EPTTeamLiquid Heart of the Swarm Preview - Page 50
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
De4ngus
United States6533 Posts
| ||
|
fatkid
United States62 Posts
| ||
|
GenesisX
Canada4267 Posts
hype hype hype! | ||
|
iinsom
Australia339 Posts
I am quite excited for this expansion, however i am not getting my hopes too high (Mainly looking for the MP side for like fixes etc) because when you set your hopes high, they get tend to get smashed more then if you set them a little lower, and more reasonably.. | ||
|
WeedRa
Germany815 Posts
| ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
 Like that doesn't happen all the time though ( ( | ||
|
Kantutan
Canada1319 Posts
On June 01 2011 08:33 Taekwon wrote: "We do view Heart of the Swarm as an expansion set, so for the regions that have a standard box business model such as North America and Europe, we will price accordingly." You would, Blizzard. What, are you implying they're being greedy or something? That's what your tone sounds like. That quote obviously means the expansion will probably be priced $10-20 less than WoL seeing as expansions are typically less than the original... | ||
|
Goldfish
2230 Posts
On June 01 2011 08:17 Fungal Growth wrote: Play the original SC campaign...it was WAY better than the WC3 campaign. The 'treasure hunt' aspect of that game was sooo boring. It just meant running units around the map to tag all the areas hidden by the fog of war. 0 creativity to that. Compare that to the original SC1 campaign where you face massive enemy encampments with multiple ways to harass their mineral lines...ways of winning with say nukes or battle cruisers or tanks was just so much funner. I disagree. The SC1-BW campaign was kind of dull. It consists of just macroing up until you have enough to defeat your opponent. (In fact in the old battle.net SC1 site, it even states that the campaign computers is set up to only send a few waves of forces against you at a time to allow you to macro up and win). Only thing that helped make the single player fun was the fact that SC was somewhat revolutionary at the time (3 different races instead of like 1 race in WC1 and WC2 >.>) and the story. SC1 consists of "destroy all your opponent's bases" while starting with a relatively small force (meaning you usually had to macro for 10-15 minutes before being able to attack). WC3's single player was more fun IMO (which is what HotS seems to be) and I'm fine with that. Anyway honestly I'm excited for the new expansion (new models, new tilesets, more stuff to use for MAP MAKING!!1). (Take note that maps like DotA would not be possible without TFT because vanilla WC3 did not support creating new units [only altering existing units] >.>. Not the case with SC2 since the editor is already an upgraded version of WC3 TFT but the expansions will at least add more assets for map makers to use). | ||
|
Axiom0
63 Posts
Of course there are people out there who are willing to develop maps for free, but creating a good project take a lot of time and effort and it isn't always fun. This provides a great incentive for the more serious software developers out there to give this SC2 map editor a shot. For example if someone made a very well done Dota clone (one that is better than Sotis) and devoted several hours every week to refining balance and patching, why shouldn't they deserve some money for their efforts? Also, the developers need not even charge money for their map, but the marketplace could provide them with a reasonable system through which to accepted donations, which fuel a lot of open source projects. It's very immature to think it is just an attempt by Blizzard to grab more money. | ||
|
Fungal Growth
United States434 Posts
On June 01 2011 08:44 Goldfish wrote: I know...that's what made SC1 lightening in a bottle and so fun. It let YOU choose how you wanted to play the map but gave an enemy big enough but slow enough in their attacks to make this fun. Removing tech/building/options doesn't make the game more fun. A simple 1v1 style game with vs a smart computer would be so boring because it would be all about rushes and rush defenses (which is too one dimensional).It consists of just macroing up until you have enough to defeat your opponent. (In fact in the old battle.net SC1 site, it even states that the campaign computers is set up to only send a few waves of forces against you at a time to allow you to macro up and win). ... SC1 consists of "destroy all your opponent's bases" while starting with a relatively small force (meaning you usually had to macro for 10-15 minutes before being able to attack). | ||
|
Goldfish
2230 Posts
On June 01 2011 08:46 Axiom0 wrote: I don't see why everyone is so worried about the marketplace. It presents a great opportunity for map developers to devote serious effort into creating good custom maps. Of course there are people out there who are willing to develop maps for free, but creating a good project take a lot of time and effort and it isn't always fun. This provides a great incentive for the more serious software developers out there to give this SC2 map editor a shot. For example if someone made a very well done Dota clone (one that is better than Sotis) and devoted several hours every week to refining balance and patching, why shouldn't they deserve some money for their efforts? Also, the developers need not even charge money for their map, but the marketplace could provide them with a reasonable system through which to accepted donations, which fuel a lot of open source projects. It's very immature to think it is just an attempt by Blizzard to grab more money. I agree. Also Blizzard said earlier [way back in 2008 or so] that the map quality has to be good (they'll need to review it personally) so it does not mean there will be nothing but paid maps. In fact as someone who plays WC3 and SC2 mainly for the editor, I'm glad Blizzard is doing this. "Not because of paid maps" but because it means they'll more likely support the editor and map maker scene. In WC3 there are tons of things that need addressing (though fortunately WC3 can almost do anything SC2 editor can do with "Jass New Gen pack"/using vJASS credit "Vexorian") but they have usually ignored the editor. There's even an exploit affecting custom games that Blizzard still has not fixed (WC3 is no longer profitable to them so I'm assuming they don't really pay much attention to it anymore sadly ).In SC2 they have been pushing the map editor updates regular;y which is good for the map maker community and custom game players alike. If premium maps get introduced, we're sure Blizzard will definitely pay attention to the map maker community and won't let something a potential devastating exploit listed above stay unpatched (though for anyone that is worried. "Malware" or exploits in map is nearly impossible in SC2 because the way things are done are different than WC3.). | ||
|
Tor
Canada231 Posts
On June 01 2011 07:52 Fungal Growth wrote: Prominently featuring Kerrigan in the campaigns is a huge mistake. The more you emphasis a super unit (like WC3 heroes) the more you devalue the economy. The more you devalue the economy, the more you devalue creativity that comes from crazy different types of unit combinations, harasses, and sim city defenses. Instead you get boring/tedious levels with just several units + Kerrigan A-clicking around the map while trying to beat a timer. WoL really messed up here...too many pressure cooker levels with little options for econ advancement. SC2 was fun when you mass econed against another mass econ AI that would send small harass parties periodically while you macrod/teched/sim city'ed up and came up with a strategy to crack their defenses. Did you play the campaign on brutal? You really should because alot of the missions are exactly what you describe, simcity/econ/unit composition management except you also have to plan around additional objectives. It is hard and intense and you must constantly be on edge. Grind the achievements on brutal difficulty and you can pull alot more value out of the campaign if you're in for a challenge. | ||
|
Fungal Growth
United States434 Posts
On June 01 2011 08:56 Tor wrote: There was econ, but not a lot. Too much of it was limited by a countdown timer (pressure cooker levels) which just killed creativity. You can't have an econ level and a countdown timer because that means there will only be a couple of builds that will work = no creativity because you can only build that perfect build.Did you play the campaign on brutal? You really should because alot of the missions are exactly what you describe, simcity/econ/unit composition management except you also have to plan around additional objectives. It is hard and intense and you must constantly be on edge. Grind the achievements on brutal difficulty and you can pull alot more value out of the campaign if you're in for a challenge. | ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
On June 01 2011 08:46 Axiom0 wrote: I don't see why everyone is so worried about the marketplace. It presents a great opportunity for map developers to devote serious effort into creating good custom maps. Of course there are people out there who are willing to develop maps for free, but creating a good project take a lot of time and effort and it isn't always fun. This provides a great incentive for the more serious software developers out there to give this SC2 map editor a shot. For example if someone made a very well done Dota clone (one that is better than Sotis) and devoted several hours every week to refining balance and patching, why shouldn't they deserve some money for their efforts? Also, the developers need not even charge money for their map, but the marketplace could provide them with a reasonable system through which to accepted donations, which fuel a lot of open source projects. It's very immature to think it is just an attempt by Blizzard to grab more money. You pay too little respect to existing map makers. Sure i'll agree that marketplace could give us better UMS/Custom maps but that is the system working perfectly. We're worried that there will be two tiers of maps: Decent but forgettable maps that cost real money and shitty free maps that you don't want. Edit: In regards to the campaign and the comments by Dustin Browder; Casual/normal balanced towards easy playing "You could play with just your mouse LOL!". I assure you playing most campaign missions on hard is difficult and god help you on brutal you are not allowed to sit back and macro up or just rush to beat a timer, you have to do both and you are stressed. And its great fun. I mean hell, theres only one map where you could potentially mass battlecruisers and believe me, Maw of the Void (which I'm referring to) is still a map where if you fail to protect your base and your units just once, your marauding battlecruiser army will not have a base to return to. And on top of all this there aren't enough minerals to remake! So yeah, show us your Kerrigan profile then bitch about the campaign being too easy >.> | ||
|
Greatness
United States450 Posts
No clan system still = e-sports expanding? Thanks Blizzard, you really know how to make a game. | ||
|
Goldfish
2230 Posts
On June 01 2011 09:04 Probe1 wrote: You pay too little respect to existing map makers. Sure i'll agree that marketplace could give us better UMS/Custom maps but that is the system working perfectly. We're worried that there will be two tiers of maps: Decent but forgettable maps that cost real money and shitty free maps that you don't want. In 2008 (or 2009, I forgot), Blizzard said they'll review maps before letting them go on sale (they said a map like "DotA"[in WC3]* is not enough quality to be considered for a marketplace). Of course since they did not mention that specifically in the most recent HotS FAQ, things may have changed. *One possibility is that they mean they want something big like custom voice acting or some crazy RPG or something like that for a "premium map" (or maybe not). *Another possibility is that they're unaware that the WC3 editor kind of stunk in some areas (memory leaks, the GUI was awful, JASS was awful without upgrading to vJASS, etc) >.>. DotA is a really "polish" map (example - there are 3 types of every item for example. One is an instant charge item to allow you to purchase it with full inventory for recipes. One is the regular item. Another is the item that appears to other players when they picked up an item that is not theirs). Though not to say DotA is above all, there are plenty of crazy fancy maps in WC3 but I'm just addressing Blizzard's "DotA is not quality enough" statement. | ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
They basically said nothing Goldfish. Thats kinda the style thats becoming prevalent. | ||
|
Tor
Canada231 Posts
On June 01 2011 09:01 Fungal Growth wrote: There was econ, but not a lot. Too much of it was limited by a countdown timer (pressure cooker levels) which just killed creativity. You can't have an econ level and a countdown timer because that means there will only be a couple of builds that will work = no creativity because you can only build that perfect build. I actually don't know what you mean by econ. There wasn't alot of economy management in SC1 campaigns. Do you mean you liked starting from scratch on most levels? The biggest econ choice you can make is "when should I expand". In SC1 did you ever need to expand (there were a few occasions I remember where you'd have to deal with low resources)? Was it the slow grind you liked about sc1? I don't think sc1 and sc2 were much different except sc2 had a different gameplay aspect to change the way you should play each mission. There were a reasonable amount of choices, you could play through with a focus on different units, granted there wasn't ALOT of different choices but really sc1 wasn't different. SC1 was basically turtle to capital ships or the best unit for earlier levels and push out en masse to win. Not exactly awesome game design. | ||
|
Goldfish
2230 Posts
On June 01 2011 09:13 Probe1 wrote: They basically said nothing Goldfish. Thats kinda the style thats becoming prevalent. Yeah but I mean something really big - Like a 10 hour RPG with voice acting, unique battle system, etc. (This is assuming they raise the map size limit from 10 MB to something a bit bigger). Though I guess we'll have to wait and see but Blizzard did say they'll review the maps to see if they quality for premium. If anyone is interested here's the preview version of WotL (so things in the preview can change) | ||
|
eits
United States210 Posts
| ||
| ||
