EPTWhat wrecked SC2? - Page 11
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
| ||
|
KungKras
Sweden484 Posts
I was hyped as all hell when I saw the early trailers for SC2. The gameplay footage was awesome at the time too. I guess the first thing that made me go "wait what?" was then Blizzard first had put up the webpage that was introducing the three races. There was a developer story about how the protoss players did early pressure with zealots in PvT, and they thought it was too hard to deal with so they introduced marauders with the concussive shell ability. And my reaction to it was something like "But wait? Early game micro like that is fun, why did they remove it?" I was still hyped though, and got even more hyped when me and my friends were in Jönköping at Dreamhack Winter (2008 or 2009 I believe) and I got to play SC2. I even managed to win a competition to get an SC2 beta key despite being mechanically not that great at Starcraft. I still use the mousepad that I won there too. And the beta was fun as hell. I was super hyped when SC2 released and I even got the collector's edition because I wanted to support my favourite game series of all time. And I played SC2 pretty regularly for about a year. It was great. I had just started university and lots of people in my class played it. When I was a university freshman and just getting to know the people there, being around so many people that played a new Starcraft game after having grown up on BW is probably what I remember the most fondly about SC2. But after that, the flaws of the game crept up on me and I just... lost interest. I stopped playing WoL and went back to BW long before HoTS released. First off, I just couldn't stand playing vs terrans. I'm a micro player in Brood War. Mostly because I'm not good at macro and mostly because I think micro is where all the fun is at. And all of a sudden my early game fun is ruined by these marauders whose concussive shells just invalidate everything i liked to do. I run into the terran army and I lose control of my units instantly and then I either win or lose the fight with no input from me. Well... that was fun, GG. Second, I hated the story soo much. Brood War really built up the player's hatred for Kerrigan. I mean that ending when she killed Fenix and Raynor swore to kill her was an awesome setup for the player getting revenge on her. Raynor really, really meant it in that Brood War mission. And then what's the first thing that happens in SC2? "Hey Raynor we know how to make your girlfriend human again with magic!" "Cool let's do that!!" And then the prophecy and all that nonsense. Everything was a personal story, in an RTS. Which just doesn't work. Almost nothing was a story about the universe or the factions. Except maybe in LotV with the protoss but by then I'd long since stopped playing. I also realized that the non-spell micro was pointless. At first I thought that they really proritized micro because I loved controlling the blink stalkers and the forcefield guys, and the anti-gravity of the phoenixes. But I slowly realized that there wasn't really anything else to control. Yeah, some units had spells, but that was pretty much it. When you tried to micro basic units it just made them less efficient because of the pathing. You couldn't turn zealots into MANlots a-la Reach or muta micro or anything else to give you an edge. Many new unit designs were just not fun for me. I already mentioned what I hated about the marauder. I liked the collossi first, but after a while of only A-moving them I started wishing I had reavers in shuttles instead. Some units were basically only designed to be harrassers that could kill your entire worker line, wich was just not interesting. Broodlords were cool though. As for the easier macro. I actually liked MBS and all that stuff. They felt like sensible evolutions of the interface. Yeah they may reduce the skill ceiling APM wise, but it's my honest opinion that if SC2's fundamentals would have been designed so that unit control mattered more then there would be other things to sink APM into. I don't like the macro mechanics though. I remember when the communtiy asked for more things to do macro wise and Blizzard introduced the macro mechanics. I liked it at first but they just became stressful extra things that you have to do to compete. I also didn't like that their matchmaking didn't let me play against totally random opponents. I mean I liked climbing the leagues, but it got stressful after too many games. In WC3's matchmaking you never knew if you'd get ROFLstomped or if you'd school somebody or if it would be an even epic game. That uncertainty made it interesting and more relaxing. And I wish I could have had such a way of playing besides the leagues. Also the races stopped feeling distinct. My protoss infantry stopped being high-tech but expensive badasses that despite their dwindling numbers could take one foes more numerous than themselves and still win. Instead, protoss infantry felt like overpriced Zerg units. Terran infantry with their beefy marauders started feeling like how protoss infantry should have felt like. Tanky and powerful.While Zerg stopped feeling numerous and expendable because of their tanky roaches. Zerg also stopped feeling like zerg because of how limited their early game aggression was. I'm the monster race damnit, let me rush people. But the thing that killed it the most for me was probably the hard counters. They sucked more fun out of the game than everything else I listed combined. In Brood War if I messed up and built too many dragoons, I could still micro them vs zerglings and get some value out of them, and maybe win. In SC2 everything is a hard counter. If you go in with the wrong units, your army is gone in 0.3 seconds. No micro can ever save you. Void rays vs marines? GG. Zergligns vs hellions? GG Zealots vs Marines/Marauders? GG. It's just not fun when every unit interaction consists of ripping another kind of units to shreds in five nanoseconds. It feels more like rock paper scissors than an RTS. Yeah having counters is fine. But having "I went this unit so now your army is gone" type of counters just makes it unplayable to me. I like trying to get my troops though tough situations and this makes it impossible. So that's why I think I lost interest. It's a shame really because I keep thinking about what could have happened if we had a game that could actually be a real successor to BW. It could have been a new exciting era, but instead it turned into a dark age for me. With the BW pro scene I loved gone and a successor I just couldn't bring myself to play or watch anymore. Thinking about it makes me so happy that BW bounced back. I hope it never dies again. | ||
|
Dazed.
Canada3301 Posts
Hell even most of those things were simplified with later patches. For an RTS game to be good it needs guerrilla warfare, harassment, low economy and high economy games, all ins but also simply aggressive builds that hinge on micro, etc. 2 rax in tvz was fairly abusive for a while in 2010, so what happened? Buff queens, cut out close spawns, increase map size, patch rax timing to be slower etc, until 2 rax was comparatively useless. When queens can just fend off microable rushes you have a bad game. Protoss were horribly designed. When you allow for immediate reinforcements at pylons, one of two things happen: The protoss army either crushes you, or, because its weaker [in order to make up for that very reinforcement potential], you crush them. Stupid. | ||
|
Broodwar4lyf
304 Posts
| ||
|
ninazerg
United States7291 Posts
On July 27 2017 22:16 opisska wrote: I come here to educate BW fans and clear their misunderstanding of SC2. I saw a thread falsely claiming that SC2 is "wrecked" and decided to briefly correct this errrorneous statement. I do not praise SC2 as the ultimate game, it's simply the game I enjoy the most. I have no problem with people enjoying BW more unless they a) shit on my game pointlessly or b) try to influence my gamr to be more like BW. The later has luckily been given up by most years ago, but I just don't see a reason to condone the former. Thanks for the "education", but since SC2 is not dead, that should be self-evident and would not require a counter-argument. SC2 still has a large viewership and player-base, which I have explained, so by that merit alone, SC2 is not a dead game. If someone has already made up their mind that SC2 is dead, there is no convincing them at this point of reality. If you're concerned that they're spreading "misinformation", then so be it. It's not going to change the facts, and if it's not being posted in the SC2 forums, then it really doesn't matter to the perception of SC2 players. Finally, as I have pointed out previously, the rule here is not to game-bash or start a game vs. game argument. If you feel personally insulted because someone said something about "your game", then the problem may be one of perspective because the game of SC2 as a playable entity does not inherently belong to any particular group of people, and legally, only belongs to Blizzard Entertainment Inc., so even if I said "Fuck SC2, game's trash, fam", you should not be personally insulted like I said something horrible about you or your family. It is just game, why you have to be mad? | ||
|
Phredxor
New Zealand15076 Posts
On July 28 2017 09:08 ninazerg wrote: Thanks for the "education", but since SC2 is not dead, that should be self-evident and would not require a counter-argument. SC2 still has a large viewership and player-base, which I have explained, so by that merit alone, SC2 is not a dead game. If someone has already made up their mind that SC2 is dead, there is no convincing them at this point of reality. If you're concerned that they're spreading "misinformation", then so be it. It's not going to change the facts, and if it's not being posted in the SC2 forums, then it really doesn't matter to the perception of SC2 players. Finally, as I have pointed out previously, the rule here is not to game-bash or start a game vs. game argument. If you feel personally insulted because someone said something about "your game", then the problem may be one of perspective because the game of SC2 as a playable entity does not inherently belong to any particular group of people, and legally, only belongs to Blizzard Entertainment Inc., so even if I said "Fuck SC2, game's trash, fam", you should not be personally insulted like I said something horrible about you or your family. It is just game, why you have to be mad? What if he's actually Mike Morhaime? | ||
|
ninazerg
United States7291 Posts
If Opisska is Mike Morhaime, then we're all doomed. | ||
|
jehlakj
23 Posts
| ||
|
Phredxor
New Zealand15076 Posts
Ded gaem has been around a long time and yet the games still alive. Not every game is going to be crazy popular like BW was in Korea or League/dota2. | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On July 28 2017 09:49 ninazerg wrote: If Opisska is Mike Morhaime, then we're all doomed. Mike Morhaime seems pretty passionate about SC2, if he ever had a secret account on TL, I'm pretty sure he'd been already permabanned after repeatedly telling SC2-haters to go fuck themselves. I am sure I wouldn't be able to stay civil here if I was personally invested in SC2. | ||
|
neptunusfisk
2286 Posts
On July 28 2017 08:12 eviltomahawk wrote: Does this kind of thread really need to exist for the thousandth time? Exactly my thoughts as well. And why is it in the BW forum? | ||
|
Levque
88 Posts
On July 28 2017 17:21 neptunusfisk wrote: Exactly my thoughts as well. And why is it in the BW forum? It's in this forum to get a different perspective/opinion than what you might find on SC reddit or SC2 general. If anyone doesn't like the thread, I suggest they don't click on it and stop coming in here backseat moderating. BW fans waited over a decade for a true sequel that never came. I like reading SC2 analysis from people who potentially have 20+ years of RTS genre experience. | ||
|
KungKras
Sweden484 Posts
You brought it up, so what if you're actually Mike Morhaime :O | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12161 Posts
On July 28 2017 16:21 opisska wrote: Mike Morhaime seems pretty passionate about SC2, if he ever had a secret account on TL, I'm pretty sure he'd been already permabanned after repeatedly telling SC2-haters to go fuck themselves. I am sure I wouldn't be able to stay civil here if I was personally invested in SC2. You seem like a good and decent individual. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
As for the easier macro. I actually liked MBS and all that stuff. They felt like sensible evolutions of the interface. Yeah they may reduce the skill ceiling APM wise, but it's my honest opinion that if SC2's fundamentals would have been designed so that unit control mattered more then there would be other things to sink APM into I believe so to. I hear the argument that these things are bad, but then again those people usually dont imagine HOW AN RTS CAN LOOK LIKE unit control wise. Also funny thing what you read on blizzards site back in the days. Pvt, zealot rushing hard for terran to deal with so they get consussive shells. HOLY FUCK? That says alot. Also somehting else that says alot, when they showed us their pre-alpha video of immortals hardcountering siege tanks BIG TIME. Well, we had signs there already. But yeah, the pre-alpha footage had some things that looked cool as fuck. Nydus canal looked to have fun tactic involved. Since zerg is a swarmy race, this could be really good strategic and tactical wise. Also charge zealots looks... fun as well. I probably imagined i could micro those zealots. If i think about it, consussive shells vs micro able charge lots. Could probably be a bit of fun atleast. OH well. | ||
|
AlphaAeffchen
110 Posts
i play RTS games since 20 years. I played BW and now i play only SC 2. I will play bw remastered. First of all SC 2 is not a dead game. We have a healthy playerbase and tournaments. The number of players is constant since the decline from 2015 - end of 2016. This dead game thing is stupid. Its normal that many people play the game and leave after sometime. BW was never popular in europe. It doesnt matter if SC 2 would be more like BW we would have nearly the same playerbase as we have now. Because BW and SC 2 are hardcore games in multiplayer. Most People are to casual to play a hardcore 1v1 game. Thats the main reason why we have a small playerbase now in multiplayer in SC 2! I played every RTS on the market. You know what the only 3 games which are good are BW and SC 2 and WC 3. They are all from Blizzard. Perhaps AOE 2 but ist not my cup of tea. Supcom was ok but it was more a fun game for some time and not really competitive. There is no other RTS that can compete with BW, SC 2 and WC 3. Look how bad Dawn of war 3 or halowars 2 is. SC 2 is the best RTS on the market there is no other game except BW or maybe Warcarft 3. If you compare BW and SC 2 there are many problems. Hardcore BW fans argue that there should be limited unit and building selection in SC 2. If Blizzard would have done this in 2010 our playerbase would be even smaller! And no its not fun to control 6 different unit groups. Even hardcore players have to understand that this mechanic is not up to date anymore and you will push people away with it. You have to Group 1-3 Units in SC 2 Lotv anyway to play efficient. And i dont understand why people argue that unlimited building selection is bad for the game. I really like macro but its stupid to click on everey buiding to build your units! I hated it in BW and i will hate it in BW remastered (i know that this is necessary for balance but its not fun to get over this mechanic). We are in the year 2017 and not longer in the 90s! Many People say that the unit design is bad in SC 2 I disagree here partially. You cant just make a game which is BW 2.0. Than we dont need SC 2. There have to be new things. Broodwar has many Units which are not used often. In SC 2 every unit can be usefull. Bad Units Units in BW are: Scout= no use at all Queen= Very very niche unit Devourer (I hope im right its the mutated Zerg anti air unit). Nearly no use for Zerg. Wraith: Some use in TvT in other matches very cheesy and a niche unit. Now pls tell me which unit in SC 2 has no use at all. There are niche units like Ghosts but you can use them. Lotv did many good things for SC 2. It made the game better. We have more battles all over the place and there is more micro in SC 2 Lotv. The Problem is that many People left multiplayer because its to hardcore for them and they want to play teamgames like Lol (i tried lol and hereos of the storm by the way and hate it to play these games because its so simple and gets boring so fast). The problems of SC 2 are: The Story is mediocre ( Iliked the first Episode of SC 2 but Hots and Lotv story plot were really bad). Design of Protoss is bad (Skytoss, low skillcap if you compare toss to other races). The Units are not as fun as the Units from the other 2 races. There is only 1 style to play terran (Bio). Many of us want mech to be viable. Blizzard promised it with Lotv but it never really happened. SC 2 needs more patches and changes constantly. We have a test Balance map. But Blizzard is too afraid to test any changes its a shame! Lets compare the different matchups from SC 2 and BW. TVT = They are really good in both games. TvP = Here is BW the better game. T v P is top notch in BW (relaly nice gameplay fun to play and to watch). Toss is so bad designed in SC 2 that it is not fun to play as toss or against it! TvZ= This is the best matchup in SC 2. Its fun to watch and to play. For me its even more fun than BW. It is really super entertaining. I really dont understand why hardcore BW people say Zerg is bad designed and doesnt feel zergy in SC 2. Zerg has really cool units which have fun interaction with your opponent. The creep mechanic is awesome and gives zerg more identity. Also i dont see any unit which is not zergy. The role of the queen is better than in BW. Also you can mass really big armys with the macro mechanic and it feels really zergy. The art design of Zerg in SC 2 is really good they feel really dark! Zerg is better designed in SC 2 than the Zerg in BW. PvZ: This is a hard one but i would say its more fun in BW because toss is bad designed in SC 2. ZvZ: Is bad in both games and not fun to watch or to play. PvP: Is better in BW because Protoss is bad designed! I know that SC 2 has many flaws but its a fantastic game and does some things better than BW. Its not fair to bash SC 2 all the time Blizzard did some things really good in SC 2! | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
On July 28 2017 07:20 Ancestral wrote: I don't think anyone "enjoys" bad pathfinding. It's just that there is always some arbitrary level of mechanical demand that must be met, and BWs seems quite optimal for a highly competitive game. In basketball, it is the laws of physics that every player has to contend with. We could design smart-balls with neural nets and thrusters that self-correct so your passes always get to the intended target. The fact that we don't want that doesn't mean players "enjoy it" when their passes get intercepted. (to superbanana) the "bad" in the pathfinding of bw is the "bugs", nobody enjoys the bugs in the pathfinding of bw, but this is separate from the rest of the pathfinding which is of great quality and produces the mechanics of movement and attack in the game which produce much deeper tactical counter play in the game. And it's not just mechanical, its the decision making too. Its not just twitch disruption / dodge but actual unfolding of different phases in a battle with multiple details all influencing each other in a different way over time with a pace that the player can actually follow and control and choose his style.. without extreme crippling damage being caused in 2 sec to units automatically clumping together for the most "liquid" experience possible (easiest to play at first, easiest to attack and dish out damage with your stupid coloball) (rather than following the moto easy to lean, hard to master, I'd say trivial to learn, tedious to master lol that's how it felt to me, just learn the base standard ownage strat, then learn the multiple all ins, then you're set high "master" gg 200 games played. Because the game is too simple-minded though fast paced and you might lose in a blink to whatever all in or spell). So in short if you like the easy to get into, SC2 will help you a ton, but if you like depth and want to get good, it will just turn mostly into a speed gambling core game. That's what I dislike the most about it, starcraft is not like that you see, it's a lot smarter than that (it still has gambling in it too! but not just speed volatile gambling). Anyway its not like you can't make an argument about why a game is better than another, "subjective" or "objective" tbh are concepts I have never really grasped that well, can be right, can be wrong, can be a little right a little wrong. But for example, when you talk about the bad pathing of bw, pls open your eyes, despite a few bugs the mechanics of movement and combat in bw absolutely own those of sc2, and it doesn't stop there. That's a rant, I gotta be honest SC2 is just a little bit better than that cause I focused on the worst. But yeah I'm not impressed how it was developped and all the history there. I think the lack of chat they did on purpose so we wouldn't criticize publicly too easily (someone actually pulled a shareholder meeting transcript where they said that some years ago, basically the line I read was "if people publicly criticize the games using the chat we lose money"). They always knew the chat was very important and loved in their games. So this is on their bosses who said no chat and mocked the communities who asked for it by avoiding and tricking. Its like, blizzard is/was full of incredible talents led by terribly selfish and stubborn bosses pulling strongly in a bad direction. And they just made a far inferior sequel, very disappointed. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
Its a fun fight as well. Both are microing their units. | ||
|
tomatriedes
New Zealand5356 Posts
| ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
| ||
| ||
