Starcraft 2 and the Philosophy of Design - Page 5

On January 08 2012 18:22 Inex wrote:
I am starting to like the fact that SC2 battles are so fast and end with one player in a huge lead over the other. You don't stay 5 minutes watching one battle across 3 screens, just one quick engagement that can mean the end of your, or your favourite pro's game.

BW unit design wasn't all that great, since there were units that weren't used for a long time and in that regard SC2 is doing a bit better. I think a lot of people here fail to see how hard it is to make a game such as SC2 and their decision not to make BW 2.0 is the right one. After all BW was the success story of its time, making the same thing today is going to be appealing for the same BW fanbase, but will hardly reach the newer crowd. The fact that SC2 is easy to pick up and play, but hard to master makes it so popular among casual players.

I liked BW, but wasn't all that into it, I was more of a Warcraft 3 player. So what Blizz managed to do is attract a lot more people with different tastes, via incredibly talented gameplay design, something that an updated version of BW would have never been able to do. I know I wouldn't play BW 2.0 and I am sure my friends wouldn't either. BW is a great game, not my cup of tea though, SC2 on the other hand is. I love it.

On January 08 2012 18:16 nokz88 wrote:
This is incredibly biased post about a point discussed to death and long forgotten.

You tell us that 12 unit max selection is a limitation that increased the skill cap. Why can't the unit clumping be viewed as the same?

In BW you have to try hard to keep your units from being too separated, because of the limited unit selection.
In SC2 you have to try hard to keep your units from clumping up, because of the clump-up mechanic.

Did you watch IMMvp's stream a few days ago? The unbelievable comebacks he pulled off after taking over a game his coach messed up? You try to do half that shit before talking about how SC2 machanics are "trivialized". The skill cap is as high as it ever was in BW, just not given enough time.

The skill cap is as high as it ever was in BW, just not given enough time.

The ceiling is incredibly low in SC2

On January 08 2012 18:30 deadmau wrote:
Who the heck wants SC2 to be BW with 3d-graphics?

On January 08 2012 19:01 Logros wrote:
Ugh is this another thread about this? It has been discussed to death already 20 times before.

Also lol @


If it is so incredibly low then how do we still see such huge differences in skill and multitasking? People are only just now scratching the surface of what is possible with some of the plays of Hero for example. A well executed multi-pronged attack can be devastating and I've noticed this happening more and more lately.

On January 08 2012 19:10 tztztz wrote:
i don't get how people can say bw is harder than sc2, but at the same time say sc2 is more coinflippy and its easier to lose to a inferior player. i mean, doesn't this make it a harder game?

On January 08 2012 19:10 tztztz wrote:
if everything said in the OP and in this debate would be true, it would mean there will never be a bonjwa. i think thats what the sc2 scene needs, a the player who just dominates the scene. because this would cancel this debate once and for all. and i think and hope it's a only a matter of time.

On January 08 2012 19:10 tztztz wrote:
people souldn't act like blizzard didn't think before making the game, they earn there money my making games. and they're not so stubborn like many say, they admited mistakes time and time again. i mean, why would they be? its in there own interest to make the best game possible. why wouldn't they want wo benefit from such a caring community they're blessed with? it doesn't make sense to think so.

On January 08 2012 19:10 tztztz wrote:
i think people talk too much about the negative sides and ignore what makes sc2 better than bw. i've never seen a thread about what makes sc2 such a great game, but hundreds about why it sucks. but there has to be something blizzard did right with sc2, because otherwise we wouldn't play, watch and talk about it on forums, right? let's start to talk about those things

On January 08 2012 19:10 tztztz wrote:
i don't get how people can say bw is harder than sc2, but at the same time say sc2 is more coinflippy and its easier to lose to a inferior player. i mean, doesn't this make it a harder game?

On January 08 2012 19:01 Logros wrote:
People are only just now scratching the surface of what is possible with some of the plays of Hero for example.

On January 08 2012 19:33 MorroW wrote:
this is a very good article

sc1 battles were pretty unpredictible and unique. it was a much more special thing to watch these huge battles while in sc2 its "just another clash".
they enter fight in different formations every time, the terrain looks different and matters alot. and micro control even the best fucks up, while sometimes they just hit it perfectly and win battles and you just go like "wtf just happened".

terrain and high ground mechanic is great point too. controlling space and ground, grabbing areas of the maps is alot more existent in sc1.

and its true higher mechanical demands would make the game harder obviously :p

however i dont think its a good idea to have cap on how many units units u can have in a control group. i think its great as it is now. players should be triggered to have more engagements on more places at once out of better reasons than something like this.
sc1 didnt have so many fights at different places because of how 12unit cap worked

unit formation and Ai i think is fine as it is. sc2 acually goes alot faster than sc1. units are move,die, build faster. if we had to deal with all this ai it would probably just make it too difficult (frustrating, annoying etc) or spectating would be less interesting cause players do so many silly mistakes.


what many needs to keep in mind is, sc2 is a very very hard game. sc1 was harder for many reasons. sc2 has so much more potential than were seeing. better micro, more multitasking, harass, multipromt attacks and unit movements. but its so hard and players arent good enough to pull this off yet.

this OP makes many very good points and explains them very well too, just because you like sc2 and think the game is awesome (just like all of us) doesnt mean it cant be improved.
coming from bw i can tell you for sure map architecture, controlling ground is so much more important. and how battles begin, how the clash looks from the start and how it progress during the fight is alot more dynamic and interesting.

overall i think OP did good comparisons but his solutions (fucking up the ai, making 12selection limit) is a bad way to accomplish what he wants

On January 08 2012 19:41 Talin wrote:


And yet Hero often drops games to players that can't multitask to save their lives.

What's the point of even scratching the surface at all if you're not being rewarded for the effort you took to master and natural ability you have to multitask like a BW progamer when you can simply be rolled over by a better unit composition or a weird timing?

All I want to see is good players playing their opponents into the ground by raw skill alone, the kind of domination where the other player doesn't stand a slightest chance, no matter how weird his timings are or how smart his transitions and unit compositions may be, or whether or not he's blind countering the better player.

Seeing that kind of thing happen makes me admire the progamers and their skill level, and gets me interested in the game. Seeing someone with superb control and multitasking simply get rolled over by an a-move because he misread the opponent who was doing some weird shit (and executing it sloppily) makes me die on the inside.

I don't care how similar or dissimilar the game is to BW. When I want to watch BW, that's exactly what I do. But no matter what game I watch I want to SEE skill and perfection in play, and I'm not seeing it at all. I see glimpses of it in one game out of 20, and then I see players who CAN actually play well thing lose all the freaking time.

On January 08 2012 19:41 Talin wrote:


And yet Hero often drops games to players that can't multitask to save their lives.

What's the point of even scratching the surface at all if you're not being rewarded for the effort you took to master and natural ability you have to multitask like a BW progamer when you can simply be rolled over by a better unit composition or a weird timing?

All I want to see is good players playing their opponents into the ground by raw skill alone, the kind of domination where the other player doesn't stand a slightest chance, no matter how weird his timings are or how smart his transitions and unit compositions may be, or whether or not he's blind countering the better player.

Seeing that kind of thing happen makes me admire the progamers and their skill level, and gets me interested in the game. Seeing someone with superb control and multitasking simply get rolled over by an a-move because he misread the opponent who was doing some weird shit (and executing it sloppily) makes me die on the inside.

I don't care how similar or dissimilar the game is to BW. When I want to watch BW, that's exactly what I do. But no matter what game I watch I want to SEE skill and perfection in play, and I'm not seeing it at all. I see glimpses of it in one game out of 20, and then I see players who CAN actually play well thing lose all the freaking time.