argument, not emotionally invested at all  )
I just don't see the point. I don't believe stuff like that will save BW. I rather think it would be for people to start convincing friends and family, to arrange tournaments, leagues, and overall just create life and excitement around it is the key to revitalize the game.
Actually, I loathe the thought of removing the FOW as it is. But I'm not going to claim it'll ruin balance, that it won't help anything at all in making BW more accessible, or that I won't get used to it in the end. I just really hate the change, especially since it's because people can't be arsed to make the extra effort. BW rewards hard work and raw talent. For me, these changes goes against the very core of the game.
Blerh, ramblings. Sorry. It's just very, very sad, even though it might rationally make sense.
|
Bisutopia19307 Posts
On May 22 2018 18:18 Glioburd wrote:The SC2 system is pretty good for new players and/or new maps. Meaning a "dark" fog of war on the entire map. The player would have to explore before building tho. It should be adjustable, maybe not by the player but in the map settings. If you play a campaign or some UMS, the classic black area should fits better. (Also why Bisudagger has been warned for this post? xd)
The best part about that warning is that it was a real one through the TL system even though it was a joke lol. Any mod could have just edited my post. I'm not sure which solution was lazier.
|
On May 22 2018 19:37 Uldridge wrote:The only reason I feel I'm opposed to it is because I dont necessarily feel like it would make casual players that much more optimized. A poll for the entire playerbase would be so appropriate here, and actual performance numbers before and after changes because you could see hard evidence for it, instead of biased speculative talk. If you're unable to find an opponent's base in reasonable amount of time, you're simply bad. I never had any issues or thought it was problematic and I played new maps every so often. Acting like absolving the blackened FoW will solve the badness all of the sudden, because now you magically can find the opponent's base in a reasonable amount of time and "adapt strategies because you understand the map" is delusional. I would like input from high level players, because lower than B level players have much more to work on than just their understanding of the map and how to play that map. So much so that I'd argue it's actually irrelevant for them. Or maybe I simply don't understand what's trying to be accomplished here. My argument is that changing it won't matter for the player experience (it's simply an illusion of it mattering while playing the game), so why change it? Your argument is: if it doesn't matter that much (or might potentially matter a lot for people) why not change it? If the FoW is changed and the evidence turns out that performance across to board (but especially for lower level players) becomes significantly better and more players are drawn to the game and map diversity is upped, then I gladly conceed my point. If not? People are pussies and fundamentally need to change their own mental state because it wouldn't matter if you played on a dark map or not (performance wise). But then you can come in again with the: why not just change it if it calms people down and gives them the illusion of helping them? + Show Spoiler +My answer is: stop spoonfeeding people illusions. It's bad for them for all sorts of reasons. I don't want to go further but it becomes a lot less BW related and much more societal at large related with this.
First of welcome to the planet Earth, where people generally don't change because you want them to.
My argument is not that big magic is gonna happen for every one and their pet aliens, making the world a better place, but that it is a small and subtle addition that would matter and make some difference for at least some people.
For that no big intake of new players or revolutionary diversification of the map pool would have to happen.
If you compare it to (your notion of) paradise, every place looks like crap.
On May 22 2018 19:53 Starecat wrote:
So i wasn't incorrect? You have to see a buildable terrain in order to create a building?
Then i would oppose to the change it would affect the game. The reason why a proper implementation from Blizzard's side would be welcome is exactly to prevent all these unwanted by-effects that doing the same thing via simple map making inevitably creates.
TLDR: We already have pre-explored maps, but they are flawed.
On May 22 2018 20:47 Incomplete..ReV wrote:
The arguments for removing it kinda makes sense and I guess I'll get used to it if it happens. But emotionally it tears me up that it's necessary to remove in the first place. Sure, it's good to make it more accessible for newer layers, but it also really sucks that everything has to change to make things easier. No one has to change. An additional feature like this does not have to and should not be mandatory.
Everything has to be so easy nowadays and "on my terms". Why not just be exposed a bit to the brutality of BW? Life is brutal, therefore BW is life. Don't give up on life! (Totally logical argument, not emotionally invested at all ) I just don't see the point. I don't believe stuff like that will save BW. I rather think it would be for people to start convincing friends and family, to arrange tournaments, leagues, and overall just create life and excitement around it is the key to revitalize the game. Actually, I loathe the thought of removing the FOW as it is. But I'm not going to claim it'll ruin balance, that it won't help anything at all in making BW more accessible, or that I won't get used to it in the end. I just really hate the change, especially since it's because people can't be arsed to make the extra effort. BW rewards hard work and raw talent. For me, these changes goes against the very core of the game.
1. Complain about people wanting things to go their way.
2. Write a whole paragraphs of alleged arguments. Let all sentences begin with "I".
I guess not all "I"s are equal…
Anyway, no one's stopping you from inviting people in. Why does something have to "safe the game" to be worth considering anyway? It's an impossible standard.
What exactly has map knowledge to do with hard work and raw talent? And why are those the primary aspects for you to define a game?
|
On May 22 2018 21:47 Freakling wrote:
1. Complain about people wanting things to go their way.
2. Write a whole paragraphs of alleged arguments. Let all sentences begin with "I".
I guess not all "I"s are equal…
Anyway, no one's stopping you from inviting people in. Why does something have to "safe the game" to be worth considering anyway? It's an impossible standard.
What exactly has map knowledge to do with hard work and raw talent? And why are those the primary aspects for you to define a game?
I'm being very clear that my opinion is based more on feelings than reason, and I acknowledge that the arguments for change quite likely has merit. I also feel I'm being very clear that despite my personal feelings, I shouldn't simply put my foot down and refuse the change if it's for the greater good. Hence, I find your comment of "I guess not all "I"s are equal" is incredibly unfair.
No one is stopping me from inviting people to BW. No one is stopping me from doing anything. Not sure where you were going with this. [EDIT: ] After looking over your post again, I reckon the main point is that saving the game and improving it can/should be two different topics. One doesn't always have the regrowth of the game at heart to consider changes, more or less? Hence, if I want to save the game, I can invite people and such, and then let people discuss changes regardless of whether it's just to make the experience better, or if it's for the sake of "saving BW"? I do apologize for not taking this properly in before writing what I did, but I'll let it stand rather than trying to hide it.
And hard work does have anything to do with it, as learning new maps and learning to click preicesly on the mini-map despite the map being all black, is part of the whole work load of learning BW. Not game changing, but it does apply.
I was venting more than arguing against. I didn't want to simply be a silent part of the discussion, knowing that it could very well lead to something in the future. If the there is change, then so be it. But at least I will have voiced my opinion on the matter. I do not want it changed, I do not see the real need for it, but if there's so many people who struggle with it and if it can help revitalize the game, then sure - go ahead. I'll deal with it. It's not like I think my opinion is more important than others - we all have our say and then things go from there.
|
On May 22 2018 21:47 Freakling wrote:
First of welcome to the planet Earth, where people generally don't change because you want them to.
My argument is not that big magic is gonna happen for every one and their pet aliens, making the world a better place, but that it is a small and subtle addition that would matter and make some difference for at least some people.
For that no big intake of new players or revolutionary diversification of the map pool would have to happen.
If you compare it to (your notion of) paradise, every place looks like crap.
You're arguing it would matter. I'm arguing it wouldn't matter other than the illusion of it mattering. There's a difference and I'm not willing to change things simply because they "feel" better.
If it objectively is something that matters (people actually achieve better results), then I'll retract everything I said and completely endorse the proposed change. But before changes happen, testing needs to be done and results before and after need to be compared.
+ Show Spoiler +Also, people change all the time because people want them to lol. You think certain general opinions are formed just like that and aren't coaxed into becoming a general opinion? It might not be overnight or might not even be in a lifetime, but people do change because other people think those people aren't right, whether it's about facts or politics.
|
On May 22 2018 22:27 Uldridge wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2018 21:47 Freakling wrote:
First of welcome to the planet Earth, where people generally don't change because you want them to.
My argument is not that big magic is gonna happen for every one and their pet aliens, making the world a better place, but that it is a small and subtle addition that would matter and make some difference for at least some people.
For that no big intake of new players or revolutionary diversification of the map pool would have to happen.
If you compare it to (your notion of) paradise, every place looks like crap. You're arguing it would matter. I'm arguing it wouldn't matter other than the illusion of it mattering. There's a difference and I'm not willing to change things simply because they "feel" better. If it objectively is something that matters (people actually achieve better results), then I'll retract everything I said and completely endorse the proposed change. But before changes happen, testing needs to be done and results before and after need to be compared. + Show Spoiler +Also, people change all the time because people want them to lol. You think certain general opinions are formed just like that and aren't coaxed into becoming a general opinion? It might not be overnight or might not even be in a lifetime, but people do change because other people think those people aren't right, whether it's about facts or politics.
Seeing the entire minimap layout is just a feeling? What the fuck? Yeah, it must have been just a feeling playing new maps on Warcraft 3 after ~10 years and knowing where i have to go. It must have been just a feeling playing on maps like Longinus, Tau Cross or Transistor and just wandering around looking for their spawnpoint
|
Seeing the entire minimap isn't a feeling, but how you perceive the minimap and it affecting your play and reflecting on that is.
You feel like it's not doing you any favors and think you're being fucked by not being able to see it. You feel like you're not being fucked when you're able to see the layout.
I'm arguing that your feeling of being/not being fucked is merely an artifact by being uncomfortable (to the point of making a thread about it) with exploring terrain you can't see beforehand.
|
On May 22 2018 22:23 Incomplete..ReV wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2018 21:47 Freakling wrote:
1. Complain about people wanting things to go their way.
2. Write a whole paragraphs of alleged arguments. Let all sentences begin with "I".
I guess not all "I"s are equal…
Anyway, no one's stopping you from inviting people in. Why does something have to "safe the game" to be worth considering anyway? It's an impossible standard.
What exactly has map knowledge to do with hard work and raw talent? And why are those the primary aspects for you to define a game? I'm being very clear that my opinion is based more on feelings than reason, and I acknowledge that the arguments for change quite likely has merit. I also feel I'm being very clear that despite my personal feelings, I shouldn't simply put my foot down and refuse the change if it's for the greater good. Hence, I find your comment of "I guess not all "I"s are equal" is incredibly unfair. No one is stopping me from inviting people to BW. No one is stopping me from doing anything. Not sure where you were going with this. [EDIT: ] After looking over your post again, I reckon the main point is that saving the game and improving it can/should be two different topics. One doesn't always have the regrowth of the game at heart to consider changes, more or less? Hence, if I want to save the game, I can invite people and such, and then let people discuss changes regardless of whether it's just to make the experience better, or if it's for the sake of "saving BW"? I do apologize for not taking this properly in before writing what I did, but I'll let it stand rather than trying to hide it.
Sorry if I sounded a bit harsh. I just wanted to point out the irony of your valuing what you admit is just a very subjective opinion higher than any one else's "whining".
And hard work does have anything to do with it, as learning new maps and learning to click preicesly on the mini-map despite the map being all black, is part of the whole work load of learning BW. Not game changing, but it does apply. But is it work well spent? Is it an efficient use of time? Does it improve a player's strategic understanding or execution to be (more or less) completely lost on a map? I don't think so.
I was venting more than arguing against. I didn't want to simply be a silent part of the discussion, knowing that it could very well lead to something in the future. If the there is change, then so be it. But at least I will have voiced my opinion on the matter. I do not want it changed, I do not see the real need for it, but if there's so many people who struggle with it and if it can help revitalize the game, then sure - go ahead. I'll deal with it. It's not like I think my opinion is more important than others - we all have our say and then things go from there. Again, if it improves the game for only some of the people already playing it, that should be enough. You may not need it. The only reason I would ever need it so I will never have to manually create any kind of fog free map version again. But there definitely is demand, so why not meet it? No reason to be frustrated, just because some one else might play the game differently than you.
On May 22 2018 22:27 Uldridge wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2018 21:47 Freakling wrote:
First of welcome to the planet Earth, where people generally don't change because you want them to.
My argument is not that big magic is gonna happen for every one and their pet aliens, making the world a better place, but that it is a small and subtle addition that would matter and make some difference for at least some people.
For that no big intake of new players or revolutionary diversification of the map pool would have to happen.
If you compare it to (your notion of) paradise, every place looks like crap. You're arguing it would matter. I'm arguing it wouldn't matter other than the illusion of it mattering. There's a difference and I'm not willing to change things simply because they "feel" better. If it objectively is something that matters (people actually achieve better results), then I'll retract everything I said and completely endorse the proposed change. But before changes happen, testing needs to be done and results before and after need to be compared. + Show Spoiler +Also, people change all the time because people want them to lol. You think certain general opinions are formed just like that and aren't coaxed into becoming a general opinion? It might not be overnight or might not even be in a lifetime, but people do change because other people think those people aren't right, whether it's about facts or politics.
What is wrong about people just feeling better about something? And what would be better results? If both players profit from a new feature, no one should improve more than the other. And any "real effect" (whatever) on higher level gameplay would actually be a real potential problem and reason to reject the change, not the other way around.
|
If the feeling better is an illusion, the feeling is rooted in falsehood. It's a fairy tale. It can be dangerous. It's not necessary. I'm not saying it's bad for the game to make this change, per se. I'm saying that if it turns out the change doesn't change performance at all, people's "feelings" about the true FoW are unfounded and need to change. If you would learn to know something isn't true, even if you initially felt like it was true, would you still think it's true after you learnt it wasn't? Wouldn't it make you feel neutral if you learned to know that the changes didn't mean jack shit? It would mean your anxiety or "bad feeling" was all personal and it's something you need to actively combat instead of something external needing to change because you don't like it.
And by performance I meant the same player before and after the change. Not both players playing the same game lol, that's not representative.
Again, if these changes actually turn out of be significant for player performance, by all means, change them. I'm just not convinced they will significantly change performance, but I'm up for experimentation nonetheless!
|
On May 22 2018 21:07 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2018 18:18 Glioburd wrote:The SC2 system is pretty good for new players and/or new maps. Meaning a "dark" fog of war on the entire map. The player would have to explore before building tho. It should be adjustable, maybe not by the player but in the map settings. If you play a campaign or some UMS, the classic black area should fits better. (Also why Bisudagger has been warned for this post? xd) The best part about that warning is that it was a real one through the TL system even though it was a joke lol. Any mod could have just edited my post. I'm not sure which solution was lazier.
Doesn't matter. That warning is now proof you are a CONVICT, and will be cited when someone disagrees with you in a different thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
