|
On June 02 2010 10:55 Elegy wrote:
OP isn't saying that sc2 = HoN, he's saying that SC2 is, to his mind, a prettier and newer version of BW (which it isn't). He wants Blizz to copy HoN's online features with regards to how it functions (i.e., HoN has a reconnect option if u drop, etc).
HoN is exactly what DotA needed-- reconnect options, better game engine built exactly for that kind of game, etc. Bnet 2.0 just blows in large part. bnet from wc3 >>>>>> bnet from sc2 in pretty much every respect (minor problem with wc3 ladder matchmaking, sc2 is better in this sense).
Finally someone who takes time to read and understand what the OP is saying. *cough* Tump *cough.*'
As for my own thoughts on this, I agree that Blizzard could learn a lesson or two from S2 Games (for those of you that don't know S2 is the co. that created HON.) I enjoy many of the things about the HON UI (chat rooms being one of them, and especially the ability to reconnect to games after being dropped for w/e reason.)
|
On June 02 2010 10:57 RyanS wrote:
You said HoN is a mirror of SC2. When you look in a mirror you see yourself exactly how you are. This makes no sense to me.
Perhaps he means that in a mirror, things appear to be flipped in the opposite direction. Perhaps it's not a good analogy.
Regardless, I agree with the OP. I don't understand how Blizzard, a huge company with massive revenues and resources, can't deliver an online experience that matches HoN's. S2 is a small developer and HoN was around long before Bnet2.0. Especially with all the hype Blizz is putting into Bnet2, I'm at a loss as to how the design and programming team failed so hard.
|
agreed, the HoN interface is splendid compared to bnet 2.0... Even the HoN replay interface puts SC2's to shame.
|
On June 02 2010 11:00 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2010 10:18 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
ya, the neatest thing I'd say HoN has is a feature that allows a player to reconnect to a game within 5 minutes of them disconnecting, whenever they disconnect.
oh and it has chat channels ^^ It's been stated that reconnect features are not practical in a 1v1 game, or a game that changes as quickly as SC/SC2. Disconnecting and reconnecting in a minute in HoN results in a game where you can reasonably come back from your slight disadvantage. A minute where you're macroing in SC2 and your opponent isn't can result in an insurmountable advantage. And it isn't fair to make your opponent sit in a paused game on the off-chance that his opponent *might* reconnect.
Yeah, in 1v1 it's not that useful. But in 4v4, it might be nice.
And more importantly, in custom games, it'd be awesome. HoN is, of course, based on the WC3 mod DotA. Reconnecting didn't work in DotA because Bnet didn't support it. If Bnet 2.0 did, it could help later custom games be good.
Of course, this is clearly a minor detail compared to some of the other issues Bnet 2.0 has.
(and in other news, my interpretation of the OP is that he things Blizzard should do to BW what S2 did to DotA: copy the mechanics as closely as possible, but with a better UI and possibly some added content. But considering the wildly divergent interpretations of the OP, it's entirely possible I, too, am incorrect)
|
-------------------------------------------
Um... sorry for the confusion I guess I should have explained it better. HoN : DOTA, SC2 : SCBW
Basically, HoN is updated DOTA and SC2 is updated SCBW. If you really don't understand this, and you think SC2 is a brand spanking new game, well it's not. The mechanics have changed drastically, but you still build workers, mine minerals, gather gas, construct supply depots, and micro mutalisks. You still develop strategies involving build orders. SC2 is, in every sense, SCBW updated and thats a GOOD thing because SCBW was kickass. Now, HoN mirrors SC2 because its an updated version of DOTA free of lag, leavers, and bad graphics.
My point was the HoN interface update rocked, and was very well designed. Bnet update - not so much -_-
|
My favorite part of HoN compared to dota is the player to server instead of p2p connections. So if 1 guy is lagging fierce it won't affect anyone else. I'm not sure but I heard it also combats hacking?
I wonder why blizz won't do this for sc2
|
On June 02 2010 11:54 Zekke wrote:
My favorite part of HoN compared to dota is the player to server instead of p2p connections. So if 1 guy is lagging fierce it won't affect anyone else. I'm not sure but I heard it also combats hacking?
I wonder why blizz won't do this for sc2
Um, unless you are trolling yes they did do it for SC2 which is one of the things messing up the custom map hosting. Since all custom maps are hosted by blizzard, instead of a list appearing of users who hosted a specific map ALL custom maps ever made (even ones with nobody playing in them at the moment) appear in one list which makes it unmanageable.
|
He's saying HoN is to DotA as SC2 is to BW.
S2 Games is the company that makes HoN.
I agree, though probably not for the same reasons. HoN, like SC2, has better graphics and a small amount of original content that isn't from DotA. However in the transition from DotA (and BW) they left out some of the key parts that make it a DotA clone (mainly slimming down the hero choices by about 50). While SC2 should take some tips from HoN's interface (and netcode, HoN is amazingly smooth online), they both made the mistake of cutting crucial content from the original.
|
Blizzard has nothing to learn lol, if anything they are the ones teaching everyone else on how to "MICROTRANSACTIONS" every possible feature. They could make any game pro if they actually tried on making good games and not profitable games. S2 is not in Blizzard's league, in fact I don't think any other company can compare itself to what blizzard is capable of doing, its simply a shame blizzard doesnt care anymore -- $$$$$$$$$$$$
|
On June 02 2010 10:56 Tsagacity wrote:When I played HoN beta my first thoughts were "Wow I hope Blizzard is taking notes for battle.net 2.0" I have been severely disappointed 
A thousand times this. I don't think I'd be nearly as pissed had I never seen S2's version of Battle.net.
I figured they'd be kicking themselves, pissed that they hadn't capitalized on DotA yet and taking notes to make their own new product better. I guess they were too busy having lunch with Facebook execs.
|
On June 02 2010 11:46 positronix wrote:
-------------------------------------------
Um... sorry for the confusion I guess I should have explained it better. HoN : DOTA, SC2 : SCBW
Basically, HoN is updated DOTA and SC2 is updated SCBW. If you really don't understand this, and you think SC2 is a brand spanking new game, well it's not. The mechanics have changed drastically, but you still build workers, mine minerals, gather gas, construct supply depots, and micro mutalisks. You still develop strategies involving build orders. SC2 is, in every sense, SCBW updated and thats a GOOD thing because SCBW was kickass. Now, HoN mirrors SC2 because its an updated version of DOTA free of lag, leavers, and bad graphics.
My point was the HoN interface update rocked, and was very well designed. Bnet update - not so much -_-
i agree that blizzard with the op but i disagree that SC2 is an updated SC:BW. from what i hear HoN is really good, and have done a very great job with the new shit they put in there, i would believe that not even a remake would > original Dota but in HoN's case, it's somewhat true. i'm the person who knows that BW exceeds SC2 by far, and SC2 has a long road for it to become just as good as BW.
|
First of all, I play HoN, and I love the game, and some parts of the UI can be drafted, but the important stuff, the netcode will not work.
HoN isn't a traditional FPS, in the sense that the unit measure always stays around the same. Starcraft has a much higher potential for massive armies, and buildings are also created with different functions. Thus Starcraft employs a turn based system, every turn, orders are recorded and sent to everyone, with the orders enacted a few steps later. This allows basically no bottleneck in networking, however latency is decided by the slowest computer.
In HoN, the networking follows the idea of games such as counterstrike. There is a server and client and everything is pretty much done as close to real time as possible. Individual lag will not affect other players and server lag will affect everyone.
HoN's netcode will not work with Starcraft.
|
Reading comprehension and the ability to understand analogies must be at an all time low in the tl forum
I completely agree with the OP. The UI of HoN is very good and feature rich. It has much of the spectator and replay features sc2 should also have.
|
I got into the HoN beta a long time ago. I never played DOTA and don't really have any interest in the game, but I did play around with it for kicks.
S2 pretty much gives the competitive community exactly what they want in the smartest way they can. I think that is what the OP is talking about - the mindset and philosophy of the developer is geared towards the competitive community's needs. All the great features they have (seeing anyone's replays... ever, cheat-resistant hosting, balancing) can make anyone (even a complete DOTA newbie like myself) realize that the game is designed for competitive use.
|
On June 02 2010 10:57 RyanS wrote:
You said HoN is a mirror of SC2. When you look in a mirror you see yourself exactly how you are. This makes no sense to me.
Its a mirror situation is what he is saying. HoN is like dota 2.0, while sc2 is starcraft 2.0. Get it? That should of been pretty easy to figure out.
|
|
|
I dunno, I don't like the s2 system that much tbh, the w3 one is better but both could have improvements. Don't think sc2 should just take someone's interface cause it has so much potential to improve upon already established systems, ofc as of now any other system (e.g. sc:bw, a rock) I'd take over this horrid bnet 2.0. Hell, I'll take the w2 benet if it means my placement matches count, my replays don't bug out, and I can chat with random people about how gay ZvZ is.
|
On June 02 2010 13:34 Count9 wrote:
I dunno, I don't like the s2 system that much tbh, the w3 one is better ...
Can you explain this?
I can't see any war3 bnet feature that is not present in HoN too.
In addition, HoN has plenty new features that the war3 bnet has not.
|
|
|
On June 02 2010 13:17 FrickenHamster wrote:
First of all, I play HoN, and I love the game, and some parts of the UI can be drafted, but the important stuff, the netcode will not work.
HoN isn't a traditional FPS, in the sense that the unit measure always stays around the same. Starcraft has a much higher potential for massive armies, and buildings are also created with different functions. Thus Starcraft employs a turn based system, every turn, orders are recorded and sent to everyone, with the orders enacted a few steps later. This allows basically no bottleneck in networking, however latency is decided by the slowest computer.
In HoN, the networking follows the idea of games such as counterstrike. There is a server and client and everything is pretty much done as close to real time as possible. Individual lag will not affect other players and server lag will affect everyone.
HoN's netcode will not work with Starcraft.
Nothing you said prevents HoN's netcode from working with SC2.
Why does StarCraft II need to use a system where all the clients operate in synchronized turns? That has been the model for RTS netcode for nearly a decade, but it is inferior to other models. If the server maintains its own copy of the game state, the clients only need to synchronize with the server and not each other. If one client stops responding for a few moments, the other clients can continue and the client that got behind will catchup when it starts receiving messages again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
