|
Amazing read, but it kind of makes me sad. As Nazgul says he loves this game as I do and many other really good / professional players. The game evolves from day to day and its just the beta yet. There are still a lot of parts which can be fixed or adjusted so they fit e-Sports more.
To name a specific example would be the unit colission, it should be quiet a bit larger, because the spectators can distinguish single units better. It would also allow more micro actions like sniping the ghost in PvT.
I think Blizzard is aware of all those facts, but is struggling because they need to find a good path between e-Sports and brining fun to the casual players. Right now my honest opinion is that it wouldn't destroy the fun for a casual player to add a few things that the 'top' players are mentioning.
And as the final statement I'm pretty sure no game can ever accomplish was Starcraft: Broodwar did. Starcraft 2 definately has the potential to dominate more than just 2-4 years, but Blizzard needs to support Starcraft 2 as they supported Broodwar to accomplish that.
|
Maybe there should be an option to disable mbs/automine and inlimited unitselection. Or just disavle those for plat and/or proleague.
Also i am quite sad that sc2 tries to please everyone, because there are many games for casual players, but not for hardcore gamers.
|
@Pupsilein Not having to assign your workers at the beginning are more indicative of the problem, not so much the problem themselves. More than anything it points to the AI problems that make the rest of the game... boring... to watch that is. Equal skilled matches didn't come down to a coin flip so much in BW. Even high-end evenly skilled players make mistakes and those will be what causes one to fail and one to win. But in watching SC2 most of the win/losses seem to come down to what units they've chosen over how they've played with them.
I agree with Nazgul a lot I suppose.
|
Nice interviews, I just spent like an hour reading them all. Keep em coming.
|
On March 05 2010 00:41 gedassan wrote:
Nice read.
I do not agree with him stating that build order is a "coin-flip" thing. Especially after saying "if everyone plays perfectly...". Come on - if you play perfectly, how can build order be a "coin-flip" thing? You would always get the perfect build order for the situation...
So either it is not possible to play perfectly (which means the players skill is never high enough in order to not matter) - which I believe is the case, or build order is actually a skill, and it is not static. You have to scout, see what the opponent is building and adapt, and defy his important tech by harassment. How is that not skill?
One thing I am worried about is that the units in SC2 cross distances so fast, it almost makes it possible to roll a huge "ball" across the map and get everywhere in time. That surely decreases depth and need for multitasking.
Come on - I'm sure you're a smart enough guy to know that with 'playing perfectly' he meant 'executing everything as well as possible within the situation the players are in' (having the right decision making on the information they get from their opponents by scouting and having a really clean macro/micro).
You start a build order which you think will do great vs your opponents race on the particular map you're playing (which is a coin flip; A has and edge over B, B has an edge over C, C has an edge over A). After scouting your opponent you'll have to make a decision on whether to continue your initial strategy - by making a judgment of its effectiveness -, or to adapt your strategy to the information you got from your opponent (which would be the 'playing perfect' part). Obviously if both players make the right judgment, it'll come down to who's initial build will give them an edge (woot! coin flip). The point is that there is not enough room for gaining advantages through, for example, some really smart coordinated attacks or certain moments of super amazingly executed micro, etc.
Anyway, good interview.. well done Chobo! Also, I think I agree with Naz on about all points he made.
|
On March 05 2010 01:19 emperorchampion wrote:
Nice interviews, I just spent like an hour reading them all. Keep em coming.
Yes sir.
|
|
|
I agree with Nazgul. If it wasnt for the Starcraft in Starcraft2, i would cut the game some serious slack anyway. But some things are just so heartbreaking that i probably wont be staying for very long. I really liked WOW right when it started, played it for a good few months intensively and then i never touched it again. But i remember the good things about it.
We're 10 years older. This is not about creating a sport. It's just a game.
Youngsters play that thing up & down anyway, no matter what blizzard does.
|
Agreed on about everything and got sad because of it.
Unless Blizzard changes a whole lot in this game, it'll vanish rather quickly.
|
It's interesting to see how many 'good' BW players who are supposedly smart jump to premature conclusions.
There are things we may notice, but the game needs time to evolve. We can put our concerns on the back burner and bring them up periodically to see how they fit, but to dismiss things outright, saying Blizzard won't change anything (when we're 2 weeks into beta) is ridiculous.
|
United States47024 Posts
Very stark contrast to Day[9]'s optimism about the game.
I'm leaning more toward Day[9]'s view, but I can see where Nazgul is coming from.
The one quote that stands out to me is this:
“I thought that company was Blizzard,” says Nazgul. “They have built a reputation of delivering highly competitive, balanced games that last forever and that you can play for the next 10 years after you buy it. These last few years, they seem to go with the general mood on a lot of things instead of choosing their own path.
No, no they haven't. They did it once. It was a fluke. They haven't gotten better or worse as developers over the last 12 years, it's just that they got really lucky 12 years ago. Competitive gaming wasn't even big enough to be a consideration for a developer in 1998.
Also, I said this in another thread, but I'm pretty sure the "improved AI" has very little actually to do with the AI (as target acquisition isn't THAT different from SC1), but more to do with the smaller collision size--things just bump into each other less, so they seem to move more fluidly when attacking into something. The term "auto-surround" is kind of misleading, seeing as they're not trying harder to surround than SC1 units--they're just better at it because they won't bump into the ass of the unit in front of them. Ironically, I think the current way that's handled is a product of the competitive community complaining that the existing pathing didn't allow for muta stacking several builds ago.
This should mean though, that if they can up collision sizes to a level that improves visibility for the spectator, that they should kill 2 birds with one stone.
On March 05 2010 00:56 Teejing wrote:
Maybe there should be an option to disable mbs/automine and inlimited unitselection. Or just disavle those for plat and/or proleague.
Also i am quite sad that sc2 tries to please everyone, because there are many games for casual players, but not for hardcore gamers.
Did you even read the article? Those issues don't even come up, and given that, by some accounts, the macro mechanics are MORE mechanically demanding than the SC1 interface, those issues have effectively been out of the discussion for months.
|
On March 05 2010 05:37 0neder wrote:
It's interesting to see how many 'good' BW players who are supposedly smart jump to premature conclusions.
There are things we may notice, but the game needs time to evolve. We can put our concerns on the back burner and bring them up periodically to see how they fit, but to dismiss things outright, saying Blizzard won't change anything (when we're 2 weeks into beta) is ridiculous.
Well when people talk about hard vs soft counters as if that is something embedded in the DNA of the game, then they are being premature, I think.
When they talk about the effects of improved pathing AI and interface, I don't think they are necessarily being premature.
When it really comes down to it, a large part of being "pro" at SC/BW is being able to wrestle with terrible pathing, a mediocre interface, and fairly rampant "glitches" like muta stacking. Taking away these aspects improve the game experience for 95% of the population, but they also narrow the gap in skill between the most dedicated pros and the average to above average players.
This is a normal outcome for improved technology. When printing presses were invented, the gap between the common man and the highly educated narrows. The gap between what I know (or can find out on my own) and what my doctor knows is narrower today than it was before the internet came along to provide online diagnostic health information.
Better AI and interface makes "pro" player more accessible to the average gamer, but of course it does nothing for pros except to make the game feel more shallow. The only solution (the one that Blizzard has chosen) is to speed up the game, so that the challenge comes from superior reaction and instinct and less from nimble control.
The skill set for SC2 will be similar, but still very different from the skill set for SC/BW, and that is something that people simply have to accept if they are going to enjoy it.
|
great job man. Interview Zatic next. (the guy who mods the SC2 strat forum)
|
United States3824 Posts
I teared up a bit at the beginning there when you were talking about TL 
|
On March 05 2010 06:53 cgrinker wrote:I teared up a bit at the beginning there when you were talking about TL
|
Hi chobopeon,
I really enjoyed this interview, please keep up the good work! Thank you to Nazgul for participating and I hope that at least a few people from Blizzard's development team get a chance to read the basic criticisms being put forward.
All beta users: plagiarize Nazgul and post these basic ideas on the beta feedback page! Along with -- of course -- a kind thank you for a very satisfactory game as it stands.
Thanks again guys. ))
|
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
I disagree with the statement that Blizzard was mostly catering to competitive gamers before SC2. Blizzard were always trying to make their games "easy to learn, difficult to master", and that is exactly how all of their games are, including, as far as I can tell, SC2.
In fact, from the non-hardcore-SC-player point of view, it is the same old SC, only with modern graphics. Some gaming sites already frown at its "lack of innovation" and "ignoring the progress in the genre", which is a good reason to conclude that Blizzard actually tries to please the hardcore public more.
I also disagree that the improved unit pathfinding is the reason that there doesn't seem to be any spectacular micro at the moment. Someone who doesn't play the game and only spectates will never realize how difficult it is to make those stupid dragoons go up the ramp all at once, or make the zerglings attack something instead of bumping into each other, because they never tried that. And unless you try that, that seems just how it is supposed to be.
But everyone can "wow" at the marine vs lurker micro or hydra dodging storms or mutalisk harass, and none of this involves overcoming buggy AI.
|
On March 05 2010 05:50 Wintermute wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2010 05:37 0neder wrote:
It's interesting to see how many 'good' BW players who are supposedly smart jump to premature conclusions.
There are things we may notice, but the game needs time to evolve. We can put our concerns on the back burner and bring them up periodically to see how they fit, but to dismiss things outright, saying Blizzard won't change anything (when we're 2 weeks into beta) is ridiculous. Well when people talk about hard vs soft counters as if that is something embedded in the DNA of the game, then they are being premature, I think. When they talk about the effects of improved pathing AI and interface, I don't think they are necessarily being premature. When it really comes down to it, a large part of being "pro" at SC/BW is being able to wrestle with terrible pathing, a mediocre interface, and fairly rampant "glitches" like muta stacking. Taking away these aspects improve the game experience for 95% of the population, but they also narrow the gap in skill between the most dedicated pros and the average to above average players. This is a normal outcome for improved technology. When printing presses were invented, the gap between the common man and the highly educated narrows. The gap between what I know (or can find out on my own) and what my doctor knows is narrower today than it was before the internet came along to provide online diagnostic health information. Better AI and interface makes "pro" player more accessible to the average gamer, but of course it does nothing for pros except to make the game feel more shallow. The only solution (the one that Blizzard has chosen) is to speed up the game, so that the challenge comes from superior reaction and instinct and less from nimble control. The skill set for SC2 will be similar, but still very different from the skill set for SC/BW, and that is something that people simply have to accept if they are going to enjoy it.
Please guys, listen to this man.
And if I had to add something, which I do, because he left it out, it's that that "closeness" that appears to be there between the pros and mediocre isn't as close as everyone seems to think. Sure, the skill bands may be smaller overall, but the guy that is a level above you in skill is STILL a level above you. He still wins.
The difference in IQ(let's pretend everyone believes in this test) between me and an armadillo is vast. Even if you guys think I'm a moron, the difference is indisputably large. Me vs Armadillo = I win. Now, the difference between me and say, Einstein(let's pretend he's still alive) compared to the difference between me and an armadillo is a whole terribly lot smaller. In fact, the difference is miniscule in comparison.
But what happens when it's Me vs Einstein? Simple. He wins.
And in actuality, to people that are very learned there is a big difference between my IQ level and Einstein's IQ level. Their vision is so much more acute that they see a large difference between what my brain can handle and his can.
I think we all need to get a little better at, and more familiar with, the game before our overly eager anticipatory anxiety of the end-all game is sprewed forth, even passionately, in the wrong direction.
|
On March 04 2010 22:46 Nev3rDie wrote:
Here's a spelling mistake you might want to fix.
"It’s likely the A-team Koreans are continuing to play StarCraft 1 as that’s what they are goot at and receive high salaries for. "
All in all, I definitely agree with what Liquid'Nazgul says about starcraft 2 with they way things are looking like right now. I really doubt Blizzard will fix this. Or maybe some mods to make the game harder can like become the standard, than the original game itself. That's the only solution I see to the current problem, is to take the solution into our own hands and mod sc2 to make it harder.
I hadn't thought about it before but you know what? The possibility of mods is huge given how much freedom and support Blizzard is promising in this area. A pro-mode may not be impossible if problems persist.
|
Perhaps features like auto-surround and stuff can be like auto-aim in FPS's, an optional setting. Although this won't fix the problem of the abundance of units which completely own other specific units.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
