I recently had the opportunity to sit down for a 30 minute interview with StarCraft II Game Director, Dustin Browder. The man needs no introduction - especially to a community of gamers who spend so much time discussing the decisions he and the SC2 development team have made. Dustin gave some really great and detailed answers and it was a pleasure talking with him.
I'd like to thank CW Jung (Community Manager) and Bob Colayco (PR Manager), who helped us set up this interview.
Enjoy!
(help a brother out!)
Teamliquid.net: First of all thanks for taking the time to do this interview. I know you guys are really busy with development.
Dustin Browder: Oh, it's our pleasure man.
TL: Dustin, we know you've worked at a number of other studios on other franchises including RTS titles – how early in life did you decide you wanted to make games?
DB: Well, when I was 10 I got a copy of Dungeons and Dragons for Christmas and I think by age 12 it was the center of my life. So I didn't know what kind of careers were available in games at that time. There weren't a lot of video game design positions back in 1982/83, but I knew I wanted to do something with this. And then it wasn't until I was in college that I found out there were these positions where this stuff could be done. Even then it wasn't until I was out of college and looked around a bit to see that companies were starting to hire designers – guys specifically for content as opposed to just for engineering.
TL: So you would say DnD was one of the biggest influences in deciding you wanted to make these sorts of products?
DB: Absolutely.
TL: I know you've said you play a lot of other games to keep up with what other developers are doing – you mentioned Dawn of War 2. What types of influences do you get from SciFi movies, TV shows etc?
DB: Oh of course, we're always looking at everything all the time and trying to get inspiration from wherever we can. You look at Starship Troopers or Aliens where there is obvious influence on what Blizzard has done. We are obviously watching everything we can get our hands on to try to create moments in games. We've got a mission in game now that's largely inspired by 300, which obviously is not a science fiction movie but has those core dramatic moments that we really really enjoy. And that is one of the great things about being a geek and being in this business – it's something that comes naturally. This is not stuff that I wouldn't be doing if I was an accountant I would still be wanting to do this. I'd still be going to see Zombieland as many times as I could – I'm just fortunate enough to work in a business where that has huge benefits.
TL: You had said in previous interviews that you basically had to relearn how to design games when you moved to Blizzard. What sort of challenges did you face when getting acquainted with the range of skill levels in the StarCraft community?
DB: It was a pretty huge challenge. The games I've made before look like Blizzard games...but they're not (laughs). And I had played quite a few Blizzard games but I haven't played them as competitively as I would have liked. After I got here I sort of saw the difference in quality level but also depth of the gameplay and the detailed experience the players have while playing it...and all the fine control that goes into a ‘craft experience as opposed to games made by other studios. And so it was really, really challenging to relearn – I think the hardest part was learning that I HAD to relearn it. That was sort of a difficult pill to swallow (laughs). Once I got over that, it came very quickly – it became very obvious what had to happen.
I'm also really fortunate to be surrounded by such a great bunch of guys – guys like [senior game designer] Mike Heiberg and [executive vice president of game design] Rob Pardo and even guys like Jeff Kaplan [who was game director] on the World of Warcraft team. I'm surrounded by a group of guys who are so talented, who ultimately just by osmosis you can pick up so much from. One of our great strengths at this point is that we've been able to attract, really, really AAA talent to the studio – guys that really know their stuff. Then we are able to just teach each other as we go. I'm able to have lunch with Jeff Kaplan and [game director] Tom Chilton whenever I want and I tell you, I learn something new everyday from those guys. Not just about World of Warcraft, but other games as well, including what works and what doesn't work in this business and what we should be shooting for.
TL: Obviously we are a StarCraft Progaming community, how much of an influence has progaming been in the development cycle and can you give us any examples?
DB: It's been pretty enormous. You know, when we announced the changes to rallying and multiple unit selection stuff we knew that was going to be kind of a big deal. I don't think we appreciated how big of a deal it was going to be. And then the discussions that resulted from that on your site and other sites around the community were very educational for us in what we were trying to accomplish.
“The benefit you guys bring to the game, the passion and knowledge this community brings has been a huge benefit working on the game. It's had a huge influence and I think it has made the game a lot better.”
I don't have specific examples, which I know you want and would love to give them to you because you've certainly earned it. I don't have specific examples of units you guys have come up with or a specific post that I've read that I thought “Oh we need to put that in the game!” and went ahead and did that. Really almost nothing in the work we do here survives the development process – I don't ever come up with an idea (well maybe rarely) – almost never, that goes right into the game and that's it. I'll get an idea and I'll take it to a designer and we'll talk about it and say “that's kind of cool, we'll see how we feel about it tomorrow”. We go back the next day and say “you know what, I like it but maybe we should change this from protoss to zerg and maybe it should be plus armor instead of % damage lost”. It will slowly get tuned and it goes through me talking with the designers, talking with Rob Pardo, talking with the lore guys, the artists, the balance guys. At that point it's changed so much that was it really my idea (laughs)? I dunno... I guess, technically I said the words that started the whole thing but it's not really my idea anymore – it has no relationship to what I originally said at the beginning. At that point, it's evolved into something that is really tight and good and hopefully we would like in the game.
So there is definitely stuff you guys have said that has spurred conversation – that have created things that have gone into the game but there's no sort of one idea that we took right off a post and put in the game. But the influences are real and are really serious and have been extremely helpful. I've often said and will continue to say that StarCraft II specifically has been extremely fortunate to have you guys watching over it. The benefit you guys bring to the game, the passion and knowledge this community brings has been a huge benefit working on the game. It's had a huge influence and I think it has made the game a lot better.
TL: I think you'll make a lot of nerds really happy with that.
DB: It's the way it is man!
TL: To follow that up, what types of challenges do you face when trying to balance the needs of the casual player versus the rage of hardcore players like in the progaming community. You had mentioned the macro mechanics being a big one.
DB: Sure that's definitely a big one – it's a place where we feel we can definitely do better but it then does break other systems. You know a great example I love reading on Teamliquid and elsewhere were not so much that you guys were missing clicks – some people said that and I didn't agree with that – but that we were missing the difference between a macro player and a micro player. That we were destroying the sense of style of the player. I could be playing a micro game and you could be playing a macro game with both the same race, and we are still playing a very different game from one another. And when I saw that I was like “Ohh!” I was opening my eyes like “Thanks! THERE IT IS! That's great! That's genius! That's exactly what we need to try to accomplish”.
So yeah, it's always a challenge. It's very easy to make units and abilities and missions and UI that appeals to the hardcore gamer. It's also very easy to make those kind of decisions that appeal to the very casual gamer. The real challenge is making it easy to learn and difficult to master, which makes everybody happy. The casual gamer has learned it easily, the hardcore guy is finding it very difficult to master. And like I've said before, and you see this in World of Warcraft all the time – there's not a hardcore gamer and a casual gamer, there's a continuum. Casual gamers can and will become hardcore gamers if you let them. If you create a game that's easy to learn, the casual guy will come and sit down and play. And if you make it really difficult to master, what you are allowing him to do is play week after week, month after month and still learn something new. Then there's always some reason for him to come back and so he'll become a hardcore gamer over time. I can't tell you how many soccer moms I've raided with – it's ridiculous. These people according to conventional gaming wisdom would never be hardcore gamers, but they have better gear than I do! And I'm the archetype of a hardcore gamer, buying 3 or 4 games a month and staying up into the wee hours of the morning to play. Yet here are the soccer moms out there with their purple gear and epic mounts.
“Thanks! THERE IT IS! That's great! That's genius! That's exactly what we need to try to accomplish.”
So what is that? I don't know but it's not the usual breakdown between casual and hardcore. You've made a game where they are allowed to get into it and enjoy it easily but they have a lot of trouble mastering it and become us. So that is the goal, and that is always challenging. That's when it's easy to come up with something for the casuals but doesn't have any depth – so what's the point? It's very easy to come up with something that has a lot of depth and nobody will understand. So we definitely go back and forth, and that's one of the reasons it takes us so damned long to make our games. Cause this stuff is hard – we're smart guys but we're not geniuses, so we have to work at it and put a lot of effort into it. So we just grind on it until we've got it to a place we are happy with.
TL: Up until Blizzcon we had heard a lot about the Queen and in previous interviews, yourself and other members of the development team had said they found Zerg to be the be pretty weak. Now when we got to Blizzcon we played and released an article where we had said we found the Queen's macro mechanic to be extremely powerful (perhaps too powerful). So a big discussion spurred from that about why was the development team finding Zerg to be so weak vs. our play test. Now obviously we only had a limited amount of time with the build, but do you have any thoughts on that?
DB: Well yeah, there's a couple of possibilities. One is that you guys may not have had as much time to play with it as we did. Certainly the Queen stuff is very obvious how powerful it can be – we've certainly found specifically at tier 2, the Zerg lack legitimate ways to really push an advantage. The Mutalisk has been running into a little bit more trouble with stalkers than say it would against dragoons. Where using Blink and Warp In are fundamentally game changing kinds of moments that suddenly change the relationship between these old units. Certainly having watched some of the games played at Blizzcon, there's a lot of stuff which you guys aren't using yet which is only to be expected. You haven't really had a chance to get your hands on it for that long – you would be gods among men if you could sit down at this game and master it in 3 days. I really hope you don't! (laughs) That would really suck and we wouldn't have done our job if that was the case. Obviously you guys are very skilled though so I do expect you to go through the cycle stuff of understanding very very quickly. I would guess that maybe you aren't seeing what we're seeing cause you haven't had enough time with it.
The other possibility of course is that we're wrong, and you guys are correct. And because we haven't gone to beta yet, maybe we are seeing the wrong thing. Now while you guys don't have enough time with it, we have a lot of time but we have a very limited player pool. We've expanded to the studio at large, but the studio at large is not all playing with one another. The Diablo team is playing like crazy but they are also playing mostly with each other. Cinematics is playing a lot but they are mostly playing with Cinematics. We do get some cross team play but not enough that would be necessary to really shake things up and show us what's going on.
So it's very possible that you are correct even with your limited play time. But simply, we have too limited a player pool and we are not pushing it as much as maybe we should. So who knows? We'll find out when we get to beta what the reality of that stuff is. It doesn't really...well it matters to me right now and we are going to keep working on it, but we've got plenty of time for those kinds of adjustments.
TL: When Starcraft 2 releases and the Battle.net ladder goes live will the dev team be actively seeking to make tweaks to official maps to promote racial balance? Or will they be trying to release standard maps and then tailoring the races like that. For example if you look at some of the classic maps that are still played where there is relative balance from the game balance versus some modern progaming maps that are designed with dramatic features to alter how they are played upon.
DB: We're gonna choose a selection of map types – to start with we'll probably start with some very limited set of maps that we feel are pretty similar at a basic level and we'll test our balance on those. We'll start releasing a wider set of map types probably – that may change of course - during the beta to see what kind of maps are the most fun. We will initially be tailoring the races a little bit more to the maps rather than doing a lot of map stuff to affect the races. But it will depend what is easiest and best for us, so we may change our mind on that.
“I can't tell you how many soccer moms I've raided with– it's ridiculous. These people according to conventional gaming wisdom would never be hardcore gamers, but they have better gear than I do!”
Like “wow this game would be perfectly balanced if only we did this to the maps” (laughs). So yeah we are definitely looking at making a standard set of maps that we riff on in a lot of creative ways and then tailoring the balance like that.
I really do feel like using map balance as a method of racial balance is something that the community has quite correctly evolved because we aren't doing a lot of patches. And so you guys have taken over the balance for us in many ways by doing the map balance which I think is glorious and I think you do a great job. But initially we won't be doing that because we know we can patch and will be patching frequently. So initially we'll be doing the balancing with the races themselves. As time goes on we may evolve, I don't know right now. We may evolve into a similar type of formula where we are doing more with map balance but we may not. Certainly for the next few years with the expansions we are going to be doing a lot of stuff with the races.
TL: Are there any gameplay paradigms that you as a developer see in Starcraft: Broodwar that, whether that be progaming, personal etc that you are actively trying to prevent in Starcraft 2? For example sitting back and turtling in TvP. Is there anything like that that you think “that is not something we want to see”?
DB: It's a little broader than that, but yeah all types of play that are extremely predictable where it's a given what you must do is what we are trying to disrupt. Now we know that you guys are smart, and we know that you guys in the community are looking for ways to win the easiest, fastest and safest way possible. So we know those things are going to happen anyways. We know that at some point there's going to be the ultimate Zerg build versus the ultimate Protoss build and that's just what you should do. But we're going to do everything you can to make it as flexible as possible to do everything creatively on your feet at the time. So you can't just become complacent and memorize a build and just run with it.
It's going to be kind of a constant arms race. We're going to be looking for ways to make it a flexible game where there's always new decisions to be made and always creative problems being presented to you. At the same time, the community is going to be looking to break that – you guys are going to be looking for ways to make just one build that always wins. Because that's what I always want to do - always win.
So that's going to be the challenge for us, and again it's not that we are trying to destroy anything specific to the original Starcraft, but we are trying to limit anything that comes up where its like “that's the obvious move.”
TL: OK, Blizzard has recently been making moves into the world of E-Sports - you have a dedicated E-Sports team now. With Starcraft 2, will you actually be organizing and sponsoring SC2 events or will you be leaving that to 3rd parties, either professional or in the community?
DB: I think Bob [Editor's Note: Bob Colayco, Blizzard PR Manager for SC2] is going to answer this one.
Bob: You know, we have an E-Sports team for a reason and I think you're going to see some 3rd party stuff as well, but we definitely like to get hands on with our own things. If you look at what we've done with WoW Arena, we do have the tournament realms and we do regional finals that we run and we sponsor. And then there's the grand finals which we have at Blizzcon, so I think you're going to see a mix of things. I can't say anything specific
DB: I think the important message for the community with this one would be, that we love the 3rd party tournaments as well. We love watching those, going to them and seeing them live etc. So we want to do stuff as well, and we want to promote E-Sports overall.
“We are trying to make this game as complete – like if nobody buys any other product, this game needs to be awesome. Like if Blizzard gets hit by a meteor tomorrow and we all die, at least Starcraft 2 was awesome – that's what it needs to be.”
We want E-Sports to grow and grow and grow – ideally with our game of course, but even in the wider world of everybody's games. We think E-Sports is an important component of what video games could become, and we want to take this opportunity with Starcraft 2 to push E-Sports forward. But, we really hope that lots of people out there see how fun it is and jump on board to make their own tournaments for our games or whoever's games. As long as we have a lot of E-Sports out there, we'll have more E-Sports players, more sites and bigger sites. It's just good for the business overall and because we put so much energy into it, it's good for us.
So we are really hoping that E-Sports, in the States specifically and in Europe as well takes off like it has in Korea where it's huge. We see that opportunity like “wow this is so fun, there's no reason this couldn't be a world-wide phenomenon” instead of one limited to a few places in the world.
TL: What is your design philosophy with regards to expansions, and have you hit a point where you have to say “OK we'll have to put this in the expansion”. And then, how do you decide “this is something we can patch in” versus “this deserves its own separate product”?
DB: We haven't gotten to that point yet where we are designing stuff exclusively for expansions, but we haven't been throwing anything out. If we have something that doesn't fit right now but we think it's cool, we'll ear mark that as “possible expansion”. Like at this point we're going to be done with the original Starcraft 2 here, Wings of Liberty when they rip it out of our cold dead hands. We are going to put every ounce of energy into this release and then we'll worry about the expansions.
So if we have an awesome idea that will just not squeeze in, sure, we'll earmark that for expansion. But we are always watching to say “hey does that suddenly fit?” and if it fits, we'll put it in the ship.
TL: You already touched on this next one but with StarCraft II and the expansions are you designing it with a Global scope for the multiplayer the way we consider StarCraft+Broodwar now? Are there units that you think “that could work in the future, but we can leave it for expansion”.
DB: No we aren't leaving any intentional holes, is that what you are asking?
TL: Yeah.
DB: No we aren't doing anything where we think “there's a hole here but we can fill it with the expansion”. We are trying to make this game complete – like if nobody buys any other product, this game needs to be awesome. Like if Blizzard gets hit by a meteor tomorrow and we all die, at least StarCraft II was awesome – that's what it needs to be.
Then with the expansions there's just going to be more, and we are going to tune and tweak the gameplay and give you some more strategic options, but we are definitely not looking at this like we are going to intentionally leave blanks that can be filled later on. That would probably be pretty lame (laughs). No, we are definitely thinking of them as separate products, like “here is a great game. Here is ANOTHER great game. It's like the other game, but great in its own right.”
TL: Typically balance feedback has been given to developers by word of mouth – typically through forums. Is the development team going to have any sort of method by which high end/high ranking players can directly give their feedback?
DB: Yes...yes.
TL: Can you give us any more?
DB: I don't know what we are exactly going to do, but we've already been in discussion with some of the high ranking players around the world. We talked to people at Blizzcon and I think we sent a professional build overseas so some of the high ranking players could take a look at it and I've gotten the feedback from them on that.
But we are definitely going to be opening up...I don't know how we are exactly going to do it, whether it be a special secret forum or if we'll do email or what. We'll definitely be talking to the high ranking folks, the guys who have traditionally been really great at our games and see what they think.
TL: You've been asked before about HLTV type functionally in StarCraft II and had noted that it was on a wishlist but weren't sure that it would be there at launch. Given that Beta has been pushed to 2010, is this something we can expect with the final product?
DB: I don't know at this point which features for Battle.net are going to make the release. There's a minimum set which I know is going to make it. Then obviously there's going to be features we patch in, and ones we do with the expansions. Some of that is still swirling around, like which ones make which cut at which time. Those guys are working really hard to bring the best possible feature set with the game launch, but there's definitely stuff that's going to be put off to the expansions and patches.
Bob: One thing I wanted to say before we get off that topic - I really want to emphasize that people are used to seeing Battle.net only get overhauled with each product release, but there's going to be a concerted effort to do more in between releases with patches.
“There's going to be some juicy stuff in between the actual product releases as we go forward.” -Bob Colayco
Again... I hate to bring the World of Warcraft analogy again but it is pretty analogous to the World of Warcraft content patches. There's going to be some juicy stuff in between the actual product releases as we go forward.
DB: We've seen what WoW has done for our games and our community, and we have a pretty good history of patching – not always what the community would want, but we try to do well. I think WoW has shown us what we can accomplish and the value it has for us, so we are trying to make the RTS team behave a little bit more like that in terms of how we get content patches over time. We'll see how we do.
Bob: That's for Battle.net features.
DB: Right.
TL: One last question here. I went to the community summit at Blizzcon and had a chance to ask Tony Hsu [EN: SC2 Producer] this question – I wanted to hear your thoughts. A lot of people's jobs and careers even outside of Blizzard rely on the success of Starcraft 2, does that immense pressure ever get to you? Do you ever have one of those “....whoa...” moments?
DB: Oh yeah it's terrifying, no question. We are very aware of the importance of the product to a lot of different people but also to gamers at large. We know how much they are expecting of this product, how good they want it to be etc. At a certain point though, you have to put the horse blinders on and say “look here's what I'm going to do. I'm going to make the best game that I can possibly make, for as many people as I possibly can. But it's got to be about the game and about the product. I'm not going to worry a ton today about a specific IGR (Internet Game Room) or whatever”. But you do take it into consideration, and it is absolutely terrifying to consider how many people need and want this product to be great and how much pressure there is to make something that is going to fulfill everyone's expectations.
TL: I have to ask quickly about the beta – there had been hints that it would be coming in the first few months of 2010. What types of numbers would we be looking at for the first wave? And is there any sort of format for how new players will be added later on (bulk waves, trickle in etc)?
DB: I don't think I have the answer to that question, it would be a better question for Chris Sigaty as he usually keeps that stuff. I also know that those numbers will change over time and we will decide as the beta goes forward how many people to invite based on how well we are doing with our server load, player activity etc. It will be a little bit organic – there isn't sort of a secret document somewhere that I can read to you and say “Oh there's the whole plan!”. We're going to play it a little bit by ear as we go.
TL: Thanks very much – I really appreciate you guys giving us all this time since I know you are all very busy.
DB: We'll hey thanks a lot man, it's always a pleasure to talking to you guys. You always have really great questions – it's just really fun talking to Teamliquid specifically. Thanks for talking to us today.
TL: Thanks very much guys, I'll let you get back to work!
You know a great example I love reading on Teamliquid and elsewhere were not so much that you guys were missing clicks – some people said that and I didn't agree with that – but that we were missing the difference between a macro player and a micro player. That we were destroying the sense of style of the player. I could be playing a micro game and you could be playing a macro game with both the same race, and we are still playing a very different game from one another. And when I saw that I was like “Ohh!” I was opening my eyes like “Thanks! THERE IT IS! That's great! That's genius! That's exactly what we need to try to accomplish”.
This quote makes me feel really good about the direction of SC2 development.
On December 03 2009 17:34 Akakito wrote: Awesome interview! :D Does anyone know What RGR means near the end??
I listened to it 5 times, googled it...no idea...maybe it's some internal Blizzard acronym like...revenue generating...something. Ill buzz CW an email to ask.
You know a great example I love reading on Teamliquid and elsewhere were not so much that you guys were missing clicks – some people said that and I didn't agree with that – but that we were missing the difference between a macro player and a micro player. That we were destroying the sense of style of the player. I could be playing a micro game and you could be playing a macro game with both the same race, and we are still playing a very different game from one another. And when I saw that I was like “Ohh!” I was opening my eyes like “Thanks! THERE IT IS! That's great! That's genius! That's exactly what we need to try to accomplish”.
This quote makes me feel really good about the direction of SC2 development.
Such an awesome interview =D !! The questions were deep and nicely worded, and so were the responses. Really nice to see them talk about the development process and the community influence. One of the best (if not THE best) interview to date with Dustin and about SC2.
Of all the delays, all the bullshit with MBS and automine and MULE shit.... I still have a huge respect for what Blizzard is doing. OR at least... trying to do.
They have a huge respect for the game, and are being VERY carefull about making this correctly. You can tell the sense of awe and respect that the man has for what he does every day.
That kind of care, and attention to detail, can't be given enough credit. Nothing is rushed. It's meant to be the greatest game ever. This is the company that can do it.
Seriously awesome interview xD It's so cool to hear how their development process is going! And actually; since they will have a way of top players giving their feedback and suggestions, will TL have a way of giving our players fortunate enough to have betas suggestions?
Lol you totally should have asked what the new mechanic they were working on protoss was:p
The layout is so nicely done I want to download it, print it, and read it in some place comfortable. Is there any way the coders can create a print-to-pdf button?
You know a great example I love reading on Teamliquid and elsewhere were not so much that you guys were missing clicks – some people said that and I didn't agree with that – but that we were missing the difference between a macro player and a micro player. That we were destroying the sense of style of the player. I could be playing a micro game and you could be playing a macro game with both the same race, and we are still playing a very different game from one another. And when I saw that I was like “Ohh!” I was opening my eyes like “Thanks! THERE IT IS! That's great! That's genius! That's exactly what we need to try to accomplish”.
This quote makes me feel really good about the direction of SC2 development.
Seriously this is the part I loved the most.. before that I was a little skeptical .. maybe he's just saying that to make us feel good, even if its bullshit, but when he said that I was like "fuck yeah, I remember that TL post and I fully agreed with it as well"
Overall really great interesting interview. I would have loved some questions about kespa, kespa maps, korean sc2 matches on TV etc. cause I'm a little worried in that department, but still great job, certainly the best Browder interview so far.
I nearly came when he started talking about the distinction between macro players and micro players. He seems like a great speaker and a passionate person. People complain a lot about blizzard and sc2 but really who else would you want to have control? Also, Blizzard can be trusted with sc2 because its their game and they have wow money so they can take a long time to make it.
I hope Beta is going to diminish and not inflate all of the 20+ page threads on balance.
Nice, they just have to release the game the first few months of 2010 because I'm not sure people are going to be happy about further pushing the release date back to late 2010 or early 2011 or something similar.
This was truley a great interview. What made me especially happy is that Blizzard really listen to the community. That all the threads really do make a difference.
Juuust give us that game. Man, DB is great... I've heard so many interviews with him and the result is always an extreme eager to play sc2. Great interview; TL.net is the best thing that happened to this world since the release of starcraft.
I like how he really says that they focus on casual vs. hardcore gamer.
But I really dislike that all his examples are from WOW, a game where the skill ceiling is low and where the hardcore gamer gets rewarded directly/artificially through his high game time (getting artificial experience and lvls and items), instead of a game like SC and war3 where a hardcore gamer gets rewarded indirectly because he is actually learning stuff and getting better at the game and its mechanics
On December 03 2009 22:47 Ota Solgryn wrote: But I really dislike that all his examples are from WOW, a game where the skill ceiling is low and where the hardcore gamer gets rewarded directly/artificially through his high game time (getting artificial experience and lvls and items), instead of a game like SC and war3 where a hardcore gamer gets rewarded indirectly because he is actually learning stuff and getting better at the game and its mechanics
So...you're saying WoW players don't learn anything or get better by playing more, they are just rewarded with purple pixels and achievements? That seems like a very ignorant statement. Besides, his examples about WoW were mostly about how they patched in new content between expansions, and how WoW caters to both casual and harcore gamers, both of which EVERYONE, including DB, thinks SCII needs to have.
On December 03 2009 20:56 Radiomouse wrote: awesome interview, only the analogies with world of warcraft got me a bit worried. Especially seeing how that game got dumbed down to absurd levels.
Great interview, I liked how the questions focused on the mentality of the game development instead of "any new units?" or "how is the balance?" that is absolutely useless in 2 weeks. Thanks!
Great interview, also a huge thanks to Dustin Browder himself - not only for taking his time to do this but by his informative and explanatory answers throughout the interview.
Awesome interview To be honest he haven't said anything i didnt expected from them, i always trusted blizzard, but its nice to ease the feelings of some unhappy part of the community.
I think since diablo 2 i´ve never hypped a game so much. It makes me feel that same feeling of anxiety when i was young, im really really looking foward to this game.
Wasn't it Nony who brought up the whole "playing style" aspect of starcraft (and how there isn't really one in other RTS games b/c they are too easy to play "perfect")? I kinda lol'd b/c he just got finished saying "I can't point to a post..." and then goes and points to one.
I was not going to ever try play sc2 competitively but i might change my opinion on that...I just think that bw is just absolutely perfect game and nothing can be better balanced and perfect as bw is. Even when they were making SC BW, they couldn't know how it will be played 10 years later and they are probably very surprised themselves what strategies and gameplay people use nowadays. I just hope they make sc 2 as good as possible and Dustin knows what they need to do, but don't know how. So i wish them good luck and take time if it is needed to make it perfect.
wonderful interview, and i like how he addresses the issue with us trying to call the queen broken simply because a few guys played around with it at blizzcon.
On December 04 2009 05:27 Etherone wrote: great interview, seems like he is on the right track, i just wish it was a faster track.
on the bright side most people here will be out of college by the time sc2 is out and it won't ruin their academic career
And simultaneously, others will enter college, and probably university
But hey, I just want to the game to be as good as possible, and I'm sure many others agree. Blizzard should take their time - it's going to be worth it.
Fantastic interview. Gotta agree with many people, they way he talked about the micro/macro distinction there tells me he understands our point of view and it gives me hope for SC2.
On December 03 2009 23:08 Manifesto7 wrote: Hey Kennigit,
You rule.
Sincerely, Manifesto7.
P.S. Durak agrees.
Thanks to the guys at Blizzard for putting this together as well. This interview is really well done and much appreciated. I feel so much more informed. Plus, I have a fuzzy feeling inside that the Blizzard guys gave TL such a comprehensive interview and personal comments.
And I'm so glad there was a reference to my review I think in this section:
"You know a great example I love reading on Teamliquid and elsewhere were not so much that you guys were missing clicks – some people said that and I didn't agree with that – but that we were missing the difference between a macro player and a micro player. That we were destroying the sense of style of the player. I could be playing a micro game and you could be playing a macro game with both the same race, and we are still playing a very different game from one another. And when I saw that I was like “Ohh!” I was opening my eyes like “Thanks! THERE IT IS! That's great! That's genius! That's exactly what we need to try to accomplish”. "
Where I was the first on this forum at least to extensively elaborate on it. If that's so I'm kinda happy I contributed something .
great interview, thank you so much kenningit, this is really great work.
Browder has gotten a lot of flack over the last year or so, but from everything I've read, he seems like he has a very deep knowledge of what he's doing in terms of his goals, expectations, and how he runs things, although I must say, he seems to have a lot of elongated "I don't know" type answers. I guess that's mostly because of how Blizzards games tend to be more of an "evolution" than a "creation," if that makes any sense.
If you get another Interview with him before the release of the game, I would really like to hear about B.net 2.0, specifically about it's matchmaking and reanking systems, something that Blizzard has sort of failed at in it's RTS games.
To be honest, I'd rather have a slow train that goes on the right track than a fast train that goes on the wrong track because the ultimate destination is what matters, right?
This way, even if Starcraft 2 fails, I can just sit back and be like "Dustin Browder and his team tried their damned hardest to make a game that could stand up to Starcraft and it didn't work. That's a testament to how perfect the original is."
You know what I really liked. His diplomatic responce to the Queen question. He told that what TL found in playtesting was not what they had found, gave reasons why this might be, didnt criticize the skill level of the TL crowd and yet still left open the possibility that the development team could be wrong and even if so that things could be changed. I thought he couldnt have done that part better and Im interested to hear responces from the TL members who had played at Blizzcon and gave their impression of the Queen.
Actually while we're on the subject I think TL did a great job of handleing their first major balance concern. We debated the issue and our impressions but at the same time (most people) remained faily open to the possiblity we were wrong. I think that attitude is going to help us allot going into beta to provide useful feedback for Blizzard.
On December 05 2009 00:12 Archerofaiur wrote: You know what I really liked. His diplomatic responce to the Queen question. He told that what TL found in playtesting was not what they had found, gave reasons why this might be, didnt criticize the skill level of the TL crowd and yet still left open the possibility that the development team could be wrong and even if so that things could be changed. I thought he couldnt have done that part better and Im interested to hear responces from the TL members who had played at Blizzcon and gave their impression of the Queen.
Actually while we're on the subject I think TL did a great job of handleing their first major balance concern. We debated the issue and our impressions but at the same time (most people) remained faily open to the possiblity we were wrong. I think that attitude is going to help us allot going into beta to provide useful feedback for Blizzard.
yeah but i kinda feel bad with they way he put it. he basically said, "you guys played the game for a few days at a couple of events and you say the zerg are broken? we've played the game for years now, but hey, maybe you are right..."
and it's not even beta yet. i like how TL anaylzes the game, but to be honest I hate seeing big articles dedicated to bashing game balance. we really don't have a right.
"People kept saying how Blizzard thought Zerg was the weakest race. Either they didn't look at Larvae Inject very carefully or they didn't play against many 1-hatch builds, because 1-hatch speedling and 1-hatch hydra are ridiculously powerful. Like laughably powerful. I won most of my early games as Z against other TL players simply by abusing the Queen"
real respectful
the article as a whole was a really good analysis and I applaud hot_bid's contributions, but stuff like that and especially all the comments from other TLers following it don't seem very fair
The best approach to take is the one Dustin just demonstrated. State what you are seeing and what you think that means but leave open the possibility that what you see is not the end all be all. I thought the start of the TL articles did a great job of this, if the subsequent discussions and forum comments lost track of this alittle.
On December 05 2009 05:53 eMbrace wrote: taken from hot_bids' article
"People kept saying how Blizzard thought Zerg was the weakest race. Either they didn't look at Larvae Inject very carefully or they didn't play against many 1-hatch builds, because 1-hatch speedling and 1-hatch hydra are ridiculously powerful. Like laughably powerful. I won most of my early games as Z against other TL players simply by abusing the Queen"
real respectful
the article as a whole was a really good analysis and I applaud hot_bid's contributions, but stuff like that and especially all the comments from other TLers following it don't seem very fair
I don't understand why you think an opinion is disrespectful.....disagreeing != disrespect. Basically there is no "Bashing" and you are being hyperbolic.
On December 05 2009 05:53 eMbrace wrote: taken from hot_bids' article
"People kept saying how Blizzard thought Zerg was the weakest race. Either they didn't look at Larvae Inject very carefully or they didn't play against many 1-hatch builds, because 1-hatch speedling and 1-hatch hydra are ridiculously powerful. Like laughably powerful. I won most of my early games as Z against other TL players simply by abusing the Queen"
real respectful
the article as a whole was a really good analysis and I applaud hot_bid's contributions, but stuff like that and especially all the comments from other TLers following it don't seem very fair
The first thing I said in my article was that I only played for two days and was not an expert. I readily admitted that I could be wrong, but these were my impressions of the game. But a lot of the responses seemed to be people throwing their hands up yelling "wow zerg is imba, blizzard wtf!?" which is not really the meaning of the article at all. But that's how forums operate, people tend to blow a lot of stuff out of proportion.
I don't see anything disrespectful or "bashing" from what I wrote. You're being oversensitive -- Blizzard likes analysis and constructive criticism from its fansitse, and they clearly don't seem to think we're disrespecting or bashing them.
On December 05 2009 05:53 eMbrace wrote: taken from hot_bids' article
"People kept saying how Blizzard thought Zerg was the weakest race. Either they didn't look at Larvae Inject very carefully or they didn't play against many 1-hatch builds, because 1-hatch speedling and 1-hatch hydra are ridiculously powerful. Like laughably powerful. I won most of my early games as Z against other TL players simply by abusing the Queen"
real respectful
the article as a whole was a really good analysis and I applaud hot_bid's contributions, but stuff like that and especially all the comments from other TLers following it don't seem very fair
The first thing I said in my article was that I only played for two days and was not an expert. I readily admitted that I could be wrong, but these were my impressions of the game. But a lot of the responses seemed to be people throwing their hands up yelling "wow zerg is imba, blizzard wtf!?" which is not really the meaning of the article at all. But that's how forums operate, people tend to blow a lot of stuff out of proportion.
I don't see anything disrespectful or "bashing" from what I wrote. You're being oversensitive -- Blizzard likes analysis and constructive criticism from its fansitse, and they clearly don't seem to think we're disrespecting or bashing them.
yeah your intro was really great and you acknowledged that you had limited play time. considering that, i just found that particular part odd.
On December 05 2009 00:12 Archerofaiur wrote: You know what I really liked. His diplomatic responce to the Queen question. He told that what TL found in playtesting was not what they had found, gave reasons why this might be, didnt criticize the skill level of the TL crowd and yet still left open the possibility that the development team could be wrong and even if so that things could be changed. I thought he couldnt have done that part better and Im interested to hear responces from the TL members who had played at Blizzcon and gave their impression of the Queen.
Actually while we're on the subject I think TL did a great job of handleing their first major balance concern. We debated the issue and our impressions but at the same time (most people) remained faily open to the possiblity we were wrong. I think that attitude is going to help us allot going into beta to provide useful feedback for Blizzard.
yeah but i kinda feel bad with they way he put it. he basically said, "you guys played the game for a few days at a couple of events and you say the zerg are broken? we've played the game for years now, but hey, maybe you are right..."
I sort of agree with this, it could have been asked a little differently. But it's not a big deal.
and it's not even beta yet. i like how TL anaylzes the game, but to be honest I hate seeing big articles dedicated to bashing game balance. we really don't have a right.
But I definitely don't agree with this.
The article was fine, what else are you supposed to write about than your experiences playing the game? It even had plenty of prefacing with how this was purely opinion and could be 100% wrong.
Amazing interview, but I have to disagree at one point. Dustin Browder said the Blizzard employees are smart, and not genius. But they are all pretty much genius. At least to me.
great interview, specifically the part about how they sent a build to the progamers to test. crazy shit (but also sad, because now korea once again has a leg up on the rest of the world competitively)
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/indb.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/digg.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/DBInterview/dbs1.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/DBInterview/dbs2.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/DBInterview/dbs3.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/DBInterview/dbs4.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/DBInterview/dbs5.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/DBInterview/dbs6.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Kennigit/DBInterview/dbs7.png)
.
![[image loading]](http://static.tvfanatic.com/images/gallery/comic-book-guy.jpg)
