|
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.
|
Osaka27148 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.
|
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.
dur your right. i was tired when i wrote that.
|
On March 09 2010 14:31 LunarC wrote:
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.
im much the same as you...
i dont mind a decentTvT, and find ZvZ a total snore fest (95% of them are build order win unless  Jaedong or Hyuk are playing)
|
I think this game was designed with minimal downtime being the main focus. But honestly i think its over too fast. A long game in SC2 is 25 mins? 90% of game being over by 10 minutes. IMO reduce number of starting workers, increase build times, increase unit hp.
I dont like my strategy games to be nothing but a big explosion in the middle. If i want to see more action and less strategy I would go play an action/adventure game. Hopefully they will slow the game down a bit.
Just my 2 cents tho.
Also i LOVE tension. I love watching a game in SC where we get to watch tension build and build and then "ok well its all going to come down to the next 30 seconds... GO!!" All of my favorite moments in SC matches were big plays after tension building and building and building. Some people are fans of "cheese" but for the most parts all of our favorite parts of SC matches were from longer games that came down to who played more strategically and who adapted. Currently in SC2 matches come down to "who made the better decision at minute 4-6" and part of that is due to unit hard-counters, but part of it is due to game speed. The game is just moving too fast to have time to make any reactions, its more like playing on impulses.
just my 2 cents, and i understand by posting i leave myself open to flaming, but "Flame on" i guess.
|
I love TvT. And it's even better in SC2. Seriously, maybe the most fun matchup for me to watch so far.
|
This game was designed with speed and intensity in mind. Straight out of the developers' mouths, though I don't remember sources. Try Gametrailers.com and watch some developer interviews for Starcraft 2. I think it's clear that super-mobility and fast intense battles with very little downtime is exactly what Blizzard was gunning for. The question is whether that was a wise decision (for gameplay, not necessarily widespread appeal) or not.
EDIT:
Source 1: Interview
Source 2: Interview
Dustin Browder on MP
|
game is intended to be much more action packed and give the player the ability to recreate a large army within a very short time frame. (warp in, queen larvae, terran reactor etc)
|
On March 09 2010 15:05 StayFrosty wrote:
game is intended to be much more action packed and give the player the ability to recreate a large army within a very short time frame. (warp in, queen larvae, terran reactor etc)
Yea, which isn't a bad thing. I definitely agree with the SC2 philosophy. Nice to see that they are tailoring the game to be exciting to watch..
|
...at the expense of some strategic aspects of the game.
|
On March 09 2010 16:04 LunarC wrote:
...at the expense of some strategic aspects of the game.
As players get better and better at the game, the strategic aspects will develop and become much more apparant than they are now.
It took Starcraft 1 pvz like 8 years before the current 'standard' build was popular (although maps tailoring to the build had a little to do with this). Beta has been out for 3 weeks, no one has really figured that much out in reality and everything right now is going to be much more aggressive because the safer alternatives haven't been refined enough yet for them to be both safe from aggressive play and at the same time let you have a significant lead into the late game. Although the points made in the op do sway towards the game will be more aggressive, I don't think thats a bad thing. Starcraft at the moment is not a fantastic spectator sport for people that don't know what's going on in all reality, pvt, pvz and tvt all wait have like 8 minute waiting peroids before any super exciting things happen in most games, zvz is HORRIBLE for people that dont know about sc, its a bunch of tiny little units attacking other tiny little units, followed by what looks to them as 1 mutalisk fighting 1 mutalisk until the other sides mutalisk dies and the other person leaves... What makes these games great for us is the subtlety, and the fact that we know the game in and out... Games with back and forth action and constant fighting are the remember-able for the average, just tuning in and doesnt know much about e-sports spectator...
Wow i really went off on a tangent and kinda threw 50 ideas into one arguement there... oh well -__-
|
On March 09 2010 16:18 Ftrunkz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2010 16:04 LunarC wrote:
...at the expense of some strategic aspects of the game. As players get better and better at the game, the strategic aspects will develop and become much more apparant than they are now. It took Starcraft 1 pvz like 8 years before the current 'standard' build was popular (although maps tailoring to the build had a little to do with this). Beta has been out for 3 weeks, no one has really figured that much out in reality and everything right now is going to be much more aggressive because the safer alternatives haven't been refined enough yet for them to be both safe from aggressive play and at the same time let you have a significant lead into the late game. Although the points made in the op do sway towards the game will be more aggressive, I don't think thats a bad thing. Starcraft at the moment is not a fantastic spectator sport for people that don't know what's going on in all reality, pvt, pvz and tvt all wait have like 8 minute waiting peroids before any super exciting things happen in most games, zvz is HORRIBLE for people that dont know about sc, its a bunch of tiny little units attacking other tiny little units, followed by what looks to them as 1 mutalisk fighting 1 mutalisk until the other sides mutalisk dies and the other person leaves... What makes these games great for us is the subtlety, and the fact that we know the game in and out... Games with back and forth action and constant fighting are the remember-able for the average, just tuning in and doesnt know much about e-sports spectator... Wow i really went off on a tangent and kinda threw 50 ideas into one arguement there... oh well -__-
I agree with what you said about spectating. I suppose we will just have to wait and see how Starcraft 2 develops. Hopefully interesting changes in how armies are composed and engage will occur in the players' hands. Otherwise, it'll be quite evident that something fundamental in the design of each races' unit composition is awry and forces boring, repetitive games with little subtley.
|
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.
Yep, as much as I hate to admit it and hope that Browder doesn't want to add C&C stuff into SC universe, it seems like it already happened.
1. We got our "super units", like Mothership, Thor (which doesn't really have a role other than a higher tier Marine -> Marauder -> Viking) and a new monstrosity which is Ultralisk.
2. Sensor towers are VERY C&C like.
3. High yeld minerals.
4. Changeling.Spy anyone?
And I don't necessarily mean that these concepts are bad, but it really seems like Browder willingly or maybe subconsciously (simply because he got used to those concepts over the years and he can't come up with any other ideas and just assumes that stuff like high yeld minerals is supposed to be standart in RTS genre) tries to incorporate them into SC universe..
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
