EPTOn the other hand you are taking Blizzard quotes of examples how a unit MUST be used, and when the unit gets unit in different ways you somehow condemn it as "bad design". Does it even matter what the original purpose was as long as the unit is viable? BW is full of happy coincidences that surely cannot be called intentional or "good design" but end up making the game better anyway, that was the point of my whole post. Stop looking for things to nitpick about and try to appreciate the fact that these units have found new purpose.
Heart Of The Swarm: The Pro's Opinions - Page 34
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Bagi
Germany6799 Posts
On the other hand you are taking Blizzard quotes of examples how a unit MUST be used, and when the unit gets unit in different ways you somehow condemn it as "bad design". Does it even matter what the original purpose was as long as the unit is viable? BW is full of happy coincidences that surely cannot be called intentional or "good design" but end up making the game better anyway, that was the point of my whole post. Stop looking for things to nitpick about and try to appreciate the fact that these units have found new purpose. | ||
|
akaname
United Kingdom599 Posts
On January 08 2012 09:06 Kare wrote: I just have to post this great picture in this thread, because it answers most of the comments in a way  ![[image loading]](http://www.quotepictures.net/wp-content/uploads/The-whole-problem-with-the-world-is-that-fools-and-fanatics.jpg) Great pic. This is known as The Dunning–Kruger Effect by the way. I see it with SC comments a lot (that's why i've learnt to shut up about balance etc  )I find it pretty hard to fathom how people can say HotS will be broken and WoL already is, but I guess in a game where basically everyone loses 50% of the time there's going to be frustrated people who blame the game. edit: this isnt aimed at Cloud | ||
|
DrZz
Romania70 Posts
On January 08 2012 09:06 Kare wrote: I just have to post this great picture in this thread, because it answers most of the comments in a way Just the way i feel also, the wise thing is to be a little doubtfull and ask yourself if you're really feeling that way before shouting in the forums. | ||
|
Boonbag
France3318 Posts
| ||
|
victorsvoice
18 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On January 10 2012 09:49 Humanfails wrote: THis is simply CYA speak, good political. Ok, first off, what does this mean? That is barely english. Did I miss out on some internet lingo in the last 2 years? On January 10 2012 09:49 Humanfails wrote: blizzard is trying to make themselves look smart while designing horrible units by saying this. Also, look at the beginning interview of dustimn browder. He made colossus and burrow roaches to "raid" bases. colossus are supposed to climb cliffs to kill probes because, and I quote in his words "Its cool". that is NO basis for creating game units that are balanced. There needs to be a damn good reason for introducing something potentially game changing like being able to walk over cliffs and enemy/friendly units. roach raiding is mostly over and done with at higher leagues. By the time it comes out, all races have a form of detection. Lets be honest, the original blizzard design team never said these things, and their units mostly stayed true to their intended design. Sc2, almost all units have to be used in UNINTENDED ways because they suck for their intended purpose. Remember that dustin browder came from C&C which was famous for Tank vs tank end game because everything else sucked realistically. (if you dont believe me, Stalker is a support/raid unit massed as the main unit for protoss 99% of the time, bane bombs from overlords to deal with deathball because of force fields and other nonsense, mass infestor fungal before nerf because zerg lacks anti-deathball/AoE otherwise, mass thors instead of 2 or 3 used as support/base of fire units during fights because they just rape so hard, etc). I did not watch any BW, but I would love someone to compair it's first year of 1v1 play to current BW play. I won't even make you go back to Starcraft-Prime to see how developed the game was. I am willing to bet it looks nothing like the refined game that TL holds up as the model for the perfect RTS. This is the problem when people bitch about the design of SC2 and the problems with the game. Blizzard did not make BW great, the players did. Blizzard only made a game that had enough depth to allow them to do so. The difference this time around is that Blizzard knows that. They only want to make a game that gives the players options and is deep enough to allow it to evolve. They can adjust and tweek the game based on what the players do, but Blizzard is only trying to add what they feel will open up new game play, not balance the game. | ||
|
Hargol
United States52 Posts
Ok, first off, what does this mean? That is barely english. Did I miss out on some internet lingo in the last 2 years? CYA stands for "Cover your a**", as in don't get in trouble. Not really internet lingo. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On January 11 2012 06:33 Hargol wrote: Ok, first off, what does this mean? That is barely english. Did I miss out on some internet lingo in the last 2 years? CYA stands for "Cover your a**", as in don't get in trouble. Not really internet lingo. I understand what CYA stands for. I was more referencing that the sentance reads like an incomplete idea or some sort of stream of thought non-sense. The "good political" sounds like the "political" is some sort of keish or pie. | ||
|
Humanfails
224 Posts
On January 11 2012 06:33 Hargol wrote: Ok, first off, what does this mean? That is barely english. Did I miss out on some internet lingo in the last 2 years? CYA stands for "Cover your a**", as in don't get in trouble. Not really internet lingo. a good political would be someone who can use double talk and propagandist language. | ||
| ||
