|
I have a theory, that Blizzard is specifically tailoring Starcraft II to be more exciting, and more action packed than Broodwar, specifically for people who are not current SC / RTS fans.
In general i think this is how they plan to make it more exciting:
- Action occurs earlier and more frequently
- Average game length is shorter (as in, less chance of 40 min TVT and 40 min TVP for example)
What makes me think this?
-Game speed seems faster and more hectic (and no, i didn't intend faster to be a pun)
- More drones to begin with
- Static defense is weak
-Lack of 'map control' units (ie: lurker, spider mines)
-Short distance/ travel time between bases
-Fluid unit movement (again, makes everything occur faster)
-More options for drop/ backdoor style play
It all points towards a common trend - fast and brutal
Compared to starcraft 1, Blizzard have probably decided that 40 minute TVP's and 6 min wait for the first action (2 hat muta) besides chasing probes, is not suitable for growing esports in a western culture.
As much as we all love broodwar, and marvel at jaedongs ability to crush the scouting probe with ease, most people probably need a bit more excitement to get them going. And blizzard want to attract as many people as possible to RTS. You gotta admit, us TL'ers are a niche market.
Anyone else feeling this, or am i crazy?
(Note: I find broodwar extremely exciting, i'm not trying to argue wether the game should be one way or another, simply trying to articulate what i believe blizzard is trying to do)
|
A game cannot be exciting at all times. It has to fluctuate, to make the good parts even more intense.
IE, if every day was christmas- no one would care about christmas
|
There's obviously still quiet parts of the game, just they don't last for 5 mins anymore.
|
I don't like quiet time. More action please.
|
hmm i havn't been around much and im sure during sc1 beta the skill level wasn't nearly as high as it is for sc2 beta
that being said maybe its just a new adjusting thing?
once people are more use to the game and know how to counter stuff... as time progresses maybe we will start seeing longer games?
who knows i might be totally off
|
On March 09 2010 12:25 milly9 wrote:
A game cannot be exciting at all times. It has to fluctuate, to make the good parts even more intense.
IE, if every day was christmas- no one would care about christmas
I don't know, watching Moon play elf mirror on terenas stand gets me excited even when hes creeping.
|
i think whats more boring than watching a long strategical games that have a lot of build up is watching fast predictable shit over and over. I doubt it will be long before watching hydra/roach a move against marine marauder will get stale.
|
I have found my games getting incrementally longer as I have been playing the game more. I do have to agree that that the level of skill in this beta is much greater than the SC1 beta and even the WC3 beta. Hopefully this will translate into a better game. Just remember to leave feedback on the battle.net forums. =)
|
On March 09 2010 12:47 Foreplay wrote:
i think whats more boring than watching a long strategical games that have a lot of build up is watching fast predictable shit over and over. I doubt it will be long before watching hydra/roach a move against marine marauder will get stale.
i don't agree. i skip most TvT promatches in BW but i do like ZvZ promatches. you like TvT more?
i think will get longer as the skill level progresses and some balance issues are fixed. It took a while in BW before people could handle a 4pool. early BW was also dominated by rush strategies. also blizzard should make bigger maps.
|
On March 09 2010 13:01 Infie wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 12:47 Foreplay wrote:
i think whats more boring than watching a long strategical games that have a lot of build up is watching fast predictable shit over and over. I doubt it will be long before watching hydra/roach a move against marine marauder will get stale. i don't agree. i skip most TvT promatches in BW but i do like ZvZ promatches. you like TvT more? i think will get longer as the skill level progresses and some balance issues are fixed. It took a while in BW before people could handle a 4pool. early BW was also dominated by rush strategies. also blizzard should make bigger maps.
zvz is one mu out of 9 that is like that and it has really exciting micro. overall i think its really too early to say how the mu's will develop but right now all of them seem like an a move fest
|
Seeing matches being a fight of whoever flanks and takes out the enemies base first is boring.
I would much rather see probe micro, medic walls, sunken breaks, muta micro and DT harass.
Right now the only fun bo is 12 pool (w' double extractor trick) zergling speed and then harassing like a bitch, once it turns into a macro game it gets boring again.
|
I doubt blizzard will think that deep into the game for sc1. They designed it and worked worked with it. It was the gamers that developed the game play and created map control etc etc. I wouldnt think when they designed it back in 1996 that map control will be a factor of game play.
For starcraft 2, with the greater AI it would seem faster i suppose?
|
I think that positional tension (lurkers, mines, tanks, etc) can remain a strong and important part of SC while the other aspects are improved for viewership. So, I completely agree with Blizzard, although I hope map control and tension remains a strong part of SC, however that occurs. I believe that the current build is capable of evolving into this, although that remains to be seen.
|
On March 09 2010 13:37 0neder wrote:
I think that positional tension (lurkers, mines, tanks, etc) can remain a strong and important part of SC while the other aspects are improved for viewership. So, I completely agree with Blizzard, although I hope map control and tension remains a strong part of SC, however that occurs. I believe that the current build is capable of evolving into this, although that remains to be seen.
Units that fill these roles can always be added in the future expasion packs. I think it is important to remember that even upon release, I dont think Blizzard views SC2 as a full game until the final planned expansion.
|
starcraft 1 wasn't just developed out of the blue either. at that time, Dune, C&C, Red Alert, Total Annihilation, Warcraft 2, were all riding high, and we saw back then that blizzard wanted sc1 to be more micro-intensive as all the other rts' at that time were either about super weapons or giant tank rushes (wc2 being the exception). Blizzard was the one that introduced limited unit selection, limited supply based on farms, and significant spells in rts' (outside of simple medic healing), and significance of unit positioning, as even the terran AI in early versions had marines protecting the seige tanks.
it seems like sc2 is more of a step back towards moving giant armies in one direction like C&C, which is obviously Dustin Browder's specialty.
|
On March 09 2010 13:11 Foreplay wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 13:01 Infie wrote:On March 09 2010 12:47 Foreplay wrote:
i think whats more boring than watching a long strategical games that have a lot of build up is watching fast predictable shit over and over. I doubt it will be long before watching hydra/roach a move against marine marauder will get stale. i don't agree. i skip most TvT promatches in BW but i do like ZvZ promatches. you like TvT more? i think will get longer as the skill level progresses and some balance issues are fixed. It took a while in BW before people could handle a 4pool. early BW was also dominated by rush strategies. also blizzard should make bigger maps. zvz is one mu out of 9 that is like that and it has really exciting micro. overall i think its really too early to say how the mu's will develop but right now all of them seem like an a move fest
There are actually only 6 matchups. 3 cross race matchups and 3 same race matchups.
Sorry to nitpick.
On topic, I believe that games will grow longer as time goes on (I have already noticed this trend in beta, and it was true for SC/BW as well). I also believe that we will see a lot more micro, and very high skill, intense micro, as the game matures. The more that certain play becomes standard, the more that micro becomes required to determine the outcome of each battle.
SC 2 will probably never have the sort of micro that players use in SC/BW to overcome bad unit AI, but in terms of maneuvering units and making smart use of casted abilities, that potential still exists in spades.
|
^ Even after a few weeks, I have seen amazing hellion, ling, colossus, etc. micro. The micro comes after people get the fundamentals down.
Multiple unit grouping is still vastly superior to single grouping. It's just that the single grouping option exists now for those 'move everyone to this general area' moments.
|
I LOVED watching the battle reports and waited for those to come out... Quite a few professional plays and everything, SC2 will be fun to both play and spectate.
|
I don't know why people think TvT is so boring. I think it's the most ridiculously exciting matchup just because there needs to be so much thought in where the players move their armies and how they carve the map, only to be decimated by mass dropships. When the dropships come into play, it's fekking glorious.
I also like ZvZ because it's so dynamic and fun to watch, but it's always intense, always short, and nearly always the same.
What I'm saying is, there's so much tension in TvT that when something explodes, it's that much more gratifying. People that hate macro games and find long strategic games to be boring seem to just be looking for some fast, intense action without caring much about the strategy behind each players' actions. Unfortunately, that's probably the majority of the casual audience and that's who Blizzard's trying to focus on.
I'm one of the people that watch every TvT and watch only Jaedong's ZvZs. Cuz those are the only ones worth watching.
|
Osaka27147 Posts
On March 09 2010 13:53 Wintermute wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 13:11 Foreplay wrote:On March 09 2010 13:01 Infie wrote:On March 09 2010 12:47 Foreplay wrote:
i think whats more boring than watching a long strategical games that have a lot of build up is watching fast predictable shit over and over. I doubt it will be long before watching hydra/roach a move against marine marauder will get stale. i don't agree. i skip most TvT promatches in BW but i do like ZvZ promatches. you like TvT more? i think will get longer as the skill level progresses and some balance issues are fixed. It took a while in BW before people could handle a 4pool. early BW was also dominated by rush strategies. also blizzard should make bigger maps. zvz is one mu out of 9 that is like that and it has really exciting micro. overall i think its really too early to say how the mu's will develop but right now all of them seem like an a move fest There are actually only 6 matchups. 3 cross race matchups and 3 same race matchups. Sorry to nitpick. On topic, I believe that games will grow longer as time goes on (I have already noticed this trend in beta, and it was true for SC/BW as well). I also believe that we will see a lot more micro, and very high skill, intense micro, as the game matures. The more that certain play becomes standard, the more that micro becomes required to determine the outcome of each battle. SC 2 will probably never have the sort of micro that players use in SC/BW to overcome bad unit AI, but in terms of maneuvering units and making smart use of casted abilities, that potential still exists in spades.
To further nitpick, there are 6 matchups to observe and 9 matchups to play, as you play each side of an XvX.
I agree with your other points. I think the ranked beta ladder leads people to play in ways that get them the most points, not ways that allow them to explore the game's full potential. In addition, map development was a huge driving force behind BW and will be here too. It always moved much faster than the strategical evolution of high level BW. The natural progression of strategies is that they must be refined as much as possible before innovation occurs. People want to gain an edge with what they know until there is no more room, forcing them to try something new.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
