On February 25 2012 06:19 EternaLLegacy wrote: I find it ironic that you choose LoL as your example of "improvement" on game design when Chu switches from HoN to LoL and explicitly states that LoL is in no way a good competitive game. You took what should be an example of what not to do and tried to spin it as "hey, it's popular, so it must be better!" Instead, it's an example of how games get dumbed down for the bad players who don't want to improve to compete on par with good players.
if its not a competitive game, why do people compete in it? who is this chu guy? is he the best lol player in the world?
You make some really great points, but I also disagree with many of your assertions and overall tone, it's not a sufficiently balanced article.
You give the impression there's no micro in SC2...Happy would like a word with you:
*marines are imba*
You say collosi can't be used as microd single units? People are starting to figure out that isn't the case
There's a ton of micro in SC2. There's probably more than BW (less control of course, but there is a difference). I wouldn't want any more micro, or I'd be playing war3. The prevalance of 1-A mechanic units like the colossus does one positive thing - it encourages good positioning and army control, because that's the only way to survive. Even bad players need decent control or they get roflstomped vs collosi, whereas in BW if both players were bad, neither needed to control their armies well.
You say static defense isn't good? What? Spines and Cannons are sick - but I agree they could use upgrades though - they should benefit from the carapace and melee upgrades of their respective race. So are planetaries - and now, 2 years on, players are figuring out space control. This is the first year where terrans are using mid-map PFs in every match up for space control. The game is young, to be blunt.
Most of the space control issues were map-related. As the map pool shifts, so does the game. Maps with wider chokes but fewer open planes are better at holding space and worse at abusing forcefields. Your article does not take these important factors into account.
On February 25 2012 06:19 EternaLLegacy wrote: I find it ironic that you choose LoL as your example of "improvement" on game design when Chu switches from HoN to LoL and explicitly states that LoL is in no way a good competitive game. You took what should be an example of what not to do and tried to spin it as "hey, it's popular, so it must be better!" Instead, it's an example of how games get dumbed down for the bad players who don't want to improve to compete on par with good players.
if its not a competitive game, why do people compete in it? who is this chu guy? is he the best lol player in the world?
He was a professional HoN player, I don't know if he continued playing HoN, but he tried LoL and rose to #1 in a month easily. So yes, for a period he was.
On February 25 2012 06:19 EternaLLegacy wrote: I find it ironic that you choose LoL as your example of "improvement" on game design when Chu switches from HoN to LoL and explicitly states that LoL is in no way a good competitive game. You took what should be an example of what not to do and tried to spin it as "hey, it's popular, so it must be better!" Instead, it's an example of how games get dumbed down for the bad players who don't want to improve to compete on par with good players.
EternaL, I am in no way saying LoL is an "improvement" on game design. Read my post - I do not use the word "improvement". I am saying that there was a reason that LoL's developers made the design changes that they did, and that if numbers and critical acclaim (by critics, industry designers, and players) are anything to go by, it was a good design decision.
Similarly, DotA 2 is going back to the old ways and the people playing it are loving it. The designers of DotA 2 had a differing game design decision that is paying off. It seems to be a good design decision.
I am NOT making the case that simplifying the game or streamlining the focus of game mechanics makes a better game or is a better game design. My problem with your OP (and what I am arguing against here) is that there are many, many good ways to approach the design of a game, and all of them can be successful in both casual and competitive fields. There is no "THE" philosophy of game design. There are philosophIES of game design.
On February 25 2012 12:53 DaemonX wrote: You make some really great points, but I also disagree with many of your assertions and overall tone, it's not a sufficiently balanced article.
There's a ton of micro in SC2. There's probably more than BW (less control of course, but there is a difference). I wouldn't want any more micro, or I'd be playing war3. The prevalance of 1-A mechanic units like the colossus does one positive thing - it encourages good positioning and army control, because that's the only way to survive. Even bad players need decent control or they get roflstomped vs collosi, whereas in BW if both players were bad, neither needed to control their armies well.
You say static defense isn't good? What? Spines and Cannons are sick - but I agree they could use upgrades though - they should benefit from the carapace and melee upgrades of their respective race. So are planetaries - and now, 2 years on, players are figuring out space control. This is the first year where terrans are using mid-map PFs in every match up for space control. The game is young, to be blunt.
Most of the space control issues were map-related. As the map pool shifts, so does the game. Maps with wider chokes but fewer open planes are better at holding space and worse at abusing forcefields. Your article does not take these important factors into account.
Stutter stepping a Collosus is soo interesting.
1. SC2 does not have more opportunities for micro compared to BW. Marines are a notable exception and I think the change to allow animation cancelling on Marine attacks was pretty good. 2. Space control is great, which is why more units should be developed for that role (e.g. like but not necessarily a lurker), instead of more 1a units (immortals, collosus, marauders, roaches). Planetaries are indeed good for this role.
On February 25 2012 06:19 EternaLLegacy wrote: I find it ironic that you choose LoL as your example of "improvement" on game design when Chu switches from HoN to LoL and explicitly states that LoL is in no way a good competitive game. You took what should be an example of what not to do and tried to spin it as "hey, it's popular, so it must be better!" Instead, it's an example of how games get dumbed down for the bad players who don't want to improve to compete on par with good players.
if its not a competitive game, why do people compete in it? who is this chu guy? is he the best lol player in the world?
For a nice 3 month he was the best LoL player, if I remember, until he came back to competitive HoN (was he on team EG? or was it SK?). In short, as he came back, I remember he couldn't keep up anymore (he used to be one of the best players in HoN), and literally said that those months he played LoL hurt him way too much, as LoL was a much easier game to play, or something like this.
On February 25 2012 06:19 EternaLLegacy wrote: I find it ironic that you choose LoL as your example of "improvement" on game design when Chu switches from HoN to LoL and explicitly states that LoL is in no way a good competitive game. You took what should be an example of what not to do and tried to spin it as "hey, it's popular, so it must be better!" Instead, it's an example of how games get dumbed down for the bad players who don't want to improve to compete on par with good players.
if its not a competitive game, why do people compete in it? who is this chu guy? is he the best lol player in the world?
For a nice 3 month he was the best LoL player, if I remember, until he came back to competitive HoN (was he on team EG? or was it SK?). In short, as he came back, I remember he couldn't keep up anymore (he used to be one of the best players in HoN), and literally said that those months he played LoL hurt him way too much, as LoL was a much easier game to play, or something like this.
As little as I like LoL your statement of him being the best LoL player is silly, he was ranked #1 on the solo queue ladder which is like being #1 NA ladder in SC2 and claiming you're the best player in the world.
EPT
