|
Can we please leave the bitching until after it is released?
People are making far too many assumptions about the game before they know anything more than a few concepts for it. Dustin Browder has gone in the space of about 10 pages from annoying for using the word 'cool' to Justin Bieber to Satan himself. SC2 has gone from being the most fun RTS made in the last 10 years to mediocre to the spawn of Satan himself. The storyline of WoL has gone from unoriginal to bile-inducing to the spawn of Satan himself. The teaser cinematic has gone from a stunning piece of ingame graphics to a bit unfinished and unpolished to the spawn of Satan himself.
Catch my drift?
|
On June 01 2011 20:23 Hekisui wrote:
They already messed up SC2 multiplayer. Dustin Browder admitted that he was clueless and wrong.
Quotes?
How much longer will it take until people realize Blizzard isn't by far the best game dev but actually a below average one?
They are by far one of the best game devs. Their gameplay has always been second to none.
In the mid-to-late 90's they were amongst the best storytellers in gaming too, but have been made to look worse by how much storytelling in gaming has progressed in the last decade. Blizzard have not really upped their game in that respect so their storytelling, while still good, is overshadowed by other developers who have taken it forward. But in gameplay they are still kings.
Ooh and when will top SC2 players realize why they get no respect? Remember when everyone respected SC BW gamers because everyone knew SC BW was the most hardcore game to play? Well, SC2 is basically the most casual RTS played competitively. It's sad when your game is more casual than HALO.
You're comparing a game that was honed and developed as a multiplayer game over 10 years to a game thats been played just over 1 year and is already gaining more attention and respect then it took Brood War about 5 years to get.
|
The doom and gloom in this thread is ridiculous. Blizzard is still a great company and Starcraft 2 is a great game. Just because it can't quite stand up to Brood War and the storytelling from Blizzard has gone down in quality (significantly) doesn't mean that everything about them is complete trash. Anyone who says a sweeping statement like SC2/WoW/D3/etc. are/are going to be bad is just a blind hater. Complaints about individual things are 100% warranted but you can't just say that Blizzard fails, they're horrible, blah blah blah. That's just obnoxious and immature.
|
Actual singleplayer gameplay is alot more fun for me in SC2 than it ever was in BW. The story isn't that great but i'm so happy they made actual interesting missions instead of the "build a base, destroy opponent" stuff that was 99% of BW.
Also i really don't understand where the huge love for old Blizzard game story comes from. Starcraft more or less just copied their races and alot of backstory from famous movies and books. If you've read some sci-fi and watched the classics SC1/BW doesn't really stand out, at least not to me. Before i get jumped i'm not saying that BW was bad but to me it was no masterpiece in terms of writing or story.
|
|
|
On June 01 2011 20:17 Paladia wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 19:17 Monzterg wrote:On June 01 2011 19:09 ThunderGod wrote:On June 01 2011 18:47 Monzterg wrote:
Starcraft 2 has to be the most disapointing sequel in the history of PC games. Hopefully this expansion can change some of that.
It sure doesnt look that way tho, looks worse and worse....
Also why have the official trailers and in-game movies become so bad? It's just not manly or cool at all any more.... Yes the single-player is laughably bad: ahahahaha. It's obviously not designed to appeal to the likes of teamliquid members - more like they were thinking of their eight-year-old kids. SC1 had a lot more depth and maturity to it. SC2 has about as much depth as Justin Bieber's voice. Yea the fact that Starcraft 2 is the Justin Bieber version of Brood War also really diminishes the status the great players get. I feel like "Woho you've become one of the best Starcraft 2 players in the world? Congratulations you have now retained a status compareable with a real pokemon grandmaster!!" I used to be a hardcore fan. I grinded ICCup, watched all the proleague, MSL and OSL matches I could on a daily basis. I'm so sad  BW was still there last time I checked. If it was by far the superior game, people would play it instead.
You guys seems to fail at realizing that there are other elements in this other than BW's core gameplay. Logic is your friend.
BW is superior to SCII by far in its core gameplay no doubt about it. BW seems to have been designed with some logic as to what makes a good RTS. SCII is designed to be 'cool' and new and dumbed down. It's still more than hard enough for me atm, but I feel like the game is holding my hand for crying out load. It's like riding a bikecycle with safety wheels. I don't want that! We'll evolve to be more stupid in time if we adapt filosofies like this, lol.
|
On June 01 2011 22:44 Spacedude wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 20:17 Paladia wrote:On June 01 2011 19:17 Monzterg wrote:On June 01 2011 19:09 ThunderGod wrote:On June 01 2011 18:47 Monzterg wrote:
Starcraft 2 has to be the most disapointing sequel in the history of PC games. Hopefully this expansion can change some of that.
It sure doesnt look that way tho, looks worse and worse....
Also why have the official trailers and in-game movies become so bad? It's just not manly or cool at all any more.... Yes the single-player is laughably bad: ahahahaha. It's obviously not designed to appeal to the likes of teamliquid members - more like they were thinking of their eight-year-old kids. SC1 had a lot more depth and maturity to it. SC2 has about as much depth as Justin Bieber's voice. Yea the fact that Starcraft 2 is the Justin Bieber version of Brood War also really diminishes the status the great players get. I feel like "Woho you've become one of the best Starcraft 2 players in the world? Congratulations you have now retained a status compareable with a real pokemon grandmaster!!" I used to be a hardcore fan. I grinded ICCup, watched all the proleague, MSL and OSL matches I could on a daily basis. I'm so sad BW was still there last time I checked. If it was by far the superior game, people would play it instead. You guys seems to fail at realizing that there are other elements in this other than BW's core gameplay. Logic is your friend. BW is superior to SCII by far in its core gameplay no doubt about it.
I have doubts about it.
Your trying to argue subjective things in absolute terms, people actually prefer different things :shockhorror:, there is nobody making you play SC2 / watch SC2 or read about SC2. If you find it that uninteresting that's cool just go back to following the BW scene, not you know posting repeatedly in threads about SC2 about how much worse it is then BW.
|
re: ideas for changing T3
Colossi take ~3 minutes to tech to and are 50% faster than a broodlord
Thors take ~3 minutes to tech to, have 400 hp and attack both ground and air, battlecruisers take ~5 minutes
Zerg's T3 takes ~6:00-7:00 to tech to, and the units can only attack ground and the broodlord has fewer hp than a voidray
not sure how this balance made it off the design desk
|
+ Show Spoiler +
Above are 2 links to GameSpot and IGN.
They have their own preview to HOTS and though u might like another angle.
|
|
|
On June 01 2011 23:01 jdsowa wrote:
re: ideas for changing T3
Colossi take ~3 minutes to tech to and are 50% faster than a broodlord
Thors take ~3 minutes to tech to, have 400 hp and attack both ground and air, battlecruisers take ~5 minutes
Zerg's T3 takes ~6:00-7:00 to tech to, and the units can only attack ground and the broodlord has fewer hp than a voidray
not sure how this balance made it off the design desk
And still this game is balanced. TvZ is extremely hard for terran lategame, you know, when that zerg "weak"tier 3 comes out.
|
On June 01 2011 22:20 karpo wrote:
Also i really don't understand where the huge love for old Blizzard game story comes from. Starcraft more or less just copied their races and alot of backstory from famous movies and books. If you've read some sci-fi and watched the classics SC1/BW doesn't really stand out, at least not to me. Before i get jumped i'm not saying that BW was bad but to me it was no masterpiece in terms of writing or story.
Those famous movies and books also copied ideas from famous movies and books. Everything borrows from something. What matters is how the story is told and the StarCraft 1 story was told with a lot of style, making best use of the tools available at the time.
The StarCraft 2 story is not as bad as people are making out but there is a kind of cartooniness to it that I didnt like, that felt more suited to the World of Warcraft universe then the grittiness of the SC universe.
Someone like Edmund Duke was a classic SC 1 character, felt like someone you'd meet in that enviroment, whereas a lot of the SC 2 characters felt more like cartoony characters better suited to Warcraft (fat dwarven ship engineer). SC 1 Mengsk was an intriguing Lenin-esque character whereas SC 2 Mengsk has no depth and is basically just a carbon-cut "evil dictator villain".
The news reporter stuff as well was just so cartoon-like. If this dominion is supposed to be so threatening why isnt Kate Lockwell getting dragged away in cuffs for her constant jibes? And Donny wossisnames "I had a brother on Tarsonis!" was just cringeworthy. It doesnt have the realistic, immersive feel of the SC 1 universe.
Still a fun single-player campaign no doubt and James Raynor is still a baller, but standards of storytelling in gaming is higher so a company of Blizzards stature gets nitpicked for the little things.
|
On June 01 2011 18:47 Monzterg wrote:
Starcraft 2 has to be the most disapointing sequel in the history of PC games.
I see someone didn't play Empire: Total War...
The only thing that distresses me is that Kerrigan is apparently regaining control of the swarm and going back to her brutally murdering everything in her way FOUR MISSIONS IN. Admittedly it's just Zerg, but I see worrying signs.
Jim Raynor may well come out of this looking like the biggest tool in the universe, and Tychus Findley the greatest unsung hero cut down before he could stop Kerrigan. *sheds tears for Tychus*
|
nice write up thanks!
I hope they get back to cross regional play, I d like to play with my US friends.
But the campaign looks kinda nice and I have no doubt Blizzard will give us a quality game.
One may argue whether SC2 is better than BW or not but even if one considers BW perfect, one has to recognise SC2 is also a good game
|
On June 01 2011 22:44 Spacedude wrote:
[You guys seems to fail at realizing that there are other elements in this other than BW's core gameplay. Logic is your friend.
BW is superior to SCII by far in its core gameplay no doubt about it. BW seems to have been designed with some logic as to what makes a good RTS. SCII is designed to be 'cool' and new and dumbed down. It's still more than hard enough for me atm, but I feel like the game is holding my hand for crying out load. It's like riding a bikecycle with safety wheels. I don't want that! We'll evolve to be more stupid in time if we adapt filosofies like this, lol.
There were things about Brood War that might be considered bad gameplay had it come out today. Units that were completely redundant, the fact that Terran couldnt leave his base for the first fifteen minutes vs Protoss etc.
I dont like hand-holding in games either but the question is whats hand-holding and whats just trying to make a game more accessible? Is SC2 hand-holding cause you can rally SCVs onto the mineral line rather then having to select each one individually as it comes out of the CC? Actually seems like a no-brainer thing for a game to let you do but in the eyes of many it makes it less 'hardcore'.
Surely the fact former SC 1 pros are completely dominating WC 3 players in the game means the fundamentals of StarCraft gameplay have been carried over really well by Blizzard?
|
On June 01 2011 22:53 TheButtonmen wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 22:44 Spacedude wrote:On June 01 2011 20:17 Paladia wrote:On June 01 2011 19:17 Monzterg wrote:On June 01 2011 19:09 ThunderGod wrote:On June 01 2011 18:47 Monzterg wrote:
Starcraft 2 has to be the most disapointing sequel in the history of PC games. Hopefully this expansion can change some of that.
It sure doesnt look that way tho, looks worse and worse....
Also why have the official trailers and in-game movies become so bad? It's just not manly or cool at all any more.... Yes the single-player is laughably bad: ahahahaha. It's obviously not designed to appeal to the likes of teamliquid members - more like they were thinking of their eight-year-old kids. SC1 had a lot more depth and maturity to it. SC2 has about as much depth as Justin Bieber's voice. Yea the fact that Starcraft 2 is the Justin Bieber version of Brood War also really diminishes the status the great players get. I feel like "Woho you've become one of the best Starcraft 2 players in the world? Congratulations you have now retained a status compareable with a real pokemon grandmaster!!" I used to be a hardcore fan. I grinded ICCup, watched all the proleague, MSL and OSL matches I could on a daily basis. I'm so sad BW was still there last time I checked. If it was by far the superior game, people would play it instead. You guys seems to fail at realizing that there are other elements in this other than BW's core gameplay. Logic is your friend. BW is superior to SCII by far in its core gameplay no doubt about it. I have doubts about it. Your trying to argue subjective things in absolute terms, people actually prefer different things :shockhorror:, there is nobody making you play SC2 / watch SC2 or read about SC2. If you find it that uninteresting that's cool just go back to following the BW scene, not you know posting repeatedly in threads about SC2 about how much worse it is then BW.
I only gave my opinion in those threads. That's hardly spamming as you hint at. Got a problem with people typing out their opinions on a forum, huh? Beside I never said I didn't see any good things about SCII. But I thought that was only logical seening as I do play SCII. I'm sure I'll post some of that if I see a point to it.
Also, if a RTS is about competition and skills then it is logical that the design should revolve about that. Now we might have a different definition about the word 'RTS'.
|
On June 01 2011 15:02 RavenLoud wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 13:16 Shaithis wrote:
Just one colossus can turn the tables in a fight vs a ground army below 100 food, and when you bring 2-3, forget it. Ever seen one siege tank (hell, let's make it four) completely decide an engagement (besides back when your bone head decided to blindly charge a siege line back in wood league)?
I hope you realize how little weight this argument carries. Yes, 4 tanks can absolutely decide an engagement....I don't see how you manage to write that then justifying it by how the opponent can avoid its impact on the engagement by....avoiding the engagement. lolwut And comparing the impact of 1 colossus with 1 tank is moot, tanks are 3 supply, they also require better control than colossi to be effective. I do like your thoughts on HOTS zerg though.
Thanks. Yes, that is correct; you do not run into a siege line, you go around it and then catch the tanks while they are repositioning. Gateway army + colossus >>> rax army + tanks in assault mode.
On June 01 2011 15:19 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +Considering that shields regenerate and the primary toss tank unit, the zealot, has way more armor than shields, this argument has no real merit. As a Terran player, if I want to go bio/mech, I need 4 upgrade paths and a diverse macro planned from the first 5 minutes, you need 2 forges and a bunch of gates plus a few robo bays and some chrono boost...
That doesn't make sense. That's just one unit, and even so you need Shield upgrades to make the 50 Shield for a Zealot be the best it can be (which is 33% of a Zealot's EHP)
OK, so let me explain it to you again. Sure, it's "just one unit," but you have to understand the tactical implications. Zealots are probably the best sponge unit in the game; for 100 minerals you get 150 HP; 100 of it at 1 armor and 50 with the ability to quickly recharge out of combat. Ground armor first is a favored option of many pro toss players vs Terran bio because it removes 16% of marine DPS vs zealots. Add guardian shield and marines are doing half damage.
|
On June 01 2011 23:31 Spitfire wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 22:44 Spacedude wrote:
[You guys seems to fail at realizing that there are other elements in this other than BW's core gameplay. Logic is your friend.
BW is superior to SCII by far in its core gameplay no doubt about it. BW seems to have been designed with some logic as to what makes a good RTS. SCII is designed to be 'cool' and new and dumbed down. It's still more than hard enough for me atm, but I feel like the game is holding my hand for crying out load. It's like riding a bikecycle with safety wheels. I don't want that! We'll evolve to be more stupid in time if we adapt filosofies like this, lol.
There were things about Brood War that might be considered bad gameplay had it come out today. Units that were completely redundant, the fact that Terran couldnt leave his base for the first fifteen minutes vs Protoss etc. I not like hand-holding in games either but the question is whats hand-holding and whats just trying to make a game more accessible? Is SC2 hand-holding cause you can rally SCVs onto the mineral line rather then having to select each one individually as it comes out of the CC? Actually seems like a no-brainer thing for a game to let you do but in the eyes of many it makes it less 'hardcore'. Surely the fact former SC 1 pros are completely dominating WC 3 players in the game means the fundamentals of StarCraft gameplay have been carried over really well by Blizzard?
I'm not saying brood war was perfect. Nothing is. Also, I'm hardly an expert at BW or SCII, but you don't really have to be to be able to analyze this part of the core gameplay.
''Is SC2 hand-holding cause you can rally SCVs onto the mineral line rather then having to select each one individually as it comes out of the CC?''
Yes, it is. The word macro has little meaning to it when you take out some of the core mechanics of it. Yes, it might be a simple thing in itself, but it's really just a gear that is part of a greater machine, sp to say.
''Surely the fact former SC 1 pros are completely dominating WC 3 players in the game means the fundamentals of StarCraft gameplay have been carried over really well by Blizzard?''
I don't really know much about WC 3, but I think we can all agree that some elements are the same.
|
Looks pretty cool, but one thing bothers me: Kerrigans hair style is something right out of the 90's.
|
On June 01 2011 20:23 Hekisui wrote:
Them suddenly coming up with brood mothers to drive the gameplay shows you how much vision they have.
Not to mention the whole Tassadar/Overmind thing and them leaking the ending of HotS. They have no vision or creativity and fail time and time again at elegant design. And very tech savy game engine wise they never were.
They already messed up SC2 multiplayer. Dustin Browder admitted that he was clueless and wrong.
How much longer will it take until people realize Blizzard isn't by far the best game dev but actually a below average one?
Ooh and when will top SC2 players realize why they get no respect? Remember when everyone respected SC BW gamers because everyone knew SC BW was the most hardcore game to play? Well, SC2 is basically the most casual RTS played competitively. It's sad when your game is more casual than HALO.
This isnt an argument against blizzard though, more like an argument against the gaming industry in general. See, its simple. If you want innovative daring non-casual games, you gotta go for the indie producers. The big names would be stupid to not use their large scale development cycles for what it works best for - raking in wide appeal big profit blockbusters. Because that is what capitalism is: mass production for the masses.
They are by far one of the best game devs. Their gameplay has always been second to none.
In the mid-to-late 90's they were amongst the best storytellers in gaming too, but have been made to look worse by how much storytelling in gaming has progressed in the last decade. Blizzard have not really upped their game in that respect so their storytelling, while still good, is overshadowed by other developers who have taken it forward. But in gameplay they are still kings.
What progress? There is none, story wise, compared to the 90s and late 90s WRPG and jRPG games, all that is is stream lining it for feeding it to a larger target audience. Which Blizzard has done successfully.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
