EPTI wasn't totally sold on the new macro boosters, but the fact that they are just defaulting back to HotS and saying "we know this isn't great design but its the best we can do" is so disappointing and makes me worry about who's hands this game is in. We have a month left in beta and there are SETTLING FOR MEDIOCRE DESIGN.
Community Feedback Update - September 18 - Page 4
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
SetGuitarsToKill
Canada28396 Posts
I wasn't totally sold on the new macro boosters, but the fact that they are just defaulting back to HotS and saying "we know this isn't great design but its the best we can do" is so disappointing and makes me worry about who's hands this game is in. We have a month left in beta and there are SETTLING FOR MEDIOCRE DESIGN. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On September 19 2015 07:06 Jaedrik wrote: Aww, you didn't quote my whole post.  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 (not mechanics). Both of you are wrong if you think that blizzard's opinion is that the game is better with the HotS macro boosters. They literally said that their opinion is that there can be better designs, e.g. automated injects. But the community is bullying them with catchphrases like "zerg macro too easy" so that they cannot go through with it. Sources: After many discussions, we realized that, at the root of it, it boils down to this: Are we chasing the best design for each of these mechanics or is taking away a skill that players have been practicing for years better for the game in the long-term? What it boils down to is we think the gain of having auto inject does not outweigh this negative perception that the change creates. | ||
|
Jaedrik
113 Posts
On September 19 2015 07:16 Big J wrote:Both of you are wrong if you think that blizzard's opinion is that the game is better with the HotS macro boosters. They literally said that their opinion is that there can be better designs, e.g. automated injects. But the community is bullying them with catchphrases like "zerg macro too easy" so that they cannot go through with it. Oh my, I didn't realize that.Sources: Well, they are panderers for allowing the community perception to shape their decisions against rightly ordered game design, and in error for believing that automation is superior design from complete removal, but correct in that they believe automation to be superior design to HotS macro boosters. | ||
|
Fran_
United States1024 Posts
On September 19 2015 07:16 Big J wrote: Both of you are wrong if you think that blizzard's opinion is that the game is better with the HotS macro boosters. They literally said that their opinion is that there can be better designs, e.g. automated injects. But the community is bullying them with catchphrases like "zerg macro too easy" so that they cannot go through with it. Sources: I'm convinced they are not being bullied by anyone in making their decisions. Mind you, i don't agree with several decisions they are taking (12 workers for example). | ||
|
Endymion
United States3701 Posts
| ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On September 19 2015 06:38 TimeSpiral wrote: 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. Nepotism is a real phenomenon. People who don't deserve jobs frequently get those jobs and then keep those job. PR is a real marketing tool. People who are the faces of companies can't always be reprimanded because it would make customers lose faith in the product. Unions, tenure, and contracts exist to prevent - sometimes entirely justified - termination, so long as some criteria are met by an employee. I'm not saying that all of these things, or even any of these things, apply to anyone on the SC2 dev team. But unless you're privy to some sort of insider information that I'm not, claiming with authority that they don't is hopelessly naive. | ||
|
blooblooblahblah
Australia4163 Posts
But most of all, I hope we're just done with macro mechanic changes in general. I'd much rather Blizzard to focus on making the necessary balance changes before the game goes live. No doubt the game will be broken when it goes live, that's sort of inevitable, but they can certainly reduce the extent of that. Also, the "OMG NO AUTO INJECTS, I'M NOT PLAYING THIS GAME EVER AGAIN" crowd on the Blizzard forum makes me laugh. | ||
|
crazedrat
272 Posts
On September 19 2015 04:18 Big J wrote: so blizzard lets the community bully them around once more. It's actually one of the worst communities of any game. | ||
|
ROOTFayth
Canada3351 Posts
On September 19 2015 04:06 WrathSCII wrote: Source First of all, we would like to point out that we saw the poll and posts relating to macro mechanics this week, and we'd like to thank you for the discussions. We don't agree with the idea that macro mechanics should be completely removed. When we tried this, and many of you pointed this out, each of the three races lost a bit of their identity and uniqueness. this feels so wrong :/ and why the hell haven't they try to remove entirely all macro mechanics (including inject larva) WHILE balancing the game around it | ||
|
Firkraag8
Sweden1006 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On September 19 2015 07:29 Endymion wrote: if they could be bullied DH would be in the game (or at least in the beta), i don't think they were bullied Not really. The macro discussion has been a lot bigger than the DH discussion in my perception. And there has been a general positive reception of the LotV "economy" change(s), so the discussion is mainly between "that one change people like" or "that other change people might like more". Most importantly though, at the end of the day the negative reception for not-doing a change will always be much less severe than the negative reception for doing a change. Or in other words, it is always harder to take something away, than to not give something. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On September 19 2015 07:37 ROOTFayth wrote: this feels so wrong :/ and why the hell haven't they try to remove entirely all macro mechanics (including inject larva) WHILE balancing the game around it Far too late in LOTV's development. The game needs to be finalized so it can go gold. | ||
|
crazedrat
272 Posts
-During the no macro mechanics patch every game was triple hatch, CC 1st, Nexus 1st. There was no ability to be aggressive early. The metagame became very bland very quickly. I noticed this myself, he's just reaffirming what I know. The MULE still needs fixing in the late game; it would really be best if the MULE / scan / calldown supply were all on the same cooldown timer and energy was removed. Chronoboost ... As a Zerg I like the new version because early aggression seems much weaker. On the other hand Chrono becomes easier for toss to use throughout the rest of the game, disproportionate with the other mechanics. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17126 Posts
On September 19 2015 07:14 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: I can't believe we're going back to a far worse MULE system. Great, so now we go back to Terran not needing workers in the late game and being able to drop MULE hammers on new bases. I can't believe they think this is superior design. I wasn't totally sold on the new macro boosters, but the fact that they are just defaulting back to HotS and saying "we know this isn't great design but its the best we can do" is so disappointing and makes me worry about who's hands this game is in. We have a month left in beta and there are SETTLING FOR MEDIOCRE DESIGN. according to Sigaty's WCS interviews Blizzard will continue making major post-release adjustments to the multiplayer and likened the scale of those changes to how much they changed Diablo3 after it was released. so i wouldn't sweat it... no need to declare the sky is falling.. cause it ain't | ||
|
Garemie
United States248 Posts
HAHAHA. Blizzard. We've tried all three options now. Now that we've seen all of them, we (majority) agree that NO macro boosters was the best option. Going back to a previous idea isn't necessarily a bad idea. Please give it another chance. | ||
|
Thouhastmail
Korea (North)876 Posts
it`s a column dealing with the macro issue.- well-written. recommendable. | ||
[PkF] Wire
France24237 Posts
On September 19 2015 08:03 Garemie wrote: "First of all, we would like to point out that we saw the poll and posts relating to macro mechanics this week, and we'd like to thank you for the discussions. We don't agree with the idea that macro mechanics should be completely removed." HAHAHA. Blizzard. We've tried all three options now. Now that we've seen all of them, we (majority) agree that NO macro boosters was the best option. Going back to a previous idea isn't necessarily a bad idea. Please give it another chance. Time is running out. No macro mechanics at all was bound to introduce too many problems for the game to be playable at launch. I think they're going for the safe option and I won't blame them for that. | ||
|
TheWinks
United States572 Posts
On September 19 2015 08:03 Garemie wrote: Blizzard. We've tried all three options now. Now that we've seen all of them, we (majority) agree that NO macro boosters was the best option. Going back to a previous idea isn't necessarily a bad idea. Please give it another chance. This was never tested. Inject was never removed. | ||
|
phfantunes
Brazil170 Posts
If they did remove it they'd have to completely redesign the game from the ground up with units, timings, compositions (just look at terran bio), etc., and they simply didn't have the time to do it, which is very, very unfortunate. In an alternate timeline they do this and LotV grows to be more popular than soccer and is played for the next 100 years, but not on our universe. | ||
|
Ansibled
United Kingdom9872 Posts
On September 19 2015 08:20 phfantunes wrote: I'm in favor of removing macro mechanics, but my guess is that they realized these were cornerstone to how the game was designed. There're so many harass units and the game is so much more mechanically acessible than BW that you kind need these boosters to get back into the game. During the no macro mechanics patch a hellion runby, liberator harass, banshee, DT, disruptor drop, etc,. would end the game right then and there if it did damage. If they did remove it they'd have to completely redesign the game from the ground up with units, timings, compositions (just look at terran bio), etc., and they simply didn't have the time to do it, which is very, very unfortunate. In an alternate timeline they do this and LotV grows to be more popular than soccer and is played for the next 100 years, but not on our universe. I somehow doubt that the secret to the success of LotV lies in macro boosters vs no macro boosters. | ||
| ||
