EPTDustin Browder, David Kim Interviews - Page 22
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
nihoh
Australia978 Posts
| ||
|
RogerChillingworth
2781 Posts
On June 13 2012 12:04 Kennigit wrote: Editing. It was supposed to be 20 but we got cut off (they counted set up time as interview time without us knowing). We couldn't edit properly till we got home. that's fucking lame as hell. cutting off the biggest e-sports community website on the internet. not to mention his responses to questions were hilarious. "haven't seen a lot of mothership". at least this short interview was illuminating enough, and if we get an amazing game at the end of all these expansions, it will have been purely a stroke of luck,. | ||
|
Sawamura
Malaysia7602 Posts
On June 14 2012 12:30 Roarer wrote: I think it takes about 5 to 10 min to give a detail explanantion for a legit point .... I believe most people can do it while keeping his full-time job and performing other obligations ^ ^ you know that 5 to 10 minutes can be used to spend on other more "worthy" things ? | ||
|
Garmer
1286 Posts
| ||
|
Zorgaz
Sweden2951 Posts
 | ||
|
Romitelli
Brunei Darussalam566 Posts
| ||
|
Vadrigar
Bulgaria2379 Posts
On June 14 2012 22:58 Romitelli wrote: Dustin Browder gets it. sure. | ||
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
 ! | ||
|
_Search_
Canada180 Posts
| ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On June 14 2012 20:00 Sawamura wrote: you know that 5 to 10 minutes can be used to spend on other more "worthy" things ? I want to make sure I understand this. A person doesn't have time to give an explanation of why his points are true. He simply asserts that they are as though this were the Inerrant, Divinly Inspired Word of the Living God. How exactly is that useful? I don't care that someone thinks Oracles are just a poor knockoff of an Arbiter. The only way that is useful information is if I know why they think that way. Only with that reasoning stated can someone argue against it or simply accept the argument as correct. Someone barfing their opinion on the forum is only useful if that opinion is explained, so that a real discussion can be had. Otherwise, it's just noise. And we get enough noise on this forum as is. If you can't take the time to explain your point, then don't bother making a point at all. | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On June 15 2012 00:15 _Search_ wrote: These interviewers do NOT know how to do an interview. I think differently. They were able to pull interesting things out of the interviewees. | ||
|
noD
2230 Posts
| ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
Last I checked it seemed to be the most verbal complaint about HOTS. 1) Its Ugly. 2) BH + WH is boring to watch and practically broken against Toss. 3) Adds to the Tank hate concept of HOTS. | ||
|
Mora
Canada5235 Posts
On June 15 2012 02:33 [F_]aths wrote: I think differently. They were able to pull interesting things out of the interviewees. I can't argue that. But as someone who has both given and received many interviews, there are ways to pull information more elegantly than to purposely misconstrue the interviewee's explanations. | ||
|
Executor1
1353 Posts
| ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
On June 15 2012 03:38 Mora wrote: I can't argue that. But as someone who has both given and received many interviews, there are ways to pull information more elegantly than to purposely misconstrue the interviewee's explanations. I feel alot of the questions asked were very weak. Nothing I heard from the interview was new. Except for: 1) DB is okay with Vortex ZvP Lategame. + Show Spoiler + Personally I feel that the reliance on 1 Vortex is stupid. Stephano showed that he could mitigate the effectiveness of Vortex with spreading out his BL. Not to mention that a NP can really ruin a Protoss' day. The concept if good, but I feel that Motherships should be replaced with a Stargate T3 caster(Same Spells, but mini versions. Imagine Multiple Vortex' and the Zerg having to dodge them. Maybe even give a 1-2 sec delay in the Vortex effect in order to allow Vortex dodging.), or maybe a re-imergance of the Dark Archon with new spells? 2) DK believes that Terran need a 1A Option. + Show Spoiler + Why the hell do we need 1A options? No race should have 1A options. Defensive styles are okay, but have them require control and strategy. For example, BW Mech was very defensive and very strong in the lategame. However you didn't simply mean you could 1A to victory, you needed to learn to strategically move across the map and have exceptional control in order to prevent Zeal Bombings, Recalls, and Stasis. Is it okay that Terran have a less micro intensive option like mech? Yes, but when you make it as easy as Massing BH+WH+Viking+Ghost, your just asking for bad game-play. Almost all complaints in SC2 have involved the 1A DeathBall, and you want to add more? BH+WH plays exactly like MM without the Stim or Medic. Why more of the same? | ||
|
Treble557
United States221 Posts
| ||
|
Dingobloo
Australia1903 Posts
On June 15 2012 04:06 GinDo wrote: I feel alot of the questions asked were very weak. Nothing I heard from the interview was new. Except for: 1) DB is okay with Vortex ZvP Lategame. + Show Spoiler + Personally I feel that the reliance on 1 Vortex is stupid. Stephano showed that he could mitigate the effectiveness of Vortex with spreading out his BL. Not to mention that a NP can really ruin a Protoss' day. The concept if good, but I feel that Motherships should be replaced with a Stargate T3 caster(Same Spells, but mini versions. Imagine Multiple Vortex' and the Zerg having to dodge them. Maybe even give a 1-2 sec delay in the Vortex effect in order to allow Vortex dodging.), or maybe a re-imergance of the Dark Archon with new spells? They're okay with it..for now, but they actually DID change it for Heart of the Swarm, vortex only hits ground they have a new air-only stasis spell which no one apparently tested or got footage of. So no, they're not going to reintroduce the dark archon, the reuse of mixed templar is one of the successes of only having 1 archon, and they're not going to scrap the mothership just to add something that's IDENTICAL to the mothership with less effective spells, that's a bit of a waste of their art budget. | ||
|
Faent
Canada94 Posts
Side note, the thumbnail for the video looks like David Kim is blowing fire. | ||
|
Roarer
Hong Kong124 Posts
On June 15 2012 04:06 GinDo wrote: I feel alot of the questions asked were very weak. Nothing I heard from the interview was new. Except for: 1) DB is okay with Vortex ZvP Lategame. + Show Spoiler + Personally I feel that the reliance on 1 Vortex is stupid. Stephano showed that he could mitigate the effectiveness of Vortex with spreading out his BL. Not to mention that a NP can really ruin a Protoss' day. The concept if good, but I feel that Motherships should be replaced with a Stargate T3 caster(Same Spells, but mini versions. Imagine Multiple Vortex' and the Zerg having to dodge them. Maybe even give a 1-2 sec delay in the Vortex effect in order to allow Vortex dodging.), or maybe a re-imergance of the Dark Archon with new spells? 2) DK believes that Terran need a 1A Option. + Show Spoiler + Why the hell do we need 1A options? No race should have 1A options. Defensive styles are okay, but have them require control and strategy. For example, BW Mech was very defensive and very strong in the lategame. However you didn't simply mean you could 1A to victory, you needed to learn to strategically move across the map and have exceptional control in order to prevent Zeal Bombings, Recalls, and Stasis. Is it okay that Terran have a less micro intensive option like mech? Yes, but when you make it as easy as Massing BH+WH+Viking+Ghost, your just asking for bad game-play. Almost all complaints in SC2 have involved the 1A DeathBall, and you want to add more? BH+WH plays exactly like MM without the Stim or Medic. Why more of the same? Regarding point 1 , I agree with you that Dustin did not realize what the problem is. It seems the Blizzard team(or at least Dustin) is not understanding what kind of game the community wants. When he draw the comparison between Mothership vs Zerg deathball and ghost vs high templar dance, he did not realize that the community likes the high templar battle way more than the mothership one. Even though both situations are affected "by a few clicks", we want a situation where someone can overcome the opponent through skills. The ghost dance can involve positioning from both spell castres , observers positioning, warp prism micro etc while there will only be 1 mothership in the game, making a limited amount of positioning decisions. This allows the ghost vs templar dance to show more skill while the mothership battle feels more luck based. If Blizzard continue to leave out the skill factor in developing the game, I am worried they will make more and more poor game design decisions. Regarding point 2, I think David Kim made a good point when he said an A moving army may not require that much micro, but it can be requiring other skills. The best example we had so far is the Broodlord army. Yeah, of course they need fungal support, but the army is still an A-moving base army(that's why so many zergs get caught in a vortex = =). In a serious note though, you have to get a healthy income, a solid base defense and save enough energy on the infestors. All the supporting factors to allow an A-moving army to work as intended can be hard to get. The army itself is not everything. You may not require heavy micro to use them well, but you may need good economy management and scouting to hold off timing attack to get he army up. However, I do agree that the A-move deathball of the protoss is not that hard to get = =" so...I think Blizzard has to put in some effort before they release the Terran A-move army to the public... and I would also add that a positional army should be more interesting in every way. It just add in more elements and factors when evaluating / predicting battle outcome. I am fine with haveing more army compositions options as long as they eventually add in the positional army =﹏= | ||
| ||
