EPTit's not about a different game, it's just about make a fucking good eSport-Titel.
Why SC2 should not be getting more BW-y - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
The Void
Germany428 Posts
it's not about a different game, it's just about make a fucking good eSport-Titel. | ||
|
Zerksys
United States569 Posts
That being said I agree with you to an extent. Sc2 should not be 100 percent like brood war. Have you seen the post about the sc2 pro mod April fools joke? Look it up if you have not because there are some very good points that are made in the posts. Namely, that recreating brood war is not what we should seek to do with sc2. In this you are correct, but I have to severely critique you here for your lack of insight beyond this point. You seem to be annoyed at the fact that people are trying to make sc2 more like brood war and you believe that these people are all trying to bring back some sort of lost nostalgia by bringing back the brood war user interface (12 unit selection, shitty pathing, one building selection, etc...) and by bringing back the units (lurker, deflier, corsair, etc...) In reality it is you that is completely missing the point and you show this by IMO what is a completely anti BW post dressed up to not appear so bad. What people are trying to recreate by mentioning BW is the magic of the game that seems to have been lost upon sc2. Many of you are going to say that you feel just as much magic when watching an sc2 game as watching a brood war game. Let me tell you this: If you've been an active participant in both scenes (active participant meaning you were as active in bw as you are now in sc2), then I challenge one person here to tell me that sc2 has the same magic that BW has. What's wrong with wanting this back? To answer your question of why more people play sc2 than played BW I have this to say. I'm of the opinion that the reason that sc2 is more popular is because of a combination of 3 factors: easy unit control, the battle.net ladder, and critical mass. 1. Easy unit control - no explaination necessary. Easier unit control makes the game easier to play. Making a less steep learning curve. This is one of the things that Sc2 got right over BW. 2. Battle.net ladder - Always winning 50 percent of the time is nice because it makes you feel that you're really good at something. If I logged onto Iccup and played right now I'd loose 90 percent of my games. People don't like to loose all the time. 3. Critical mass: Sc2 has enough fans now that the whole "friends tell other friends" concept is now in place. Don't get me wrong. I love this game, but something about it just doesn't feel right. I can't put my finger on it, but I think it has something to do with the fact that armies just don't feel big any more. When I play with a maxed 200/200 army I feel like I'm playing with a warcraft III TFT 100/100 army. Sc2 got a lot of things right that BW didn't - I agree with this 100 percent. But there are certain elements that BW got right that shouldn't have been taken out of the game. | ||
|
Zamkis
Canada114 Posts
| ||
|
The Void
Germany428 Posts
if you have a great race-game with great physics... would you ruin the physics in his successor just to have a different game? no problem with copying things from bw if they were great. there is no need to invent a totally new game. if you want new units no problem but they must work at some point in time. i like that they are testing but they shouldnt lose the track. for exsample the cliff mechanics are still a bit broken in sc2. if they would change it in the way it was in bw this would actually ADD more tactical deepness. this is a case where they made something different for no reason and its bad... so.. | ||
|
BrosephBrostar
United States445 Posts
On October 26 2011 09:56 opisska wrote: But here comes my question: what is the point of recreating something, even if it was good? BW is still a perfectly working piece of software, with servers to play on and a large playerbase. What is the point of having another game very similar to it, when we already do have BW? Because BW has basically been thrown under a bus and a lot of BW fans feel the only possibility of seeing more BW is by having SC2 become BW++. On October 26 2011 09:56 opisska wrote: The general success of SC2 is given by the fact, that it is simpler to play on a reasonable (whatever that means for you) level than BW. Thanks to this fact, more non-koreans can really enjoy playing it and more non-koreans can enjoy watching other non-koreans play it. (Wait, OP, are you really that simple-minded? No, I am not, but I think that it is unnecessary to explain this statement with political correct words. Everyone gets the point, right?). It leads to SC2 lacking some aspects of BW but also filling some that BW never had - namely a vivid, lively western ESPORTS scene. Being easier might make it more popular as a game, but that has little bearing on how popular it is as a spectator event. There are tons of fat and unathletic people who watch regular sports. You're basically arguing for the WNBA, and we all know no one watches women's basketball. I'd also like to point out that the western SC2 scene only really took off after tournaments started inviting Korean players. | ||
red4ce
United States7313 Posts
On October 26 2011 10:05 neSix wrote: I think you're missing the point of those arguments: It's not the game itself we wish to copy, but rather it's the characteristics that made the game so great that we hope to see more of in SC2. I don't think the (legitimate) goal for anyone is to mimic Brood War. Instead, I think it's to use a game that we loved a benchmark for comparison. It's not that we want the game to be identical, but rather we would like the sequel to make use of aspects that we found exciting, such as space control, drawn-out, spaced-out large battles, the ability to turn an advantage into a victory outright as opposed to just expanding, etc. Pretty much this. SC2 fans always talk about how SC2 isn't Brood War, yet every time we see a game with BW characteristics (lots of back and forth small engagements, multipronged harass, sick marine splits, insane multitasking) the games get 98% recommended votes. Whether you like to admit it or not, you DO want SC2 to be more BW-esque, just not BW 2.0. | ||
|
DarkRise
1644 Posts
| ||
|
lololol
5198 Posts
On October 26 2011 10:54 Redmark wrote: That in itself is hyperbole. There is a minority of people who explicitly say that they want this, and a larger group who always clamor for lurkers, reavers, scourge, old high ground, tank AI etc. People want these, because there are better than what we have right now, they don't want an exact copy of BW, because they already bought one years ago, they just want the stuff that is better. You know, they want a game that is improved and better, not one that is different, if they want one that is different, they can buy a million other cheap bad rts games, which believe me are all very different from BW. | ||
|
Fighter
Korea (South)1531 Posts
On October 26 2011 10:05 neSix wrote: I think you're missing the point of those arguments: It's not the game itself we wish to copy, but rather it's the characteristics that made the game so great that we hope to see more of in SC2. I don't think the (legitimate) goal for anyone is to mimic Brood War. Instead, I think it's to use a game that we loved a benchmark for comparison. It's not that we want the game to be identical, but rather we would like the sequel to make use of aspects that we found exciting, such as space control, drawn-out, spaced-out large battles, the ability to turn an advantage into a victory outright as opposed to just expanding, etc. Yep, this guy's pretty much spot on. There's certain things that make BW not only fun to play, but a lot of fun to watch as a spectator sport. Just off the top of my head, here's some things that make BW so much fun to watch: Dropships and Shuttles trying to evade scourge I mean, HOW much fun is this whole scenario?? The scourge just BARELY catching up, the commentators freaking out, WILL IT GET AWAY?? WILL IT GET KILLED?? So much fun. There's nothing quite like that in sc2. If a drop gets spotted early it's usually more of an issue of whether or not the player can respond correctly, which is interesting, and entertaining, but not edge of my chair exciting the way scourge chases are. This isn't always the case, but come on, scourge chases happened all the time in BW, and they were awesome. Reaver drops and workers trying to run away This is the same kinda thing. It takes good reaction speed to move your workers fast enough, which is technically impressive, but then watching the scarab chase the workers, wondering how many kills it can get... it just builds so much tension and it's SO exciting. And once again, there's nothing quite like it in sc2. Hold position lurkers The zerg player burrows his lurkers in an interesting spot. The terran doesn't suspect. A mass of marines move out. They're getting closer to the lurkers. The terran has no idea but the crowd is freaking out. Is he going to move forward? Will the zerg player wait until JUST the right moment? This is actually something sc2 kind of DID mimic, what with burrowed banelings. Is it is as good? Maybe. Maybe even better. I think you get my point. I'm not saying sc2 needs scourge and reavers, but what it does need are units that create interesting and entertaining scenarios like what I've described. Sc2 is probably going to be fun to play no matter what, but the difference between how fun it is to watch a player micro roaches, and how fun it is to watch a player micro a shuttle with a reaver, is something that makes a HUGE difference to the spectators. It's not the specific units from BW that I want to see moved to SC2, it's the design philosophy. Part of what made BW so good was that it had units that could do amazing things when micro'd, and engagements rewarded intelligent use of geography and tactics (i.e. no deathballs). Edit: I don't want to come off as someone who's knocking SC2, because SC2 does A LOT of things right. I mean, I went to MLG Columbus, I love the game and it's only getting better and better. I just want to point out what could be added to make it the best it CAN be.  | ||
|
The Void
Germany428 Posts
On October 26 2011 11:03 lololol wrote: People want these, because there are better than what we have right now, they don't want an exact copy of BW, because they already bought one years ago, they just want the stuff that is better. You know, they want a game that is improved and better, not one that is different, if they want one that is different, they can buy a million other cheap bad rts games, which believe me are all very different from BW. nailed it! thx | ||
|
Angra
United States2652 Posts
On October 26 2011 10:39 R0YAL wrote: Size has no influence with this. In BW the units take a path and takes into consideration all of the other units in its way, so the unit would take the fastest path as if the other units were a part of terrain. This caused units to naturally spread out more because they had to find a path around the other units. In SC2 they take the fastest path regardless of where other units are, and even push units out of the way. Since all of the units are going straight to a location, they bunch up. Most ramps in BW could only fit 1 unit at a time though, too. Other units physically couldn't get by if a unit was on hold position at the time. It takes about 3-4 units to do the same thing in most SC2 ramps. Anyway regardless of how it worked, it had a really huge impact on how the game worked, and it's a big reason why SC2 feels and plays so differently. | ||
|
Fuhrmaaj
167 Posts
Other than that, I'd rather be playing BW to be perfectly honest.The control in BW allows for many micro techniques and the distinction between micro players and macro players was very large. For example, you could control mutas in such a way that they constantly darting in and attacked then left without slowing down. This was crucial when sniping marines because you would significantly reduce the amount of damage you sustained. There was also no delay for firing animations (for the most part, I'm looking at you Valkyrie), so if you had one more range than your opponent then you wouldn't need to suffer any damage while using scoot and shoot micro. Map control and long-term planning was rewarded much better in BW as well. You could place spider mines around the map and later siege up near those positions and be largely protected from Protoss gateway units. This defined your pushing paths and it was very difficult for Terran when all of their mine fields were cleaned up with Dragoons and an observer because it drastically limited your map control and awareness and slowed your pushes. Terran mech could form a siege line literally from one end of the map to the other and it would take an entire Protoss army focuses on one point to break the siege line. I miss these types of planning dynamics. I think that if some of the game engine were made to be more similar to BW, that we could again see more interesting harass dynamics. I'm less interested in which units are used, but they play a significant factor in the game dynamic. If the new units are considered more similar to BW, I don't really care. It's a new game, there are new units and if we as a community like the new units then we'll adopt the game. If we don't like the new units and Blizzard doesn't want to accommodate us then we can continue to play WoL; wait for Legacy of the Void; or put together a mod which raises the skill ceiling on the game. I've seen many custom maps which tweak certain features of the game and it's not out of the question. My two cents. | ||
|
Alpino
Brazil4390 Posts
| ||
|
The Void
Germany428 Posts
On October 26 2011 11:15 Alpino wrote: I just want space control and less "ball on ball" action. /signed many little tricky moves instead of 1a + some spells. | ||
|
RavenLoud
Canada1100 Posts
For example, people will always bring up carrier micro in BW when lamenting its SC2 counterpart. However I do not think the majority of fans want SC2 to be BW in HD (Play SC2BW mod for that ) | ||
|
MMello
279 Posts
| ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
| ||
|
Loes
Canada115 Posts
Thats a really good point. | ||
|
canikizu
4860 Posts
/sarcasm I like SC2 for what it is right now. I don't want to another BW that I've watched for last decade. | ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
On October 26 2011 10:17 R0YAL wrote: I disagree entirely. The army balls in sc2 are not even close to as spectator friendly as the pathing in bw was. It looked much better, it was more clear, and it felt almost infinitely more epic. I actually can't conceive someone thinking that a blob on one screen is more appealing than masses upon masses of units stretched out over the map. That's just a bad side effect of good pathfinding. Honestly, it's up to you to 1a2a3a4a and not Blizzard to artificially create spread. | ||
| ||
