|
On March 28 2009 04:46 freelander wrote:
I am starting doubting this
(let's apply this concept for starcraft)
Let's say it's pvp. I rush for the time travel tech, and asap I send back my first zealot to the time where we only had 4 probes.
How isn't this insta win?
In that time, I stall his mining process and he won't have any resources hence I win.
Edit:
Okay maybe this was a stupid question, because I believe that this will be the primary strategy, going back in time and taking away the opponent's resources.
you don't send shit back through time. you just go back into time to do things differently that you did.
for example, you go mass hydras ZvP and then go back in time to tech switch to mutaling.
after a few minutes in the present time, all your hydras turn to mutaling and y ou storm the fucking zealots gg.
|
On March 28 2009 06:14 Bill307 wrote:
I am here to talk about whether or not this game interests me, and the other competitive gamers who read these forums.
It's obviously not meant to be a competitive game, why would you try to judge it as such?
|
On March 28 2009 06:17 Polyphasic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2009 04:46 freelander wrote:
I am starting doubting this
(let's apply this concept for starcraft)
Let's say it's pvp. I rush for the time travel tech, and asap I send back my first zealot to the time where we only had 4 probes.
How isn't this insta win?
In that time, I stall his mining process and he won't have any resources hence I win.
Edit:
Okay maybe this was a stupid question, because I believe that this will be the primary strategy, going back in time and taking away the opponent's resources. you don't send shit back through time. you just go back into time to do things differently that you did. for example, you go mass hydras ZvP and then go back in time to tech switch to mutaling. after a few minutes in the present time, all your hydras turn to mutaling and y ou storm the fucking zealots gg.
don't send shit back through time?
man, have you watched the videos? .. if not... well..
the developer even said in the third one I think that you should be careful about the position of units when you send them back, to not be at the same spot..
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On March 28 2009 06:22 armed_ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2009 06:14 Bill307 wrote:
I am here to talk about whether or not this game interests me, and the other competitive gamers who read these forums. It's obviously not meant to be a competitive game, why would you try to judge it as such?
1. Because that's what I care about. I'm not one of their employees. I'm not an investor. As far as I'm concerned, the only question I need to ask myself is, "Am I going to enjoy playing this game?"
I could look at it from a casual gaming perspective if I wanted. Maybe if I was developing an RTS, or a game that involved time travel, I'd have a reason to spend more time analysing it for usability and other factors. But I'm not, so this is just some random game to me.
2. Because this is a forum where we discuss StarCraft: Brood War at a competitive level, so a lot of members are interested in playing multiplayer games competitively. Now when those members come into this topic wondering, "Is this worth my time?", they can go over my posts and see that no, it probably isn't.
|
United States47024 Posts
On March 28 2009 06:33 Bill307 wrote:
1. Because that's what I care about. I'm not one of their employees. I'm not an investor. As far as I'm concerned, the only question I need to ask myself is, "Am I going to enjoy playing this game?"
This is my point though. Why does it not being a competitive game preclude you (or anyone else) from enjoying the game? Just because you play Starcraft competitively doesn't mean you play every game competitively. As far as I know, most people on this site who actively play Starcraft also do play other non-competitive games.
|
On March 28 2009 06:14 Bill307 wrote:
1. Because that's what I care about. I'm not one of their employees. I'm not an investor. As far as I'm concerned, the only question I need to ask myself is, "Am I going to enjoy playing this game?"
I could look at it from a casual gaming perspective if I wanted. Maybe if I was developing an RTS, or a game that involved time travel, I'd have a reason to spend more time analysing it for usability and other factors. But I'm not, so this is just some random game to me.
So if you have no interest in random casual games, why comment on it at all? Casual and competitive games are two very different things, criticizing a game for being one rather than the other is just silly. It'd be like me going to a topic about movies and criticizing all of them for not being books.
On March 28 2009 06:33 Bill307 wrote:
2. Because this is a forum where we discuss StarCraft: Brood War at a competitive level, so a lot of members are interested in playing multiplayer games competitively. Now when those members come into this topic wondering, "Is this worth my time?", they can go over my posts and see that no, it probably isn't.
It's hardly as if being a competitive gamer doesn't mean you can't have other interests.
@freelander: What you brought up shouldn't be an issue because changes don't come into effect instantly, so even if you go back and take out your opponent's mining base he'll still have resource flow in the future for a while, where he could raise an army, send it back and defend.
|
@armed
well
if the changes don't come into effect instantly, than it means that the casuality is just not right
|
Whoa what a cool idea to make it work by having the time catch up and shit... cool stuff
|
On March 28 2009 06:47 freelander wrote:
@armed
well
if the changes don't come into effect instantly, than it means that the casuality is just not right
Please take the time to watch the videos before commenting again, this is specifically addressed. Why would you even argue about something without understanding it?
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
On March 28 2009 04:45 xiaofan wrote:
this sounds confusing as shit
|
I'm extremely impressed with the idea, but I don't think it'll be anywhere near a blockbuster. Just because the graphics and such is a little outdated by 15 years.
|
what if some guy takes 8 tanks to the past and wrecks his opponent's army...
the opponent sees this and takes 8 tanks and positions them in the past right before the 8 tanks warp in..
so then the guy gets his 8 tanks and warps them right before the opponent's 8 tanks get there...
this makes me dizzy.
better chronoshift an MCV then finish building barracks and tanya for some sniping
|
On March 28 2009 04:46 freelander wrote:
I am starting doubting this
(let's apply this concept for starcraft)
Let's say it's pvp. I rush for the time travel tech, and asap I send back my first zealot to the time where we only had 4 probes.
How isn't this insta win?
In that time, I stall his mining process and he won't have any resources hence I win.
Edit:
Okay maybe this was a stupid question, because I believe that this will be the primary strategy, going back in time and taking away the opponent's resources.
What if I time travel back and block your initial nexus placement?
:O
|
On March 28 2009 06:41 armed_ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2009 06:14 Bill307 wrote:
1. Because that's what I care about. I'm not one of their employees. I'm not an investor. As far as I'm concerned, the only question I need to ask myself is, "Am I going to enjoy playing this game?"
I could look at it from a casual gaming perspective if I wanted. Maybe if I was developing an RTS, or a game that involved time travel, I'd have a reason to spend more time analysing it for usability and other factors. But I'm not, so this is just some random game to me.
So if you have no interest in random casual games, why comment on it at all? Casual and competitive games are two very different things, criticizing a game for being one rather than the other is just silly. It'd be like me going to a topic about movies and criticizing all of them for not being books. Show nested quote +On March 28 2009 06:33 Bill307 wrote:
2. Because this is a forum where we discuss StarCraft: Brood War at a competitive level, so a lot of members are interested in playing multiplayer games competitively. Now when those members come into this topic wondering, "Is this worth my time?", they can go over my posts and see that no, it probably isn't. It's hardly as if being a competitive gamer doesn't mean you can't have other interests. @freelander: What you brought up shouldn't be an issue because changes don't come into effect instantly, so even if you go back and take out your opponent's mining base he'll still have resource flow in the future for a while, where he could raise an army, send it back and defend.
Meh, I agree with Bill... and no it's not like going to a topic on movies and complaining that they're not books. It's like going to a topic about movies and complaining that the movies suck because they're cheesey/any other horrendous flaw...
And Bill's posts were good and provided a consolidated source of information about what I needed to know about the aspects of the game I was curious about so I could form my own opinion. Take or leave his opinion, I agree with it.
I've had enough experience with "indie" games and I've been playing games for far too long. I know what I like, and want to play. This game has potential, but the 50/50 on resolving the paradoxes is just plain silly. I'm also not a huge fan of how they executed some of their ideas on time travel and other aspects of the game.
Now It's not just that the game isn't wholly competitively viable... thuogh a lot of the aspects that make a game competitive are coincidentally also aspects that in my opinion make a game good (balance, post release support, and logical reasoning for the various aspects of the game come to mind). There are obvious exceptions, especially out of the RTS genre. But this happens to be an RTS... meh i'm rambling on... the game is still in alpha and does show good potential.... time will tell...
|
pretty truly unique idea... left me wondering how they can pull it off
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On March 28 2009 06:41 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2009 06:33 Bill307 wrote:
1. Because that's what I care about. I'm not one of their employees. I'm not an investor. As far as I'm concerned, the only question I need to ask myself is, "Am I going to enjoy playing this game?"
This is my point though. Why does it not being a competitive game preclude you (or anyone else) from enjoying the game? Just because you play Starcraft competitively doesn't mean you play every game competitively. As far as I know, most people on this site who actively play Starcraft also do play other non-competitive games.
So you're wondering why I'm dismissing the game? Fair enough, I'll explain my point of view.
I play a game for one of three reasons:
(a) for the story,
(b) to overcome some challenge, or
(c) to win against others.
Generally RPGs are the only games that really hook me with their stories, although some recent games like MGS4 might appeal to me a lot as well, if I owned consoles for them. In any case, we don't know anything about Achron's storyline, so I can't comment on it.
We don't know about what kinds of single-player or co-op challenges Acrhon might have, either. Right now, only the multiplayer aspect is being marketed. So again, I can't comment.
Arguably, maybe it won't be particularly good in either aspect, when so much emphasis is being placed on player-vs-player. But there is no point in debating that.
So this leaves me with one and only one reason to play Achron: to win against others in their acclaimed multiplayer. Which means playing competitively.
And as for other people, if they are going to enjoy Achron for different reasons, then why would my posts stop them? I'm directing my posts at people who want to play it competitively. That's all.
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On March 28 2009 06:41 armed_ wrote:
So if you have no interest in random casual games, why comment on it at all?
I explained that in the post you quoted.
It's hardly as if being a competitive gamer doesn't mean you can't have other interests.
And I'm not stopping them from playing this game.
Edit: Hey armed_, if I said "Game X doesn't run on Macs", would you start arguing with me because "Not everyone uses a Mac"?
'Cause that's the exact same worthless point you are making here.
Or do you really think it's necessary to tell Windows users that they can run Game X even if a Mac can't?
(And if this analogy flies over your head, then it's not my problem.)
|
It's obviously not meant to be a competitive game, why would you try to judge it as such?
1. Because that's what I care about. I'm not one of their employees. I'm not an investor. As far as I'm concerned, the only question I need to ask myself is, "Am I going to enjoy playing this game?"
obviously if a game is not based on something you are into or enjoy, you are not going to be immediately interested. the above bolded point contradicts itself. using this logic you would discredit a basketball video game because you are really looking for a football video game. take things for what they are, like this game is obviously not tailored for a highly competitive esports scene. the way i see this game is like bejeweled, or geneforge, games a small company makes simply because they want to. it's not a huge developer trying to get mass appeal or a competitive following. you don't ask a metal head to write a review on a rap album do you? it's all biased opinions.
|
The least I can say is that the concept is at least interesting.
|
The concept is interesting, but seems like it will be difficult to implement in a way that is simple and enjoyable. The explanations in the demo make the game sound boring and cumbersome to play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
