|
On September 19 2012 02:26 mordk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 02:24 paralleluniverse wrote:On September 19 2012 02:18 Endymion wrote:
I'm really starting to think that blizzard isn't getting worse, we're all just getting older... d3 is pretty close to what d2 from a casual perspective imo. same with WoW, i raided sunwell along with 25m icc and i think they were pretty equivilant in difficulty, i was just elitist at the time because i wanted to be cool.. but honestly, we all started played these 'old blizz games' atleast 8 years ago, think of the person that you were 8 years ago compared to now.. do you really enjoy the same things? i wasn't even thinking about relating to bodies with vaginas 8 years ago and now it takes precedent over games, that alone signals that my lack of enjoyment is just growing up.. D2 didn't milk the playerbase with a RMAH, which destroyed the entire point of playing the game, Playing with RMAH is your choice. If you feel the need to use it to feel accomplished while playing, you're doing gaming wrong. The only possible use I'll give the RMAH is sell something so I can buy moar games :D
You don't get it. Why play at all if there is a RMAH, where you can just buy items for real money? Yes, you can choose to not use it. But that doesn't answer the question of what the point of the game is. Why play the game in the first place?
|
On September 19 2012 00:32 -Kaiser- wrote:
Lol, poor Blizzard. There goes their only excuse for garbage content.
this made me lol.
|
On September 19 2012 02:33 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 02:26 mordk wrote:On September 19 2012 02:24 paralleluniverse wrote:On September 19 2012 02:18 Endymion wrote:
I'm really starting to think that blizzard isn't getting worse, we're all just getting older... d3 is pretty close to what d2 from a casual perspective imo. same with WoW, i raided sunwell along with 25m icc and i think they were pretty equivilant in difficulty, i was just elitist at the time because i wanted to be cool.. but honestly, we all started played these 'old blizz games' atleast 8 years ago, think of the person that you were 8 years ago compared to now.. do you really enjoy the same things? i wasn't even thinking about relating to bodies with vaginas 8 years ago and now it takes precedent over games, that alone signals that my lack of enjoyment is just growing up.. D2 didn't milk the playerbase with a RMAH, which destroyed the entire point of playing the game, Playing with RMAH is your choice. If you feel the need to use it to feel accomplished while playing, you're doing gaming wrong. The only possible use I'll give the RMAH is sell something so I can buy moar games :D You don't get it. Why play at all if there is a RMAH, where you can just buy items for real money? Yes, you can choose to not use it. But that doesn't answer the question of what the point of the game is. Why play the game in the first place?
i dunno, just play it as if it was a single player game and as if there isn't a retarded easy to access rmah.. i see what you mean though, but content wise it's still able to be enjoyed, albeit the "thrill" of online play is greatly diminished though.. i didn't know they balanced loot around the rmah though, that's really retarded.. with that logic they should have done it with LoD as well..
|
On September 19 2012 02:33 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 02:26 mordk wrote:On September 19 2012 02:24 paralleluniverse wrote:On September 19 2012 02:18 Endymion wrote:
I'm really starting to think that blizzard isn't getting worse, we're all just getting older... d3 is pretty close to what d2 from a casual perspective imo. same with WoW, i raided sunwell along with 25m icc and i think they were pretty equivilant in difficulty, i was just elitist at the time because i wanted to be cool.. but honestly, we all started played these 'old blizz games' atleast 8 years ago, think of the person that you were 8 years ago compared to now.. do you really enjoy the same things? i wasn't even thinking about relating to bodies with vaginas 8 years ago and now it takes precedent over games, that alone signals that my lack of enjoyment is just growing up.. D2 didn't milk the playerbase with a RMAH, which destroyed the entire point of playing the game, Playing with RMAH is your choice. If you feel the need to use it to feel accomplished while playing, you're doing gaming wrong. The only possible use I'll give the RMAH is sell something so I can buy moar games :D You don't get it. Why play at all if there is a RMAH, where you can just buy items for real money? Yes, you can choose to not use it. But that doesn't answer the question of what the point of the game is. Why play the game in the first place?
A lot of single player games have "nothing to play for" apart from the story and how much fun the mechanics of the game bring you.D3 story sucked tho.
Tbh Diablo 3 was the first new single player game I played in like the last 4 years.
I don't know if its just me being a cheep bastard but if I want to play a good single player game I play the old psx or game boy games on an emulator.
|
On September 19 2012 02:39 TheKefka wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 02:33 paralleluniverse wrote:On September 19 2012 02:26 mordk wrote:On September 19 2012 02:24 paralleluniverse wrote:On September 19 2012 02:18 Endymion wrote:
I'm really starting to think that blizzard isn't getting worse, we're all just getting older... d3 is pretty close to what d2 from a casual perspective imo. same with WoW, i raided sunwell along with 25m icc and i think they were pretty equivilant in difficulty, i was just elitist at the time because i wanted to be cool.. but honestly, we all started played these 'old blizz games' atleast 8 years ago, think of the person that you were 8 years ago compared to now.. do you really enjoy the same things? i wasn't even thinking about relating to bodies with vaginas 8 years ago and now it takes precedent over games, that alone signals that my lack of enjoyment is just growing up.. D2 didn't milk the playerbase with a RMAH, which destroyed the entire point of playing the game, Playing with RMAH is your choice. If you feel the need to use it to feel accomplished while playing, you're doing gaming wrong. The only possible use I'll give the RMAH is sell something so I can buy moar games :D You don't get it. Why play at all if there is a RMAH, where you can just buy items for real money? Yes, you can choose to not use it. But that doesn't answer the question of what the point of the game is. Why play the game in the first place? A lot of single player games have "nothing to play for" apart from the story and how much fun the mechanics of the game bring you.D3 story sucked tho. Tbh Diablo 3 was the first new single player game I played in like the last 4 years. I don't know if its just me being a cheep bastard but if I want to play a good single player game I play the old psx or game boy games on an emulator.
Single player you are expected to play 40-80 hours. I have a feeling that's not what Blizzard or anyone had in mind.
|
the complaint of releasing "half completed titles" is a smear job complaint you can make about any piece of software ever made.
all you do is define "complete-ness" as including some feature that was not in the game on release.
the core SC2 game was a lot closer to balanced than SC1 was when it was released.
as has been documented on many occasions the SC1 engine is an horrific monstrosity requiring continuous bug fixes.
some people should check out what ex-employees said about Adham's management of Blizzard/Chaos/Silicon&Synapse from 1997 to 1999.
it was hardly nirvana.
the bottom line is that out of all companies who make competitive RTS games Blizzard continues to offer the best post sales support of any company by a huge margin.
who wants to play some Red Alert 3?
or maybe some Company of Heroes?
|
well this thread is only gona be blizzard bashing
|
On September 19 2012 02:43 CrtBalorda wrote:
well this thread is only gona be blizzard bashing
They "bashed" themselves in the article lol....what do you expect
People were saying forever their games have gone downhill and they just confirmed it so idk.
|
blah, net died for a bit.
On September 19 2012 01:49 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 01:43 IntoTheEmo wrote:
It's also in the timing, WotLK came out shortly after the merger, which was when all the WoW complaints started.
Either way, their actions speak for themselves, they aren't the same company anymore regardless. From WoW alone: the scrapping of the promised water instance for a rushed end game Dragon Soul, the reworking of talents to be similar to D3, how they managed to break the default UI in 5.0, how we got 2 crappily redone troll instances as 4.1 content for months... I realize people make mistakes, but the number of questionable decisions they've made that make you want to go "honestly, why do that for?" is staggering over the recent years.
I mean, did we really need Farmville/Pokemon in WoW? Did we need a BNet GUI on SC2 that looks like it was designed for console? Do we really need chat chan- oh wait.
Not to mention that they managed to disrespect their own game in that OSL broadcast. That was disgusting.
I could go on forever complaining, but yeah, there'll always be people who'll defend Blizzard. I've always joked about how Blizzard would still break sales records if they sold an empty game box. I feel that they're abusing their brand name to its maximum right now, releasing games as if they were still in beta - MoP won't be released with cross realm zones (?), SC2 was released without chat channels, D3 was released without PvP. Yeah their games in the past were missing a few features/had bugs/were imbalanced, but you don't really feel that they've blatantly allowed that to happen. That's what's annoying about them right now. That's why we're so quick to blame it on Activision.
Ah well, back to WC3. With my nostalgia glasses on, clearly. This is the kind of scapegoating and selective memory I'm talking about. The complaints started in WotLK? Really? Did you ever play WoW in Classic and TBC? Remember raid or die, world of roguecraft, welfare epics from arenas, complaints that the game was too hard, waiting for months as Blizzard "balanced" classes at the rate of 1-2 per patch, honor system being nothing but a mindless and skill-less grind, AP-PoM-Pyro, dying in 1 global, etc? Blizzard has made a lot of stupid and moronic decisions before Activision and a lot of stupid and moronic decisions after Activision. Stop using Activision as a scapegoat and put the blame where it belongs -- Blizzard.
Meh, you could say that mass caster imbalance in WC3: Reign of Chaos was a stupid decision too. But balance is one thing, was it a bad game? Did people sit around in cities all day? People went out and did stuff regardless. Oh yeah, and the arena gear had rating requirements. WoW didn't get its popularity from WoLTK, that's for sure. I guess I meant the complaints from people with common sense. Why shouldn't you have to learn to be better at the game to get the most out of it?
You sorta could tell that they were putting in the effort to do things. How many facepalm worthy decisions have they made recently? WoW classes are balanced now, but at the expense of only having 7 talents?
And yeah I wasn't saying it WAS Activision, but the timing was pretty good for it and you can't really blame anyone for that. It's sooo much easier to point a finger at the rather questionable Koltick than directly at the company who made the games we used to revere.
|
On September 19 2012 02:46 TheKefka wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 02:43 CrtBalorda wrote:
well this thread is only gona be blizzard bashing They "bashed" themselves in the article lol....what do you expect
Oh, I must have missed the part where they said "My name is Tom Chilton and we make bad games".
|
Let's be honest here, HOTS development is shaping up to be a disaster.
1. In TWO years, they can't figure out what units and direction the game should take. It takes them TWO years to come up with the warhound, only to be scrapped in the first week.
2. They can't figure out what needs to be fixed in the game, and just cop suggestions from pro forum.
3. They are unwilling to overhaul mechanics and old units. If you want to fix a game, you need to look at the whole picture, instead of copy pasting in marauders in other forms.
|
On September 19 2012 02:33 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 02:26 mordk wrote:On September 19 2012 02:24 paralleluniverse wrote:On September 19 2012 02:18 Endymion wrote:
I'm really starting to think that blizzard isn't getting worse, we're all just getting older... d3 is pretty close to what d2 from a casual perspective imo. same with WoW, i raided sunwell along with 25m icc and i think they were pretty equivilant in difficulty, i was just elitist at the time because i wanted to be cool.. but honestly, we all started played these 'old blizz games' atleast 8 years ago, think of the person that you were 8 years ago compared to now.. do you really enjoy the same things? i wasn't even thinking about relating to bodies with vaginas 8 years ago and now it takes precedent over games, that alone signals that my lack of enjoyment is just growing up.. D2 didn't milk the playerbase with a RMAH, which destroyed the entire point of playing the game, Playing with RMAH is your choice. If you feel the need to use it to feel accomplished while playing, you're doing gaming wrong. The only possible use I'll give the RMAH is sell something so I can buy moar games :D You don't get it. Why play at all if there is a RMAH, where you can just buy items for real money? Yes, you can choose to not use it. But that doesn't answer the question of what the point of the game is. Why play the game in the first place?
??
I don't understand
I play the game because I find it fun that is all. I don't play games to have uber characters and nothing else. I play them because I have fun doing so, be it looting items, killing hard bosses, advancing levels, or whatever, the conjunction of games' features is what lures me to play a game.
In D3's case, I find it fun and relaxing to pump some music and slay some random shit, while I wait for luck to arrive in terms of items. I don't give a single fuck about RMAH it doesn't affect my experience at all.
On September 19 2012 02:40 JimmyJRaynor wrote:the complaint of releasing "half completed titles" is a smear job complaint you can make about any piece of software ever made. all you do is define "complete-ness" as including some feature that was not in the game on release. the core SC2 game was a lot closer to balanced than SC1 was when it was released. as has been documented on many occasions the SC1 engine is an horrific monstrosity requiring continuous bug fixes. some people should check out what ex-employees said about Adham's management of Blizzard/Chaos/Silicon&Synapse from 1997 to 1999. it was hardly nirvana. the bottom line is that out of all companies who make competitive RTS games Blizzard continues to offer the best post sales support of any company by a huge margin. who wants to play some Red Alert 3? or maybe some Company of Heroes?
I agree in SC2's case and I agree that Blizzard has THE best support for their games in the whole industry, I don't doubt that. But their games used to have a larger degree of polish, this is clearly noticeable on D3, in which legendaries were obviously bland, and there was no PvP, a feature which is kind of central to most Action RPGs around, and Diablo in particular (note that I have never enjoyed PvP in Diablo, but I find it to be an important and defining feature).
There's a big difference between releasing a game with balance issues and some graphic and interface glitches, and releasing incomplete games.
Look at Skyrim, shitty UI, absurd graphic glitches, horses flying around, whatever, but no one would ever say it was released incomplete. Diablo 3, in comparison, was released at beta stage, which is extremely un-Blizzlike in my eyes, which is why I blame Activision for those things.
D3 isn't getting tweaked by patches, it's getting released FFS. Also to note I like and enjoy D3 a lot I'm no hater, I just miss the way Blizzard used to make games, it was unique, Blizzard used to be a synonym of taking an old concept and getting it to it's full potential, we can't say that anymore, although SC2 kinda escapes this because like it or not it's the highest quality RTS in years.
|
The entire game is messed up because of two critical design mistakes:
1. Warpgates
2. Sentries
Remove these, and you can remove all the garbage like roach and marauder and immortal and blink. Get rid of the colossus for good measure while you are at it.
|
On September 19 2012 02:51 architecture wrote:
Let's be honest here, HOTS development is shaping up to be a disaster.
1. In TWO years, they can't figure out what units and direction the game should take. It takes them TWO years to come up with the warhound, only to be scrapped in the first week.
2. They can't figure out what needs to be fixed in the game, and just cop suggestions from pro forum.
3. They are unwilling to overhaul mechanics and old units. If you want to fix a game, you need to look at the whole picture, instead of copy pasting in marauders in other forms.
1. Are you suggesting that they immediately began working on Heart of the Swarm directly after Wings of Liberty? It tooks them forever to get Wings of Liberty to a somewhat fair and balanced state. They've probably been working on Heart of the Swarm for about a year.
2. They're developing changes at a decent pace. Would you rather them release patch notes everyday with current units completely revolutionized every single day? They don't want to change too much at one time, that's how you conduct experiments - changing individual variables, slowly, one at a time.
3. Warhound is out so your example is moot. Regardless, they've been fixing the game for 2 years now. Just because they're rolling out new units does not mean that they won't ever balance the banshee or the queen or the stalker ever again.
|
On September 19 2012 02:51 architecture wrote:
Let's be honest here, HOTS development is shaping up to be a disaster.
1. In TWO years, they can't figure out what units and direction the game should take. It takes them TWO years to come up with the warhound, only to be scrapped in the first week.
2. They can't figure out what needs to be fixed in the game, and just cop suggestions from pro forum.
3. They are unwilling to overhaul mechanics and old units. If you want to fix a game, you need to look at the whole picture, instead of copy pasting in marauders in other forms.
only about half the buyers of the game take multiplayer seriously.
to call it a disaster you'd have to see the campaign side of things... you have not.
but let's just assume you are correct.
if this game is a 'disaster' as you say it is then .. in these slow economy times.. NO ONE WILL BUY IT.
problem solved.
|
On September 19 2012 02:57 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 02:51 architecture wrote:
Let's be honest here, HOTS development is shaping up to be a disaster.
1. In TWO years, they can't figure out what units and direction the game should take. It takes them TWO years to come up with the warhound, only to be scrapped in the first week.
2. They can't figure out what needs to be fixed in the game, and just cop suggestions from pro forum.
3. They are unwilling to overhaul mechanics and old units. If you want to fix a game, you need to look at the whole picture, instead of copy pasting in marauders in other forms. only about half the buyers of the game take multiplayer seriously. to call it a disaster you'd have to see the campaign side of things... you have not. but let's just assume you are correct. if this game is a 'disaster' as you say it is then .. in these slow economy times.. NO ONE WILL BUY IT. problem solved.
That's why they are pushing the beta out right now. The game HAS to hit by Christmas, or it won't have good sales.
The fact is that SC2 has no mindshare. Most casual players don't care about it, and it doesn't have the same traction as SC1, because there are plenty of other PC games that people can enjoy.
And a Zerg ONLY expansion is just going to be less appealing than human only one for the masses.
|
On September 19 2012 02:47 IntoTheEmo wrote:blah, net died for a bit. Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 01:49 paralleluniverse wrote:On September 19 2012 01:43 IntoTheEmo wrote:
It's also in the timing, WotLK came out shortly after the merger, which was when all the WoW complaints started.
Either way, their actions speak for themselves, they aren't the same company anymore regardless. From WoW alone: the scrapping of the promised water instance for a rushed end game Dragon Soul, the reworking of talents to be similar to D3, how they managed to break the default UI in 5.0, how we got 2 crappily redone troll instances as 4.1 content for months... I realize people make mistakes, but the number of questionable decisions they've made that make you want to go "honestly, why do that for?" is staggering over the recent years.
I mean, did we really need Farmville/Pokemon in WoW? Did we need a BNet GUI on SC2 that looks like it was designed for console? Do we really need chat chan- oh wait.
Not to mention that they managed to disrespect their own game in that OSL broadcast. That was disgusting.
I could go on forever complaining, but yeah, there'll always be people who'll defend Blizzard. I've always joked about how Blizzard would still break sales records if they sold an empty game box. I feel that they're abusing their brand name to its maximum right now, releasing games as if they were still in beta - MoP won't be released with cross realm zones (?), SC2 was released without chat channels, D3 was released without PvP. Yeah their games in the past were missing a few features/had bugs/were imbalanced, but you don't really feel that they've blatantly allowed that to happen. That's what's annoying about them right now. That's why we're so quick to blame it on Activision.
Ah well, back to WC3. With my nostalgia glasses on, clearly. This is the kind of scapegoating and selective memory I'm talking about. The complaints started in WotLK? Really? Did you ever play WoW in Classic and TBC? Remember raid or die, world of roguecraft, welfare epics from arenas, complaints that the game was too hard, waiting for months as Blizzard "balanced" classes at the rate of 1-2 per patch, honor system being nothing but a mindless and skill-less grind, AP-PoM-Pyro, dying in 1 global, etc? Blizzard has made a lot of stupid and moronic decisions before Activision and a lot of stupid and moronic decisions after Activision. Stop using Activision as a scapegoat and put the blame where it belongs -- Blizzard. Meh, you could say that mass caster imbalance in WC3: Reign of Chaos was a stupid decision too. But balance is one thing, was it a bad game? Did people sit around in cities all day? People went out and did stuff regardless. Oh yeah, and the arena gear had rating requirements. WoW didn't get its popularity from WoLTK, that's for sure. I guess I meant the complaints from people with common sense. Why shouldn't you have to learn to be better at the game to get the most out of it? You sorta could tell that they were putting in the effort to do things. How many facepalm worthy decisions have they made recently? WoW classes are balanced now, but at the expense of only having 7 talents? And yeah I wasn't saying it WAS Activision, but the timing was pretty good for it and you can't really blame anyone for that. It's sooo much easier to point a finger at the rather questionable Koltick than directly at the company who made the games we used to revere.
Most of those issues weren't even balance. What was there to do in Classic WoW except 40 man raids? The entire endgame was 40 man raids. That's why the biggest complaint (apart from servers consistently blowing up and having massive queues) is raid or die. There was no endgame, nothing else to do, except raiding.
Arena gear didn't have ratings requirements at first, many still don't. The term welfare epics originated in TBC because arena gear was too easy to get with a 2s team, whereas the raiding gear was a lot harder to get.
The "balance" in WoW currently has nothing to do with the new talent system. PvE has been pretty much balanced since WotLK. Talents have nothing to do with it, since everyone who raids had the same talents under the old system anyway. It's a constant.
The point is, there was major design flaws with Classic and TBC, just as there are design flaws in WotLK, Cata and MoP. Don't blame Activision, blame Blizzard.
|
On September 19 2012 02:57 Butterednuts wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 02:51 architecture wrote:
Let's be honest here, HOTS development is shaping up to be a disaster.
1. In TWO years, they can't figure out what units and direction the game should take. It takes them TWO years to come up with the warhound, only to be scrapped in the first week.
2. They can't figure out what needs to be fixed in the game, and just cop suggestions from pro forum.
3. They are unwilling to overhaul mechanics and old units. If you want to fix a game, you need to look at the whole picture, instead of copy pasting in marauders in other forms. 1. Are you suggesting that they immediately began working on Heart of the Swarm directly after Wings of Liberty? It tooks them forever to get Wings of Liberty to a somewhat fair and balanced state. They've probably been working on Heart of the Swarm for about a year. 2. They're developing changes at a decent pace. Would you rather them release patch notes everyday with current units completely revolutionized every single day? They don't want to change too much at one time, that's how you conduct experiments - changing individual variables, slowly, one at a time. 3. Warhound is out so your example is moot. Regardless, they've been fixing the game for 2 years now. Just because they're rolling out new units does not mean that they won't ever balance the banshee or the queen or the stalker ever again.
Their process is wrong. They want to glue in new stuff first, and balance incrementally. They should be looking at the game as a whole and balancing the entire set of interactions.
You can tweak any unit into a "balanced" state by having the right MS, hp/cost, burst/sustained DPS.
Are roaches, colossi balanced? Sure. But do they represent a hole that they dug themselves into with a lot of other overall decisions? Yes.
|
On September 19 2012 02:39 TheKefka wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 02:33 paralleluniverse wrote:On September 19 2012 02:26 mordk wrote:On September 19 2012 02:24 paralleluniverse wrote:On September 19 2012 02:18 Endymion wrote:
I'm really starting to think that blizzard isn't getting worse, we're all just getting older... d3 is pretty close to what d2 from a casual perspective imo. same with WoW, i raided sunwell along with 25m icc and i think they were pretty equivilant in difficulty, i was just elitist at the time because i wanted to be cool.. but honestly, we all started played these 'old blizz games' atleast 8 years ago, think of the person that you were 8 years ago compared to now.. do you really enjoy the same things? i wasn't even thinking about relating to bodies with vaginas 8 years ago and now it takes precedent over games, that alone signals that my lack of enjoyment is just growing up.. D2 didn't milk the playerbase with a RMAH, which destroyed the entire point of playing the game, Playing with RMAH is your choice. If you feel the need to use it to feel accomplished while playing, you're doing gaming wrong. The only possible use I'll give the RMAH is sell something so I can buy moar games :D You don't get it. Why play at all if there is a RMAH, where you can just buy items for real money? Yes, you can choose to not use it. But that doesn't answer the question of what the point of the game is. Why play the game in the first place? A lot of single player games have "nothing to play for" apart from the story and how much fun the mechanics of the game bring you.D3 story sucked tho. Tbh Diablo 3 was the first new single player game I played in like the last 4 years. I don't know if its just me being a cheep bastard but if I want to play a good single player game I play the old psx or game boy games on an emulator.
Get dark souls on the PC if you don't have it already, regardless of retarded control schemes it's one of the best games of our age and time
|
On September 19 2012 03:03 architecture wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 02:57 Butterednuts wrote:On September 19 2012 02:51 architecture wrote:
Let's be honest here, HOTS development is shaping up to be a disaster.
1. In TWO years, they can't figure out what units and direction the game should take. It takes them TWO years to come up with the warhound, only to be scrapped in the first week.
2. They can't figure out what needs to be fixed in the game, and just cop suggestions from pro forum.
3. They are unwilling to overhaul mechanics and old units. If you want to fix a game, you need to look at the whole picture, instead of copy pasting in marauders in other forms. 1. Are you suggesting that they immediately began working on Heart of the Swarm directly after Wings of Liberty? It tooks them forever to get Wings of Liberty to a somewhat fair and balanced state. They've probably been working on Heart of the Swarm for about a year. 2. They're developing changes at a decent pace. Would you rather them release patch notes everyday with current units completely revolutionized every single day? They don't want to change too much at one time, that's how you conduct experiments - changing individual variables, slowly, one at a time. 3. Warhound is out so your example is moot. Regardless, they've been fixing the game for 2 years now. Just because they're rolling out new units does not mean that they won't ever balance the banshee or the queen or the stalker ever again. Their process is wrong. They want to glue in new stuff first, and balance incrementally. They should be looking at the game as a whole and balancing the entire set of interactions. You can tweak any unit into a "balanced" state by having the right MS, hp/cost, burst/sustained DPS. Are roaches, colossi balanced? Sure. But do they represent a hole that they dug themselves into with a lot of other overall decisions? Yes.
So would you rather wait 2 more years for them to completely balance Wings of Liberty and then implement the new units so that they have proper balance with the Wings of Liberty units?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
