EPTWhat wrecked SC2? - Page 13
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Laurens
Belgium4557 Posts
| ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
On July 28 2017 23:51 Foxxan wrote: The thinking in rts games are old, there are no modern thinking made in rts games. The old "concept" is: High buildtime without any interraction with your opponent. Meaning, you build supply, units, gets your economy bigger, can take litteral several minutes this alone. No real micro involved in this period, or real tough decisions or tactics. Big emphasize of hardcounters. Very outdated. Yes some old concepts can still be good but there are several that doesnt fit in a modern rts game. From curiosity, let's run with this. What would you see in a game if you were designing one. Obviously, the RTS genre itself is still enjoyed by many, so I don't think it quite makes the concept of RTS outdated...but what you seem to be suggesting is some fundamental to changes to how RTS plays. In your updated version of RTS, can you give some sort of conceptual idea of how game flow/unit interactions/etc would operate? | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
| ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
| ||
|
vult
United States9400 Posts
On July 29 2017 02:56 fishjie wrote: the problem was poorly designed units that had no micro such as the colossus, immortal, and so on, or worse units that were anti micro such as force fields or fungal. then there was the problem of clumping. pvt became turtle up and macro into one deathball engage that decided the match. made it boring to watch. with the queen range patch zerg deathball of gglord and winfestor made it 1000x worse, it official killed the viewership of WOL, from which the game NEVER recovered. ryung said it best when he cried "imba imba imba" when he lost to sniper in GSL. the better player lost, as evidenced by bads such as roro and sniper who faded into obscurity once winfestor were nerfed. people who bravely pointed it out were either banned or ridiculed. the results speak for themselves. no spectators = dead game spectators =/= players in terms of game popularity | ||
|
InfCereal
Canada1759 Posts
On July 28 2017 23:00 Topdoller wrote: Just watched Byun v Maru this morning, that TvT pretty much summed up most of SC2 problems in a nut shell. No map control required , just worker harrass or doomdrop into base. You could basically glue the starting spots together and delete the rest of the map. As a viewer experience its pretty poor Funny you say that, a lot of the map makers have strong opinions about all the units that ignore terrain. Goes hand in hand with your "glue the map together" comment. | ||
Falling
Canada11570 Posts
On July 29 2017 04:05 vult wrote: spectators =/= players in terms of game popularity No, but units with limited micro potential beyond concave and retreat impacts spectators and players. There's something very fun for a player, while still not very good (let's say iCCup rank of D)... which is still substantially better than complete casuals who make 1-2 factories and have the average apm of 30. Anyways for D and up, there's something inherently fun with learning things like muta micro, vulture attack-retreat micro, or boxing vultures to lay mine fields, or reaver micro, or getting faster and faster at storming, or dragoon attack-retreat micro, or maybe learning mineral hopping tricks. It's flashy and adds some pizaz compared to just building up large groups of units and attacking... consider something like Supreme Commander, which I've been playing a lot more of lately because I'm having a hard time convincing a friend to play Starcraft. Supreme Commander FA is heavily strategic and has impressively large units that do terrible, terrible damage, and you need to multi-task to launch multi-pronged attacks, etc. But it's not very flashy. You tend to work from a fairly zoomed out perspective for grand strategy- but that really tactical back and forth with small bands of units, not nearly so present and not nearly so visceral as the micro found in BW. So, I find the individual battles not nearly so satisfying to control. The micro in BW has been compared to fighting games, and I think that's fairly apt- there are certain moves/ key combinations that you learn that allows you to create amazing combos on screen. It's fun for the players to learn, and it's fun for spectators to watch. SC2 had some of that, but far too many units had their DPS spread out in a continuous attack, rather than in short bursts. Short burst DPS, means you can move your unit in between the next burst and not lose damage. Moving Collossi too much would cancel their attacks and so, something like drop micro is not incentivized compared to the reaver, which has burst splash damage, but is quite slow. Also, where there was micro potential, the movement felt quite sloppy: BW muta micro vs SC2 muta micro. LaLuSh has looked into a lot of that sort of thing in far more detail. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
On July 29 2017 03:14 L_Master wrote: From curiosity, let's run with this. What would you see in a game if you were designing one. Obviously, the RTS genre itself is still enjoyed by many, so I don't think it quite makes the concept of RTS outdated...but what you seem to be suggesting is some fundamental to changes to how RTS plays. In your updated version of RTS, can you give some sort of conceptual idea of how game flow/unit interactions/etc would operate? That is a hard thing to do. Deponding on what kind of RTS design it is. Not sure i understand your question either? My word knowledge is rather bad. Yes i want to change how RTS games are played. Not sure how to describe it, without getting a headache. And i usually am vague with my explanations, if i was to try and really make people understand it would take a while. Not something i really wanna do. Still i dont quite understand what kind of answer you would have liked. | ||
|
ninazerg
United States7291 Posts
On July 29 2017 03:20 opisska wrote: As a random choice of example, I just watched Innovation vs Maru on Proxima, G2 in IEM Shanghai (played this morning I think). Absolutely incredible game to watch in my opinion. I would be curious, if the people critical to SC2 in this thread would think the same if they watched it - if it is just ignorance of how good SC2 is nowadays or genuinely different taste. They would think it's a horrible match because SC2 is a BAD DOG. What an un-fun game. Who would ever play SC2? It's literally worse than Mao Tse-Tung. | ||
|
Jealous
10339 Posts
On July 29 2017 03:44 ProMeTheus112 wrote: i think there can be good games in sc2, just not as good not as often, and lot of pretty bad games Re: opisska: This is my thought as well. I often watch TL's "top games of 20XX" and I even went through the trouble of watching the rest of the series in some cases. There were a few TvZ's I truly thought were good games; Inno vs. TaeJa was a good game too. SC2 just doesn't deliver those games frequently enough for me to commit to watching anything but the "best of." Certainly doesn't motivate me to pick the game back up. | ||
|
fishjie
United States1519 Posts
On July 29 2017 04:05 vult wrote: spectators =/= players in terms of game popularity WRONG. no spectators - no competitive scene. this coincided with the death of NASL, MLG dropping sc2, dreamhack dropping sc2 and etc. with only a few thousands for live finals vs hundreds of thousands or whatever for MOBA, there was no contest. spectators are everything. they bring ad revenue. no ad revenue, no tourneys, smaller prizepools. no way teams can play for players. also coincided with many players retiring. there's a reason there is no new blood in korea for sc2 now. | ||
|
Jae Zedong
407 Posts
Funny, I had completely different feeling. After seeing Zerg unit design in SC2 my first though was "Did WoW concept artists really infested MY GAME?" This. Every Blizzard game since 2004 has been infested with this crap art style to the point where it borders on incompetence. The SC2 extractor looks like an inflatable bouncy castle for heavens sake. It doesn't matter if the style looked decent in WoW (which itself is debatable), games from completely different universes should not look alike just because they come from the same company. We get it Mr. Art Director, you really like concave shapes and big shoulder guards. Now can you please get back to azeroth? | ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
On July 29 2017 04:29 Foxxan wrote: That is a hard thing to do. Deponding on what kind of RTS design it is. Not sure i understand your question either? My word knowledge is rather bad. Yes i want to change how RTS games are played. Not sure how to describe it, without getting a headache. And i usually am vague with my explanations, if i was to try and really make people understand it would take a while. Not something i really wanna do. Still i dont quite understand what kind of answer you would have liked. You talk about how the RTS concept is old and designers don't understand the format. To me, this means that you have some ideas of what designers should do differently. I was just curious what your thoughts are. Right now, it feels sort of like if I was learning to play an instrument and you said "you're playing is bad", this may be true; but it's not very useful for understanding. You haven't said why it's bad/what should be better. Right now the only thing I know is "Foxxan thinks RTS design concept is old", but don't really have any idea what that means, or what could/should be different. | ||
|
Slydie
1959 Posts
1: Reaching and maintaining a high level is VERY demanding and time consuming. I reached platinum once, but it was obvious that it was a one-time thing, it required too much of me. 2: The "endgame" ladder experience itself is very lonely, it is you vs. your opponent, over and over. I ended up swiching to Heroes of the Storm to play with my friends on skype. 3: RTS-games were at it's peak in the mid 90s with the Dune 2, Warcraft, C&C and Age of Empires series. Many players bought and played sc2 for nostalgic reasons, but we are having wives and children. Playing a demanding game like sc2 is very hard to combine with family life, especially as it is not as social as other hobbies. 4: A lot of gaming in the recent years have moved to phones and i-pads. SC2 is the anithesis to that. I have played quite a bit of Hearthstone on my phone, as it is so much easier to just pull up and get a game done. Nothing about balance, nothing about graphics, very little about game design, although, they could have made a much better job at the social aspect of the game, especially from the beginning. | ||
|
ItsFunToLose
United States776 Posts
sc:bw wc3 sc2 these games live or die by their custom mapping scene. The Blizzard from our childhoods is dead. The people that blizzard have now have absolutely no clue what they're doing, or what made them great. | ||
|
ninazerg
United States7291 Posts
On July 29 2017 06:05 Jae Zedong wrote: This. Every Blizzard game since 2004 has been infested with this crap art style to the point where it borders on incompetence. The SC2 extractor looks like an inflatable bouncy castle for heavens sake. It doesn't matter if the style looked decent in WoW (which itself is debatable), games from completely different universes should not look alike just because they come from the same company. We get it Mr. Art Director, you really like concave shapes and big shoulder guards. Now can you please get back to azeroth? Are you saying giant shoulder pads ruined SC2? | ||
|
Jae Zedong
407 Posts
On July 29 2017 06:22 Slydie wrote: RTS-games were at it's peak in the mid 90s with the Dune 2, Warcraft, C&C and Age of Empires series. Many players bought and played sc2 for nostalgic reasons I'm sorry, but why the hell did you leave out Starcraft from that list? You as a Starcraft 2 player list classic RTSes from the 90's and leave out the best selling RTS from that period? Are you not aware what the 2 in Starcraft 2 means? | ||
|
arb
Noobville17922 Posts
On July 29 2017 03:20 opisska wrote: As a random choice of example, I just watched Innovation vs Maru on Proxima, G2 in IEM Shanghai (played this morning I think). Absolutely incredible game to watch in my opinion. I would be curious, if the people critical to SC2 in this thread would think the same if they watched it - if it is just ignorance of how good SC2 is nowadays or genuinely different taste. for me it was the blobs of units, and nothing they do is super impressive i dont think. For example mass transfuses while macroing well would be incredible if it wasnt for smart cast. Also the fact they made zerg less zergy, since iirc zerglings and banelings? not counting drones ofc, are the only 1 supply units? | ||
|
AntiHack
Switzerland553 Posts
Skill | Maps |Actual game balance ------------------------|-----------|----| Sc2 Skill |Maps|Actual game balance (fail) --------|---|----------------------------| | ||
|
[sc1f]eonzerg
Belgium7002 Posts
On July 29 2017 03:20 opisska wrote: As a random choice of example, I just watched Innovation vs Maru on Proxima, G2 in IEM Shanghai (played this morning I think). Absolutely incredible game to watch in my opinion. I would be curious, if the people critical to SC2 in this thread would think the same if they watched it - if it is just ignorance of how good SC2 is nowadays or genuinely different taste. i really love to watch Maru games ,back in proleague or GSL OSL,IEM,he makes any game looks interesting,(mostly hots games) but it doesnt mean i like to watch sc2 or i follow sc2,i think is just a boring game that u can play 4 times in a year(my case in wol hots lotv,im still asking myself why i did buy every expansion.)i really loved the wol campaign,have to finish hots and lotv =) | ||
| ||
