Interesting interview with Dustin Browder, lead designer for StarCraft II.
The lead designer, who previously worked on real-time strategy games in Electronic Arts' Command & Conquer series, said he had to make creative adjustments when he joined the StarCraft II team. For him, the main hurdle was learning how to take some of the "fun" stuff out of the game.
"It took me a year and a half to figure this out," said Browder, an enthusiastic designer who might also be around the top 10 percent in the world in terms of speed-talking.
"I kept trying to shove stuff in that was fun but wasn't a sport," he said. "And everybody would tell me 'no,' and I wouldn't understand why. And I thought they were all jerks. I didn't know, right? I couldn't figure it out."
Lol, this is such troll bait. The article is mostly fluff actually. It would have been interesting to hear about all the "fun" things he thought up that got shot down, or what the development team's philosophy on what makes something a "sport".
On April 22 2011 20:22 surraymb wrote: So Dustin Browder finally admits he has a problem figuring out what the starcraft community wants? Big surprise there...
Thank god for those other people telling him 'no'. Should be more of those around him telling him 'no' to everything he proposes.
the issue is actually that the starcraft community doesnt know what it wants.
this is absolute troll bait.Nobody talks like that in a serious interview.
Some of the funstuff might actually need skill...but you know I think that Wings of liberty is like initiation I think the Expansions will weed out people who break because they can't use X unit as efficiently as the pros.
actually he said in several interview, that changing from C&C to SC was hard for him - what makes totally sense if you compare those games ...
the philosophy of blizzard is and was to have less stuff in the game to have more overall fun - having tons of "fun" units doesn't necessarily mean the game is fun as a whole
The article is actually pro esports if anything, he had some ideas for "Fun" units but the team is there to keep everyone in check of their vision for SC2.
It is a positive interview and that Blizzard takes SC2 seriously and wont introduce machine gun wielding dolphins and monkeys with grenades
Too bad warpgate still made it through the beta :\ reapers were bad and were essentially nerfed out of the game, but warpgate is still what's wrong with the game right now and I guarantee was one of Browder's "cool" ideas.
An interesting interview, I wish it had focussed a little more on what Blizzard has done to make the game fun, instead of unintentionally implying that they're trying as hard as they can to make the game not fun.
Hes really talking about the "fun" in novelty, which only lasts a short time, the fun of a sport is that it only gets more interesting the deeper you go, and it has no clear skill ceiling.
On April 22 2011 20:34 Tyree wrote: The article is actually pro esports if anything, he had some ideas for "Fun" units but the team is there to keep everyone in check of their vision for SC2.
It is a positive interview and that Blizzard takes SC2 seriously and wont introduce machine gun wielding dolphins and monkeys with grenades
Hey, don't hate on my Allied combat dolphins and Soviet giant squid, yo!
Jokes aside, although the current iteration of SC2 does feel slightly watered down compared to the pre-release material, it's quite mind-boggling to think about where we would be if all those over-the-top imba units made it into the final product. Would it end up like BW where the imbalances actually balance out each other, or would it just end up looking like plain bad design?
Anyways, nice interview nonetheless. Making a Starcraft game is hard, and it's interesting to hear that he admits its difficulty.
On April 22 2011 20:22 surraymb wrote: So Dustin Browder finally admits he has a problem figuring out what the starcraft community wants? Big surprise there...
Thank god for those other people telling him 'no'. Should be more of those around him telling him 'no' to everything he proposes.
the issue is actually that the starcraft community doesnt know what it wants.
The issue is grouping 1 million players like you did. Of course the community will not agree on what it wants, there are a lot of ppl in it. =_=
On April 22 2011 20:22 surraymb wrote: So Dustin Browder finally admits he has a problem figuring out what the starcraft community wants? Big surprise there...
Thank god for those other people telling him 'no'. Should be more of those around him telling him 'no' to everything he proposes.
the issue is actually that the starcraft community doesnt know what it wants.
e-Sports aren't meant to be "fun," they're meant to be played competitively. You can play for fun, but don't expect anyone to give you money for it.
Want to make Starcraft "fun?" Take out harrassment. Harassment is annoying; no one sees mutalisks in their mineral line and thinks to themselves, "Awesome!" But harassment is part of what makes Starcraft worthy of being called a sport. If we wanted the game to be "fun," they should just institute a magical barrier that stops all aggression for the first twenty minutes, so that Starcraft is reduced to a bunch of things exploding after that 20 minute mark. Only thing is, that wouldn't be fun after a few days...
On April 22 2011 20:22 surraymb wrote: So Dustin Browder finally admits he has a problem figuring out what the starcraft community wants? Big surprise there...
Thank god for those other people telling him 'no'. Should be more of those around him telling him 'no' to everything he proposes.
the issue is actually that the starcraft community doesnt know what it wants.
The issue is grouping 1 million players like you did. Of course the community will not agree on what it wants, there are a lot of ppl in it. =_=
On April 22 2011 21:07 pandaminion wrote: Want to make Starcraft "fun?" Take out harrassment. Harassment is annoying; no one sees mutalisks in their mineral line and thinks to themselves, "Awesome!"
CnC is super boring and lame, every single title is. So horribly imbalanced that it removes all depth and just the general game design in itself makes it impossible for the game to be good.
I think SC2 is vastly dumbed down and units that really added a lot of skill got removed. Just giving back the mine to Terrans would vastly improve the game, if they had balanced it right from the beginning that is.. Luckily BW was so awesome that even if you makes it more shallow it's still a super good game.
On April 22 2011 21:07 pandaminion wrote: Want to make Starcraft "fun?" Take out harrassment. Harassment is annoying; no one sees mutalisks in their mineral line and thinks to themselves, "Awesome!"
Me and my 15 hidden infestors disagree
Yea, I think that's the fun. You feel so bad when you are harrassed, so you feel so good when you harrass yourself (e.g. dying in dota is not fun, it feels bad; killing feels good because you 'pwn' them/ make them feel bad -> make you feel good). Harass is definately fun.
On April 22 2011 20:22 surraymb wrote: So Dustin Browder finally admits he has a problem figuring out what the starcraft community wants? Big surprise there...
Thank god for those other people telling him 'no'. Should be more of those around him telling him 'no' to everything he proposes.
the issue is actually that the starcraft community doesnt know what it wants.
The issue is grouping 1 million players like you did. Of course the community will not agree on what it wants, there are a lot of ppl in it. =_=
That's what he said -_-
yeah, it's a result of grouping large amount of people together. "the issue is actually that the [any group here, e.g. children, women, men, gamers, europeans] doesnt know what it wants"
On April 22 2011 20:22 surraymb wrote: So Dustin Browder finally admits he has a problem figuring out what the starcraft community wants? Big surprise there...
Thank god for those other people telling him 'no'. Should be more of those around him telling him 'no' to everything he proposes.
the issue is actually that the starcraft community doesnt know what it wants.
On April 22 2011 21:07 pandaminion wrote: e-Sports aren't meant to be "fun," they're meant to be played competitively. You can play for fun, but don't expect anyone to give you money for it.
Want to make Starcraft "fun?" Take out harrassment. Harassment is annoying; no one sees mutalisks in their mineral line and thinks to themselves, "Awesome!" But harassment is part of what makes Starcraft worthy of being called a sport. If we wanted the game to be "fun," they should just institute a magical barrier that stops all aggression for the first twenty minutes, so that Starcraft is reduced to a bunch of things exploding after that 20 minute mark. Only thing is, that wouldn't be fun after a few days...
I don't know, carrying out the harassment successfully in incredibly fun.
On April 22 2011 20:34 Tyree wrote: The article is actually pro esports if anything, he had some ideas for "Fun" units but the team is there to keep everyone in check of their vision for SC2.
It is a positive interview and that Blizzard takes SC2 seriously and wont introduce machine gun wielding dolphins and monkeys with grenades
Well, those infested bunkers they've showwn aren't that far off -_-
"Dustin Browder is pretty good at his own game. A few months ago, he was ranked around the top 7 percent in the world, although he admits he's a bit rusty, and may now only be in the top 10 percent." Ahurhurhur
Even though this is a bit of a sensationalist headline I get what it means. Makes sense as well.
A lot of these "fun" things in other games involve pushing units around, something I'm glad Blizzard said they were going to avoid with Starcraft II. It's a shame they went back on that and added force fields. I might complain about mothership vortex, but I think with the resent patch it's okay.
At any rate, I can certainly relate to Dustin Browder. I have a fair amount of experience with the BFME series (which apparently he worked on, don't know for sure,) and I modded it for a long time. I would constantly rework my ideas of what makes a good game and start my mod over from scratch. I started as a kid who wanted a "fun" game, and to add things into the original. The rest of the modding community for that game was pretty much the same way, whether it's adding dozens of new units and heroes, or making the game "realistic" (as in, buildings are nearly invulnerable to all but siege weapons and everything takes multiple minutes to produce.) Over time I got more into esports and starcraft, and my modding reflected that. In the end the engine just wasn't good enough for me. It probably took me about a year and a half to figure it out.
On April 22 2011 20:29 BLinD-RawR wrote: this is absolute troll bait.Nobody talks like that in a serious interview.
Some of the funstuff might actually need skill...but you know I think that Wings of liberty is like initiation I think the Expansions will weed out people who break because they can't use X unit as efficiently as the pros.
We can only hope my friend we can only hope. I actually look forward to the day where gold league is an accomplishment.
It's really no surprise. He comes from CnC where they have bizarre and wacky units just for fun. There is a reason nobody is pilling into stadiums to watch it.
I like Dustin and everything he has done. If he really was doing a bad job, there wouldn't be a new tournament announced every week. He must be doing something right.
Fun is different to everyone. However, the majority of people think "fun" is playing competively. So 'fun" is used in the right context here. Needs to be more "novelty".
And besides we have novelty units in single-player! Thats the point of single player.
On April 22 2011 21:07 pandaminion wrote: e-Sports aren't meant to be "fun," they're meant to be played competitively.
God I really hate this game but I just have to play it because if I play this game (which I hate because it is not fun) enough then I might get good enough to make money off (doing something I hate)
Of course it's meant to be fun. Every competetive sport out there has elements in it that a person participating in enjoys. If they didn't they wouldn't do it.
L O L .... sry of my ENG... first SC1 BW is fun bacous is hard to play and there is plenty off things to use and to do in game.... ( in my opinion sc1 have plenty of minygames in side of one game)
if you insert rucket puks intu basket ball basket ball will be become whery boring after few games..man lol.... first thing basket ball will lose strategy positioning timing everything game will be joke...and that is what Dustin do with this game...insted river drops (skill positioning timing) he insert colloss who do all that in A MOVE.....(nitro packs in basketball)
sc2 is only interesting now bacous off old glory from bw....(and old unites)....
baskett ball with nitro packs= circus (with no brain in it)
sport is one thing (skill timing,strategy,positioning , hard to pull out,mass brain usage)
and circus is other thing (baskett ball with nitro packs (hahah) its fun to whatch 1 or 2 times but lol)
On April 22 2011 23:28 Gfire wrote: A lot of these "fun" things in other games involve pushing units around, something I'm glad Blizzard said they were going to avoid with Starcraft II. It's a shame they went back on that and added force fields. I might complain about mothership vortex, but I think with the resent patch it's okay.
At any rate, I can certainly relate to Dustin Browder. I have a fair amount of experience with the BFME series (which apparently he worked on, don't know for sure,) and I modded it for a long time. I would constantly rework my ideas of what makes a good game and start my mod over from scratch. I started as a kid who wanted a "fun" game, and to add things into the original. The rest of the modding community for that game was pretty much the same way, whether it's adding dozens of new units and heroes, or making the game "realistic" (as in, buildings are nearly invulnerable to all but siege weapons and everything takes multiple minutes to produce.) Over time I got more into esports and starcraft, and my modding reflected that. In the end the engine just wasn't good enough for me. It probably took me about a year and a half to figure it out.
IMO, BFME was a pretty fun game with quite a few neat ideas that made it a very unique RTS. I had a blast playing that game, and I also enjoyed quite a few mods that were floating around for it (Deezire had a good mod; Elven Alliance was pretty awesome; the no pop-cap mods were also a blast). Although people do complain about its fundamental design (limited base-building and resource-collecting), I still found it to be a very fun, cinematic experience.
Although Dustin is great at making games, the fact that SC2 is trying to become more than a game to become an e-sport hinders the creativity of any game designer. I think a lot of the more broken elements in SC2 came from earlier in development when he and his team didn't have a clear vision of a proper e-sport. Now that the game is out in the wild, at least they can keep their fingers on the community's pulse to get a better idea of how to improve the game in the expansions.
I actually think this is quite a good thing he's said. The more "fun" units which are rather gimmicky were just used in Campaign, which I really do love. I love some of the WoL campaign units like the Diamondback, Hercules, Odin and a few others. They're not fit to be part of the actual multiplayer side as they're horribly imbalanced, but they're fun units and getting to use them in the campaign is really cool. :D
On April 23 2011 00:05 thebole1 wrote: L O L .... sry of my ENG... first SC1 BW is fun bacous is hard to play and there is plenty off things to use and to do in game.... ( in my opinion sc1 have plenty of minygames in side of one game)
if you insert rucket puks intu basket ball basket ball will be become whery boring after few games..man lol.... first thing basket ball will lose strategy positioning timing everything game will be joke...and that is what Dustin do with this game...insted river drops (skill positioning timing) he insert colloss who do all that in A MOVE.....(nitro packs in basketball)
sc2 is only interesting now bacous off old glory from bw....(and old unites)....
baskett ball with nitro packs= circus (with no brain in it)
sport is one thing (skill timing,strategy,positioning , hard to pull out,mass brain usage)
and circus is other thing (baskett ball with nitro packs (hahah) its fun to whatch 1 or 2 times but lol)
Wow, this is a terrific post. I could understand the gist perfectly and agree 100%.
fun unites are for campaing...(i also think reper should be replaced with some other unites(or abylitis like spider mins or something..)
to make this game beather they should insert copetativ abylitis and unites that will work in battle...(no fun unites) also unites that require skill to play not only A muve unites....
so blizzard dustin.... listen to ppl like idra or something... made game sport (and that meens also fun) and dont made joke of this epic game...
On April 22 2011 21:07 pandaminion wrote: e-Sports aren't meant to be "fun," they're meant to be played competitively.
God I really hate this game but I just have to play it because if I play this game (which I hate because it is not fun) enough then I might get good enough to make money off (doing something I hate)
Of course it's meant to be fun. Every competetive sport out there has elements in it that a person participating in enjoys. If they didn't they wouldn't do it.
The root of fun in most games is in competition, its fun to win, its fun to improve. Other kinds of fun are usually short lived in my experience.
On April 22 2011 20:22 surraymb wrote: So Dustin Browder finally admits he has a problem figuring out what the starcraft community wants? Big surprise there...
Thank god for those other people telling him 'no'. Should be more of those around him telling him 'no' to everything he proposes.
the issue is actually that the starcraft community doesnt know what it wants.
is this why every new unit in SC2 was a CNC3 or RA3 unit....
Viking- ability to transform into air or ground mode, walking mech. mecha tengu- ability to transform into air or ground mode, walking mech.
stalker - strong against armor, shoots missles, can attack air and ground, ability blink on a cooldown. Shock trooper- strong against armor, shoots missles, can attack air and ground, ability blink on a cooldown.
hellion- strong anti light, fast. has upgrade to make anti light better. attack buggy -strong anti light, fast. has upgrade to make anti light better.
colossus- walking towering mech, weak against air, does aoe with pew pew lasers. tripod- walking towering mech, weak against air, does aoe with pew pew lasers.
the mothership used to be similar way back in SC2 alpha, ie same abilities similar effect. but was changed alot in SC2 from the cnc3 one atleast.
the list goes on, which is basically every new unit in SC2 that wasnt in SC1, and the units even look similar, ive been trying to photoshop them all together and make a post in the funny picture thread about it, but my photoshop skills are terrible.
now for those of you that dont understand the irony to my post in regards to the interview, Why didnt anyone tell him no to all his cnc unit clones? you know the A move colossus.... It just makes me wonder what they actually told him no to... alot of what im referring to is the final paragraph of that interview when hes talking about unit design and making "Cool" units.
Isn't fun what made BW successful? They should have gone the SC1 route and made fun, over the top abilities first before balancing them. Reavers and mines are the two that come to mind. Mines blowing up unsuspecting units or a well performed mine daebak are fun.
On April 22 2011 23:57 Rabiator wrote: Doesnt Browder admit that he is not qualified for his job by admitting this?
No.... He is just saying that designing a game as an e-sport is much more difficult as designing it as a game. That fun crazy elements that for a normal game might be Ok on a game designed as an e sport might not be good, thus it was hard for him.
I'll give you an example in another popular series. The Modern Warfare series have a lot of "fun"(and lets not pretend that the concept of fun its not something entirely subjective in many aspects) stuff like Killstreak rewards that might be incredibly fun for the player, but that stuff its not good when you think of it as a serious e sport.Hmmm, maybe I should have mentioned Super Smash Brothers and items, almost the same case.
I don't think many people appreciate the difficulties in what Blizzard is trying to do. Its something that its kinda new and kinda cool(IMO), instead of designing SC2 as a competitive game they are designing it as an e sport that is something that has not been done before.
Will this hurt the game? I honestly don't know, honestly I think only time will tell. But I think that SC2 is fun for me as both a player and a spectator. Can they do better? Yeah of course. I just don't think that all the armchair game design that many people are doing when judging this game is fair, nor taking into account what blizzard is trying to do.
tl;dr: The whole article is DB just telling about the challenges of designing the game as an e sport instead of just being a game.
On April 23 2011 00:47 KiF1rE wrote: is this why every new unit in SC2 was a CNC3 or RA3 unit....
Viking- ability to transform into air or ground mode, walking mech. mecha tengu- ability to transform into air or ground mode, walking mech.
stalker - strong against armor, shoots missles, can attack air and ground, ability blink on a cooldown. Shock trooper- strong against armor, shoots missles, can attack air and ground, ability blink on a cooldown.
hellion- strong anti light, fast. has upgrade to make anti light better. attack buggy -strong anti light, fast. has upgrade to make anti light better.
colossus- walking towering mech, weak against air, does aoe with pew pew lasers. tripod- walking towering mech, weak against air, does aoe with pew pew lasers.
the mothership used to be similar way back in SC2 alpha, ie same abilities similar effect. but was changed alot in SC2 from the cnc3 one atleast.
the list goes on, which is basically every new unit in SC2 that wasnt in SC1, and the units even look similar, ive been trying to photoshop them all together and make a post in the funny picture thread about it, but my photoshop skills are terrible.
now for those of you that dont understand the irony to my post in regards to the interview, Why didnt anyone tell him no to all his cnc unit clones? you know the A move colossus.... It just makes me wonder what they actually told him no to... alot of what im referring to is the final paragraph of that interview when hes talking about unit design and making "Cool" units.
Actually, Dustin Browder didn't work on C&C3 and RA3. Heck, RA3 was announced in 2008, which was after many of SC2's core designs had been previewed.
As far as your comparisons go, I do disagree with some of them.
The Viking was unveiled BEFORE the Mecha Tengu was unveiled for RA3. The Viking was introduced in 2007 in some of the first preview videos. The Mecha Tengu was announced in 2008 with the full unveil of the Empire of the Rising Sun faction that was revealed months after the original RA3 announcement. One could say that the Mecha Tengu copied the Viking.
The Stalker is literally a Dragoon with Blink that was made slightly weaker to compensate for the added mobility.
Although the Hellion is visually inspired by the Attack Buggies of C&C, the Vulture from BW also is very similar in functionality.
Also, I don't think the Annihilator Tripod did AOE damage. It could shoot in 3 different directions, but I think the lasers were concentrated on single targets which made it more of an anti-armor unit whereas the Colossi mainly counters low-HP units in small numbers and everything in larger numbers. Visually, there are obvious similarities.
In addition, I'm not surprised to see some cues in SC2's design from C&C3. C&C3 was fairly well-received when it was released, and similar to SC2, it was praised by critics as a good example of an old-school RTS design being modernized. Heck, C&C3 was even a modest e-sport for some time to a point where it appeared at WCG for a few years.
Did Dustin Browder also work on C&C: Generals? Because that game was awesome and pretty competitive without stupid units.
I wonder why didn't he use some of those units in SC2 instead of RA3 or CnC3 ones
Buses full of mob with Ak47s :D Armored vehicles that you could change the function depending on what you put inside. At least we know how they came up with the idea of cloaking the buildings in SC2 :D
And epic comments like "Thanks you for the new shoes" or "Ak47 for everyone!"
On April 23 2011 01:14 -Archangel- wrote: Did Dustin Browder also work on C&C: Generals? Because that game was awesome and pretty competitive without stupid units.
I wonder why didn't he use some of those units in SC2 instead of RA3 or CnC3 ones
Buses full of mob with Ak47s :D Armored vehicles that you could change the function depending on what you put inside. At least we know how they came up with the idea of cloaking the buildings in SC2 :D
And epic comments like "Thanks you for the new shoes" or "Ak47 for everyone!"
On April 22 2011 20:33 kedinik wrote: "Take out the fun" as in "remove zany imbalanced over the top units and powers like you have in C&C games."
It's a very reasonable thing to say.
Yeah. I'm betting he wanted to do this too... I didn't play C&C generals but I'd expect any C&C designer to put in stupid units or abilities. And I don't think that game was balanced although it was fun at a non-competitive level. Great for a friendly lan party not great for a e-sport.
The mothership kind of feels like that kind of unit. ( also makes me really miss the arbiter)
Such an elegant and articulated individual this Dustin Browder character is... What with all his "cool" unit ideas he copied from a fluffy, dull, and gimmicky project of his past. Command and Conqueror Generals wrote up the blueprint on how to dissuade a game from eSports and kill the promising future of a classic series that had an old and dedicated fan base.
I can't begin to imagine how ridiculous these "fun" unit prototypes might have been, nor do I want to attempt to think like a 4th grader, so I'll just move along. The fact that anyone working on a recent C&C game has gotten such a high level position at Blizzard is beyond me.
Knowing that Dustin Browder and perhaps some of his C&C cronies are the main catalyst of sc2's evolution really leaves me with a feeling of hopelessness for the future of sc2.
I thoroughly enjoy eSports and everything has to offer, I think it is amazing what the community has done with sc2. Though I will admit I have not been amazed, impressed, or excited by anything Blizzard has done with sc2 -- I really hope they can bring some fresh intuitive people on board to lead their next project.
On April 23 2011 01:05 eviltomahawk wrote: Actually, Dustin Browder didn't work on C&C3 and RA3. Heck, RA3 was announced in 2008, which was after many of SC2's core designs had been previewed.
As far as your comparisons go, I do disagree with some of them.
The Viking was unveiled BEFORE the Mecha Tengu was unveiled for RA3. The Viking was introduced in 2007 in some of the first preview videos. The Mecha Tengu was announced in 2008 with the full unveil of the Empire of the Rising Sun faction that was revealed months after the original RA3 announcement. One could say that the Mecha Tengu copied the Viking.
The Stalker is literally a Dragoon with Blink that was made slightly weaker to compensate for the added mobility.
Although the Hellion is visually inspired by the Attack Buggies of C&C, the Vulture from BW also is very similar in functionality.
Also, I don't think the Annihilator Tripod did AOE damage. It could shoot in 3 different directions, but I think the lasers were concentrated on single targets which made it more of an anti-armor unit whereas the Colossi mainly counters low-HP units in small numbers and everything in larger numbers. Visually, there are obvious similarities.
In addition, I'm not surprised to see some cues in SC2's design from C&C3. C&C3 was fairly well-received when it was released, and similar to SC2, it was praised by critics as a good example of an old-school RTS design being modernized. Heck, C&C3 was even a modest e-sport for some time to a point where it appeared at WCG for a few years.
some yes, but you cant deny the similarities. i know browder left before cnc3. but it doesnt deny that he was influenced by the games..
C&C3 was a decent esport till the balance designers ruined the game, coupled with EA cutting funding, It was in WCG because EA funded alot of the cnc portion. I competed in the WCG national finals for cnc3 for the 2 years it ran and played over 7000 some games =/. Tripod did do aoe damage, it kind of splashed but it only splashed in unit groups, like a rifleman squad. i used them to counter mass infantry all the time with support from other units of course. you may remember me from battlecast primetime spotlights from the earlier episodes and that replay that was downloaded several hundred thousand some times =/ You know the one with the mothership comeback? which thankfully they removed those types of abilities before the beta.
But my point was, similar units were used and they were essentially the simplest a move type units, or an intended micro function. There was a lack of creativity in the new units of how they are used. Other older interviews mention browder about wanting to keep "iconic" units and how they were difficult to balance. My biggest complaint about SC2 gameplay was always the bland or useless gimmick units. Hoping we get the balance stuff worked out were the niche units like the mothership become a bit more useful and not just a MLG crowd pleaser or super OP. And we get some new stuff come the expansions that add to gameplay in areas the races are weak at, or open new styles of play with them.
On April 22 2011 20:33 kedinik wrote: "Take out the fun" as in "remove zany imbalanced over the top units and powers like you have in C&C games."
It's a very reasonable thing to say.
Many consider the reason balance was achieved so damn well in scbw was the fact that each race had its own unique forms of imbalanced units that gave each race different roles and positioning in different times in the game, leading to interesting and fun game flows.
If SC2 only had units that attack moved and that is it, it would be a horrible game.
This is quite disturbing to read about. StarCraft and Brood War were never meant to be e-sports, they were designed to be fun. Look what happened. I think Blizzard may be trying to hard to make StarCraft 2 an e-sport when they should just do what they did with Brood War and let the community do the rest.
On April 23 2011 02:13 KaBoom300 wrote: This is quite disturbing to read about. StarCraft and Brood War were never meant to be e-sports, they were designed to be fun. Look what happened. I think Blizzard may be trying to hard to make StarCraft 2 an e-sport when they should just do what they did with Brood War and let the community do the rest.
Good point, agree with this. I think people should give Blizzard more time to work on SCII and only when the 2 exps have been released and some time afterwards have passed will we ever see what SCII will become
Some of the old alpha videos from 2007. I hadn't watched these in for ever. Given the fact that they had actually implemented some of these you can imagine the kinds of ideas that got rejected outright.
On April 23 2011 01:47 Stringy wrote: Such an elegant and articulated individual this Dustin Browder character is... What with all his "cool" unit ideas he copied from a fluffy, dull, and gimmicky project of his past. Command and Conqueror Generals wrote up the blueprint on how to dissuade a game from eSports and kill the promising future of a classic series that had an old and dedicated fan base.
Lol. Did you even play it in MP? Did you play Zero Hour? There were some sided that were weaker then others but there were enough of those that could compete against each other.
On April 23 2011 01:05 eviltomahawk wrote: Actually, Dustin Browder didn't work on C&C3 and RA3. Heck, RA3 was announced in 2008, which was after many of SC2's core designs had been previewed.
As far as your comparisons go, I do disagree with some of them.
The Viking was unveiled BEFORE the Mecha Tengu was unveiled for RA3. The Viking was introduced in 2007 in some of the first preview videos. The Mecha Tengu was announced in 2008 with the full unveil of the Empire of the Rising Sun faction that was revealed months after the original RA3 announcement. One could say that the Mecha Tengu copied the Viking.
The Stalker is literally a Dragoon with Blink that was made slightly weaker to compensate for the added mobility.
Although the Hellion is visually inspired by the Attack Buggies of C&C, the Vulture from BW also is very similar in functionality.
Also, I don't think the Annihilator Tripod did AOE damage. It could shoot in 3 different directions, but I think the lasers were concentrated on single targets which made it more of an anti-armor unit whereas the Colossi mainly counters low-HP units in small numbers and everything in larger numbers. Visually, there are obvious similarities.
In addition, I'm not surprised to see some cues in SC2's design from C&C3. C&C3 was fairly well-received when it was released, and similar to SC2, it was praised by critics as a good example of an old-school RTS design being modernized. Heck, C&C3 was even a modest e-sport for some time to a point where it appeared at WCG for a few years.
some yes, but you cant deny the similarities. i know browder left before cnc3. but it doesnt deny that he was influenced by the games..
C&C3 was a decent esport till the balance designers ruined the game, coupled with EA cutting funding, It was in WCG because EA funded alot of the cnc portion. I competed in the WCG national finals for cnc3 for the 2 years it ran and played over 7000 some games =/. Tripod did do aoe damage, it kind of splashed but it only splashed in unit groups, like a rifleman squad. i used them to counter mass infantry all the time with support from other units of course. you may remember me from battlecast primetime spotlights from the earlier episodes and that replay that was downloaded several hundred thousand some times =/ You know the one with the mothership comeback? which thankfully they removed those types of abilities before the beta.
But my point was, similar units were used and they were essentially the simplest a move type units, or an intended micro function. There was a lack of creativity in the new units of how they are used. Other older interviews mention browder about wanting to keep "iconic" units and how they were difficult to balance. My biggest complaint about SC2 gameplay was always the bland or useless gimmick units. Hoping we get the balance stuff worked out were the niche units like the mothership become a bit more useful and not just a MLG crowd pleaser or super OP. And we get some new stuff come the expansions that add to gameplay in areas the races are weak at, or open new styles of play with them.
I wonder if you also played C&C Generals Zero Hour and what did you think of that game?
On April 23 2011 01:05 eviltomahawk wrote: Actually, Dustin Browder didn't work on C&C3 and RA3. Heck, RA3 was announced in 2008, which was after many of SC2's core designs had been previewed.
As far as your comparisons go, I do disagree with some of them.
The Viking was unveiled BEFORE the Mecha Tengu was unveiled for RA3. The Viking was introduced in 2007 in some of the first preview videos. The Mecha Tengu was announced in 2008 with the full unveil of the Empire of the Rising Sun faction that was revealed months after the original RA3 announcement. One could say that the Mecha Tengu copied the Viking.
The Stalker is literally a Dragoon with Blink that was made slightly weaker to compensate for the added mobility.
Although the Hellion is visually inspired by the Attack Buggies of C&C, the Vulture from BW also is very similar in functionality.
Also, I don't think the Annihilator Tripod did AOE damage. It could shoot in 3 different directions, but I think the lasers were concentrated on single targets which made it more of an anti-armor unit whereas the Colossi mainly counters low-HP units in small numbers and everything in larger numbers. Visually, there are obvious similarities.
In addition, I'm not surprised to see some cues in SC2's design from C&C3. C&C3 was fairly well-received when it was released, and similar to SC2, it was praised by critics as a good example of an old-school RTS design being modernized. Heck, C&C3 was even a modest e-sport for some time to a point where it appeared at WCG for a few years.
some yes, but you cant deny the similarities. i know browder left before cnc3. but it doesnt deny that he was influenced by the games..
C&C3 was a decent esport till the balance designers ruined the game, coupled with EA cutting funding, It was in WCG because EA funded alot of the cnc portion. I competed in the WCG national finals for cnc3 for the 2 years it ran and played over 7000 some games =/. Tripod did do aoe damage, it kind of splashed but it only splashed in unit groups, like a rifleman squad. i used them to counter mass infantry all the time with support from other units of course. you may remember me from battlecast primetime spotlights from the earlier episodes and that replay that was downloaded several hundred thousand some times =/ You know the one with the mothership comeback? which thankfully they removed those types of abilities before the beta.
But my point was, similar units were used and they were essentially the simplest a move type units, or an intended micro function. There was a lack of creativity in the new units of how they are used. Other older interviews mention browder about wanting to keep "iconic" units and how they were difficult to balance. My biggest complaint about SC2 gameplay was always the bland or useless gimmick units. Hoping we get the balance stuff worked out were the niche units like the mothership become a bit more useful and not just a MLG crowd pleaser or super OP. And we get some new stuff come the expansions that add to gameplay in areas the races are weak at, or open new styles of play with them.
I wonder if you also played C&C Generals Zero Hour and what did you think of that game?
Yeah I have to say to all the people criticizing bowder - Generals was a pretty decent game with very few "zany" things, it was probably the most realistic of all the CnC games.
That said I wish that maybe someone else was the lead designer of sc2, he just doesn't seem like the best fit imo.
On April 22 2011 20:37 AcrossFiveJulys wrote: Too bad warpgate still made it through the beta :\ reapers were bad and were essentially nerfed out of the game, but warpgate is still what's wrong with the game right now and I guarantee was one of Browder's "cool" ideas.
The problem with "nerfing it out of the game" is that the entire Protoss race is designed around the ability to warp gateway units in - Protoss units build the slowest of all the races, even after warpgate finishes:
Gateways: 1 Zealot - 38s (28s cd w/warpgate) 1 Stalker - 42s (32s cd w/warpgate) 1 Sentry - 42s (32s cd w/warpgate)
This itself means that protoss is very reactive by nature - you will most always have a smaller army size (because of the higher build times) and must unit comp to be effective. This is also part of the reason that warpgate is so good - if you are moving from gateway to warpgate, right after a gateway finishes building, the warpgate has NO COOLDOWN for the next unit being built. This is the ONLY time that production is better than the other races, one time during the entire game.
This fact is also a point to think about with the talks concerning build times and the PvP 4gate dilemma that was brought up on the forums earlier. Think about it - if gateways produce a zealot in say, 30s, and a warpgate produces one instantly but incurs a CD of 40s, one could theoretically produce a zealot, switch to warpgate, warp a zealot, switch back to gateway, produce a zealot.
Net gain? the first zealot takes 30s, the second takes 10s to change mode to warpgate + 5s to warp in, and the third takes 10s to change mode and 30s to build (the same as waiting for a warp in). This allows the Protoss, without incuring a cooldown on mode changing, to effectively bypass the drawback that is being talked about.
As it is currently, because gateway units take longer to produce over warpgate units, this kind of "trick" cannot be employed except the very instant warpgate is completed.
That said, I think I went off-topic a bit. If warpgates were Browder's idea, the entire race was (re)built around said feature. Nerfing it out of existence requires a full and complete overhaul of the Protoss race, which is extremely unlikely.
On April 23 2011 03:46 mucker wrote: Some of the old alpha videos from 2007. I hadn't watched these in for ever. Given the fact that they had actually implemented some of these you can imagine the kinds of ideas that got rejected outright.
I really like those old corruptors. Even just the artwork with their tentacles more spread apart. Makes them a lot more menacing. But yeah, that corrupt ability was pretty weird.
It's not bad to have a creative mind like Browder working on the game as long as he doesn't have free reign.. I really wouldn't like to have siege tanks disguise as trees in starcraft
EPT
