|
Honestly who cares about design philosophy or repetitive action that might as well be automated? Is dribbling in basketball a stupid repetitive task that has no point other than to make the game artificially harder? Yes.. but it'd be a boring ass game for pansies if you just carried a ball across the court and threw it in a basket.
Say what you want but if I didn't have to do any base management, or if said base management was too trivial, I'd be staring at units duking it out and yawning. SC2, at least for me, is fun because no matter how hard I try, I always feel like I could've been doing more. Meaningful or not, if I forget to press s every 10 seconds to make an scv I'll lose the game, and that's challenging for me in a good way.
|
On April 23 2010 08:17 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2010 08:17 Senx wrote:On April 23 2010 08:12 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:07 avilo wrote:On April 23 2010 07:56 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 07:53 avilo wrote:wow, turning out to be an excellent, excellent patch by blizzard. Congrats on them realizing that there is such a thing as "interface balance," (being too easy, or too hard)and using it in their design process  there is no reason to wonder why these guys are top tier RTS developers. WTF is interface balance? There is nothing "too easy" or "too hard." That's like saying Protoss in BW is "easy," cause you just "1a2a3a." Interface balance is a concept of how easy it is to play a game mechanically. You have RTS games such as dune, cnc1, war2 that are on one spectrum of the interface balance, aka way too hard and hindering input of what you can do in the game. Then you have Starcraft, which is perfectly in between everything (theoretically) as you have a very nice interface, not too easy, but also not so hard. This is why Starcraft has the highest skill differential among top players period. Then you have newer modern games that are very "easy," such as warcraft 3, redalert 3, cnc3, where macro and game input is very easy, almost too easy, such that the skill differential between top players is very little (that goes for cnc games, not war3). So basically, you have the original RTS games that are one end, the newer RTS on the other end of interface balance, and Starcraft right smack dab in the middle. Dune ++++++++++++++ STarcraftBroodWar +++++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS and then you have SC2, which Blizzard has designed well enough that I would say from playing/watching has a high skill differential, while also having an easier interface than brood war, but not so easy it takes the skill differential of the game away like many other 1 year life cycle RTS games. so you have: Dune/cnc1 +++++++++++ SC BW ++++++++ SC2 +++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS that is interface balance... That is an absurd concept. As far as I'm concerned, when X years from now and we can link minds with our computers, that is when RTS games can be perfected. How fast.well you can physically input something should have absolutely no bearing on a strategy game. So judging from your recent posts, I can assume you think that Starcraft Broodwar is the shittiest RTS of all time beacuse of all the mindless UI and gameplay(unit AI) -hurdles you had to overcome in order to become a really good player? I think alot of people have a different opinion about that on this site. Way to not read posts. I had said that I am fine with limiting factors in terms of UI. But when you have something that improves UI, and then to go back and actively remove it, is beyond me. If I thought SC was a shitty game I wouldn't be on this site watching streams at 5am every night.
The entire idea behind the added macro mechanics was for people to have to go back to their base. Letting people do it from the wireframe went against the core design principles
|
Zerglings now break dance :D
Ranks change at 5 kill intervals. Not sure when they stop, I got to 20.
|
Why didn't they list these changes? a lot of them are huge
|
Oh well time to change race again :p
|
United States22883 Posts
On April 23 2010 08:17 Senx wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2010 08:12 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:07 avilo wrote:On April 23 2010 07:56 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 07:53 avilo wrote:wow, turning out to be an excellent, excellent patch by blizzard. Congrats on them realizing that there is such a thing as "interface balance," (being too easy, or too hard)and using it in their design process there is no reason to wonder why these guys are top tier RTS developers. WTF is interface balance? There is nothing "too easy" or "too hard." That's like saying Protoss in BW is "easy," cause you just "1a2a3a." Interface balance is a concept of how easy it is to play a game mechanically. You have RTS games such as dune, cnc1, war2 that are on one spectrum of the interface balance, aka way too hard and hindering input of what you can do in the game. Then you have Starcraft, which is perfectly in between everything (theoretically) as you have a very nice interface, not too easy, but also not so hard. This is why Starcraft has the highest skill differential among top players period. Then you have newer modern games that are very "easy," such as warcraft 3, redalert 3, cnc3, where macro and game input is very easy, almost too easy, such that the skill differential between top players is very little (that goes for cnc games, not war3). So basically, you have the original RTS games that are one end, the newer RTS on the other end of interface balance, and Starcraft right smack dab in the middle. Dune ++++++++++++++ STarcraftBroodWar +++++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS and then you have SC2, which Blizzard has designed well enough that I would say from playing/watching has a high skill differential, while also having an easier interface than brood war, but not so easy it takes the skill differential of the game away like many other 1 year life cycle RTS games. so you have: Dune/cnc1 +++++++++++ SC BW ++++++++ SC2 +++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS that is interface balance... That is an absurd concept. As far as I'm concerned, when X years from now and we can link minds with our computers, that is when RTS games can be perfected. How fast.well you can physically input something should have absolutely no bearing on a strategy game. So judging from your recent posts, I can assume you think that Starcraft Broodwar is the shittiest RTS of all time beacuse of all the mindless UI and gameplay(unit AI) -hurdles you had to overcome in order to become a really good player? I think alot of people have a different opinion about that on this site. I don't think the change is the end of the world, but one thing that raises concern is that zerg base management may have gotten harder since BW, and I don't think that's the same for the other two races. I don't play them, however, so any P/T players please correct me if I'm wrong. Chronoboost and MULEs have added new options, but MBS isn't as beneficial for us as it is for the other two and it's not like we can do s/d/z and get 6 lings. It's s/d/zzz while having to spread creep and play with OL/overseers, on top of the main macro mechanic (inject.)
The F keys will definitely make things easier though, I'll just use those for hatcheries instead. In some ways, I think it'll improve my queen micro and build decisions.
Plus on the other hand, P can't just hide random ass warpgates all over the place as easily as before.
|
On April 23 2010 08:23 _EmIL_ wrote:
lol didnt even know that Z had so easy to macro
wtf? So the "game" told the closest queen to inject the hatch? Such a crap tbh. doesnt deserve to be in the game
It was an extension of the smart casting. When you have multiple spellcasters selected, when told to cast a spell, the caster with enough energy closest to the place you told it to cast will be the one that casts at that location.
What doesn't "deserve" to be in SC2 is such a shittily designed macro mechanic. If a macro mechanic was intended to add a gain from having APM spent on macro, or create an additional decision making process with "energy tension" of the macro mechanic, or just make the player look back at their base, the design of spawn larva failed all three. The solution would clearly be to rethink spawn larva, not remove ability/spellcasting on wire-frames.
|
I still think the zerg macro mechanic got unfairly nerfed. Imagine later in the game when you have 4-5 bases. During battle is a player really expected to look at 5 different locations? That's ridiculous.
|
On April 23 2010 08:25 Feefee wrote:
Honestly who cares about design philosophy or repetitive action that might as well be automated? Is dribbling in basketball a stupid repetitive task that has no point other than to make the game artificially harder? Yes.. but it'd be a boring ass game for pansies if you just carried a ball across the court and threw it in a basket.
Say what you want but if I didn't have to do any base management, or if said base management was too trivial, I'd be staring at units duking it out and yawning. SC2, at least for me, is fun because no matter how hard I try, I always feel like I could've been doing more. Meaningful or not, if I forget to press s every 10 seconds to make an scv I'll lose the game, and that's challenging for me in a good way.
Guess what you can have base management that actually requires decision making. It doesnt have to be one or the other. Here ill show you
+ Show Spoiler +
Whats that you say? A fluke? Not convinced you say? Ok how about this?
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On April 23 2010 08:17 Senx wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2010 08:12 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:07 avilo wrote:On April 23 2010 07:56 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 07:53 avilo wrote:wow, turning out to be an excellent, excellent patch by blizzard. Congrats on them realizing that there is such a thing as "interface balance," (being too easy, or too hard)and using it in their design process there is no reason to wonder why these guys are top tier RTS developers. WTF is interface balance? There is nothing "too easy" or "too hard." That's like saying Protoss in BW is "easy," cause you just "1a2a3a." Interface balance is a concept of how easy it is to play a game mechanically. You have RTS games such as dune, cnc1, war2 that are on one spectrum of the interface balance, aka way too hard and hindering input of what you can do in the game. Then you have Starcraft, which is perfectly in between everything (theoretically) as you have a very nice interface, not too easy, but also not so hard. This is why Starcraft has the highest skill differential among top players period. Then you have newer modern games that are very "easy," such as warcraft 3, redalert 3, cnc3, where macro and game input is very easy, almost too easy, such that the skill differential between top players is very little (that goes for cnc games, not war3). So basically, you have the original RTS games that are one end, the newer RTS on the other end of interface balance, and Starcraft right smack dab in the middle. Dune ++++++++++++++ STarcraftBroodWar +++++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS and then you have SC2, which Blizzard has designed well enough that I would say from playing/watching has a high skill differential, while also having an easier interface than brood war, but not so easy it takes the skill differential of the game away like many other 1 year life cycle RTS games. so you have: Dune/cnc1 +++++++++++ SC BW ++++++++ SC2 +++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS that is interface balance... That is an absurd concept. As far as I'm concerned, when X years from now and we can link minds with our computers, that is when RTS games can be perfected. How fast.well you can physically input something should have absolutely no bearing on a strategy game. So judging from your recent posts, I can assume you think that Starcraft Broodwar is the shittiest RTS of all time beacuse of all the mindless UI and gameplay(unit AI) -hurdles you had to overcome in order to become a really good player? I think alot of people have a different opinion about that on this site.
Stop living in the past we are in the future there are flying cars and shit already!
RTS doesn't stand for Really Tedious Sports where supposed to be using our brains not bodies else we should all be in the gym with the Jocs.
|
Where have you been all thread, floor exercise and Feefee?
Embrace their words of wisdom!
EMBRACE IT
|
8751 Posts
On April 23 2010 08:17 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2010 08:17 Senx wrote:On April 23 2010 08:12 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:07 avilo wrote:On April 23 2010 07:56 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 07:53 avilo wrote:wow, turning out to be an excellent, excellent patch by blizzard. Congrats on them realizing that there is such a thing as "interface balance," (being too easy, or too hard)and using it in their design process there is no reason to wonder why these guys are top tier RTS developers. WTF is interface balance? There is nothing "too easy" or "too hard." That's like saying Protoss in BW is "easy," cause you just "1a2a3a." Interface balance is a concept of how easy it is to play a game mechanically. You have RTS games such as dune, cnc1, war2 that are on one spectrum of the interface balance, aka way too hard and hindering input of what you can do in the game. Then you have Starcraft, which is perfectly in between everything (theoretically) as you have a very nice interface, not too easy, but also not so hard. This is why Starcraft has the highest skill differential among top players period. Then you have newer modern games that are very "easy," such as warcraft 3, redalert 3, cnc3, where macro and game input is very easy, almost too easy, such that the skill differential between top players is very little (that goes for cnc games, not war3). So basically, you have the original RTS games that are one end, the newer RTS on the other end of interface balance, and Starcraft right smack dab in the middle. Dune ++++++++++++++ STarcraftBroodWar +++++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS and then you have SC2, which Blizzard has designed well enough that I would say from playing/watching has a high skill differential, while also having an easier interface than brood war, but not so easy it takes the skill differential of the game away like many other 1 year life cycle RTS games. so you have: Dune/cnc1 +++++++++++ SC BW ++++++++ SC2 +++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS that is interface balance... That is an absurd concept. As far as I'm concerned, when X years from now and we can link minds with our computers, that is when RTS games can be perfected. How fast.well you can physically input something should have absolutely no bearing on a strategy game. So judging from your recent posts, I can assume you think that Starcraft Broodwar is the shittiest RTS of all time beacuse of all the mindless UI and gameplay(unit AI) -hurdles you had to overcome in order to become a really good player? I think alot of people have a different opinion about that on this site. Way to not read posts. I had said that I am fine with limiting factors in terms of UI. But when you have something that improves UI, and then to go back and actively remove it, is beyond me. If I thought SC was a shitty game I wouldn't be on this site watching streams at 5am every night.
The health of BW's competition 10 years after release has a lot to do with the difficulty of inputting actions into the game. There has been a ton of discussion on TL.net as to why it's good for the competitive scene to have a limited UI. Honestly the best argument that can be made by people of your opinion is to just pull out of the argument and say that RTS, or the type of RTS SC:BW is, isn't your favorite kind of game. There is something uniquely good about having the most effective strategies be very difficult, essentially impossible, to perform perfectly and it ought to be a feature of all StarCraft RTS games. If you don't like it, play different kinds of games.
|
|
|
New scan look. Not sure how it looks for the opponent though.
![[image loading]](http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/5369/screenshot025n.jpg)
edit: Beaten to it, at least I posted a picture!
|
On April 23 2010 08:31 Liquid`NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2010 08:17 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:17 Senx wrote:On April 23 2010 08:12 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:07 avilo wrote:On April 23 2010 07:56 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 07:53 avilo wrote:wow, turning out to be an excellent, excellent patch by blizzard. Congrats on them realizing that there is such a thing as "interface balance," (being too easy, or too hard)and using it in their design process there is no reason to wonder why these guys are top tier RTS developers. WTF is interface balance? There is nothing "too easy" or "too hard." That's like saying Protoss in BW is "easy," cause you just "1a2a3a." Interface balance is a concept of how easy it is to play a game mechanically. You have RTS games such as dune, cnc1, war2 that are on one spectrum of the interface balance, aka way too hard and hindering input of what you can do in the game. Then you have Starcraft, which is perfectly in between everything (theoretically) as you have a very nice interface, not too easy, but also not so hard. This is why Starcraft has the highest skill differential among top players period. Then you have newer modern games that are very "easy," such as warcraft 3, redalert 3, cnc3, where macro and game input is very easy, almost too easy, such that the skill differential between top players is very little (that goes for cnc games, not war3). So basically, you have the original RTS games that are one end, the newer RTS on the other end of interface balance, and Starcraft right smack dab in the middle. Dune ++++++++++++++ STarcraftBroodWar +++++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS and then you have SC2, which Blizzard has designed well enough that I would say from playing/watching has a high skill differential, while also having an easier interface than brood war, but not so easy it takes the skill differential of the game away like many other 1 year life cycle RTS games. so you have: Dune/cnc1 +++++++++++ SC BW ++++++++ SC2 +++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS that is interface balance... That is an absurd concept. As far as I'm concerned, when X years from now and we can link minds with our computers, that is when RTS games can be perfected. How fast.well you can physically input something should have absolutely no bearing on a strategy game. So judging from your recent posts, I can assume you think that Starcraft Broodwar is the shittiest RTS of all time beacuse of all the mindless UI and gameplay(unit AI) -hurdles you had to overcome in order to become a really good player? I think alot of people have a different opinion about that on this site. Way to not read posts. I had said that I am fine with limiting factors in terms of UI. But when you have something that improves UI, and then to go back and actively remove it, is beyond me. If I thought SC was a shitty game I wouldn't be on this site watching streams at 5am every night. The health of BW's competition 10 years after release has a lot to do with the difficulty of inputting actions into the game. There has been a ton of discussion on TL.net as to why it's good for the competitive scene to have a limited UI. Honestly the best argument that can be made by people of your opinion is to just pull out of the argument and say that RTS, or the type of RTS SC:BW is, isn't your favorite kind of game. There is something uniquely good about having the most effective strategies be very difficult, essentially impossible, to perform perfectly and it ought to be a feature of all StarCraft RTS games. If you don't like it, play different kinds of games.
amen
|
On April 23 2010 08:31 Liquid`NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2010 08:17 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:17 Senx wrote:On April 23 2010 08:12 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:07 avilo wrote:On April 23 2010 07:56 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 07:53 avilo wrote:wow, turning out to be an excellent, excellent patch by blizzard. Congrats on them realizing that there is such a thing as "interface balance," (being too easy, or too hard)and using it in their design process there is no reason to wonder why these guys are top tier RTS developers. WTF is interface balance? There is nothing "too easy" or "too hard." That's like saying Protoss in BW is "easy," cause you just "1a2a3a." Interface balance is a concept of how easy it is to play a game mechanically. You have RTS games such as dune, cnc1, war2 that are on one spectrum of the interface balance, aka way too hard and hindering input of what you can do in the game. Then you have Starcraft, which is perfectly in between everything (theoretically) as you have a very nice interface, not too easy, but also not so hard. This is why Starcraft has the highest skill differential among top players period. Then you have newer modern games that are very "easy," such as warcraft 3, redalert 3, cnc3, where macro and game input is very easy, almost too easy, such that the skill differential between top players is very little (that goes for cnc games, not war3). So basically, you have the original RTS games that are one end, the newer RTS on the other end of interface balance, and Starcraft right smack dab in the middle. Dune ++++++++++++++ STarcraftBroodWar +++++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS and then you have SC2, which Blizzard has designed well enough that I would say from playing/watching has a high skill differential, while also having an easier interface than brood war, but not so easy it takes the skill differential of the game away like many other 1 year life cycle RTS games. so you have: Dune/cnc1 +++++++++++ SC BW ++++++++ SC2 +++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS that is interface balance... That is an absurd concept. As far as I'm concerned, when X years from now and we can link minds with our computers, that is when RTS games can be perfected. How fast.well you can physically input something should have absolutely no bearing on a strategy game. So judging from your recent posts, I can assume you think that Starcraft Broodwar is the shittiest RTS of all time beacuse of all the mindless UI and gameplay(unit AI) -hurdles you had to overcome in order to become a really good player? I think alot of people have a different opinion about that on this site. Way to not read posts. I had said that I am fine with limiting factors in terms of UI. But when you have something that improves UI, and then to go back and actively remove it, is beyond me. If I thought SC was a shitty game I wouldn't be on this site watching streams at 5am every night. The health of BW's competition 10 years after release has a lot to do with the difficulty of inputting actions into the game. There has been a ton of discussion on TL.net as to why it's good for the competitive scene to have a limited UI. Honestly the best argument that can be made by people of your opinion is to just pull out of the argument and say that RTS, or the type of RTS SC:BW is, isn't your favorite kind of game. There is something uniquely good about having the most effective strategies be very difficult, essentially impossible, to perform perfectly and it ought to be a feature of all StarCraft RTS games. If you don't like it, play different kinds of games.
Again MULE and Chronoboost show you can have both base management AND decision making.
You know how Psi Storm doesnt have autocast but players dont care because it has decision making. Player action must be tied to player decision making. Thats the concept of meaningful action. And its just good game design.
|
What is this rank thats under kills?
|
On April 23 2010 08:31 Liquid`NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2010 08:17 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:17 Senx wrote:On April 23 2010 08:12 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:07 avilo wrote:On April 23 2010 07:56 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 07:53 avilo wrote:wow, turning out to be an excellent, excellent patch by blizzard. Congrats on them realizing that there is such a thing as "interface balance," (being too easy, or too hard)and using it in their design process there is no reason to wonder why these guys are top tier RTS developers. WTF is interface balance? There is nothing "too easy" or "too hard." That's like saying Protoss in BW is "easy," cause you just "1a2a3a." Interface balance is a concept of how easy it is to play a game mechanically. You have RTS games such as dune, cnc1, war2 that are on one spectrum of the interface balance, aka way too hard and hindering input of what you can do in the game. Then you have Starcraft, which is perfectly in between everything (theoretically) as you have a very nice interface, not too easy, but also not so hard. This is why Starcraft has the highest skill differential among top players period. Then you have newer modern games that are very "easy," such as warcraft 3, redalert 3, cnc3, where macro and game input is very easy, almost too easy, such that the skill differential between top players is very little (that goes for cnc games, not war3). So basically, you have the original RTS games that are one end, the newer RTS on the other end of interface balance, and Starcraft right smack dab in the middle. Dune ++++++++++++++ STarcraftBroodWar +++++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS and then you have SC2, which Blizzard has designed well enough that I would say from playing/watching has a high skill differential, while also having an easier interface than brood war, but not so easy it takes the skill differential of the game away like many other 1 year life cycle RTS games. so you have: Dune/cnc1 +++++++++++ SC BW ++++++++ SC2 +++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS that is interface balance... That is an absurd concept. As far as I'm concerned, when X years from now and we can link minds with our computers, that is when RTS games can be perfected. How fast.well you can physically input something should have absolutely no bearing on a strategy game. So judging from your recent posts, I can assume you think that Starcraft Broodwar is the shittiest RTS of all time beacuse of all the mindless UI and gameplay(unit AI) -hurdles you had to overcome in order to become a really good player? I think alot of people have a different opinion about that on this site. Way to not read posts. I had said that I am fine with limiting factors in terms of UI. But when you have something that improves UI, and then to go back and actively remove it, is beyond me. If I thought SC was a shitty game I wouldn't be on this site watching streams at 5am every night. The health of BW's competition 10 years after release has a lot to do with the difficulty of inputting actions into the game. There has been a ton of discussion on TL.net as to why it's good for the competitive scene to have a limited UI. Honestly the best argument that can be made by people of your opinion is to just pull out of the argument and say that RTS, or the type of RTS SC:BW is, isn't your favorite kind of game. There is something uniquely good about having the most effective strategies be very difficult, essentially impossible, to perform perfectly and it ought to be a feature of all StarCraft RTS games. If you don't like it, play different kinds of games.
As a sport, how much are spectators going to care that it took x amount of additional APM to cast spawn larva on 5 hatcheries? None at all. They ARE going to care about those pros 220+ APM allowing them to perform amazing battle micro across 3 different attack locations.
People are awed by muta micro or even muta mis-micro, they are not awed by a player losing a game because of missing a round of larva usage(or a round of spawn larva injection).
|
On April 23 2010 08:31 Liquid`NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2010 08:17 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:17 Senx wrote:On April 23 2010 08:12 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:07 avilo wrote:On April 23 2010 07:56 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 07:53 avilo wrote:wow, turning out to be an excellent, excellent patch by blizzard. Congrats on them realizing that there is such a thing as "interface balance," (being too easy, or too hard)and using it in their design process there is no reason to wonder why these guys are top tier RTS developers. WTF is interface balance? There is nothing "too easy" or "too hard." That's like saying Protoss in BW is "easy," cause you just "1a2a3a." Interface balance is a concept of how easy it is to play a game mechanically. You have RTS games such as dune, cnc1, war2 that are on one spectrum of the interface balance, aka way too hard and hindering input of what you can do in the game. Then you have Starcraft, which is perfectly in between everything (theoretically) as you have a very nice interface, not too easy, but also not so hard. This is why Starcraft has the highest skill differential among top players period. Then you have newer modern games that are very "easy," such as warcraft 3, redalert 3, cnc3, where macro and game input is very easy, almost too easy, such that the skill differential between top players is very little (that goes for cnc games, not war3). So basically, you have the original RTS games that are one end, the newer RTS on the other end of interface balance, and Starcraft right smack dab in the middle. Dune ++++++++++++++ STarcraftBroodWar +++++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS and then you have SC2, which Blizzard has designed well enough that I would say from playing/watching has a high skill differential, while also having an easier interface than brood war, but not so easy it takes the skill differential of the game away like many other 1 year life cycle RTS games. so you have: Dune/cnc1 +++++++++++ SC BW ++++++++ SC2 +++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS that is interface balance... That is an absurd concept. As far as I'm concerned, when X years from now and we can link minds with our computers, that is when RTS games can be perfected. How fast.well you can physically input something should have absolutely no bearing on a strategy game. So judging from your recent posts, I can assume you think that Starcraft Broodwar is the shittiest RTS of all time beacuse of all the mindless UI and gameplay(unit AI) -hurdles you had to overcome in order to become a really good player? I think alot of people have a different opinion about that on this site. Way to not read posts. I had said that I am fine with limiting factors in terms of UI. But when you have something that improves UI, and then to go back and actively remove it, is beyond me. If I thought SC was a shitty game I wouldn't be on this site watching streams at 5am every night. The health of BW's competition 10 years after release has a lot to do with the difficulty of inputting actions into the game. There has been a ton of discussion on TL.net as to why it's good for the competitive scene to have a limited UI. Honestly the best argument that can be made by people of your opinion is to just pull out of the argument and say that RTS, or the type of RTS SC:BW is, isn't your favorite kind of game. There is something uniquely good about having the most effective strategies be very difficult, essentially impossible, to perform perfectly and it ought to be a feature of all StarCraft RTS games. If you don't like it, play different kinds of games.
Wasn't BW realistically dead outside of Korea other then the spurt since SC2 was announced? The fact BW didn't stay popular(to the masses) shows that a scene might not survive the initial boom period of launch and last long if all but the most committed players can train there hands with dull tasks.
I understand making a game hard to cause skill gaps between players to seperate the different calibre of players but a physical gap instead of a mental gap is meant for physical sports not a strategy game whose name explains its raison d'être.
|
8751 Posts
On April 23 2010 08:34 Archerofaiur wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2010 08:31 Liquid`NonY wrote:On April 23 2010 08:17 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:17 Senx wrote:On April 23 2010 08:12 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 08:07 avilo wrote:On April 23 2010 07:56 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On April 23 2010 07:53 avilo wrote:wow, turning out to be an excellent, excellent patch by blizzard. Congrats on them realizing that there is such a thing as "interface balance," (being too easy, or too hard)and using it in their design process there is no reason to wonder why these guys are top tier RTS developers. WTF is interface balance? There is nothing "too easy" or "too hard." That's like saying Protoss in BW is "easy," cause you just "1a2a3a." Interface balance is a concept of how easy it is to play a game mechanically. You have RTS games such as dune, cnc1, war2 that are on one spectrum of the interface balance, aka way too hard and hindering input of what you can do in the game. Then you have Starcraft, which is perfectly in between everything (theoretically) as you have a very nice interface, not too easy, but also not so hard. This is why Starcraft has the highest skill differential among top players period. Then you have newer modern games that are very "easy," such as warcraft 3, redalert 3, cnc3, where macro and game input is very easy, almost too easy, such that the skill differential between top players is very little (that goes for cnc games, not war3). So basically, you have the original RTS games that are one end, the newer RTS on the other end of interface balance, and Starcraft right smack dab in the middle. Dune ++++++++++++++ STarcraftBroodWar +++++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS and then you have SC2, which Blizzard has designed well enough that I would say from playing/watching has a high skill differential, while also having an easier interface than brood war, but not so easy it takes the skill differential of the game away like many other 1 year life cycle RTS games. so you have: Dune/cnc1 +++++++++++ SC BW ++++++++ SC2 +++++++++ cnc/war3/modern RTS that is interface balance... That is an absurd concept. As far as I'm concerned, when X years from now and we can link minds with our computers, that is when RTS games can be perfected. How fast.well you can physically input something should have absolutely no bearing on a strategy game. So judging from your recent posts, I can assume you think that Starcraft Broodwar is the shittiest RTS of all time beacuse of all the mindless UI and gameplay(unit AI) -hurdles you had to overcome in order to become a really good player? I think alot of people have a different opinion about that on this site. Way to not read posts. I had said that I am fine with limiting factors in terms of UI. But when you have something that improves UI, and then to go back and actively remove it, is beyond me. If I thought SC was a shitty game I wouldn't be on this site watching streams at 5am every night. The health of BW's competition 10 years after release has a lot to do with the difficulty of inputting actions into the game. There has been a ton of discussion on TL.net as to why it's good for the competitive scene to have a limited UI. Honestly the best argument that can be made by people of your opinion is to just pull out of the argument and say that RTS, or the type of RTS SC:BW is, isn't your favorite kind of game. There is something uniquely good about having the most effective strategies be very difficult, essentially impossible, to perform perfectly and it ought to be a feature of all StarCraft RTS games. If you don't like it, play different kinds of games. Again MULE and Chronoboost show you can have both base management AND decision making.
Completely missing the point there. This discussion is about the ease of use of the interface. Whether or not an action involves a significant decision does not change how easy the process of doing the action is. We are talking about going from thinking "I want to do this action" to the game actually doing the action. How you came to think that you want to do that action is irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/6/62/Orbital_Command.png/250px-Orbital_Command.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.sc2armory.com/img/protoss/buildings/nexus.jpg)
