|
4713 Posts
Perhaps the emphasis on pure BW units is wrong, but Blizzard's reluctance to re-introduce and re-use BW ideas and concepts is much more mind boggling.
Ok we get it, they can't copy paste units directly from BW to SC2, because:
1 The engine is different and require a ton more tweaks
2 Blizzard would take tons of flack for not being creative
3 Blizzard wants to create a new game with a new experience.
That is all fine and dandy, but for god sakes there is nothing stopping them from using some of the fundamental concepts that made BW successful.
And what I'm talking about are concepts of space control, micro forcing abilities and micro friendliness.
It took Blizzard 2 fucking years to realize that races need space control of some sort to make the game more interesting. In BW the spider mine, tank, dark swarm and lurker provided space control. We have the tank but a heavily nerfed version compared to BW, Blizzard is re-introducing different versions of the spider mine, the lurker and the swarm.
However space control is still problematic given that high ground mechanics are a joke compared to BW.
Also Blizzard has yet to fully realize that micro friendliness and micro forcing abilities are such a huge thing.
They are on the right track with the widow mine, but at the same time they introduce boring attack move units that have no place in a game like SC2, units like the battle hellion and warhound.
Ok, I get this as well, the game engine is so smart that units clump up and it makes it hard to micro like in BW, because in BW all units benefited form micro. But that still isn't an excuse to make boring attack move units like the colossus. If the engine is so good that you can't micro like the BW way, then give units some abilities/stats that makes them benefit from micro.
Terran bio is a perfect example, it benefits a ton from micro like stutter step, splits, dodges etc. Banelings are great because they can be micro-ed to be more effective, by splitting them up to hit more stuff and they also force micro.
Zealots aren't so great because they don't require much micro when they get charge, but at least they force out a lot of micro from the opponent.
I think concepts like these are what people should be most critical of when discussing BW compared to SC2, because while Blizzard has done a good job in some areas, they have done poorly in others.
|
On June 17 2012 01:07 jalstar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2012 01:04 Shiori wrote: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.
Stop saying like all of that is any challenging, except marine/marauder micro everything else is a joke.
|
The main problem i see is that there should be added units whose effectiveness is directly proportional to the micro used, not units whose effective are independent from the micro, like the oracle. (1) Dustin says he's amazed by MKP's marine micro. Well why doesn't he stop adding colossus like units like the warhound or the oracle, which require no micro skill compared with marine splitting?
It's true that mechanical-like actions like there were in BW should be removed, but having 1-click units like the oracle and the warhound even for spectators is not very fun to watch. They may look cool at first, but when the novelty disappears the skill cap is so low, it's always the same thing and it quickly gets boring.
(1) though the oracle not only is it micro-less, it also makes a skill your opponent only has one option to do. Attack the walls on the minerals (1a). There's no micro involved on both fronts, and it doesn't even look cool so the oracle is the epitome of a boring unit.
|
All i know is i feel sorry for Protoss players, BW Protoss looks really good to play with lots of really interesting units.
In SC2 the Zealot is a joke meatshield, the Collossus is dismal 1a unit , the Carrier is a waste of gas , Templer storm is now just a "breeze", the stalker is a shadow of the dragoon..
This whole race has been reduced to a dismal game to watch \ play where a protoss has to sit in his base untill he gets the deathball before they can move out, all because Warp gate is a disaster to balance
HOTS will be great fun for Zerg ands Terran, but i really fear for Protoss. The new units\abilities dont inspire at all except the new harras unit ..which guess what ? its an Arbitor from BW
|
People are basically hypocrites. They say they want maps like BW, units like BW, even players from BW, but when you ask why they don't just watch/play BW they don't want to. It's like a woman who always complains that her new boyfriend isn't like her old one that she dumped.
|
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.
I hate it how sc2 is basicly 3rd Bw with half-assed Bw units, Blizzard will most likely never remove bad units like Colossus unless the community is dying out or whatever and they need to pull a desperate move.
Marine/marauder needs to be split and you have to kite but even then eventually you can just a-move when your winning, which displays the bad decision of adding unlimited(almost i guess) units in a control group. Your not microing when your fighting.
This is one of the reasons i don't like watching competitive sc2 since there is pretty much 0 difference in people controlling their armies and how they use them, with the exception of terrans splitting their marines/marauders of course, but the rest is split-1a-2t, you get my point. It's not like HerO's storms are better then Sage's.
I think HoTs is looking better then WoL but with added a-move units(Tempest, Warhound, Battle Hellion) my opinion probably won't change, instead of making sc2 units like BW, they should have made pretty much everything different except remain the UI and the 3 races.
|
On June 17 2012 18:32 Guamshin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2012 01:04 Shiori wrote: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. I hate it how sc2 is basicly 3rd Bw with half-assed Bw units, Blizzard will most likely never remove bad units like Colossus unless the community is dying out or whatever and they need to pull a desperate move. Marine/marauder needs to be split and you have to kite but even then eventually you can just a-move when your winning, which displays the bad decision of adding unlimited(almost i guess) units in a control group. Your not microing when your fighting. This is one of the reasons i don't like watching competitive sc2 since there is pretty much 0 difference in people controlling their armies and how they use them, with the exception of terrans splitting their marines/marauders of course, but the rest is split-1a-2t, you get my point. It's not like HerO's storms are better then Sage's. I think HoTs is looking better then WoL but with added a-move units(Tempest, Warhound, Battle Hellion) my opinion probably won't change, instead of making sc2 units like BW, they should have made pretty much everything different except remain the UI and the 3 races.
Your problem is that you're not paying close enough attention to how much control is actually going on in Starcraft 2 because it's happening so fast you can't follow it.
Starcraft 2 is faster paced than Brood War. Armies are built quicker, and can be destroyed even quicker than that. That said, there's a TON of control required at the pro level, and the truth is that people like you are either just missing it because it's happening too fast for you to follow it or you're purposefully neglecting it for the sake of argument.
I'll give you some examples.
1. Forcing siege tank volleys with expendable units in order to make charging a tank line more effective.
2. Baneling landmines
3. hold position micro of any sort especially involving the early game with workers.
4. Utilizing the factory in TvP to force charge out of Zealots or to block off the ramp in entombed valley.
5. Medivac/Prism load unload micro.
6. Ghost vs High Templar vs Infestor
etc. etc.
Some of those examples like the 1 and 4 are subtle, others like 6 are points of interest for every match up and get a lot of coverage but in all cases control is JUST as important in SC2 as it was in Brood War, the difference is that the game itself is so fast paced that oftentimes the best control is hard to see amidst all the graphical violence that goes on during SC2 battles. Posts like yours just tend to focus on ONE thing about SC2 that you don't like and use that for your reasoning for why the game is fundamentally flawed.
|
Because Blizzard wants to give the World a 2nd chance at beating :
BoxeR,oov,Xellos,NaDa,Flash.
|
Why are some musicians so reluctant to do the same album over and over again, but still stick to some of their trademark styles? Obviously, they want to do something new while still being recognizable and that's good.
The swarm host is quite different from the lurker and the brood lord. Lurker and BL fire when in range as all other units, the SH lays a foundation for attack waves which is new and could create a whole new dynamic for zerg attacks.
Just using BW units would be unbelievably lame and would raise the question whether they've lost all their creativity and even how they justify the price for SC2.
|
On June 17 2012 18:58 FrogOfWar wrote:
Why are some musicians so reluctant to do the same album over and over again, but still stick to some of their trademark styles? Obviously, they want to do something new while still being recognizable and that's good.
The swarm host is quite different from the lurker and the brood lord. Lurker and BL fire when in range as all other units, the SH lays a foundation for attack waves which is new and could create a whole new dynamic for zerg attacks.
Just using BW units would be unbelievably lame and would raise the question whether they've lost all their creativity and even how they justify the price for SC2.
DotA 2 is just a remade DotA, nobody is complaining about creativity because its a good game, granted it's free. 50-60$ for a game IS pretty steep I guess.
|
People asked for the Lurker well... maybe the people who are die hard bw players like your self. As far as i know the demographic witin the sc2 player base is only made up by a minority bw hardcore players.
|
On June 17 2012 18:04 Guamshin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2012 01:07 jalstar wrote:On June 17 2012 01:04 Shiori wrote: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. Stop saying like all of that is any challenging, except marine/marauder micro everything else is a joke.
Bullshit.
Have you ever watched ling baneling wars in ZvZ?
Even the best zergs in the world aren't remotely close to the micro control of lings/banelings
|
I Think Blizzard got really lucky with Broodwar. The original team involved had real talent and also had a good slice of luck in producing it. This combined with a community especally in Korean has kept it alive all these years.
There is a saying "if it isnt broke, dont fix it", the additional units added to SC2 dont really inspire to be honest.
TV broadcasting requires good SFX these days and thats the biggest thing thats selling SC2. If broodwar had supped up graphics and sound would we see Kespa making the trasition to SC2, thats the question?
I can understand the current SC2 team wanting to add their own units, but i have havent seen much from them that indicates they have the creativity to a good job
|
Oh... again the BW butthurts. Close this thread please, it does not contribute anything besides giving an opportunity for the vocal minority of "BW hardcores" to whine about how much of a shitty game SCII is.
SCII did not kill BW, it's age did and it's lack of foreign scene. Now that scene develops in a way it had never developed for BW and you want to bitch about it? Finally RTS e-sports are starting to become more mainstream in the west and you bitch about it? Yes, the ability to reach platinum with macro and an a-move with 60 apm makes SCII definately more accesible. And you bitch about it?
Still pros use 300 (SCII apm) and it's not close enough to being skill-capped, every observer can see points of vulnerability that could have been exploited, army movements that could have been done, units that could have been controlled better, strategies that could have been used. And you bitch about a low skill-cap? FFS, go grab an MLG title if the skill cap is so low.
The thread has derailed far from it's title and I believe it would be justified to take it down. The OP wanted to discuss about the re-introduction of BW units and even from the first page the discussion went downhill. How less micro friendly is SCII, how much people hate infestors/forcefields, how much a-moving there is and a DOTA2 discussion. Very few posts stayed on topic and actually discussed the introduction of some BW-units in HotS.
We get it. You like BW. Go play it. And stop whining every chance you get. You are a MINORITY. Get over it.
|
On June 17 2012 18:29 BrosephBrostar wrote:
People are basically hypocrites. They say they want maps like BW, units like BW, even players from BW, but when you ask why they don't just watch/play BW they don't want to. It's like a woman who always complains that her new boyfriend isn't like her old one that she dumped.
We do... But blizzard have tried to kill BW for years and finally succeeded. Now we want a game that's actually worthy of BW. Currently, SC2 is not. And giving SC2 engine's flaws as a reason for not introducing successful BW concepts (e.g. units clumping up to an extreme, which they can easily fix...). It's idiotic of blizzard to build their whole game around crappy engine, which forces them to introduce more crappy changes like nerfing all sorts of spells and units.
The fact that they think their new pathing algorythm is somehow "superior" to BW, WC3, CoH, AoX or many other RTS games that don't have clumping, is beyond ridiculous. That's as if Quake's developer said "our new engine is so much superior to the old one - we've finally gotten rid of starfe jumping, rocket jumping and so on".
There's a difference between bugs and "unintended features". Just because blizzard did not intend for something to exist, does not mean they have to get rid of it. Void Ray fazing is a prime example of that. It had SO MUCH potential. But blizzard doesn't get it. Their "moving shot" proves that.
|
Void Ray fazing, i remember that, was a good trick that require micro...SC2 is just too flat/straight forward compared to BW.
|
On June 17 2012 18:32 Guamshin wrote:
I hate it how sc2 is basicly 3rd Bw with half-assed Bw units, Blizzard will most likely never remove bad units like Colossus unless the community is dying out or whatever and they need to pull a desperate move.
Marine/marauder needs to be split and you have to kite but even then eventually you can just a-move when your winning, which displays the bad decision of adding unlimited(almost i guess) units in a control group. Your not microing when your fighting.
This is one of the reasons i don't like watching competitive sc2 since there is pretty much 0 difference in people controlling their armies and how they use them, with the exception of terrans splitting their marines/marauders of course, but the rest is split-1a-2t, you get my point. It's not like HerO's storms are better then Sage's.
I think HoTs is looking better then WoL but with added a-move units(Tempest, Warhound, Battle Hellion) my opinion probably won't change, instead of making sc2 units like BW, they should have made pretty much everything different except remain the UI and the 3 races.
Really, you are not kidding me? Statements like that goes to show to what degenerate conservatism some BW fans adhere to. Just because it creates the need for more APM and thus players of a higher ´skill´. Pfff, in BW youŕe constantly fighting the limitations of the game engine. It has been balanced around those limitations which makes it great, but that doesnt mean it would be acceptable in the current RTS environment. Lots and lots of new players would be really turned off to something they are so used to in say the Command and Conquer games, and every reviewer would piss on Blizzards face. The majority of the SC2 money and support comes from the new players. The BW community lingers too much in some kind of feeling of self-importance.
Microing needless stuff such as harvesters or tricks like Void ray fazing may be cool to some of you, but to me and most people with a common sense they are needless bugs. ´hey to become good at this game you have to practice to repeat this countless times for a minimal advantage´. I agree with you that units like the Colossus dont really add to the variety of battling in SC2, but dont blame the game mechanics on it.
|
On June 17 2012 17:10 Roarer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2012 16:52 pb.fcnz wrote:
I've only read the first two pages so this argument might have been made but, I'm curious to know from people who've played them, how blizzard has dealt with this in Warcraft? I would assume, simply on a lore basis, that re-introducing a good part of the BW units would make sense, no? Did they carry over most units in WC? (I know 2 races were added from 2->3 but as far as humans/orc go?)
Edit: And by lore I mean, does the storyline from SC2 follow SC:BW time-wise? How do they explain the sudden, magic change in units out of nowhere? Vulture went out of production at space-age-Ford motors? I didn't touch the SC2 SP yet, not a fan of single player, never actually finished SC or BW even though I first played the game a few months after SC's release lol (I barely ever finish SP games, they bore me to death), so enlighten me here :o From Warcraft 2 to Warcraft 3, the human and Orc races units undergone HUGE changes. First, all the navy units were removed. The Archer/ Axe thrower were totally removed(back up by lore). Ogre and Ogre mages for the orcs are completely gone. (back up by lore) Paladin and Archmage of the Human were turn into heroes. The air units of warcraft 2 are all removed. I know that the orc Dragons removal are according to lore, cuz the orcs lost control over the red dragon queen. I am not sure if the gryphon rider are gone cuz of lore though. Blizzard add a tons of new units which are took out from the lore, especially spell casters, I do not think any of the spell casters in warcraft 3 are from warcraft 2 (except the new archmage is a little bit like the old mage). Basically there are only 2 units of each race are the same as warcraft 2: the footman (grunt) and the workers. Everything else is a complete overhaul. The battle system/UI/Buildings, everyhting is completely new.
I used to dislike warcraft 3 for being so different, but after following starcraft 2 I really appreciate it. I wonder what kind of discussion we would be having if starcraft 2 was as different from starcraft 1 as warcraft 3 was compared to warcraft 2.
On June 17 2012 19:45 Trivmvirate wrote:
Microing needless stuff such as harvesters or tricks like Void ray fazing may be cool to some of you, but to me and most people with a common sense its a bug.
Just like skiing in tribes or rocket jumping in quake or combos in street fighter right?
|
There's no way to win if he brings back Brood War units, ppl would just complain "can't they come up with their own stuff instead of just ripping off brood war?" We already have a bunch of units back from BW in sc2 or very similar versions of BW units. Let them bring in new stuff
|
On June 17 2012 19:26 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2012 18:29 BrosephBrostar wrote:
People are basically hypocrites. They say they want maps like BW, units like BW, even players from BW, but when you ask why they don't just watch/play BW they don't want to. It's like a woman who always complains that her new boyfriend isn't like her old one that she dumped. We do... But blizzard have tried to kill BW for years and finally succeeded. Now we want a game that's actually worthy of BW. Currently, SC2 is not. And giving SC2 engine's flaws as a reason for not introducing successful BW concepts (e.g. units clumping up to an extreme, which they can easily fix...). It's idiotic of blizzard to build their whole game around crappy engine, which forces them to introduce more crappy changes like nerfing all sorts of spells and units. The fact that they think their new pathing algorythm is somehow "superior" to BW, WC3, CoH, AoX or many other RTS games that don't have clumping, is beyond ridiculous. That's as if Quake's developer said "our new engine is so much superior to the old one - we've finally gotten rid of starfe jumping, rocket jumping and so on". There's a difference between bugs and "unintended features". Just because blizzard did not intend for something to exist, does not mean they have to get rid of it. Void Ray fazing is a prime example of that. It had SO MUCH potential. But blizzard doesn't get it. Their "moving shot" proves that.
Absolutely agree. I get the impression game designers these days never even played video games. If the current design team made Quake 3 Im sure they would hotfix strafe and rocket jumping right away because it wasnt something they intended.
That reminds of person I once met who was a 40 year old game designer. It was about the time Doom 3 came out and he was convinced Doom 3 is the best game ever made, reason being its engine that was a monster at that time. He didnt give two shits about gameplay and things like that, he was obssesed solely with how much polygons the engine was able to animate. I asked him what are his toughts about games like BW, Sacrifice ( if anyone heard about that one, one of my favorite gamea), Jedi Outcast, Homeworld and such and he said they are good but very inferior to Doom 3. He dissmised what I had to say about creativity, lore and gameplay because Im not a programmer or a game designer and I couldnt possibly know anything about that. He also didnt think much of the players them selves and blamed them a lot for not being able to appreciate how amazing Doom 3 was ( similar to the interview about Bnet 2.0 when they say its a lot more complex and superior system to the old one but noone is appreciating that).
Im not saying Dustin Browder fits this description, Im sure he doesnt, but Im very very sure game designers and us have a fundamentally different views and approach to games. Id say they have a distorted sense of reality more or less.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
