|
Hey guys,
having had a look at the new units introduced in HotS, I'm really curious about one thing:
Why is Blizzard so reluctant to bring back some of the units from Brood War?
Take for instance the War Hound:
When first it was announced, it seemed to have an Anti-Air missile and operated very much like the Goliath. Back then I was kind of puzzled by how they did not just bring back the Goliath, with the awesome sound any animation of their Anti-Air rockets.
Also strange seems the Swarm Host.
People asked for the Lurker, people got the Lurker. Well, kind of.
A burrowed siege unit that can be used to break fortified positions?
Alright, but why give Zerg a unit that's so shockingly similar to the Brood Lord instead of the sleek, horrifying Lurker people love?
I am now die hard Broodwar fan, only having heard from it once SC2 was out, only having played ~50 games vs. the computer, only having a very vague idea about how units work.
So please don't crucify me if I got something wrong. 
What do you think?
|
Because Dustin Browder is cancer with his "go play BW it's a great game" line. He has no talent, is too old, and isn't suited for the job he has. Him and his goons prefer their pride over admitting they introduced fundamental balance flaws that can be fixed by taking a hint from some of the BW units.
Sorry about the negative tone, but it sums up the answer to your question.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
It's lose-lose for Blizzard. If they bring back exact copies they get flamed for lacking creativity. If they add new units they get flamed because there was nothing wrong with BW units, so why change them?
|
My guess is because, as a game developer, it really isn't fun to do the same things over and over again, you would much rather invent new stuff.
Imagine being the one that came up with the idea of the colossus, you can then be proud because it is being loved by many, it really isn't the same as just re-coding the reaver.
|
On June 17 2012 00:59 DemigodcelpH wrote:
Because Dustin Browder is cancer with his "go play BW it's a great game" line. He has no talent, is too old, and isn't suited for the job he has. Him and his goons prefer their pride over admitting they introduced fundamental balance flaws that can be fixed by taking a hint from some of the BW units.
Sorry about the negative tone, but it sums up the answer to your question.
I bet you'd do a hella lot better job that Dustin Browder.
And they do admit it, hence the battle hellion or the swarm host introductions.
|
On June 17 2012 01:00 jalstar wrote:
It's lose-lose for Blizzard. If they bring back exact copies they get flamed for lacking creativity. If they add new units they get flamed because there was nothing wrong with BW units, so why change them?
Also Dustin Browder doesn't want to be compared to what might very well end up being a better game.
He's worried about his job and his success as a developer.
But yeah I think anyone who follows SC closely realizes more BW units is only good.
|
They chose not to go down the Dota 2 road and just 'remake Brood War in 3d'.
I think it's best to stick to that now, Sc2 is a great game.
|
On June 17 2012 01:02 Flightan wrote:
My guess is because, as a game developer, it really isn't fun to do the same things over and over again, you would much rather invent new stuff.
Imagine being the one that came up with the idea of the colossus, you can then be proud because it is being loved by many, it really isn't the same as just re-coding the reaver.
Considering everyone hates the Colossus, I wouldn't celebrate too quickly. Nobody is asking for units that are identical to BW counterparts; we're asking for units that respect the standard set by BW: high skill-cap, specialized units with clear weaknesses. Instead we have units like the Colossus/Roach/Marauder/Marine/Ling/Infestor/Immortal which are basically good against almost everything and are never a bad idea to build. What's more with the exception of the Marine, none of them are really micro-heavy.
|
On June 17 2012 01:03 SimDawg wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2012 01:00 jalstar wrote:
It's lose-lose for Blizzard. If they bring back exact copies they get flamed for lacking creativity. If they add new units they get flamed because there was nothing wrong with BW units, so why change them? Also Dustin Browder doesn't want to be compared to what might very well end up being a better game. He's worried about his job and his success as a developer. But yeah I think anyone who follows SC closely realizes more BW units is only good.
I would love exact copies of BW units, but their review scores would tank. Even WoL was criticized by the mainstream for being too much like BW.
|
On June 17 2012 01:04 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2012 01:02 Flightan wrote:
My guess is because, as a game developer, it really isn't fun to do the same things over and over again, you would much rather invent new stuff.
Imagine being the one that came up with the idea of the colossus, you can then be proud because it is being loved by many, it really isn't the same as just re-coding the reaver. Considering everyone hates the Colossus, I wouldn't celebrate too quickly. Nobody is asking for units that are identical to BW counterparts; we're asking for units that respect the standard set by BW: high skill-cap, specialized units with clear weaknesses. Instead we have units like the Colossus/Roach/Marauder/Marine/Ling/Infestor/Immortal which are basically good against almost everything and are never a bad idea to build. What's more with the exception of the Marine, none of them are really micro-heavy.
WHOOSH
Straight over your head.
|
I mean, I loved Brood War, and I'm glad many of the units and mechanics of the game are in this one, but why are we clamoring for units that we've used time and again in a game released almost 15 years ago? I'm not interested in still using the Lurker or Goliath. It would just come off as laziness to bring back a bunch of old units.
|
On June 17 2012 01:04 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2012 01:02 Flightan wrote:
My guess is because, as a game developer, it really isn't fun to do the same things over and over again, you would much rather invent new stuff.
Imagine being the one that came up with the idea of the colossus, you can then be proud because it is being loved by many, it really isn't the same as just re-coding the reaver. Considering everyone hates the Colossus, I wouldn't celebrate too quickly. Nobody is asking for units that are identical to BW counterparts; we're asking for units that respect the standard set by BW: high skill-cap, specialized units with clear weaknesses. Instead we have units like the Colossus/Roach/Marauder/Marine/Ling/Infestor/Immortal which are basically good against almost everything and are never a bad idea to build. What's more with the exception of the Marine, none of them are really micro-heavy.
Colossus, Roach, and Marauder I can sort of understand, but lings, infestors, and immortals are all really micro-heavy if used properly. Breaking tank lines, splitting vs banelings, infestor "hit and run from tank shots", and warp prism/immortal micro is all common at high levels.
|
United States10890 Posts
I really wish that SC2 was just a 3D BW, and I also think that SC2 : BW is probably more fun / better game than the actual SC2. I hope that Blizzard makes a complete remake of BW one day in 3D, that would be sick. But for now you just either have to play BW or play SC2, or both like me. :D
|
You forgot the flying defiler, the viper. But ye, blizz staff is running out of ideas.
Just look at the tempest....
|
There is a major difference. BW units had less of a micro-limiting aspect to them. The only true micro-limiting features were Stasis and the Queen's ensnare (one of the rarest abilities used by one of the rarest units used). This is a major difference to SC2, where forcefields, broodlings, fungal, vortex and now the swarm hosts and mineral-freeze thing. This has a lot to do with the new pathfinding elements and clumping nature of the game. Where in BW goons wouldn't clump no matter how hard you tried, now units just naturally blob. Lurkers absolutely demolish clumped up units, so instead, we get less damage but a micro limit. These are also necessary to prolong battles, as they tend to be over very quickly (Protoss, I'm looking at you).
There seems to be a difference in the game mechanics on a fundamental level requiring a different design attitude (or vice versa). The new units seem to be more in line with BW ideas to allow extra fluidity to the game.
|
On June 17 2012 01:00 jalstar wrote:
It's lose-lose for Blizzard. If they bring back exact copies they get flamed for lacking creativity. If they add new units they get flamed because there was nothing wrong with BW units, so why change them?
Would they really get flamed for bringing exact copies? I mean look at dota 2, it is exactly the same as dota 1, just better graphics, nobody is flaming them for lack of creativity.
|
This will quickly turn out to be another SC II bash thread as it seems. Starcraft II is a different game with different mechanics. Even if you would reintroduce all that is brood war it would probably play out differently. Also it is not Blizzards intent to copy BW. Dustin Browder even said they would reintroduce the Goliath instead of the Warhound if they have to, balance wise ( I think, correct me if I'm wrong) but they want to create a new game with new ideas.
The cool thing about it is that they dont force new ideas closed mindedly, they only favor them. At least that's how I feel about it.
I personally like that approach seeing how everyone complains about CoD etc always being the same. SC II is not BW with different graphics obviously and consequently it shouldnt be viewed as such. Since BW is such a great game why would you make another game when BW is already out there and playable?
Better Graphics for better enjoyability of the viewers I would guess but even the step from 2D to 3D would make it feel very differently. Improving the AI would have huge consequences, too, I think.
|
On June 17 2012 01:09 Kazius wrote:
There is a major difference. BW units had less of a micro-limiting aspect to them. The only true micro-limiting features were Stasis and the Queen's ensnare (one of the rarest abilities used by one of the rarest units used). This is a major difference to SC2, where forcefields, broodlings, fungal, vortex and now the swarm hosts and mineral-freeze thing. This has a lot to do with the new pathfinding elements and clumping nature of the game. Where in BW goons wouldn't clump no matter how hard you tried, now units just naturally blob. Lurkers absolutely demolish clumped up units, so instead, we get less damage but a micro limit. These are also necessary to prolong battles, as they tend to be over very quickly (Protoss, I'm looking at you).
There seems to be a difference in the game mechanics on a fundamental level requiring a different design attitude (or vice versa). The new units seem to be more in line with BW ideas to allow extra fluidity to the game.
Also Maelstrom. And Lockdown. (And critters  )
|
I'm really glad they're not tossing in BW units. Some people don't want to play a reuniformed BW. I loved the Lurker, Defiler, Science Vessel and Reaver but I want some new shit in here for SC2.
|
People moan no matter what happens. SC2 is already pretty successful as an eSport but they also gave to cater for different people, new shiny units mean more casual sales, which is potentially more people watching SC2. I am totally fine with them not adding broodwar units as long as they improve the game as a spectators perspective in some way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
