|
On September 19 2015 08:42 CheRRyKiTTy wrote:Show nested quote +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. No, no and no. The difference here is that Blizzard Dev team is much more capable of building a working game out of someone's vision than the average team liquid posters. There is no way to guarantee the vision they have chosen to pursue is better than the vision the community has. When you create art it maybe years of your lifeblood poured into the project and most of the people want to create something unique. The community on the other hand wanted a game that would be a spiritual successor to Broodwar. Instead we got a great RTS, but very different from what people would have visioned. -Macro boosters make the game a race to 200/200, an issue that the original Starcraft did not really have. This was really an unforeseen issue when the game first released. The maps were too small and the metagame was far too primitive to make any conclusions about the effect of the macro mechanics on the actual gameplay. Currently the game is balanced around the macro mechanics so removing them proved to be too much work for the dev team. -Space control has traditionally been very weak. Tanks were nerfed, Lurker did not exist for a long time, instead the game was centered around more fluid unit movement, this combined with the 200/200 race creates deathball metagame which probably nobody likes. The problem yet again is the fact the game was designed on maps like Metalopolis, Steppes of war, Scrap Station. If you have to make a game that works on these maps, the area control units can't be very strong. However, when you are creating a game for larger maps like the modern Starcraft maps which actually have a rush distance more than 20 seconds you need slow/stationary units that are capable of controlling the space against larger forces. -Protoss units and abilities that prevent micro, Force fields, colossi, latest offender adepts all prevent opponent from doing counter micro in large battles. Force field and colossus are such god damn cool ideas that I can understand why a developer who came up with them would want to keep them in the game. Yeah, the idea is cool, it's not good, but force field was of course the protoss way of defending the base when the rush distances were ridiculously short. Colossus deathball on the other hand proved to be a lot less efficient when both players were doing builds that would be considered all-ins or even cheeses in the modern metagame. When people finally figured out how problematic they were... Well, too late. Blizzard development team is much better at building a game than any of us on the forum, but I would argue that their game design is not in this situation the best. I don't really fault them for the WoL design, I might have fallen into the exactly same traps. I feel in HotS they made pretty good job of improving upon WoL. Now in LotV they had a chance to correct the mistakes they made when they really did not know how exactly the game would play out. They even faked an interest in doing dramatic changes to make the game better. Then, they reverted everything, told us the game would be released in 2 months and gave us community feedback which completely lacks any depth. So don't tell me the Blizzard Dev team is absolutely the best development team working on the game.
They are not the the best team but we are the team we have, so deal with it. No on cares if you like the game, no one cares if you hate it, you have a choice, take it or leave it.
Better yet, If you think they suck, try applying to them and think of something that deals with ALL aspects of the game. for example:
If I do A, will it affect B and C, if no then lets try it, if not how do I change B and C in order to compensate for such a change. Also, how do I make it fair for 3, NOT 2 races...
God you guys that are complaining think you're some god-damn genius, that you guys can do better. If you can, prove us wrong; if you cant, the least you guys SHOULD do is be whiny fuckers and complain all the time, some of you want Terran better, some of you want Protoss better, some of you want Zerg to be easier, some of you dont care, some of you want everything to be balanced, and some of you whine but never give solutions
So if you are Blizzard, who should you Cater to??????? Huh???? The people who whine? LOL, I'll be damned if they ever do that.
This community is very close to poisoning David's mind, and clouding his judgementfor WHAT IS BEST FOR THE GAME! not what you THINK is best for the game.
Seriously, if you guys don't have constructive helpful ideas, just shut the fuck up, nobody wants to hear you guys whine, so salty and poisonous
And If David Kim actually listens to one of you, you guys should be happy, not like ' fking David Kim Finally listens', you're not his Boss, Why the fuck should he listen to us? We buy the game, sure, but do any of us who whine all the time have any idea how to design a game? maybe a couple, but most of us don't know how to design a game
|
On September 19 2015 10:13 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 08:42 CheRRyKiTTy wrote:
So don't tell me the Blizzard Dev team is absolutely the best development team working on the game.
Blizzard has the best RTS development team in the world. No RTS development team is better... no team is even close. the absolute best game designer guys on the planet are working on stuff that makes real money.. like more than 9 figures ...stuff like WoW , GTA5, and D3
WoW is also made by Blizzard, they have the best RTS AND (MMO) RPG games.
|
Wow has turned to utter shit, and there's no competition at all on the rts front.
|
Lol at some people actually thinking blizzard "pretended" to make big changes like they tried to fool everybody.
Could you be any more dramatic or retarded. They definitely were trying, they just ran out of time it seems.
|
My biggest problem with this patch, is that late game mule has ALWAYS been a problem... that they addressed last patch in a very graceful way... So why revert that and then not address it at all?
I'm just gonna come out and say it... that's fucking ridiculous.
There are plenty of ways to deal with it, many listed in these forums. For example, a casting radius for the CC.
Done... that fucking simple. Jesus fucking christ lol. Just fucking do something about it... Like one fucking day of code and you win the grand prize. No test needed, because everyone knows it's excessive as fuck 
Blizzard, I love your games... I love that you made 3 sc2 games and I hope one day there is an sc3.
But this whole process... I just don't understand. It's a beta for our feedback, but then I'm pretty sure nobody wanted late game mule hammer. You fix, but then unfix and leave the worst part of it (which is clearly fixable, not even much effort required). At least just come out in your weekly statement and say, "we like the mule hammer, we will keep it." That is at least something I can logically understand, even if I can't get behind it.
|
United States12237 Posts
I'm stunned at the backpedaling of the Inject Larva change. Completely stunned. Not the fact that it happened, because any experiment can turn out to fail, but the reason why it happened.
I was having a discussion with some friends earlier about the game design behind Starcraft 1. Back in those days, Blizzard operated as a black box. Cross-sections of employees from various departments formed what were called "Strike Teams", and their job was to deliver feedback and suggestions to the designers. The designers, in turn, weighed that feedback and made decisions based upon whether the change made sense or not. One of my friends was on the Starcraft Strike Team and got the Overlord speed reduced from normal to the skycrawling blimp we all know.
The Internet has since evolved as a communication tool. It's faster than ever to post something up on Facebook or Twitter or Reddit, it literally takes seconds. You don't have to take minutes to register on some obscure message board where something may disappear into obscurity, you instead spend a few seconds cobbling something together and vomit it out and tag some company accounts that you know. So, it's a lot more tempting for developers to seek out crowdsourced feedback because it's so readily available -- players are eager to voice their opinions! There's an inherent risk in doing this because the quality of that feedback can vary, and even the most popular ideas can be detrimental to the game experience. That decision is ultimately left up to the designers, as it should be.
I don't know how extensive the Blizzard Strike Teams are anymore. I don't know how heavily their opinions are weighed now compared to in the past. I do know that Blizzard actively reaches out to the community for input, and that's no idle gesture. Would some community member's suggestion to slow SC1 Overlords down to their current speed have gotten the attention of the devs today? Who knows?
The real dangerous precedent that I see is that the Larva Inject backpedal goes a step beyond community influence. The change was reverted because of a perception that may or may not have permanence. When SC2 was in early development, it went through wild shifts until eventually macro mechanics came into being. A lot of the community balked at this decision, calling it needless clicking and a chore -- especially regarding the Inject mechanic. There was a huge uproar about it. Now players can't see the game without it. It's a bizarre situation. If Blizzard had gone through with the Inject change and it made it into the live LotV game, players would have adapted to it. It's what they do. But, because maybe some Zerg players could be possibly ridiculed as unskilled noobs by toxic trolling players, they reverted the change. It's a policy change born from fear, the way I see it. For better or for worse, this never would have happened 20 years ago. Absolutely no chance.
|
Y'all are nerds. Lets calm down here.
Everyone is acting like all balance work and design tweaks are going to stop on 11/10/15.
Let Blizzard do their job -- provide the feedback with a level head, and hope for the best. If you don't like the end product, don't buy it. But don't forget that changes can still be made, and this level of insight / communication is still a good thing for the game.
|
On September 19 2015 14:25 Excalibur_Z wrote:
I'm stunned at the backpedaling of the Inject Larva change. Completely stunned. Not the fact that it happened, because any experiment can turn out to fail, but the reason why it happened.
I was having a discussion with some friends earlier about the game design behind Starcraft 1. Back in those days, Blizzard operated as a black box. Cross-sections of employees from various departments formed what were called "Strike Teams", and their job was to deliver feedback and suggestions to the designers. The designers, in turn, weighed that feedback and made decisions based upon whether the change made sense or not. One of my friends was on the Starcraft Strike Team and got the Overlord speed reduced from normal to the skycrawling blimp we all know.
The Internet has since evolved as a communication tool. It's faster than ever to post something up on Facebook or Twitter or Reddit, it literally takes seconds. You don't have to take minutes to register on some obscure message board where something may disappear into obscurity, you instead spend a few seconds cobbling something together and vomit it out and tag some company accounts that you know. So, it's a lot more tempting for developers to seek out crowdsourced feedback because it's so readily available -- players are eager to voice their opinions! There's an inherent risk in doing this because the quality of that feedback can vary, and even the most popular ideas can be detrimental to the game experience. That decision is ultimately left up to the designers, as it should be.
I don't know how extensive the Blizzard Strike Teams are anymore. I don't know how heavily their opinions are weighed now compared to in the past. I do know that Blizzard actively reaches out to the community for input, and that's no idle gesture. Would some community member's suggestion to slow SC1 Overlords down to their current speed have gotten the attention of the devs today? Who knows?
The real dangerous precedent that I see is that the Larva Inject backpedal goes a step beyond community influence. The change was reverted because of a perception that may or may not have permanence. When SC2 was in early development, it went through wild shifts until eventually macro mechanics came into being. A lot of the community balked at this decision, calling it needless clicking and a chore -- especially regarding the Inject mechanic. There was a huge uproar about it. Now players can't see the game without it. It's a bizarre situation. If Blizzard had gone through with the Inject change and it made it into the live LotV game, players would have adapted to it. It's what they do. But, because maybe some Zerg players could be possibly ridiculed as unskilled noobs by toxic trolling players, they reverted the change. It's a policy change born from fear, the way I see it. For better or for worse, this never would have happened 20 years ago. Absolutely no chance.
I don't think this is a case of fear/reaction to backlash. I sure hope blizzard is aware we will eventually get used to whatever changes come our way.
Blizzard has been trying to address the issue SC2 has had since WoL- there is a constant level of high mechanical difficulty, one that overrules most other aspects of the game. Blizzard wanted to shift the focus from mechanical mastery, to strategic and executive mastery. While most would argue the ladder is better, I'm leaning more towards the idea of mechanical focus. I'd offer my points on this, but that's not the point.
Starcraft 2 has been around for 5 years now (How many games are still even talked about 5 years later?), I believe blizzard has stated a desire for 10 years of SC2. That said, is adjusting a major part of the games identity halfway through its lifetime really the best decision?
|
On September 19 2015 14:04 Little-Chimp wrote:
Lol at some people actually thinking blizzard "pretended" to make big changes like they tried to fool everybody.
Could you be any more dramatic or retarded. They definitely were trying, they just ran out of time it seems.
They literally derped around the first 3 months and started doing something massive at the last month, But sadly somehow unexpectedly they ran out time. So sad...
|
On September 19 2015 14:25 Excalibur_Z wrote:
If Blizzard had gone through with the Inject change and it made it into the live LotV game, players would have adapted to it. It's what they do. But, because maybe some Zerg players could be possibly ridiculed as unskilled noobs by toxic trolling players, they reverted the change. It's a policy change born from fear, the way I see it. For better or for worse, this never would have happened 20 years ago. Absolutely no chance.
DK's talk of players' perception of auto-Inject Zerg "seeming easy" is nothing more than transparent PR lingo. Blizzard's phrasing is always couched with weak language like "slightly" and "seeming."
Look no further than the pro player summit, where Protoss being "slightly easier" to master resulted in the near termination of the Colossus, a dismantling of the Protoss deathball, and a complete rework to Protoss offense.
I think that it's safe to assume that the dev team believes auto-Inject Zerg to be too easy to macro.
If I'm wrong, they aren't merely fear-driven, they're delusional, too, because reverting macro mechanics back to Heart of the Swarm won't make people who already think Terran is a harder race rethink that policy.
|
I guarantee that the new warp prism pick up will be taken out 2 weeks into game..... any cat and mouse dynamic is really in fact terrible design
|
also name one game/sport that succeeded with pro-level in mind first...
this is logic people not any sort of fanboyism
|
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.
Amazing how divided the community is.
I for one wouldn't like macro mechanics being automated. It feels like cheating even, to me. And then there are people like you, most likely bronze-silver players who loves the idea of having everything automated for them so they can only focus on their army. But I really think that's the wrong direction, as on the highest level, two professional players focusing only on their army will be a very bad thing. On that level, player's micro mechanics and positioning are close to flawless, which means you need other mechanics in the game to separate the two and actually determine who the better player is.
You have to realize that good players WANT to do more things than just control their army. StarCraft is beautiful that way - there's ALWAYS something you can do better/faster. Macro mechanics help that further, raising the skill ceiling and helps the better player actually show that he is better.
I wonder, a year ago, would people like you not purchase the next expansion if everything wasn't automated? Isn't that a very new concept? I mean the sentence sounds really really weird to me. "I won't purchase LotV unless the macro mechanics are fully automated". That sounds so uber weird to me.
|
I am frustrated... DK was happy last week going in their direction, now changes due to community "negative perception"?? What happened to sticking to your guns and doing what was best for the game?? Read the update before last and then read this weeks.
Never seen the community so divided now.. Either no macro boosters, manual or auto. I thought they should have road the middle line or even make a choice between auto and manual. But at the very least, they need to fix mule hammering. Make it so they dont pool or have certain range. Then I honestly dont know what to do about the injects at this point, and im a zerg. Maybe just make it only have to be cast every 90 seconds or something. That way theres less clicks, but still cant forget. Would have to work out how they hatch.
|
I Love the new patch and the slight tweaks. I can not understand how anyone was truly happy with "auto inject".
|
On September 19 2015 17:30 KT_Elwood wrote:
I Love the new patch and the slight tweaks. I can not understand how anyone was truly happy with "auto inject".
What part of "No inject" you don't understand? No one wants auto inject. They don't want inject at all.
|
On September 19 2015 17:50 WrathSCII wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 17:30 KT_Elwood wrote:
I Love the new patch and the slight tweaks. I can not understand how anyone was truly happy with "auto inject". What part of "No inject" you don't understand? No one wants auto inject. They don't want inject at all.
Hmm, actually lots of people have said that they want everything automated, in this very thread, which means auto-mule, auto-inject etc.
|
On September 19 2015 17:50 WrathSCII wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 17:30 KT_Elwood wrote:
I Love the new patch and the slight tweaks. I can not understand how anyone was truly happy with "auto inject". What part of "No inject" you don't understand? No one wants auto inject. They don't want inject at all.
Auto inject is still better than manual inject. It's like making a reactor:
You make the reactor, you get another production queue. End of story. You don't have to click on the reactor every minute to maintain that second queue. Nope. You just build that reactor once and it does its job until it is sniped.
Automation is everywhere anyways, it is necessary. Otherwise you would be sitting around and manually returning minerals from your workers all game long and units/buildings wouldn't automatically produce after giving the order.
Just reduce the maximum larva-storage on hatcheries to something like 3, 4 or 5 with it. Insta remaxes should be nerfed anyways and this ensures that the zerg player has to use his production queues or lose out on production after half a minute of not producing, the same way the other races work.
|
On September 19 2015 17:30 KT_Elwood wrote:
I Love the new patch and the slight tweaks. I can not understand how anyone was truly happy with "auto inject".
+1
|
On September 19 2015 18:12 Haighstrom wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2015 17:30 KT_Elwood wrote:
I Love the new patch and the slight tweaks. I can not understand how anyone was truly happy with "auto inject". +1
I agree, I think they found a good solution if they want to keep the macro mechanics. Now just find a way to avoid 10-20 mules on a base at the same time and we are good to go  .
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
