|
On September 19 2015 05:37 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 04:54 Jaedrik wrote:On September 19 2015 04:51 Charoisaur wrote:That's what every game designer should do, 99% of the community know NOTHING about game design.
They think without macro mechanics the game will be better because ... they think so.
So if blizzard actually listens to the community and removes mms and once the meta settles it becomes clear that it has made the game completely boring and stale ... guess who gets blamed for it? Surely not the community.
As a game designer you have to do what is best for the game. NOT what the community thinks is best for the game. Nice appeal to authority, bro. I cordially disagree. Removing the macro ( edit: ) BOOSTERS, not mechanics, outright is a far superior option to increase the fun for the vast majority than leaving them as they are. Now, if they were perfectly automated we could have the best of both worlds: the spectacle of race flavor and good design. . Well, DK things keeping macro mechanics is the superior option. Who should I trust? Some random TL scrub with 25 posts or the lead designer of the uncontested number 1 RTS game for the last five years who single-handely kept the RTS genre alive with his brilliant design decisions and the best balance competitive games have ever seen? Hard to decide.
Who do you think you should you trust...
A designer who will do the best move for the game as a whole, working towards the goal of long-term success?
Or
A designer who will base the design of the game on false perceptions of some people in the community?
......
I just wish we had a designer on SC2 who was the first option...
|
TEAM LIQUID DOES NOT REPRESENT ALL STARCRAFT PLAYERS
Sure, we are a very vocal community. But I have several friends in Masters who watch pro games all the time and who literally NEVER COME HERE.
A couple of polls here doesn't mean that Blizzard is foresaking their user base.
Blizzard will produce the game the way they want, and you will probably keep playing it. I don't see the point of these "that's it, I'm done with Blizzard forever" posts. You're obviously not, if you're here debating changes to the beta version of a game on a fucking SC2 forum.
The fact that DK is even concerned about the community is great. That he reads TL is even better. But don't feel like he owes you anything.
SC2 is still by a very very very wide margin the best RTS out there and that's not going to change whether macro mechanics are in the game, automatic, manual, or not..
Personally I don't think the macro mechanics are that big of an issue. I'd rather they just leave them as they are in HotS and fix the rest of the multiplayer. If I REALLY wanted to complain about something it would be about how there is still no benefit to being on more than 3 bases at a time (you just mine out bases faster, that's all).
|
On September 19 2015 05:43 DinoMight wrote:
TEAM LIQUID DOES NOT REPRESENT ALL STARCRAFT PLAYERS
Sure, we are a very vocal community. But I have several friends in Masters who watch pro games all the time and who literally NEVER COME HERE.
A couple of polls here doesn't mean that Blizzard is foresaking their user base.
Blizzard will produce the game the way they want, and you will probably keep playing it. I don't see the point of these "that's it, I'm done with Blizzard forever" posts. You're obviously not, if you're here debating changes to the beta version of a game on a fucking SC2 forum.
The fact that DK is even concerned about the community is great. That he reads TL is even better. But don't feel like he owes you anything.
SC2 is still by a very very very wide margin the best RTS out there and that's not going to change whether macro mechanics are in the game, automatic, manual, or not..
Personally I don't think the macro mechanics are that big of an issue. I'd rather they just leave them as they are in HotS and fix the rest of the multiplayer. If I REALLY wanted to complain about something it would be about how there is still no benefit to being on more than 3 bases at a time (you just mine out bases faster, that's all).
The only thing I think DK owes us, is as a senior designer for this game, he deserves to give us the best damn designed game he is capable of.
He is not doing that when his own words stated in one of the last updates that manual injects are an inferior design, but he is re-implementing them because of the PERCEPTION of some players, regardless of reality and what is best for the games design.
He is not giving us the best design he is capable of... by CHOICE...
|
On September 19 2015 04:37 Kyrth wrote:Show nested quote +Zerg
We're now leaning towards the fact that auto inject might not be the direction we want to go in the long-term. The primary reason is we've seen, and will continue to see, perception issues that diminish great Zerg players with arguments such as, "Zerg has no macro to do," or "every Zerg, no matter the skill level, can macro well because it's just all automatic." What it boils down to is we think the gain of having auto inject does not outweigh this negative perception that the change creates.
Well, at least they are up front about their reasoning. I suppose I will just enjoy single player, just like I did with HOTS.
And I will enjoy better games in MP.
I
V
|
On September 19 2015 05:54 -Archangel- wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 04:37 Kyrth wrote:Zerg
We're now leaning towards the fact that auto inject might not be the direction we want to go in the long-term. The primary reason is we've seen, and will continue to see, perception issues that diminish great Zerg players with arguments such as, "Zerg has no macro to do," or "every Zerg, no matter the skill level, can macro well because it's just all automatic." What it boils down to is we think the gain of having auto inject does not outweigh this negative perception that the change creates.
Well, at least they are up front about their reasoning. I suppose I will just enjoy single player, just like I did with HOTS. And I will enjoy better games in MP. I V
Stop shilling bro, we get it.
|
On September 19 2015 05:31 Spyridon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 05:25 Motiva wrote:
I disagree that the races lose their identity and uniqueness. The races in BW seemed more unique and more solidified in their identities in my opinion. I do think utterly removing the mechanics creates way more work for Blizzard than they are capable of by release though. I still think removing them completely is the best thing for the game in terms of actually making a good solid fun RTS. That is another complaint that wasn't really true in DK's post either. The main complaints when they removed macro mecahnics was just that Terran needed to be rebalanced. Not the "races identities being ruined". Also a change like removing macro mechanics means the units themselves can be buffed since the race does not rely on those mechanics. Which would mean a lot of room to improve uniqueness. Most people agree wtih you that removing them is the best thing for the game. But this weeks update proves, without a doubt, that they don't care about the best thing for the game. The perception of players is more important. This is besides the fact that perception is a "short term" thing... and they are doing long term damage by not choosing the best design...
Well put! I also remember the main complaint being that Terran was at a disadvantage. That's why I assumed that the next patch would be a buff to Terran.
Instead we got Automated Macro.
|
On September 19 2015 06:03 AgamemnonSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 05:31 Spyridon wrote:On September 19 2015 05:25 Motiva wrote:
I disagree that the races lose their identity and uniqueness. The races in BW seemed more unique and more solidified in their identities in my opinion. I do think utterly removing the mechanics creates way more work for Blizzard than they are capable of by release though. I still think removing them completely is the best thing for the game in terms of actually making a good solid fun RTS. That is another complaint that wasn't really true in DK's post either. The main complaints when they removed macro mecahnics was just that Terran needed to be rebalanced. Not the "races identities being ruined". Also a change like removing macro mechanics means the units themselves can be buffed since the race does not rely on those mechanics. Which would mean a lot of room to improve uniqueness. Most people agree wtih you that removing them is the best thing for the game. But this weeks update proves, without a doubt, that they don't care about the best thing for the game. The perception of players is more important. This is besides the fact that perception is a "short term" thing... and they are doing long term damage by not choosing the best design... Well put! I also remember the main complaint being that Terran was at a disadvantage. That's why I assumed that the next patch would be a buff to Terran. Instead we got Automated Macro.
Yeah that's another frustrating thing about all of this...
They CHOSE to go with their own decision of what they think is best, regardless of feedback. And regardless of the obvious fact that the REAL complaints were about Terran needing re balancing (which should be expected when their mechanic and production are heavily mineral based).
Yet in this case, they choose to go with the community perception, rather than what they think is best.
So in one event they go with what they think is best, the other the complete opposite and go with what the community perception is. What is the common denominator here? The changes they choose to go with are what requires the least development time. Right after they announce the release date in under 2 months...
The double-standard makes it obvious what is really going on here..
|
Do people honestly believe that auto-inject vs auto chrono/mule implementations doesn't make the game disproportionately easier for zerg?
I see the Supreme Commander macro route as an inevitability in the face of auto-inject and in the words of the balance team it didn't "feel like StarCraft II anymore." And I agree with them if they went that route.
Take a glance through http://nios.kr/sc2/global/1v1/hots/ and click through the various leagues and you'll find that zerg mechanics are not holding back low skilled players relative to their terran/protoss counterparts as well. It's been like that since Wings. If anything auto-inject would make that even worse! That's why I think Supreme Commandercraft would happen as a natural result. Not just for the sake of the top players, but also the bottom.
|
On September 19 2015 06:16 TheWinks wrote:Do people honestly believe that auto-inject vs auto chrono/mule implementations doesn't make the game disproportionately easier for zerg? I see the Supreme Commander macro route as an inevitability in the face of auto-inject and in the words of the balance team it didn't "feel like StarCraft II anymore." And I agree with them if they went that route. Take a glance through http://nios.kr/sc2/global/1v1/hots/ and click through the various leagues and you'll find that zerg mechanics are not holding back low skilled players relative to their terran/protoss counterparts as well. If anything auto-inject would make that even worse! That's why I think Supreme Commandercraft would happen as a natural result.
If that were the case, wouldn't GM have been flooded with Zerg players wehn Zerg was automated? If you checked in the last few days there's actually relatively few Zerg in GM...
And by Blizzards own description, they are not doing this to make it "easier" or "harder". If it was about that, and Zerg really was easier in the end, they could make changes accordingly to balance that out. That is a balance decision, not a design decision.
There are major design issues with the MM, which is actually BESIDE many balance issues with MM as well... They are overall unhealthy for the game, both with design and balance, among other things.
|
On September 19 2015 06:20 Spyridon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 06:16 TheWinks wrote:Do people honestly believe that auto-inject vs auto chrono/mule implementations doesn't make the game disproportionately easier for zerg? I see the Supreme Commander macro route as an inevitability in the face of auto-inject and in the words of the balance team it didn't "feel like StarCraft II anymore." And I agree with them if they went that route. Take a glance through http://nios.kr/sc2/global/1v1/hots/ and click through the various leagues and you'll find that zerg mechanics are not holding back low skilled players relative to their terran/protoss counterparts as well. If anything auto-inject would make that even worse! That's why I think Supreme Commandercraft would happen as a natural result. And by Blizzards own description, they are not doing this to make it "easier" or "harder". If it was about that, and Zerg really was easier in the end, they could make changes accordingly to balance that out. That is a balance decision, not a design decision. There are major design issues with the MM, which is actually BESIDE many balance issues with MM as well... They are overall unhealthy for the game, both with design and balance, among other things.
With enough effort, you can balance win rates around practically anything, but that doesn't mean your design is good. You're also primarily balancing at the top and ignoring the rest of the bell curve and most of the players reside in that bell curve. Blizzard should balance around the top, but they have to be cognizant of what's happening at other levels to ensure their game is healthy. I think the ultimate consequences of automatic injects would cause a worse game. I think all races need attention sinks and screen movement that disrupts their attention and army control. You can do something like make zerg a lot weaker because they can devote more attention to army control or create a new mechanic that's as demanding as inject, but I don't think that would be a good idea.
|
On September 19 2015 05:50 Spyridon wrote:
He is not doing that when his own words stated in one of the last updates that manual injects are an inferior design, but he is re-implementing them because of the PERCEPTION of some players, regardless of reality and what is best for the games design.
Auto-Injects make Zerg easier to macro than Manual Injects, correct? We can argue about the degree to which it makes it easier for years, whether it's too much or too little or Goldilocks fine, but it is easier.
Prepare to have your mind blown.
When David Kim says that he's worried about Zerg seeming too easy to macro... he's actually pussy-footing, bullshitting, PR-ing, whatever you want to call it, his way around saying that in his opinion Zerg becomes unacceptably easy to macro.
We've seen this kind of PR speak before, very recently in fact, concerning the Colossus/Protoss talk at the player summit, where it was revealed that everyone agreed that HotS Protoss was the "slightly easier" race to master. Slightly easier? What the fuck is "slightly"? "While the skill floor is higher by 4.5%, the skill ceiling is lower by 6.2%, which is a 1.7% net loss in complexity"??? I'd love to see the math that resulted in that "slightly."
It means, when we get rid of the kid gloves with which DK feels he must treat his customers, that it is UNACCEPTABLY easy, to a degree that forces them to acknowledge the problem publicly and remove core units and 5-year old playstyles from the game. Does that sound like a slight problem?
Now if you want to debate whether he's right or not, that's a different - and much more fruitful - discussion.
|
On September 19 2015 06:20 Spyridon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 06:16 TheWinks wrote:Do people honestly believe that auto-inject vs auto chrono/mule implementations doesn't make the game disproportionately easier for zerg? I see the Supreme Commander macro route as an inevitability in the face of auto-inject and in the words of the balance team it didn't "feel like StarCraft II anymore." And I agree with them if they went that route. Take a glance through http://nios.kr/sc2/global/1v1/hots/ and click through the various leagues and you'll find that zerg mechanics are not holding back low skilled players relative to their terran/protoss counterparts as well. If anything auto-inject would make that even worse! That's why I think Supreme Commandercraft would happen as a natural result. If that were the case, wouldn't GM have been flooded with Zerg players wehn Zerg was automated? If you checked in the last few days there's actually relatively few Zerg in GM... And by Blizzards own description, they are not doing this to make it "easier" or "harder". If it was about that, and Zerg really was easier in the end, they could make changes accordingly to balance that out. That is a balance decision, not a design decision. There are major design issues with the MM, which is actually BESIDE many balance issues with MM as well... They are overall unhealthy for the game, both with design and balance, among other things.
Dude, you are obsessed with comparing Spawn Larva to MULE. We've had detailed conversations about this. I reviewed them today, actually. They are not comparable. At all. I have a few things for you:
David Kim is a senior game designer, at the top of his industry, working for one of the most prestigious outfits in the world. He and his team are much, much more sophisticated than everyone on this forum. If that does not apply to you, immediately submit your resume/CV to Blizzard and see what happens.
We're fortunate to be members of the beta, and our thoughts and experience and valuable to them, but this entitled grandiosity that we're somehow a better game designer than Kim and his team is utterly delusional.
|
TEAM LIQUID DOES NOT REPRESENT ALL STARCRAFT PLAYERS
Sure, we are a very vocal community. But I have several friends in Masters who watch pro games all the time and who literally NEVER COME HERE.
What a nonsensical example? So the master leaugers who do not visit Teamliquid represent Starcraft players?
Last time I checked master leaguers were only a small minority.
The point is that you shouldn't look at the minority numbers at all. You should look at the bigger pictures and thus who potentially could play Sc2 more regularly if the game design was improved. On the other hand if you make changes based on "perception" of the minority you'll never make progress.
|
On September 19 2015 06:38 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +TEAM LIQUID DOES NOT REPRESENT ALL STARCRAFT PLAYERS
Sure, we are a very vocal community. But I have several friends in Masters who watch pro games all the time and who literally NEVER COME HERE. What a nonsensical example? So the master leaugers who do not visit Teamliquid represent Starcraft players? Last time I checked master leaguers were only a small minority. The point is that you shouldn't look at the minority numbers at all. You should look at the bigger pictures and thus who potentially could play Sc2 more regularly if the game design was improved. On the other hand if you make changes based on "perception" of the minority you'll never make progress.
I'm just saying there are many players of various skill, including masters players, who don't go on TL.
The reason I bring up that they're Masters is because invariably someone will point out that "dead accounts" and bronze leaguers have no idea what they're talking about and that everyone who "is good" is on TL.
False. Many people who care a lot about SC2 and spend a lot of time playing it never share their opinions on TL. Partially because of a small group of trolls that ruins everyone's perception of the community.. always talking about how shitty SC2 is compared to BW and how David Kim should be publicly castrated... those people.
|
On September 19 2015 04:49 Jaedrik wrote:
Looks like I won't be purchasing LotV.
Sad, really. The macro mechanics aren't fun unless perfectly automated.
Bye, please close the door when you exit.
I'm happy they are bringing back macro mechanics and I really enjoy the community updates. I'm convinced they have the absolute right to have their opinion and make decisions that are not popular, after they read the feedback.
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On September 19 2015 06:38 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 06:20 Spyridon wrote:On September 19 2015 06:16 TheWinks wrote:Do people honestly believe that auto-inject vs auto chrono/mule implementations doesn't make the game disproportionately easier for zerg? I see the Supreme Commander macro route as an inevitability in the face of auto-inject and in the words of the balance team it didn't "feel like StarCraft II anymore." And I agree with them if they went that route. Take a glance through http://nios.kr/sc2/global/1v1/hots/ and click through the various leagues and you'll find that zerg mechanics are not holding back low skilled players relative to their terran/protoss counterparts as well. If anything auto-inject would make that even worse! That's why I think Supreme Commandercraft would happen as a natural result. If that were the case, wouldn't GM have been flooded with Zerg players wehn Zerg was automated? If you checked in the last few days there's actually relatively few Zerg in GM... And by Blizzards own description, they are not doing this to make it "easier" or "harder". If it was about that, and Zerg really was easier in the end, they could make changes accordingly to balance that out. That is a balance decision, not a design decision. There are major design issues with the MM, which is actually BESIDE many balance issues with MM as well... They are overall unhealthy for the game, both with design and balance, among other things. Dude, you are obsessed with comparing Spawn Larva to MULE. We've had detailed conversations about this. I reviewed them today, actually. They are not comparable. At all. I have a few things for you: David Kim is a senior game designer, at the top of his industry, working for one of the most prestigious outfits in the world. He and his team are much, much more sophisticated than everyone on this forum. If that does not apply to you, immediately submit your resume/CV to Blizzard and see what happens. We're fortunate to be members of the beta, and our thoughts and experience and valuable to them, but this entitled grandiosity that we're somehow a better game designer than Kim and his team is utterly delusional.
It's far from impossible that dedicated fans of the game have ideas that are as valid as those of the game designers themselves. Education and position do not automatically correlate to expertise, even though it's very comfortable to assume that they do.
I absolutely do not think that every poster on TL is a better fit for designing and balancing SCII than Kim and his team are -- in fact, I consider most posters that would pass themselves off as experts to be way out there -- but the idea that they are better designers by merit of simply being designers also cannot stand.
|
On September 19 2015 06:06 Spyridon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 06:03 AgamemnonSC2 wrote:On September 19 2015 05:31 Spyridon wrote:On September 19 2015 05:25 Motiva wrote:
I disagree that the races lose their identity and uniqueness. The races in BW seemed more unique and more solidified in their identities in my opinion. I do think utterly removing the mechanics creates way more work for Blizzard than they are capable of by release though. I still think removing them completely is the best thing for the game in terms of actually making a good solid fun RTS. That is another complaint that wasn't really true in DK's post either. The main complaints when they removed macro mecahnics was just that Terran needed to be rebalanced. Not the "races identities being ruined". Also a change like removing macro mechanics means the units themselves can be buffed since the race does not rely on those mechanics. Which would mean a lot of room to improve uniqueness. Most people agree wtih you that removing them is the best thing for the game. But this weeks update proves, without a doubt, that they don't care about the best thing for the game. The perception of players is more important. This is besides the fact that perception is a "short term" thing... and they are doing long term damage by not choosing the best design... Well put! I also remember the main complaint being that Terran was at a disadvantage. That's why I assumed that the next patch would be a buff to Terran. Instead we got Automated Macro. Yeah that's another frustrating thing about all of this... They CHOSE to go with their own decision of what they think is best, regardless of feedback. And regardless of the obvious fact that the REAL complaints were about Terran needing re balancing (which should be expected when their mechanic and production are heavily mineral based). Yet in this case, they choose to go with the community perception, rather than what they think is best. So in one event they go with what they think is best, the other the complete opposite and go with what the community perception is. What is the common denominator here? The changes they choose to go with are what requires the least development time. Right after they announce the release date in under 2 months... The double-standard makes it obvious what is really going on here..
They totally missed a chance to make Terran what it should be. Strong position units, back by micro oriented harassment. The mule has made Terran play more like Zerg, cheap units streaming across the map. The lack of quality inject across the board has led to Zerg units being stronger than they should be. Losing a queen or missing an inject is so devastating the game has been balanced around that. That's why a Zerg that holds off harass and makes all the early game injects just stream roll. It's all or nothing.
Removing the mechanics and balancing the game would have gotten so much more back and forth action. The game would have played so much smoother. Now we get such extremes. No larva early game, then 1000000 larva late game. Terran mass mule 100000 minerals instantly on one base 30 minutes into the game.
And I am all for creating interesting game mechanics. But who are the people that feel mules and injects are interesting? That's what defines sc2? A super scv and a puking slug?
We should have been fine with the macro mechanics going and then demand more interesting units/features instead.
|
On September 19 2015 06:46 Zealously wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 06:38 TimeSpiral wrote:On September 19 2015 06:20 Spyridon wrote:On September 19 2015 06:16 TheWinks wrote:Do people honestly believe that auto-inject vs auto chrono/mule implementations doesn't make the game disproportionately easier for zerg? I see the Supreme Commander macro route as an inevitability in the face of auto-inject and in the words of the balance team it didn't "feel like StarCraft II anymore." And I agree with them if they went that route. Take a glance through http://nios.kr/sc2/global/1v1/hots/ and click through the various leagues and you'll find that zerg mechanics are not holding back low skilled players relative to their terran/protoss counterparts as well. If anything auto-inject would make that even worse! That's why I think Supreme Commandercraft would happen as a natural result. If that were the case, wouldn't GM have been flooded with Zerg players wehn Zerg was automated? If you checked in the last few days there's actually relatively few Zerg in GM... And by Blizzards own description, they are not doing this to make it "easier" or "harder". If it was about that, and Zerg really was easier in the end, they could make changes accordingly to balance that out. That is a balance decision, not a design decision. There are major design issues with the MM, which is actually BESIDE many balance issues with MM as well... They are overall unhealthy for the game, both with design and balance, among other things. Dude, you are obsessed with comparing Spawn Larva to MULE. We've had detailed conversations about this. I reviewed them today, actually. They are not comparable. At all. I have a few things for you: David Kim is a senior game designer, at the top of his industry, working for one of the most prestigious outfits in the world. He and his team are much, much more sophisticated than everyone on this forum. If that does not apply to you, immediately submit your resume/CV to Blizzard and see what happens. We're fortunate to be members of the beta, and our thoughts and experience and valuable to them, but this entitled grandiosity that we're somehow a better game designer than Kim and his team is utterly delusional. It's far from impossible that dedicated fans of the game have ideas that are as valid as those of the game designers themselves. Education and position do not automatically correlate to expertise, even though it's very comfortable to assume that they do. I absolutely do not think that every poster on TL is a better fit for designing and balancing SCII than Kim and his team are -- in fact, I consider most posters that would pass themselves off as experts to be way out there -- but the idea that they are better designers by merit of simply being designers also cannot stand.
I worked in the Game Industry for more than ten years (Lionhead, Microsoft, Crytek): what differentiate a professional game designer from a fan is professionalism, not skills as such. Designing a game is not just about having ideas, but also executing them in a very high pressure environment, where there are also forces (economic, political) to deal with. I strongly believe that without actual experience, executing on a game design is something beyond 99.9% of the fans of any game. And again, this is not a matter of skills.
Please believe me that I'm not paying a lip service when I say that from what I read from you, you do have the skills, and with the right experience you would be a great game designer.
|
So yeah, we're going back to HotS on mechanics, and for the better if you ask me.
Now balance that damn game 
|
On September 19 2015 06:44 Fran_ wrote:Bye, please close the door when you exit.
I'm happy they are bringing back macro mechanics and I really enjoy the community updates. I'm convinced they have the absolute right to have their opinion and make decisions that are not popular, after they read the feedback. Aww, you didn't quote my whole post. 
Edit: that may be because you quoted it before I edited it. :D
I'll lock the door on my way out. May need to break in through the window later.
Of course, they have the absolute right to their opinions, and the sovereign right to make whatever decision concerning their game they wish for it is their property, however it does not mean they are correct.
They are in grave error about the merits of the design and flavor of the macro boosters, as they're more accurately called.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
