|
All I want to see in HoTS is the unit pictures in the bottom center be grouped in sets of 10 instead of groups of 8. Right now you select 20 marines and it shows 3 rows. Eight, Eight, Two. Who was coding this and thought "you know what base humans love to count in? EIGHT!"
|
On April 15 2012 12:17 Dental Floss wrote:
All I want to see in HoTS is the unit pictures in the bottom center be grouped in sets of 10 instead of groups of 8. Right now you select 20 marines and it shows 3 rows. Eight, Eight, Two. Who was coding this and thought "you know what base humans love to count in? EIGHT!"
nice tidbit. You out to be a game developer. I'd email this instantly to Chris Sigathy
|
On April 15 2012 12:17 Dental Floss wrote:
All I want to see in HoTS is the unit pictures in the bottom center be grouped in sets of 10 instead of groups of 8. Right now you select 20 marines and it shows 3 rows. Eight, Eight, Two. Who was coding this and thought "you know what base humans love to count in? EIGHT!"
Probably intentional given medivacs also carry 8 units. Not useful, but arguably intentional.
Oh and incidentally I think the main problem with mass recall on a nexus isn't how good it is but with chronoboost - namely that protoss aren't punished enough for not using it. The use of scans can render entire terran build orders completely useless and god knows what zerg would do without injects. Chronoboost just seems to be something that all but the best protoss just abandon for use in building probes. Yeah if you're 4 gating you spam chronoboost on your gateways but that's about it.
Not sure what to do about that though.
|
On April 15 2012 19:15 Evangelist wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 12:17 Dental Floss wrote:
All I want to see in HoTS is the unit pictures in the bottom center be grouped in sets of 10 instead of groups of 8. Right now you select 20 marines and it shows 3 rows. Eight, Eight, Two. Who was coding this and thought "you know what base humans love to count in? EIGHT!" Probably intentional given medivacs also carry 8 units. Not useful, but arguably intentional.
yeah, and 8supply per depot.
Though I kind of agree, grouping them in tens would make it easier to get fast estimations with one look, but I guess it's tradition to choose arbitrary numbers for selection limits and selection rows in blizzard RTS games 
|
On April 15 2012 12:17 Dental Floss wrote:
All I want to see in HoTS is the unit pictures in the bottom center be grouped in sets of 10 instead of groups of 8. Right now you select 20 marines and it shows 3 rows. Eight, Eight, Two. Who was coding this and thought "you know what base humans love to count in? EIGHT!"
That actually took a while to get used to so I wouldn't waste valuable time trying to do mental arithmetic when checking mineral line saturation etc.
On April 15 2012 19:15 Evangelist wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 12:17 Dental Floss wrote:
All I want to see in HoTS is the unit pictures in the bottom center be grouped in sets of 10 instead of groups of 8. Right now you select 20 marines and it shows 3 rows. Eight, Eight, Two. Who was coding this and thought "you know what base humans love to count in? EIGHT!" Probably intentional given medivacs also carry 8 units. Not useful, but arguably intentional.
How does the fact that a medivac carries 8 units really influence that and make it intentional? You still see your full drop if you have rows of 8. Any way you want to put it I don't really see the connection between the two.
Maybe Blizzard thought that people would complain that SC2 is an easier game than BroodWar so they made sure to put some things in that make it a little more difficult. Counting in 8's and no LAN support for example. If you get dropped and have to play a game twice that ought to make it harder to win right?
|
On April 15 2012 19:27 JOJOsc2news wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 19:15 Evangelist wrote:On April 15 2012 12:17 Dental Floss wrote:
All I want to see in HoTS is the unit pictures in the bottom center be grouped in sets of 10 instead of groups of 8. Right now you select 20 marines and it shows 3 rows. Eight, Eight, Two. Who was coding this and thought "you know what base humans love to count in? EIGHT!" Probably intentional given medivacs also carry 8 units. Not useful, but arguably intentional. How does the fact that a medivac carries 8 units really influence that and make it intentional? You still see your full drop if you have rows of 8. Any way you want to put it I don't really see the connection between the two.
Er. Because the bulk of the game is based around grouping things in some variation of base 8 supply or base 6, and both have a common denominator in 24 (which you will find is saturation for a standard blue base).
It's just a convenient number to use and it keeps people in the mindset of using base 8 for things.
|
On April 15 2012 19:34 Evangelist wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 19:27 JOJOsc2news wrote:On April 15 2012 19:15 Evangelist wrote:On April 15 2012 12:17 Dental Floss wrote:
All I want to see in HoTS is the unit pictures in the bottom center be grouped in sets of 10 instead of groups of 8. Right now you select 20 marines and it shows 3 rows. Eight, Eight, Two. Who was coding this and thought "you know what base humans love to count in? EIGHT!" Probably intentional given medivacs also carry 8 units. Not useful, but arguably intentional. How does the fact that a medivac carries 8 units really influence that and make it intentional? You still see your full drop if you have rows of 8. Any way you want to put it I don't really see the connection between the two. Er. Because the bulk of the game is based around grouping things in some variation of base 8 supply or base 6, and both have a common denominator in 24 (which you will find is saturation for a standard blue base). It's just a convenient number to use and it keeps people in the mindset of using base 8 for things.
Yup...
Keeping people in the mindset of using base 8 is the only really reason I can see to be honest. With a row of 10 I wouldn't have more trouble identifying 24 workers simply because you only need to look for the third row (whether it has 4 or not). However, rows of 8 make sense from a design continuity and coherence perspective.
|
On April 15 2012 09:36 TheMatrix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 06:18 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 05:47 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 05:41 To3-Knee wrote:On April 15 2012 05:21 TheMatrix wrote:
I don't like these changes or lack thereof.
For the Zerg race I'd like to see the baneling, roach and corrupter gone and the lurker and 2 more units introduced.
For the Protoss race I'd like to see the Colossus and VoidRay gone and the reaver and one more units introduced.
For the Terran race I'd like to see the Marauder, Viking and Thor gone and firebat and valkyrie introduced.
I'd also like to see fungal growth be a slow spell, rather than immobilizing spell. Something like 30% to 50% reduction in speed for 4 seconds.
I'd also like to see storm do 110 damage over 4 seconds.
On the general gameplay side of things I'd like to see unit selection points to be bigger so they don't clump up so much. Really seems like you are playing the wrong game. How so? I've been playing Blizzard games since 1998 and I think I have some knowledge as to what is best. I don't have a big confidence in a red alert 2 and battle for middle earth game designer. I'd rather have the old starcraft game designer instead of Dustin Browder. Dustin Browder has been designing games since 1995, some of his games becoming best strategy game of a year, I think he has like infinitly more knowledge than you when it comes down to what is best (not to mention that "best" is a dumb discussion to begin with. Different game --> different "best") Also noone around here has a lot of confidence in a guy, whose first post in an SC2 forum is about turning SC2 into Broodwar. Seems like you just clicked the wrong button, there is a Broodwar forum, go and use it. So what? His best game he's worked on was Vigilante 8 and did a good job with Red Alert 2. Either way Red Alert 2 was as unbalanced as one game can be and all of the other games he designed were arcade type strategy games with no micro, macro or strategy. He is not the guy who knows anything on how to continue in the footsteps of Brood War. Shane Dabiri and Rob Pardo should have been the game designers and not Dustin Browder.
Everyone who hates argues that "SC2 should be more like Broodwar" and the opposite "Then play Broodwar, this is SC2" arguments are stupid. StarCraft 2 should have been the evolution of Broodwar. Now it's more like a bad C&C crossover which basically was verified by recycled ideas of Browder during the HotS presentation. Races were designed which much less hard mechanics to appeal to the mainstream, but which will 100% backfire since the watchability of deathballs are not as exciting as, e.g. good marine micro (one of the few examples of old fashioned BW hard mechanics in SC2). Conclusion is that C&C style units don't work for a game like SC and if Browder won't stop to implement the units from his past games, SC2 will be ruined in the long run for highest level players, i.e. we won't see any long-term consistency in player base and a decline of interest within the viewership at least for certain matchups.
|
On April 15 2012 19:41 VoO wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 09:36 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 06:18 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 05:47 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 05:41 To3-Knee wrote:On April 15 2012 05:21 TheMatrix wrote:
I don't like these changes or lack thereof.
For the Zerg race I'd like to see the baneling, roach and corrupter gone and the lurker and 2 more units introduced.
For the Protoss race I'd like to see the Colossus and VoidRay gone and the reaver and one more units introduced.
For the Terran race I'd like to see the Marauder, Viking and Thor gone and firebat and valkyrie introduced.
I'd also like to see fungal growth be a slow spell, rather than immobilizing spell. Something like 30% to 50% reduction in speed for 4 seconds.
I'd also like to see storm do 110 damage over 4 seconds.
On the general gameplay side of things I'd like to see unit selection points to be bigger so they don't clump up so much. Really seems like you are playing the wrong game. How so? I've been playing Blizzard games since 1998 and I think I have some knowledge as to what is best. I don't have a big confidence in a red alert 2 and battle for middle earth game designer. I'd rather have the old starcraft game designer instead of Dustin Browder. Dustin Browder has been designing games since 1995, some of his games becoming best strategy game of a year, I think he has like infinitly more knowledge than you when it comes down to what is best (not to mention that "best" is a dumb discussion to begin with. Different game --> different "best") Also noone around here has a lot of confidence in a guy, whose first post in an SC2 forum is about turning SC2 into Broodwar. Seems like you just clicked the wrong button, there is a Broodwar forum, go and use it. So what? His best game he's worked on was Vigilante 8 and did a good job with Red Alert 2. Either way Red Alert 2 was as unbalanced as one game can be and all of the other games he designed were arcade type strategy games with no micro, macro or strategy. He is not the guy who knows anything on how to continue in the footsteps of Brood War. Shane Dabiri and Rob Pardo should have been the game designers and not Dustin Browder. Everyone who hates argues that "SC2 should be more like Broodwar" and the opposite "Then play Broodwar, this is SC2" arguments are stupid. StarCraft 2 should have been the evolution of Broodwar. Now it's more like a bad C&C crossover which basically was verified by recycled ideas of Browder during the HotS presentation. Races were designed which much less hard mechanics to appeal to the mainstream, but which will 100% backfire since the watchability of deathballs are not as exciting as, e.g. good marine micro (one of the few examples of old fashioned BW hard mechanics in SC2). Conclusion is that C&C style units don't work for a game like SC and if Browder won't stop to implement the units from his past games, SC2 will be ruined in the long run for highest level players, i.e. we won't see any long-term consistency in player base and a decline of interest within the viewership at least for certain matchups.
Well said. StarCraft is just another caliber compared games as Red Alert 2 or Battle for Middle-Earth; none of these games were played online on a serious competitive level. There is a huge difference in designing single player RTS games and competitive games. For the former, you don't need to entertain players for a long period of time. You can get away with implementing fancy units that impress in the first place, but then impair the overall game design. For a competitive game such as SC2 that must be designed to provide long-term motivation for several years, you have to design a game much more detailed, providing a strong strategic depth. SC2 has none of this. Unfortunately, Dustin Browder has proven over and over again that he simply does not care about this and would rather squeeze in allegedly fancy units in the game or - even worse - just recycle units from his old games rather than listen to the competitive community which comprises exactly those people who keep this game alive in the long run.
|
On April 15 2012 19:41 VoO wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 09:36 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 06:18 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 05:47 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 05:41 To3-Knee wrote:On April 15 2012 05:21 TheMatrix wrote:
I don't like these changes or lack thereof.
For the Zerg race I'd like to see the baneling, roach and corrupter gone and the lurker and 2 more units introduced.
For the Protoss race I'd like to see the Colossus and VoidRay gone and the reaver and one more units introduced.
For the Terran race I'd like to see the Marauder, Viking and Thor gone and firebat and valkyrie introduced.
I'd also like to see fungal growth be a slow spell, rather than immobilizing spell. Something like 30% to 50% reduction in speed for 4 seconds.
I'd also like to see storm do 110 damage over 4 seconds.
On the general gameplay side of things I'd like to see unit selection points to be bigger so they don't clump up so much. Really seems like you are playing the wrong game. How so? I've been playing Blizzard games since 1998 and I think I have some knowledge as to what is best. I don't have a big confidence in a red alert 2 and battle for middle earth game designer. I'd rather have the old starcraft game designer instead of Dustin Browder. Dustin Browder has been designing games since 1995, some of his games becoming best strategy game of a year, I think he has like infinitly more knowledge than you when it comes down to what is best (not to mention that "best" is a dumb discussion to begin with. Different game --> different "best") Also noone around here has a lot of confidence in a guy, whose first post in an SC2 forum is about turning SC2 into Broodwar. Seems like you just clicked the wrong button, there is a Broodwar forum, go and use it. So what? His best game he's worked on was Vigilante 8 and did a good job with Red Alert 2. Either way Red Alert 2 was as unbalanced as one game can be and all of the other games he designed were arcade type strategy games with no micro, macro or strategy. He is not the guy who knows anything on how to continue in the footsteps of Brood War. Shane Dabiri and Rob Pardo should have been the game designers and not Dustin Browder. Everyone who hates argues that "SC2 should be more like Broodwar" and the opposite "Then play Broodwar, this is SC2" arguments are stupid. StarCraft 2 should have been the evolution of Broodwar. Now it's more like a bad C&C crossover which basically was verified by recycled ideas of Browder during the HotS presentation. Races were designed which much less hard mechanics to appeal to the mainstream, but which will 100% backfire since the watchability of deathballs are not as exciting as, e.g. good marine micro (one of the few examples of old fashioned BW hard mechanics in SC2). Conclusion is that C&C style units don't work for a game like SC and if Browder won't stop to implement the units from his past games, SC2 will be ruined in the long run for highest level players, i.e. we won't see any long-term consistency in player base and a decline of interest within the viewership at least for certain matchups.
Go and play C&C competitively, before comparing those two. From the low level experiences I have made in this nonfiguered game, RA3's amount of mirco and action beats the crap out of SC2. (one of the reasons why I prefer the slower, more strategyoriented Starcraft games)
And no, SC2 has nothing in common with how C&C is being played. SC2 is very passive, defender and position oriented, C&C is very tech, unit and action oriented.
Deathballs are pretty much nonexistent in C&C, because it relies on counterunit systems, something that BW and SC2 don't do and therefore building up certain compositions that are simply superior in combat is possible - and yes, it is a myth that SC2 relies on a stronger counterunit system than BW. Units like Marauders with +100% damage against armored are just as much counterunits like +100% siege tanks vs big units in BW etc. Only in BW you couldn't read this inside the game, therefore a lot of people didn't know about it and how it worked exactly.
The main problems of SC2 are that the ratio of mining=producing and working with the units one has is off (Barrin's breadth of gameplay) and that the micro discrepancy between the races is off, making Zerg and Protoss micro useless against Terran (stim and longranged units) and Protoss micro useless against Zerg (fighting very fast units with lowdamage units).
The only micro left in certain (nonmirror) MUs are abilities, which the game simply doesn't have enough (useful ones) off.
|
On April 15 2012 20:17 .syd. wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 19:41 VoO wrote:On April 15 2012 09:36 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 06:18 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 05:47 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 05:41 To3-Knee wrote:On April 15 2012 05:21 TheMatrix wrote:
I don't like these changes or lack thereof.
For the Zerg race I'd like to see the baneling, roach and corrupter gone and the lurker and 2 more units introduced.
For the Protoss race I'd like to see the Colossus and VoidRay gone and the reaver and one more units introduced.
For the Terran race I'd like to see the Marauder, Viking and Thor gone and firebat and valkyrie introduced.
I'd also like to see fungal growth be a slow spell, rather than immobilizing spell. Something like 30% to 50% reduction in speed for 4 seconds.
I'd also like to see storm do 110 damage over 4 seconds.
On the general gameplay side of things I'd like to see unit selection points to be bigger so they don't clump up so much. Really seems like you are playing the wrong game. How so? I've been playing Blizzard games since 1998 and I think I have some knowledge as to what is best. I don't have a big confidence in a red alert 2 and battle for middle earth game designer. I'd rather have the old starcraft game designer instead of Dustin Browder. Dustin Browder has been designing games since 1995, some of his games becoming best strategy game of a year, I think he has like infinitly more knowledge than you when it comes down to what is best (not to mention that "best" is a dumb discussion to begin with. Different game --> different "best") Also noone around here has a lot of confidence in a guy, whose first post in an SC2 forum is about turning SC2 into Broodwar. Seems like you just clicked the wrong button, there is a Broodwar forum, go and use it. So what? His best game he's worked on was Vigilante 8 and did a good job with Red Alert 2. Either way Red Alert 2 was as unbalanced as one game can be and all of the other games he designed were arcade type strategy games with no micro, macro or strategy. He is not the guy who knows anything on how to continue in the footsteps of Brood War. Shane Dabiri and Rob Pardo should have been the game designers and not Dustin Browder. Everyone who hates argues that "SC2 should be more like Broodwar" and the opposite "Then play Broodwar, this is SC2" arguments are stupid. StarCraft 2 should have been the evolution of Broodwar. Now it's more like a bad C&C crossover which basically was verified by recycled ideas of Browder during the HotS presentation. Races were designed which much less hard mechanics to appeal to the mainstream, but which will 100% backfire since the watchability of deathballs are not as exciting as, e.g. good marine micro (one of the few examples of old fashioned BW hard mechanics in SC2). Conclusion is that C&C style units don't work for a game like SC and if Browder won't stop to implement the units from his past games, SC2 will be ruined in the long run for highest level players, i.e. we won't see any long-term consistency in player base and a decline of interest within the viewership at least for certain matchups. Well said. StarCraft is just another caliber compared games as Red Alert 2 or Battle for Middle-Earth; none of these games were played online on a serious competitive level. There is a huge difference in designing single player RTS games and competitive games. For the former, you don't need to entertain players for a long period of time. You can get away with implementing fancy units that impress in the first place, but then impair the overall game design. For a competitive game such as SC2 that must be designed to provide long-term motivation for several years, you have to design a game much more detailed, providing a strong strategic depth. SC2 has none of this. Unfortunately, Dustin Browder has proven over and over again that he simply does not care about this and would rather squeeze in allegedly fancy units in the game or - even worse - just recycle units from his old games rather than listen to the competitive community which comprises exactly those people who keep this game alive in the long run.
These commonplace statements are getting very very old, mostly due to the fact that it isn't true in the slightest and is just a jab from someone on the outside looking in. Be honest with yourself, you have 0 idea what it takes to make a video game. As well you have 0 clue what goes on at blizzard behind closed doors. To inject an emotion into someone you don't even know is just ridiculous. Your statement is basically just fluff, with no real substance.
There are always people who love to bitch but bring nothing to the table.
|
On April 15 2012 23:38 Arkless wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 20:17 .syd. wrote:On April 15 2012 19:41 VoO wrote:On April 15 2012 09:36 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 06:18 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 05:47 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 05:41 To3-Knee wrote:On April 15 2012 05:21 TheMatrix wrote:
I don't like these changes or lack thereof.
For the Zerg race I'd like to see the baneling, roach and corrupter gone and the lurker and 2 more units introduced.
For the Protoss race I'd like to see the Colossus and VoidRay gone and the reaver and one more units introduced.
For the Terran race I'd like to see the Marauder, Viking and Thor gone and firebat and valkyrie introduced.
I'd also like to see fungal growth be a slow spell, rather than immobilizing spell. Something like 30% to 50% reduction in speed for 4 seconds.
I'd also like to see storm do 110 damage over 4 seconds.
On the general gameplay side of things I'd like to see unit selection points to be bigger so they don't clump up so much. Really seems like you are playing the wrong game. How so? I've been playing Blizzard games since 1998 and I think I have some knowledge as to what is best. I don't have a big confidence in a red alert 2 and battle for middle earth game designer. I'd rather have the old starcraft game designer instead of Dustin Browder. Dustin Browder has been designing games since 1995, some of his games becoming best strategy game of a year, I think he has like infinitly more knowledge than you when it comes down to what is best (not to mention that "best" is a dumb discussion to begin with. Different game --> different "best") Also noone around here has a lot of confidence in a guy, whose first post in an SC2 forum is about turning SC2 into Broodwar. Seems like you just clicked the wrong button, there is a Broodwar forum, go and use it. So what? His best game he's worked on was Vigilante 8 and did a good job with Red Alert 2. Either way Red Alert 2 was as unbalanced as one game can be and all of the other games he designed were arcade type strategy games with no micro, macro or strategy. He is not the guy who knows anything on how to continue in the footsteps of Brood War. Shane Dabiri and Rob Pardo should have been the game designers and not Dustin Browder. Everyone who hates argues that "SC2 should be more like Broodwar" and the opposite "Then play Broodwar, this is SC2" arguments are stupid. StarCraft 2 should have been the evolution of Broodwar. Now it's more like a bad C&C crossover which basically was verified by recycled ideas of Browder during the HotS presentation. Races were designed which much less hard mechanics to appeal to the mainstream, but which will 100% backfire since the watchability of deathballs are not as exciting as, e.g. good marine micro (one of the few examples of old fashioned BW hard mechanics in SC2). Conclusion is that C&C style units don't work for a game like SC and if Browder won't stop to implement the units from his past games, SC2 will be ruined in the long run for highest level players, i.e. we won't see any long-term consistency in player base and a decline of interest within the viewership at least for certain matchups. Well said. StarCraft is just another caliber compared games as Red Alert 2 or Battle for Middle-Earth; none of these games were played online on a serious competitive level. There is a huge difference in designing single player RTS games and competitive games. For the former, you don't need to entertain players for a long period of time. You can get away with implementing fancy units that impress in the first place, but then impair the overall game design. For a competitive game such as SC2 that must be designed to provide long-term motivation for several years, you have to design a game much more detailed, providing a strong strategic depth. SC2 has none of this. Unfortunately, Dustin Browder has proven over and over again that he simply does not care about this and would rather squeeze in allegedly fancy units in the game or - even worse - just recycle units from his old games rather than listen to the competitive community which comprises exactly those people who keep this game alive in the long run. These commonplace statements are getting very very old, mostly due to the fact that it isn't true in the slightest and is just a jab from someone on the outside looking in. Be honest with yourself, you have 0 idea what it takes to make a video game. As well you have 0 clue what goes on at blizzard behind closed doors. To inject an emotion into someone you don't even know is just ridiculous. Your statement is basically just fluff, with no real substance. There are always people who love to bitch but bring nothing to the table.
But can't you see that SC2 is a Red Alert clone and has had no success as a competitive game whatsoever, made by a designer that actively hates the Starcraft franchise? 
|
I am sad to see the replicant gone. I wanted Protoss Brood Lords...then again, I guess that's what the Tempest is now.
|
On April 16 2012 00:51 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 23:38 Arkless wrote:On April 15 2012 20:17 .syd. wrote:On April 15 2012 19:41 VoO wrote:On April 15 2012 09:36 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 06:18 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 05:47 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 05:41 To3-Knee wrote:On April 15 2012 05:21 TheMatrix wrote:
I don't like these changes or lack thereof.
For the Zerg race I'd like to see the baneling, roach and corrupter gone and the lurker and 2 more units introduced.
For the Protoss race I'd like to see the Colossus and VoidRay gone and the reaver and one more units introduced.
For the Terran race I'd like to see the Marauder, Viking and Thor gone and firebat and valkyrie introduced.
I'd also like to see fungal growth be a slow spell, rather than immobilizing spell. Something like 30% to 50% reduction in speed for 4 seconds.
I'd also like to see storm do 110 damage over 4 seconds.
On the general gameplay side of things I'd like to see unit selection points to be bigger so they don't clump up so much. Really seems like you are playing the wrong game. How so? I've been playing Blizzard games since 1998 and I think I have some knowledge as to what is best. I don't have a big confidence in a red alert 2 and battle for middle earth game designer. I'd rather have the old starcraft game designer instead of Dustin Browder. Dustin Browder has been designing games since 1995, some of his games becoming best strategy game of a year, I think he has like infinitly more knowledge than you when it comes down to what is best (not to mention that "best" is a dumb discussion to begin with. Different game --> different "best") Also noone around here has a lot of confidence in a guy, whose first post in an SC2 forum is about turning SC2 into Broodwar. Seems like you just clicked the wrong button, there is a Broodwar forum, go and use it. So what? His best game he's worked on was Vigilante 8 and did a good job with Red Alert 2. Either way Red Alert 2 was as unbalanced as one game can be and all of the other games he designed were arcade type strategy games with no micro, macro or strategy. He is not the guy who knows anything on how to continue in the footsteps of Brood War. Shane Dabiri and Rob Pardo should have been the game designers and not Dustin Browder. Everyone who hates argues that "SC2 should be more like Broodwar" and the opposite "Then play Broodwar, this is SC2" arguments are stupid. StarCraft 2 should have been the evolution of Broodwar. Now it's more like a bad C&C crossover which basically was verified by recycled ideas of Browder during the HotS presentation. Races were designed which much less hard mechanics to appeal to the mainstream, but which will 100% backfire since the watchability of deathballs are not as exciting as, e.g. good marine micro (one of the few examples of old fashioned BW hard mechanics in SC2). Conclusion is that C&C style units don't work for a game like SC and if Browder won't stop to implement the units from his past games, SC2 will be ruined in the long run for highest level players, i.e. we won't see any long-term consistency in player base and a decline of interest within the viewership at least for certain matchups. Well said. StarCraft is just another caliber compared games as Red Alert 2 or Battle for Middle-Earth; none of these games were played online on a serious competitive level. There is a huge difference in designing single player RTS games and competitive games. For the former, you don't need to entertain players for a long period of time. You can get away with implementing fancy units that impress in the first place, but then impair the overall game design. For a competitive game such as SC2 that must be designed to provide long-term motivation for several years, you have to design a game much more detailed, providing a strong strategic depth. SC2 has none of this. Unfortunately, Dustin Browder has proven over and over again that he simply does not care about this and would rather squeeze in allegedly fancy units in the game or - even worse - just recycle units from his old games rather than listen to the competitive community which comprises exactly those people who keep this game alive in the long run. These commonplace statements are getting very very old, mostly due to the fact that it isn't true in the slightest and is just a jab from someone on the outside looking in. Be honest with yourself, you have 0 idea what it takes to make a video game. As well you have 0 clue what goes on at blizzard behind closed doors. To inject an emotion into someone you don't even know is just ridiculous. Your statement is basically just fluff, with no real substance. There are always people who love to bitch but bring nothing to the table. But can't you see that SC2 is a Red Alert clone and has had no success as a competitive game whatsoever, made by a designer that actively hates the Starcraft franchise?
No, I can't. No success? Dude you're tripping.
|
On April 16 2012 01:19 KookyMonster wrote:
I am sad to see the replicant gone. I wanted Protoss Brood Lords...then again, I guess that's what the Tempest is now.
replicant couldnt copy massive
|
On April 16 2012 01:24 Arkless wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 00:51 Grumbels wrote:On April 15 2012 23:38 Arkless wrote:On April 15 2012 20:17 .syd. wrote:On April 15 2012 19:41 VoO wrote:On April 15 2012 09:36 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 06:18 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 05:47 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 05:41 To3-Knee wrote:On April 15 2012 05:21 TheMatrix wrote:
I don't like these changes or lack thereof.
For the Zerg race I'd like to see the baneling, roach and corrupter gone and the lurker and 2 more units introduced.
For the Protoss race I'd like to see the Colossus and VoidRay gone and the reaver and one more units introduced.
For the Terran race I'd like to see the Marauder, Viking and Thor gone and firebat and valkyrie introduced.
I'd also like to see fungal growth be a slow spell, rather than immobilizing spell. Something like 30% to 50% reduction in speed for 4 seconds.
I'd also like to see storm do 110 damage over 4 seconds.
On the general gameplay side of things I'd like to see unit selection points to be bigger so they don't clump up so much. Really seems like you are playing the wrong game. How so? I've been playing Blizzard games since 1998 and I think I have some knowledge as to what is best. I don't have a big confidence in a red alert 2 and battle for middle earth game designer. I'd rather have the old starcraft game designer instead of Dustin Browder. Dustin Browder has been designing games since 1995, some of his games becoming best strategy game of a year, I think he has like infinitly more knowledge than you when it comes down to what is best (not to mention that "best" is a dumb discussion to begin with. Different game --> different "best") Also noone around here has a lot of confidence in a guy, whose first post in an SC2 forum is about turning SC2 into Broodwar. Seems like you just clicked the wrong button, there is a Broodwar forum, go and use it. So what? His best game he's worked on was Vigilante 8 and did a good job with Red Alert 2. Either way Red Alert 2 was as unbalanced as one game can be and all of the other games he designed were arcade type strategy games with no micro, macro or strategy. He is not the guy who knows anything on how to continue in the footsteps of Brood War. Shane Dabiri and Rob Pardo should have been the game designers and not Dustin Browder. Everyone who hates argues that "SC2 should be more like Broodwar" and the opposite "Then play Broodwar, this is SC2" arguments are stupid. StarCraft 2 should have been the evolution of Broodwar. Now it's more like a bad C&C crossover which basically was verified by recycled ideas of Browder during the HotS presentation. Races were designed which much less hard mechanics to appeal to the mainstream, but which will 100% backfire since the watchability of deathballs are not as exciting as, e.g. good marine micro (one of the few examples of old fashioned BW hard mechanics in SC2). Conclusion is that C&C style units don't work for a game like SC and if Browder won't stop to implement the units from his past games, SC2 will be ruined in the long run for highest level players, i.e. we won't see any long-term consistency in player base and a decline of interest within the viewership at least for certain matchups. Well said. StarCraft is just another caliber compared games as Red Alert 2 or Battle for Middle-Earth; none of these games were played online on a serious competitive level. There is a huge difference in designing single player RTS games and competitive games. For the former, you don't need to entertain players for a long period of time. You can get away with implementing fancy units that impress in the first place, but then impair the overall game design. For a competitive game such as SC2 that must be designed to provide long-term motivation for several years, you have to design a game much more detailed, providing a strong strategic depth. SC2 has none of this. Unfortunately, Dustin Browder has proven over and over again that he simply does not care about this and would rather squeeze in allegedly fancy units in the game or - even worse - just recycle units from his old games rather than listen to the competitive community which comprises exactly those people who keep this game alive in the long run. These commonplace statements are getting very very old, mostly due to the fact that it isn't true in the slightest and is just a jab from someone on the outside looking in. Be honest with yourself, you have 0 idea what it takes to make a video game. As well you have 0 clue what goes on at blizzard behind closed doors. To inject an emotion into someone you don't even know is just ridiculous. Your statement is basically just fluff, with no real substance. There are always people who love to bitch but bring nothing to the table. But can't you see that SC2 is a Red Alert clone and has had no success as a competitive game whatsoever, made by a designer that actively hates the Starcraft franchise? No, I can't. No success? Dude you're tripping.
You only have to watch the battle.net active players. It is a lot less than warcraft3 or broodwar some years ago. Or compared with the beta/season1 there are a abysmall difference in active players. And nobody plays ladder anymore. Blizzard is killing the game.
|
On April 16 2012 01:24 Arkless wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 00:51 Grumbels wrote:On April 15 2012 23:38 Arkless wrote:On April 15 2012 20:17 .syd. wrote:On April 15 2012 19:41 VoO wrote:On April 15 2012 09:36 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 06:18 Big J wrote:On April 15 2012 05:47 TheMatrix wrote:On April 15 2012 05:41 To3-Knee wrote:On April 15 2012 05:21 TheMatrix wrote:
I don't like these changes or lack thereof.
For the Zerg race I'd like to see the baneling, roach and corrupter gone and the lurker and 2 more units introduced.
For the Protoss race I'd like to see the Colossus and VoidRay gone and the reaver and one more units introduced.
For the Terran race I'd like to see the Marauder, Viking and Thor gone and firebat and valkyrie introduced.
I'd also like to see fungal growth be a slow spell, rather than immobilizing spell. Something like 30% to 50% reduction in speed for 4 seconds.
I'd also like to see storm do 110 damage over 4 seconds.
On the general gameplay side of things I'd like to see unit selection points to be bigger so they don't clump up so much. Really seems like you are playing the wrong game. How so? I've been playing Blizzard games since 1998 and I think I have some knowledge as to what is best. I don't have a big confidence in a red alert 2 and battle for middle earth game designer. I'd rather have the old starcraft game designer instead of Dustin Browder. Dustin Browder has been designing games since 1995, some of his games becoming best strategy game of a year, I think he has like infinitly more knowledge than you when it comes down to what is best (not to mention that "best" is a dumb discussion to begin with. Different game --> different "best") Also noone around here has a lot of confidence in a guy, whose first post in an SC2 forum is about turning SC2 into Broodwar. Seems like you just clicked the wrong button, there is a Broodwar forum, go and use it. So what? His best game he's worked on was Vigilante 8 and did a good job with Red Alert 2. Either way Red Alert 2 was as unbalanced as one game can be and all of the other games he designed were arcade type strategy games with no micro, macro or strategy. He is not the guy who knows anything on how to continue in the footsteps of Brood War. Shane Dabiri and Rob Pardo should have been the game designers and not Dustin Browder. Everyone who hates argues that "SC2 should be more like Broodwar" and the opposite "Then play Broodwar, this is SC2" arguments are stupid. StarCraft 2 should have been the evolution of Broodwar. Now it's more like a bad C&C crossover which basically was verified by recycled ideas of Browder during the HotS presentation. Races were designed which much less hard mechanics to appeal to the mainstream, but which will 100% backfire since the watchability of deathballs are not as exciting as, e.g. good marine micro (one of the few examples of old fashioned BW hard mechanics in SC2). Conclusion is that C&C style units don't work for a game like SC and if Browder won't stop to implement the units from his past games, SC2 will be ruined in the long run for highest level players, i.e. we won't see any long-term consistency in player base and a decline of interest within the viewership at least for certain matchups. Well said. StarCraft is just another caliber compared games as Red Alert 2 or Battle for Middle-Earth; none of these games were played online on a serious competitive level. There is a huge difference in designing single player RTS games and competitive games. For the former, you don't need to entertain players for a long period of time. You can get away with implementing fancy units that impress in the first place, but then impair the overall game design. For a competitive game such as SC2 that must be designed to provide long-term motivation for several years, you have to design a game much more detailed, providing a strong strategic depth. SC2 has none of this. Unfortunately, Dustin Browder has proven over and over again that he simply does not care about this and would rather squeeze in allegedly fancy units in the game or - even worse - just recycle units from his old games rather than listen to the competitive community which comprises exactly those people who keep this game alive in the long run. These commonplace statements are getting very very old, mostly due to the fact that it isn't true in the slightest and is just a jab from someone on the outside looking in. Be honest with yourself, you have 0 idea what it takes to make a video game. As well you have 0 clue what goes on at blizzard behind closed doors. To inject an emotion into someone you don't even know is just ridiculous. Your statement is basically just fluff, with no real substance. There are always people who love to bitch but bring nothing to the table. But can't you see that SC2 is a Red Alert clone and has had no success as a competitive game whatsoever, made by a designer that actively hates the Starcraft franchise? No, I can't. No success? Dude you're tripping.
Being one of last fanboys prevents you from seeing real flaws. Are you forgotting ladder is shrinking rapidly season after season, viewers numbers are dropping ? Most viewed match in SC2 have been Nada vs Boxer not long after beta and it has been downhill ever since ..
|
On April 15 2012 12:17 Dental Floss wrote:
All I want to see in HoTS is the unit pictures in the bottom center be grouped in sets of 10 instead of groups of 8. Right now you select 20 marines and it shows 3 rows. Eight, Eight, Two. Who was coding this and thought "you know what base humans love to count in? EIGHT!"
Actually... 20 is eight, eight, four. lol 
|
On April 15 2012 12:17 Dental Floss wrote:
All I want to see in HoTS is the unit pictures in the bottom center be grouped in sets of 10 instead of groups of 8. Right now you select 20 marines and it shows 3 rows. Eight, Eight, Two. Who was coding this and thought "you know what base humans love to count in? EIGHT!"
I think twelve would be superior. I count in twelves.
|
On April 16 2012 01:19 KookyMonster wrote:
I am sad to see the replicant gone. I wanted Protoss Brood Lords...then again, I guess that's what the Tempest is now.
This is something that concerned me. It's basically just a brood lord that can shoot up from the sound of it. How utterly boring..
You know what would be pretty nice? Let carriers kite things. Maybe give Protoss a real air to air unit that doesn't suck?
I mean the only reason carriers aren't actually viable are Vikings and Corruptors. Corruptors can be morphed into brood lords after the carrier army is dead, vikings can be built two at a time.
Remove vikings from being able to be reactored out and carriers will make a much strong showing. Make zerg have to choose between either corruptors or brood lords and carriers make a much stronger showing.
Interestingly enough, in brood war, terrans couldn't pump double viking production from 2-4 starports and thus, couldn't hard counter carriers. Zerg actually did have to choose between powerful anti-air and powerful anti-ground, so hard countering carriers wasn't a process of: Build my hard-counter to air, morph them into my hard-counter to ground, go win. Between that and the fact that carriers could move while their interceptors were out made them a powerful unit. I don't really know about PvP, though these days I don't see going carriers being the worst idea so long as you build up a speedlot force underneath it--but pvp is such a binary matchup right now that this doesn't seem reasonable to ever try and do--not to mention the sheer economic requirement needed to go carriers.
I'm really upset with blizzard's ideas for protoss air. The carrier is actually a very strong unit, but the void ray and phoenix are just -so- bad at dealing with other air units that there's no way you can go sky-toss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
