|
Ok this issue has been discussed over and over and over and...
But now we can speak with some more valid arguments.
I have just observed some replays and in my opinion SC2 will never replace SC.
Why?
The reasons are mainly 2:
1) The game screen is just too low. You can't have a good vision of the battlefield and this just sucks while observing (it is not good also playing too)
2)the game is too fast. The obs have no time to think, every battle finish in like 10 seconds
( BONUS ARGUMENT:3)This is too way easy. This add-on argument hop in my mind when i see that a hatchery,nexus an cc has two rp (worker and unit). So you need like 1% control you needed in sc)
what's your opinion?
|
My opinion is that since SC2 is still very new you're not accustomed to it. Especially on point 2. Give it time.
|
1)You get it used to it fast and I found that it is as easy to follow games as it was in BW. New units/graphics makes usually some confusion in the beginning.
2)Explain better.
I've been watching replays a lot and SC2 looks greater and greater after every game I watch. It is actually amazing how low system requirements SC2 need. My <300e computer runs SC2 easily. I can never come back to BW =)
|
There will be confusion to begin with. I know David Kim got used to it >< But in any case if they see a problem, it should get fixed. Also, the quickness of battles could be attributed to all the hard counters...
|
My thoughts..
Casters/streams will find optimal graphic settings for a balance between clarity and graphics.
Pro players will play on pretty low settings for optimal clarity.
After being stuck for 11 years in a 2D game, getting used to 3D graphics takes some time.
I do think they need to make player colors stronger though.
|
Agree with Shade, will be (i'm guessing) atleast a year after vanillia. I think the foreign scene will be doing SC2 related tournaments and such before korea starts to change, it's strange though because idk about you guys but after watching ppl stream SC2 , BW seems pretty boring.
|
"I have just observed some replays and in my opinion SC2 will never replace SC."
yes we can speak with more valid arguments now
|
On February 22 2010 03:00 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
"I have just observed some replays and in my opinion SC2 will never replace SC."
yes we can speak with more valid arguments now
lol, thats exactly what I thought when I read the OP.
|
I'm going to have to wholeheartedly disagree, and here's why.
Why?
The reasons are mainly 2:
On February 22 2010 02:47 LuDwig- wrote:
1) The game screen is just too low. You can't have a good vision of the battlefield and this just sucks while observing (it is not good also playing too)
Idk what the hell you're talking about here. is the scroll speed too slow for you, because you can speed it up. is it something else? that's why observers click on the minimap. either way, this is a completley invalid reason why SC2 will never be more successful than BW.
On February 22 2010 02:47 LuDwig- wrote:
2)the game is too fast. The obs have no time to think, every battle finish in like 10 seconds
( BONUS ARGUMENT:3)This is too way easy. This add-on argument hop in my mind when i see that a hatchery,nexus an cc has two rp (worker and unit). So you need like 1% control you needed in sc)
this is a pretty bad reason too. the obs will adjust. that's like saying a warcraft 3 player will never be good at sc because sc is so much faster than war3. while the second part may be true, the second part is not. they adjust.
SC2 is much faster paced, and (currently i should add) heavily favors aggressive in-your-face strategies, which also favor both casual observers and hardcore fanboys alike.
secondly, SC2 is so much more visually pleasing. I wish the sound effects were better, drone spits and marines shooting for example just sound girly, for lack of a better word. visuals and sounds make or break a game for the casual player, which is what SC2 needs more of if it is gonna be succsessful.
the only reason why SC2 wouldn't be more succsessful that BW, in my opinion, is simply if Korea doesn't accept it, for whatever their reason maybe. and, at this point, this is a pretty good possibility.
On February 22 2010 03:00 Narwhal wrote:
Agree with Shade, will be (i'm guessing) atleast a year after vanillia. I think the foreign scene will be doing SC2 related tournaments and such before korea starts to change, it's strange though because idk about you guys but after watching ppl stream SC2 , BW seems pretty boring.
And i feel the same way, check out Beta Blues
|
On February 22 2010 02:47 LuDwig- wrote:
Ok this issue has been discussed over and over and over and...
But now we can speak with some more valid arguments.
I have just observed some replays and in my opinion SC2 will never replace SC.
Why?
The reasons are mainly 2:
1) The game screen is just too low. You can't have a good vision of the battlefield and this just sucks while observing (it is not good also playing too)
2)the game is too fast. The obs have no time to think, every battle finish in like 10 seconds
( BONUS ARGUMENT:3)This is too way easy. This add-on argument hop in my mind when i see that a hatchery,nexus an cc has two rp (worker and unit). So you need like 1% control you needed in sc)
what's your opinion?
Ye you're right, you need like 1% control you needed in SC plus the game is far too fast to be able to properly control your units.
+ Show Spoiler +jk, hope you're a troll and that this contradiction was made on purpose
|
1) The game screen is just too low. You can't have a good vision of the battlefield and this just sucks while observing (it is not good also playing too)
I actually think it is about the same as BW, the buildings just seem to take up more space since you see them all from different perspectives since its 3d where as in BW you saw them all from one.
2)the game is too fast. The obs have no time to think, every battle finish in like 10 seconds
I agree with this one, the hard counters in this game are a bit too hard and there are to many of them, in BW it was mostly soft counters or hard counters if microed the right way. I think the BW way was better.
|
on point #2 you dont know yet because battle lasted couple of seconds on the BETA so in the final version there are (hopefully) longer and more balanced micro battles.
|
On February 22 2010 02:47 LuDwig- wrote:
Ok this issue has been discussed over and over and over and...
But now we can speak with some more valid arguments.
I have just observed some replays and in my opinion SC2 will never replace SC.
Why?
The reasons are mainly 2:
1) The game screen is just too low. You can't have a good vision of the battlefield and this just sucks while observing (it is not good also playing too)
2)the game is too fast. The obs have no time to think, every battle finish in like 10 seconds
( BONUS ARGUMENT:3)This is too way easy. This add-on argument hop in my mind when i see that a hatchery,nexus an cc has two rp (worker and unit). So you need like 1% control you needed in sc)
what's your opinion?
Thanks for your prophecy oh great one, you have seen "some" replays and you already had vision of how the game will unveil even though nobody knows how to play it properly and there are like 0 timings explored, just wow
|
You start with 6 workers now right? They need to make it back to 4-5. Also maybe tone down some of damage as buildings get destroyed so quickly!! If they can do even little things like this, it will be really good.
SC2 looks amazing and some of the replay features are awesome
|
i didnt get the op at all
i feel like the screen is about same size and i feel like the units have about same hp (but without the insane plague/storm/lurker/mines that ended battles in second)
|
guys you know you base you opinion on a game who in actually in BETA phase ? and the beta is just 3day old ? how can it hbe fair if you compare a 10year old of balancement witha 3day old BETA
|
On February 22 2010 03:16 KhAlleB wrote:
guys you know you base you opinion on a game who in actually in BETA phase ? and the beta is just 3day old ? how can it hbe fair if you compare a 10year old of balancement witha 3day old BETA
very well said
|
yeah compare a beta game 2 a 11 year old game. GJ
and btw i think he means that there is just "2 much happening" that u dont really know which units are from which player and stuff like that.
|
The unbelievably cool game editor can modify anything to the community's (Team Liquid or otherwise) liking. If buildings blow up too easily just give them more hit points. Want to start with less probe/drone then set it up that way. Blizzard will make a million adjustments but the very anxious mod community will have a reworked version of Brood War out in no time. So I am looking forward to playing BW with the beautiful graphics. And maybe a few tauren marines. 
http://www.starcraft2.com/features/terran/taurenmarine.xml
|
In 1 year, BroodWar will be what Warcraft 2 is today, played by extremely loyal(in a demented way) people and/or people with shitty computers.
|
I think with everyone getting faster and faster Internet connections and HDTV's and tv broadcasts coming in HD more and more that with SC2 looking so nice its got the best chance of any game to become mainstream enough to foster a pro scene in the west. Its still quite unlikely but this generation has the best chance of any and hopefully SC2 will be very enjoyable to watch.
|
On February 22 2010 02:47 LuDwig- wrote:
2)the game is too fast. The obs have no time to think, every battle finish in like 10 seconds
what's your opinion?
not entirely true, if you micro properly battles actually take some time
(eg marauders vs zealots)
|
SC2 a game that's been in beta for less than one week is not immediately as refined as BW a game that has been expanded once and has been tweaked for 12 years. Therefore SC2 will never be as good as BW.
No logical holes in that one, right?
|
In 1 year, BroodWar will be what Warcraft 2 is today, played by extremely loyal(in a demented way) people and/or people with shitty computers
Exactly. There will be no such thing as an SC1 progamer once SC2 comes out. There won't be a significant audience for it, so nobody will waste money sponsoring televised tournaments or pro teams. Every progaming team will be busting their asses to become the best at SC2 as fast as they can.
|
I think there will be transitions.. this will sound like a crappy comparison, but I'll try anyway.....
A few years back the sport "Sceleton" was invented, its like sledding, but with your head first, the first few world champions, were former Sledding pro's how trained the new way, by now there has grown a whole generation of pros, who never did anything else than Sceleton.
It will be the same with SC, there will tournaments for a year, or maybe 2, but in the end there are going to be 16 Year old Progamer who never played SC intensively. and the young fans of these Pro's are the target group, for the marketing of the Tournament Sponsors.
I'm sorry guys, I know you feel like you are dumbing your girl after 12 years for a prettier one, but life is life  You have my respect though for trying to stay faithful 
|
I really don`t see your logic OP.
SC2 is still in the 1st week of the beta... the 1st week. Of course the game isn`t polished, even SC1 wasn`t polished in the beginning. I mean vanilla SC1 wasn`t balanced, it took a expansion, which added crucial units like medics, lurkers, dts and other, to make it balanced and even then they had to put out several patches over a year to get the balanced perfection that is SC Brood War. So crying over a game that is still IN DEVELOPMENT is pointless.
|
On February 22 2010 03:14 zergpower123 wrote:
You start with 6 workers now right? They need to make it back to 4-5. Also maybe tone down some of damage as buildings get destroyed so quickly!! If they can do even little things like this, it will be really good.
SC2 looks amazing and some of the replay features are awesome
I do find it weird that so many things get bonus "siege" damage, as if this were WC3.
|
Why would decreasing the amount of SCVs you start with make the game better? The only thing it would do is make it more boring to play and watch in the beginning.
Fast battles are entertaining. Besides units died fast in BW too. Observers didnt have a problem there. Im pretty sure they can handle it.
What youre suggesting is to make the game more dumbed down and make it require less skills, not make it better.
|
Well I definitely agree that SC2 takes about 1% of the APM of SC1 because of having two rally points.
Also you are right about the game speed. It's a much better competitive game if they slow it down by about half. That way you can see who is really the better player.
|
|
|
On February 22 2010 02:47 LuDwig- wrote:
Ok this issue has been discussed over and over and over and...
But now we can speak with some more valid arguments.
I have just observed some replays and in my opinion SC2 will never replace SC.
Why?
The reasons are mainly 2:
1) The game screen is just too low. You can't have a good vision of the battlefield and this just sucks while observing (it is not good also playing too)
2)the game is too fast. The obs have no time to think, every battle finish in like 10 seconds
( BONUS ARGUMENT:3)This is too way easy. This add-on argument hop in my mind when i see that a hatchery,nexus an cc has two rp (worker and unit). So you need like 1% control you needed in sc)
what's your opinion?
I think it's so unfair that Zerg units spawn at the same building while P & T have to look for them all over the place!!
Back 2 Topic, how can you compare like 100 hours experience at a completely new game with a decade of playing, watching replays, learning tactics, micro and macro?
Sure SC2 plays in the Starcraft universe. It even has some of the units you had in SCBW. But it is a new game. Actually, it's not even the FINAL version which will be burned on millions of DVDs.
"Beta" as in Zealots could be removed and Lurkers readded when the game is released.
|
people still play WC 2?! O_O
|
On February 22 2010 02:47 LuDwig- wrote:
1) The game screen is just too low. You can't have a good vision of the battlefield and this just sucks while observing (it is not good also playing too)
what's your opinion?
I thought the same. But then I increased the screen resolution.
|
On February 22 2010 03:00 Narwhal wrote:
Agree with Shade, will be (i'm guessing) atleast a year after vanillia. I think the foreign scene will be doing SC2 related tournaments and such before korea starts to change, it's strange though because idk about you guys but after watching ppl stream SC2 , BW seems pretty boring.
I'm the opposite, at the moment. I find SC2 streams fairly boring, but BW streams still very interesting.
It's too hard to tell what will ultimately happen because there's too much nebulous area. It's going to take time for people to learn SC2 in order to watch it and for strategies and balance to properly emerge.
|
uhhhhhhh no.
starcraft 2 is not going to be nearly as good as starcraft
first of all, starcraft was mega balanced
starcraft 2, there is no way in hell this shit is balanced. i mean, i don't have the beta, but what with the development team making so many big changes this late in the game, makes me think they aren't sure at all about all the balancing. there is definitely going to be a superior race in sc2
not to mention starcraft 2 is not going to spread like brood war did. this shit requires good computers, a whole new copy with cd key, and is more complex
and there are more reasons, but i'll just stop here
btw, does everyone notice that only older teenage guys sit in the sudden attack crowd, while there are much more crazy fangirls in sc crowds? FPS is becoming more dominate these days, and nobody knows what starcraft is, while fucking everybody was crazy about modern warfare 2. everything is different, its just not gonna be like brood war
|
On February 22 2010 06:48 yomi wrote:
Well I definitely agree that SC2 takes about 1% of the APM of SC1 because of having two rally points.
Also you are right about the game speed. It's a much better competitive game if they slow it down by about half. That way you can see who is really the better player.
So you're honestly telling me 99% of APM in SC was setting RALLY POINTS? Come on now, some of the statements in this thread are down right stupid.
|
On February 22 2010 07:37 Nal_rAwr wrote:
uhhhhhhh no.
starcraft 2 is not going to be nearly as good as starcraft
first of all, starcraft was mega balanced
starcraft 2, there is no way in hell this shit is balanced. i mean, i don't have the beta, but what with the development team making so many big changes this late in the game, makes me think they aren't sure at all about all the balancing. there is definitely going to be a superior race in sc2
not to mention starcraft 2 is not going to spread like brood war did. this shit requires good computers, a whole new copy with cd key, and is more complex
and there are more reasons, but i'll just stop here
btw, does everyone notice that only older teenage guys sit in the sudden attack crowd, while there are much more crazy fangirls in sc crowds? FPS is becoming more dominate these days, and nobody knows what starcraft is, while fucking everybody was crazy about modern warfare 2. everything is different, its just not gonna be like brood war
But Nal_rAwr, SC1 took many years to get balanced. We all expect sc2 to be unbalanced for a while, with new abuses being discovered and patched. Also, Sc2 has a lot of quality customization. SC2 in low quality is not that demanding.
Edit: spelling error
|
On February 22 2010 07:37 Nal_rAwr wrote:
uhhhhhhh no.
starcraft 2 is not going to be nearly as good as starcraft
first of all, starcraft was mega balanced
starcraft 2, there is no way in hell this shit is balanced. i mean, i don't have the beta, but what with the development team making so many big changes this late in the game, makes me think they aren't sure at all about all the balancing. there is definitely going to be a superior race in sc2
not to mention starcraft 2 is not going to spread like brood war did. this shit requires good computers, a whole new copy with cd key, and is more complex
and there are more reasons, but i'll just stop here
btw, does everyone notice that only older teenage guys sit in the sudden attack crowd, while there are much more crazy fangirls in sc crowds? FPS is becoming more dominate these days, and nobody knows what starcraft is, while fucking everybody was crazy about modern warfare 2. everything is different, its just not gonna be like brood war
1) you're honestly going to tell me SC was balanced from the get go, let alone the dev team didn't make any changes from beta to release? Come on man, do some research.
2) Give computers 11 years after the launch of SC2 and I'll bet you everything will be able to run it on ultra
3) Since SC2 Beta has come out (and has been approaching) I've talked about it in school with a few friends and I was shocked at the amount of kids who chimed in when overhearing us, saying they loved SC and can't wait for SC2. I'm sure SC2 will have no problem moving units (at least in the US)
|
its the beta, we still have so much to learn
the gameplay in 2002 is vastly different from the gameplay in 2010. the mechanics, the speed - its the same game in hugely different worlds
wait for the release, give it some time, then reevaluate your position on something thats only been out for a few days
|
fast pace is good. people have to remeber, broodwar is OLD, you can't expect sc2 to deliver like bw did. this in my opinon is better. give yourself time to play it out and get used to it, you can't hang on to the past forever...i mean bw IS ANCIENT ffs
|
On February 22 2010 06:50 fnaticAugury wrote:
SC:BW > Wc3 > Sc2
I think you meant
SC:BW > Wc3 > Sc2: Beta (Out for less than a week)
Unless you've played the finished product already?
|
I feel that no game will ever be greater than BW. I hope as well as think that BW will be played 10 years from now. A GAME that dosen't get old for 11 years will never get old and BW will stay the best RTS game ever made. Aka, sc2 will fail.
Prime example: Super Smash for N64, why do people play that more than other smash games? Cuz its better. There is no way that it can be improved upon and therefore will always stand at #1.
|
1. I just plain disagree.
2. That's because people haven't developed the level of micro that's present in BW. As understanding ff unit roles and quirks develops and micro improves, we'll see battles last longer.
3. Frankly this is a stupid argument. A better interface will mean better gameplay, which will benefit players and observers. The only people who don't want a simpler, easier to use interface are BW pros who are sad/angry/jealous that new SCII players won't have to wrestle with the interface to get good.
|
On February 22 2010 08:12 madsweepslol wrote:
1. I just plain disagree.
2. That's because people haven't developed the level of micro that's present in BW. As understanding ff unit roles and quirks develops and micro improves, we'll see battles last longer.
3. Frankly this is a stupid argument. A better interface will mean better gameplay, which will benefit players and observers. The only people who don't want a simpler, easier to use interface are BW pros who are sad/angry/jealous that new SCII players won't have to wrestle with the interface to get good.
I agree, specially on number 3
|
at this point if you dont think SC2 will be that great, you need stop trolling SC2 related info then and leave us alone
|
I think sc2 will turn out like SSB:Brawl. It will not replace sc1 in the competitive scene, but a lot of the competitive players from sc1 will switch to sc2 to become a casual gamer.
|
SC2 got one big flaw and that is that micro is basicly nonexistant . I guess thats because of the new 3D engine. Game looks preety nice i have to say and probably feels like sc but i dont think it can ever top it or even come close to the original.
SC2 will probably take over sc nonkorean gaming scene but i dont think it will ever replace progaming sc in korea if it dont lose much popularity.
|
A very simple advantage that SC2 has over SC is the better support for higher resolutions. Observers can use like 2560x1600 resolution screens and there will be a huge screen.
|
After the SC2 release i give SC:BW like half a year, maybe a bit more in Korea. Same goes for WC3, maybe except Dota :p
|
On February 22 2010 08:43 SkelA wrote:
SC2 got one big flaw and that is that micro is basicly nonexistant .
Remind me again, how good was StarCraft original micro when it was one week into beta...?
|
On February 22 2010 08:34 Chairman Ray wrote:
I think sc2 will turn out like SSB:Brawl. It will not replace sc1 in the competitive scene, but a lot of the competitive players from sc1 will switch to sc2 to become a casual gamer.
You mean only in Korea right?
|
lol i love how people are already formulating theories and opinions that they try to turn into facts with just either watching replays or playing a 3day old BETA. oh shit....what was that word again... BETA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
what does beta mean again??
wait i got this let me wiki this...
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_meaning_of_Beta
and another:
http://cplus.about.com/od/glossar1/g/betadefinition.htm
there you go.
p.s:
"...beta describes the state of an application during its development, when it has more or less full functionality but is still being tested..."
|
So the OP is saying this game will fail because he's never played and just watched some replays of guys that have played the game for 3 days?
???
|
On February 22 2010 03:22 abyss wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2010 03:16 KhAlleB wrote:
guys you know you base you opinion on a game who in actually in BETA phase ? and the beta is just 3day old ? how can it hbe fair if you compare a 10year old of balancement witha 3day old BETA very well said
This.
|
Of course it will replace and in my opinion surpass SC1. Its already widely popular on the internet the next step is websites like hulu then wham mainstream. then football sold out concert halls
It didnt happen in Korea all at once
Edit: Oh and about dota it will die too but not before its offspring have flourished like HoN and LoL
|
I don't think so, they will in all likelihood run parallel leagues we still don't even know if the final product will be popular to spectators. I don't see the Sc1 pro scene going anywhere at least not for another 2 years at the very soonest.
|
On February 22 2010 09:00 SevenAteNine wrote:
Of course it will replace and in my opinion surpass SC1. Its already widely popular on the internet the next step is websites like hulu then wham mainstream. then football sold out concert halls
It didnt happen in Korea all at once
Edit: Oh and about dota it will die too but not before its offspring have flourished like HoN and LoL
By the way, didn't they plan to make a new DotA for SC2?
|
from what has been said so far by everyone and the information given to us by blizzard, SC2 just seems like a grasp at more money. They are attempting to cut off OR profit off of all 3rd party things on sc2. For example, ICCup is in trouble. 3rd party things r what makes starcraft what it is, especially for foreigners. I feel that it is much ezier for things like the TSL to happen on bw because iccup is much ezier to cooperate with than Blizzard; who doesnt really give a crap.
|
sc2 will definitely take some time to get balanced.
i mean just think about it, blizzard already said there will be (at least) two addons. (mainly for the other race campaigns) but as in all other addons there will be numerous tweaks to gameplay (as in new units and heroes for wc3), so i think only after the two other expansions have come out the game will truly balance itself out.
but after that i hope sc2 will get as popular as sc1 is today.
|
yeah it looks like sc2 will kind of replace broodwar in a year or two.
i doubt we'll have the same situation that there was with competitive cs 1.6 and cs source
|
ill put in my 2 cents.
i just hope sc2 doesnt become like halo series.
halo2=amazing, fun, and competitive as shit
halo3= broken, gay, boring, too casual
halo3 had beautfiul graphics but dam was it boring to play. anyone could just pick it up and get good. not because of the skills but because of the skill ceiling was low as hell. any reg. halo2 vet like i were forced to play at some mediocre level because of the game. no room to improve.
sc2 has good graphics but i hope blizzard doesnt make it too..."noobish." i would like it easier to pick up and play for the casual, but also have that competitive side to it.
|
On February 22 2010 09:10 Monkeyboi2k3 wrote:
from what has been said so far by everyone and the information given to us by blizzard, SC2 just seems like a grasp at more money. They are attempting to cut off OR profit off of all 3rd party things on sc2. For example, ICCup is in trouble. 3rd party things r what makes starcraft what it is, especially for foreigners. I feel that it is much ezier for things like the TSL to happen on bw because iccup is much ezier to cooperate with than Blizzard; who doesnt really give a crap.
Maybe you feel this way because you <3 iccup but i could easily see blizzard allowing iccup to still exist within its on structure Blizzard really just wants more control over its intellectual property whois to say iccup wont exist or that blizzard wont create pro level servers set side for truly elite leagues/tourny's
I would LOVE to go on battle.net and watch OSL finals being played LIVE maybe they would even cast the finals live on battle.net in different languages?
you dont know whats to come
|
Funny how awhile ago people were raging about how game is too slow "SPEED IT UP BLIZZARD!". Now people complaint the game is too fast "WHAT THE HOW HAPPENED?".
Someone should do a comparison of the screen size because somehow I feel in SC2, you actually get a bigger view than SC. Didn't Blizzard already said people with widescreen will see more, instead of stretched.
Your second and third argument contradict as well...
|
I don't even get what people are arguing here, are they saying SC2 cannot become balanced, and that's why they don't like it? What if it was 100% SC1 with better graphics, would it be better then? Why can't it be balanced? They did it once, why can't they do it again?
SC1 is one of my favorite games of all time. However, I've played it for years and years, and now I want something new. Playing SC2 2v2s for the past couple days has been extremely fun, and now I see no way of going back to SC1.
|
I can't predict what the competitive scene will do, but I can say that as of right now, I enjoy playing SC2 more than SCBW and it is still in beta. I really like the fast pace and I REALLY like the match making function of battle.net and the game is just super fun to play.
It also fixes some things that really annoyed me about SC1 like the 12 unit max selection and dumb units randomly walking around the map just cause they are retarded (dragoon, goliaths, etc). Those are just a couple things (there are others) that bothered me about SC1 that SC2 fixed.
|
I don't think SC2 is too fast. It feels about the same as SC1. Its just that we aren't nearly as knowledgeable. So our reaction time and decision making speed is slow.
|
On February 22 2010 03:10 UmmTheHobo wrote:Show nested quote +1) The game screen is just too low. You can't have a good vision of the battlefield and this just sucks while observing (it is not good also playing too) I actually think it is about the same as BW, the buildings just seem to take up more space since you see them all from different perspectives since its 3d where as in BW you saw them all from one. Show nested quote +2)the game is too fast. The obs have no time to think, every battle finish in like 10 seconds I agree with this one, the hard counters in this game are a bit too hard and there are to many of them, in BW it was mostly soft counters or hard counters if microed the right way. I think the BW way was better.
What's wrong with hard counters? I think it makes the game more strategic and scouting much more important. Everything in this game are viable unlike in bw in which only a few units are really needed. No longer can you say "if I learn how to make and control marines and medics, against mutas and lurkers, I am good in 90% of all TvZ games." The game becomes much more unpredictable and rewarding to creativity.
|
SC2 will kill us all... AAAAAAAA RUUUN FOR UR LIVES!!!
man sc2 is new.... its just a beta TEST, wait for the final release and then we will see if this game kills SC (just like when w3 was the new blizzard game)
|
After watching SC2 streams, I have completely lost interest in watching BW all together. I chose watching louder over watching pro games. The graphics are sick, and even in stream you can tell who is who and whats going on.
|
SCBW is financially pumped out. SC2 has to be a huge success to make Blizzard spend money on getting SCBW Battle.net 2.0 ready...
|
On February 22 2010 08:54 heroyi wrote:
lol i love how people are already formulating theories and opinions that they try to turn into facts with just either watching replays or playing a 3day old BETA. oh shit....what was that word again... BETA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Blizzard has been working on the game for 9 years, maybe that's why there can be obviously fundamental problems with this game. The fact that the beta forums are full of "low skill" players arguing about random things as being overpowered or imbalanced will probably mean blizzard cannot properly gauage what the actual problems with the gameplay are, because they will only be applicable at the higher skill levels and will receive less attention than all the bronze league players complaining about reapers.
|
I think the very fact that most of the beta testers, and a huge portion of the post-release players, will be Brood War players gives Blizzard a huge edge in making this game the "next" Brood War - one too big for them to fuck up. Brood War didn't just become what it did by its own (considerable) merits, but because it started attracting the right sort of player. Now all those players, or at least the majority, are going to at least be giving SC2 a chance.
Can't fuck that up.
|
thats why im glad we have david kim to pwn everyone with his wtfnoobstick
|
All we can do is hope that it does.
|
oh man I'd pay good money to see Flash do reaper micro though  He could probably "micro" a cc/nexus in like 20 seconds
|
re : too fast
after watching reps i think buildings go down way too fast in sc2
|
I have 250-290 apm with my SC1 terran and i think the game feels faster than sc1. With units like reapers and being able to warp protoss units in various places there leaves a lot of windows open for very cute play which will make amazing highlight reels. I think you're totally wrong and it will in fact replace SC1.... I think we just need for some time to let people get used to the game and wait for the gosus to appear.
In my opinion the biggest problem for me personally is how easy they made it use to spam spells like storm and the new force field spell. I dont mind that they are very strong, but they are so easy to mass cast with pin point accuracy. It took me a good amount of time to get skilled with using defilers effectively and I feel like I can walk into SC2 and be (already) a pro with the new spells which is unfortunate because nobody can walk into SC1 and be a pro with controlling a 200/200 supply army and keeping swarms up. It takes more than 10 prelim games to learn those technique.
|
who cares, just play the game you like more and we'll see what happens
|
i dont think players should be made that SC2 is not as difficult to learn as SC1 is. It really isn't a bad thing, in fact it makes it like other sports. Everyone can play basketball, but the pro's truly EXCEL at it. So the super pro's in SC2 will be distinguished as the ones who have their niche's such as strategies, the OMG SO IMPORTANT apm's and whatnot.
while casual gamers will...like normal bbal or football players; play at their own pace and convenience and for fun.
BTW there is a seperate league for Pro's in SC2. Currently there's platinum, gold, silver, bronze, copper. There is a Pro league however you need to be personally placed into that league by Blizzard once you have a sponsor and whatnot. Basically if your sponsored as a pro-gamer, then blizzard will pop you into that league with all the other pro's.
|
On February 22 2010 10:40 AsianEcksDragon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2010 03:10 UmmTheHobo wrote:1) The game screen is just too low. You can't have a good vision of the battlefield and this just sucks while observing (it is not good also playing too) I actually think it is about the same as BW, the buildings just seem to take up more space since you see them all from different perspectives since its 3d where as in BW you saw them all from one. 2)the game is too fast. The obs have no time to think, every battle finish in like 10 seconds I agree with this one, the hard counters in this game are a bit too hard and there are to many of them, in BW it was mostly soft counters or hard counters if microed the right way. I think the BW way was better. What's wrong with hard counters? I think it makes the game more strategic and scouting much more important. Everything in this game are viable unlike in bw in which only a few units are really needed. No longer can you say "if I learn how to make and control marines and medics, against mutas and lurkers, I am good in 90% of all TvZ games." The game becomes much more unpredictable and rewarding to creativity.
Hell yah!
I had a game where I went fast Mothership off two base PvT and eventually I lost everything to tanks/thors/marauders, so since I remembered I had a fleet beacon I went back and made two extra stargates, went for carriers, and then got a 2nd mothership to vortex units in and out so my carriers sustained less damage to take out the Thor's.
Or like when someone proxy gates you it is possible to defend even on 1 gate (to get a 2nd later) by getting a fast sentry and letting it build up energy while microing vs a larger number of zealots (2 zealots & 1 sentry vs. 3 zealots is do-able, but tough)... in the long-run you can stall by force-fielding your ramp to keep them out or split the forces with force field to even the playing field.
A lot of the strategy in this game isn't so much about learning how to use control groups properly, but to know what works best when and what unit combination will be inneffective, slightly effective, and very effective against whatever your opponent is doing.
The point of the hard counters is to force a tech switch which everybody can do. It's the same concept as going 2 gate reaver --> carrier vs a Terran. They now have to devote more resources to getting goliaths, making it a hard counter, but now theres new tactics to go with these counters.
You're just not playing yet (not the guy I quoted directly) so you're not noticing the softer counters in the game.
|
On February 22 2010 12:04 starcraft911 wrote:
I have 250-290 apm with my SC1 terran and i think the game feels faster than sc1. With units like reapers and being able to warp protoss units in various places there leaves a lot of windows open for very cute play which will make amazing highlight reels. I think you're totally wrong and it will in fact replace SC1.... I think we just need for some time to let people get used to the game and wait for the gosus to appear..
If you start a custom game on fast instead of faster, the attack/move speed and production speed of old units (overlord, zealots, etc) feels almost identical to SC1. The game is actually faster, its not just you.
|
On February 22 2010 14:28 nMn wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2010 12:04 starcraft911 wrote:
I have 250-290 apm with my SC1 terran and i think the game feels faster than sc1. With units like reapers and being able to warp protoss units in various places there leaves a lot of windows open for very cute play which will make amazing highlight reels. I think you're totally wrong and it will in fact replace SC1.... I think we just need for some time to let people get used to the game and wait for the gosus to appear.. If you start a custom game on fast instead of faster, the attack/move speed and production speed of old units (overlord, zealots, etc) feels almost identical to SC1. The game is actually faster, its not just you.
this could actually end up making players better in sc1
if u think of sc2 being the same speed as sc1 and can keep up like u did in sc1
then chances r when u go back to sc1 it will feel alot easier to do things, no?
grr wheres my beta key
|
On February 22 2010 14:24 Amber[LighT] wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On February 22 2010 10:40 AsianEcksDragon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2010 03:10 UmmTheHobo wrote:1) The game screen is just too low. You can't have a good vision of the battlefield and this just sucks while observing (it is not good also playing too) I actually think it is about the same as BW, the buildings just seem to take up more space since you see them all from different perspectives since its 3d where as in BW you saw them all from one. 2)the game is too fast. The obs have no time to think, every battle finish in like 10 seconds I agree with this one, the hard counters in this game are a bit too hard and there are to many of them, in BW it was mostly soft counters or hard counters if microed the right way. I think the BW way was better. What's wrong with hard counters? I think it makes the game more strategic and scouting much more important. Everything in this game are viable unlike in bw in which only a few units are really needed. No longer can you say "if I learn how to make and control marines and medics, against mutas and lurkers, I am good in 90% of all TvZ games." The game becomes much more unpredictable and rewarding to creativity. Hell yah! I had a game where I went fast Mothership off two base PvT and eventually I lost everything to tanks/thors/marauders, so since I remembered I had a fleet beacon I went back and made two extra stargates, went for carriers, and then got a 2nd mothership to vortex units in and out so my carriers sustained less damage to take out the Thor's. Or like when someone proxy gates you it is possible to defend even on 1 gate (to get a 2nd later) by getting a fast sentry and letting it build up energy while microing vs a larger number of zealots (2 zealots & 1 sentry vs. 3 zealots is do-able, but tough)... in the long-run you can stall by force-fielding your ramp to keep them out or split the forces with force field to even the playing field. A lot of the strategy in this game isn't so much about learning how to use control groups properly, but to know what works best when and what unit combination will be inneffective, slightly effective, and very effective against whatever your opponent is doing. The point of the hard counters is to force a tech switch which everybody can do. It's the same concept as going 2 gate reaver --> carrier vs a Terran. They now have to devote more resources to getting goliaths, making it a hard counter, but now theres new tactics to go with these counters. You're just not playing yet (not the guy I quoted directly) so you're not noticing the softer counters in the game.
I'm checking the replay thread now, if its not there i will cry
|
i dont agree with this whole sc1 will be like warcraft 2 is now within a year
the replay value of sc1 is very much higher than that of war2 , war2 ums are basically non existant for example.
|
Can't play SC1 and Bnet 1.0 forever...
|
I don't agree with the notion that SC2 will instantly kill BW. Did source kill 1.6? Did Brawl kill melee? Did quake 4 kill quake 3? etc.
|
On February 22 2010 20:02 writer22816 wrote:
I don't agree with the notion that SC2 will instantly kill BW. Did source kill 1.6? Did Brawl kill melee? Did quake 4 kill quake 3? etc.
exactly what i was thinking. sc2 will have its own progaming scene and sc1 will keep its current progaming scene. it will not replace anything and more then likely the current pros over in korea stick to sc1 without ever going to sc2 because there more comfortable with sc1. sc2 is after all a almost completly diffrent game in terms of strategy making and unit composition. old builds in sc1 will not work in sc2 most of the time. so most pro players will just stick to what they know instead of going to something diffrent.
but at the same time im confident sc2 will get its own scene with completely different range of pro gamers dedicated to sc2. and who knows we still might even get some familiar faces from sc1 veterans to switch over to sc2 aswell.
|
On February 22 2010 20:02 writer22816 wrote:
I don't agree with the notion that SC2 will instantly kill BW. Did source kill 1.6? Did Brawl kill melee? Did quake 4 kill quake 3? etc.
This.
1.6 is infinitely more popular than source and has a competitive scene behind it while source doesn't.
I don't know too much about brawl/melee but everyone I've talked to said melee is a lot better for competitive.
I personally think SC:BW will never die and SC2 will never make it big in korea, but hey, who knows?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
