Blizzard to announce something at PAX - Page 13

Post a Reply

Prev 1 11 12 13 14 15 54 Next

eagle

United States693 Posts

March 01 2013 11:20 GMT

#241

diablo 3 on xbox 720 and ps4

Velr

Switzerland10764 Posts

March 01 2013 11:37 GMT

#242

On March 01 2013 15:34 aksfjh wrote:

Show nested quote +

On March 01 2013 10:22 Falling wrote:

On March 01 2013 10:14 Shakattak wrote:

On March 01 2013 09:18 KwarK wrote:

On March 01 2013 08:34 opisska wrote:

On March 01 2013 06:42 KwarK wrote:

On March 01 2013 06:17 Blackfish wrote:

On February 28 2013 23:19 KwarK wrote:

On February 28 2013 22:56 mordk wrote:

On February 28 2013 20:08 Velr wrote:
I just realise... ~3-4 Years ago i would have been hyped as fuck for this. Now I just don't give a shit.

SC2.. D3... And with it Blizzard... Oh how the mighty have fallen.

Meh.. SC2 is fine and was always fine. It wasn't BW on 3D which many people wanted, but it's a damn fine game.

Not for a company which brought out Diablo I and II, Starcraft and Brood War and the original WoW. Blizzard were once exceptional.

Having thought about this for 2 and a half year now I can tell: If it was broodwar, I wouldn´t play. I like to feel competitve even tough I suck, so sc2 with it´s easier mechanics and league system is perfect for me... And hell it´s still f*cking hard game to play. Now think about broodwar... I mean yeah watching the pros play was great and such, but selecting each worker individually, only 12 things on 1 control group... we all know it, it´s hard and after a stressed out day from school I wouldn´t want that. So for a game itself and not counting in esports... SC2 is better, atleast for the diamond-bronze region.

It doesn't work that way. You get used to it. Saying the game is unplayable with unit selection capped at 12 is like saying the game is unplayable because gateways can't be set to automatically build a certain unit whenever you have psi and minerals.

And you also get used to the fact that it doesn't have to be that way. I have played BW for years - I have never watched it, neither I had any idea that there is some "esports" or TL or wahetver, so I wasn't "a part of the community" - but I played the game for some time basically every evening. Then I got worn out by the sheer impossiblity to do anything interesting with some semblance of success, because the game was ridiculously hard - and most of the time we did not even play on fastest!

So when SC2 came, I was looking forward to it, but I had no idea how good is it gonna be. I played about 3000 ladder games of SC2 already and there is still something to explore, new things to learn. Yes, there is much more to do in BW, but the difference is, that in SC2, I can actually succeed.

So in my point of view, SC2 is an absolutely briliant game and I completely love it. Should I judge Blizzard based on it, I would have to say that they are a damn good company - considering also all the support they give even though I already paid them. Yes, there are things that could be better, but overall, this game was the best spent 50 Euro of my life.

It's above average but even a bunch of things like the functionality of the multiplayer (battlebet 2.0) are inferior to bw. Admittedly it took about six years of patches for bw to get to the point it got to but that was groundbreaking stuff. Starcraft built upon the legacy of Warcraft II and introduced revolutionary online multiplayer gaming. SC II was shipped without chat channels and the like and was slow in responding to the needs that the gamers knew they had because previous games had already provided for them while pushing no boundaries itself. The same mentality applied to the gameplay itself, where previously it had been groundbreaking it became just an imitation of a proven formula. The formula is good, I'm not doubting that, when I say something is imitating the stuff that made bw a success I'm not knocking it, bw was really good. But a poorly photocopied version of something good is not what Blizzard used to be about. They pushed the boundaries and set the benchmark for these genres, it was Blizzard innovation that made them what they are, for them to maintain their reputation for exceptional work they need to continue that revolutionary approach rather than rest on their laurels and imitate their past glories. Anyone could see what made a multiplayer RTS good after brood war, starcraft II is good but it should be good because the formula has already been discovered and proven. Blizzard previously set a higher standard by inventing that formula and simply achieving a competent imitation is a failure to match the standard they set for themselves.

Im not sure what your arguing then , do you want them to make different games ? How do you push the boundaries of RTS or RPG games like diablo ? People are too crazy about balance for them to do anything revolutionary , don't fix what isn't broken .

Well look no further than how Battlenet 0.2 was shipped and you could say they broke what didn't need to be fixed and I think you have a better idea of what kwark is saying. There are many places where they shipped out 'less than' rather than 'equal to' or 'greater than.'

This is pretty much bullshit right here. Nothing more, nothing less. You don't like Battle.net 2.0, we get that, but to suggest that it was a worse iteration of the shit IRC client that you had in BW and WC3 is stupid. It's different, they tried new things, and it was relatively polished for how new it was. You couldn't integrate other Blizzard games on the old Battle.net, you couldn't create the achievements, level system, competent stat tracking, a reliable ladder and matchmaking system, and so on. Even on their worst part, custom game management, it was infinitely better than what WC3 had become: a list of 95% bot hosted DotA games, 5% games that were also bot hosted and would kick you for downloading. That was a ton of fun...

If you really think Bnet 0.2 at release and in the year after was even close to being as good as the WC3 bnet... Then you should go see a doctor.
I don't know how the Bnet 0.2 atm is.. I haven't used it in 6 Months and don't plan to do so in the near future...

I never had any troublse with the WC3 custom game system.. Maybe because I mainly played Dota tho (get gamename from some leaguge site or meet some friends/opponents in some chatchannel and go :p).

Btw: Wc3 did MORE (shown) stat tracking than SC2 did when i still cared, it was just not shown "IN" the bnet but on the blizzard site via link from the bnet.

opisska

Poland8852 Posts

March 01 2013 12:00 GMT

#243

Well, the B.net interface is not stellar, but does it really matter so much? I need it exactly to press "find match" and that's about it. I can imagine doing it on a rainbow screen with flying unicorns, it won't really change the experience of playing SC2.

I still think that SC2 is groundbreaking. Please, show me any other RTS that is so strategically deep, complex and balanced, yet so accessible for an average player. 3D BW would probably be a better e-sport, but that's not really what they were trying to make, I think - they wanted a game that more people would play and enjoy. I am not sure that it can be done much better than SC2 is - many things that people of this community want would completely ruin the accesibility of the game.

Yes, I get it, it is a developement away from something you liked, so you are not gonna stand up and cheer for it, but it is a much larger developement that anyone here gives them credit for.

nihlon

Sweden5581 Posts

March 01 2013 12:36 GMT

#244

It's easy to call something "ground-breaking" when most devs have given up on the genre. No one can show you games that doesn't get made.

Also, Blizzard sells a lot on their name. If you delete sc brood war from history and release sc2 as Spacecraft! in the name of an different developer, I dare to say it wouldn't be near as successful as it is currently. Though that might be up for debate I suppose.

KwarK

United States42983 Posts

March 01 2013 12:51 GMT

#245

If you delete bw from history and sc2 happens then the company that made it have done something remarkable and displayed incredible vision and creativity. I'm not saying sc2 is bad. I'm saying that it pushed no boundaries. Blizzard weren't just competent, they were revolutionary. Nothing about any of their recent work is.

Glockateer

United States254 Posts

March 01 2013 12:55 GMT

#246

I wish it was rock n' roll racing 2 or starcraft ghost. One can dream, right?

nagual

Ukraine70 Posts

March 01 2013 12:57 GMT

#247

Project Blackstone ends somewhere in the middle of the march, so I think that announcement might be related..

RaelSan

Belgium223 Posts

March 01 2013 13:05 GMT

#248

Blizzard buying IPL and starts to man-handle esports ?

One can dream

ZergOwaR

Norway280 Posts

March 01 2013 13:12 GMT

#249

On March 01 2013 21:55 Glockateer wrote:
I wish it was rock n' roll racing 2 or starcraft ghost. One can dream, right?

a new version of rock n'roll racing.. now we're talking ^^

baldgye

United Kingdom1092 Posts

March 01 2013 13:17 GMT

#250

a balanced version of HotS?

Fasterfood

Canada166 Posts

March 01 2013 13:22 GMT

#251

People are WAAAAAAY over hyping this.

Blizzard save their big announcements for Blizzcon. The only reason they would announce something at PAX instead would be Blizzcon coming too late for an announcement.

Realistically the only things that blizzard could be expected to release before Blizzcon are Blizzard all stars, patches for D3 or WoW, or potentially confirm an Xbox release for D3. It could even be something as trivial as hands on for PS3/4 D3.

LaSt)ChAnCe

United States2179 Posts

March 01 2013 14:24 GMT

#252

at PAX blizzard is going to make an announcement that at Blizzcon they will make an announcement of the day of the announcement of a new game

Psychobabas

2531 Posts

March 01 2013 14:29 GMT

#253

On March 01 2013 23:24 LaSt)ChAnCe wrote:
at PAX blizzard is going to make an announcement that at Blizzcon they will make an announcement of the day of the announcement of a new game

haha yeah or something lame like that

CruelZeratul

Germany4588 Posts

March 01 2013 14:50 GMT

#254

Blizzard DotA, formerly known as Blizzard All-Stars seems most likely.

wongfeihung

United States763 Posts

March 01 2013 15:31 GMT

#255

On March 01 2013 23:50 CruelZeratul wrote:
Blizzard DotA, formerly known as Blizzard All-Stars seems most likely.

You got that the wrong way around. It's Blizzard All-Stars, formerly known as Blizzard DotA, because Blizzard doesn't own the rights to DotA or something like that.

LiamTheZerg

United States523 Posts

March 01 2013 15:35 GMT

#256

On March 01 2013 23:50 CruelZeratul wrote:
Blizzard DotA, formerly known as Blizzard All-Stars seems most likely.

lmfao at this game