|
On June 18 2012 13:05 0neder wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 12:57 Benjamin99 wrote:
Why dont they use units from warcraft 3? Or Commander & Conquer?. Maybe becuase its a new game? I really dont understand why BW fans keep bitching about starcraft 2. Its not the same game its a new game!
If you dont like it dont play it its very simple! Unfortunately, I don't think your post was a troll attempt, but just to name a few: Blink - from WC3 Concussive shells - from WC3 Hero Units - from WC3 Super long range high supply units - from C&C And I'm not familiar with C&C, but based off what I've heard from TL, apparently most of the new SC2 units and their abilities directly correlate to C&C units, and many of SC2's current deficiencies parallel those of C&C. I like SC2. But LIKE isn't good enough. Ever seen Ratatouille. I don't just want to LIKE SC2. I want to LOVE it. It's not good enough right now to love. If you want to understand the critique, then you need to understand BW. I don't care about Brood War itself, but I love it because it was based on successful principles of game design, competition, and excitement. SC2 needs that complete foundation or it will fizzle fast. You can't just change major league baseball to teeball and say NEW GAME! BE HAPPY!
No I dont troll, My point is starcraft 2 got nothing todo with BW just like it got nothing todo with warcraft 3. Yea it might have mechanics and spells that are similar but isnt that becuase the games are made from the same company?
I really cant understand why BW fans keep trying to make starcraft 2 into BW. They are not the same just like football and handball arnt the same yea they might both be using a round ball to play the game but thats about it!
|
On June 18 2012 14:09 Benjamin99 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 13:05 0neder wrote:On June 18 2012 12:57 Benjamin99 wrote:
Why dont they use units from warcraft 3? Or Commander & Conquer?. Maybe becuase its a new game? I really dont understand why BW fans keep bitching about starcraft 2. Its not the same game its a new game!
If you dont like it dont play it its very simple! Unfortunately, I don't think your post was a troll attempt, but just to name a few: Blink - from WC3 Concussive shells - from WC3 Hero Units - from WC3 Super long range high supply units - from C&C And I'm not familiar with C&C, but based off what I've heard from TL, apparently most of the new SC2 units and their abilities directly correlate to C&C units, and many of SC2's current deficiencies parallel those of C&C. I like SC2. But LIKE isn't good enough. Ever seen Ratatouille. I don't just want to LIKE SC2. I want to LOVE it. It's not good enough right now to love. If you want to understand the critique, then you need to understand BW. I don't care about Brood War itself, but I love it because it was based on successful principles of game design, competition, and excitement. SC2 needs that complete foundation or it will fizzle fast. You can't just change major league baseball to teeball and say NEW GAME! BE HAPPY! No I dont troll, My point is starcraft 2 got nothing todo with BW just like it got nothing todo with warcraft 3. Yea it might have mechanics and spells that are similar but isnt that becuase the games are made form the same company? I really cant understand why BW fans keep trying to make starcraft 2 into BW. They are not the same just like football and handball arnt the same yea they might be using a round ball but thats about it!
Because we are trying to help.
|
On June 18 2012 13:50 0neder wrote:
Would BW have been chosen as the competitive game if it wasn't really fun to play on a well-designed battle.net and tons of people hadn't been already playing it? Then it was built on a foundation of competition and excitement.
Was a good high ground mechanic luck/glitch?
Was units that don't clip each other luck/glitch?
Was good unit/race dynamic design luck/glitch?
I don't think so.
Sure, MutaStack, etc. were bugs, but I'm not talking about those. I'm talking about basic essential keys to success.
Yes, units not clipping each other is fairly lucky. Have you seen BW pathing? If you click just right/wrong, they will do the stupidest things imaginable in spaces they should never be able to get through. By today's standards, things that units can screw up in BW should not even be possible.
Yes, good unit/race dynamic was also luck. The designers clearly did things that would be cool, and tweaked things to a point where each race felt "equally cool". No design team is ever going to scrutinize balance for a scene that was ludicrous to even suggest at the time. SC2 started out with the expectation of "competitive balance", while BW started out as "look, RTS with 3 unique races! Awesome!"
I'll give high ground to you.
|
On June 18 2012 14:12 WolfintheSheep wrote:
No design team is ever going to scrutinize balance for a scene that was ludicrous to even suggest at the time. SC2 started out with the expectation of "competitive balance"Awesome!"
And this was where I think Browder, Kim and their crew went wrong. They were too worried about it being immediately worthy of 5 figure broadcast competition and not messing things up. Kim probably helped ruin the game through diluting stuff, and Browder just isn't as good a designer as the original team.
|
On June 18 2012 10:39 IntoTheheart wrote:
To me SC2 is not SCBW. If I wanted BW units I'd play SC2BW or BW.
The idea AFAIK is to create units which aren't replicants of old units but create similar roles. We see the Phoenix and the Corsair having the same function on paper (more or less), the tanks, marines, zerglings, etc. etc. all have similar functions which were stable to the SC universe but I kinda like the fact that Blizzard is trying new things.
The point isnt to turn SC2 into a BW clone, but rather to look at the two and ask yourself how the differences between the two affect the gameplay and watchability as an eSport.
BW had a limit of 12 for groups, SC2 has no limit.
It seems to be a no-brainer that SC2 is easier to control, but is that really true? At the start of an engagement in SC2 you usually have one full control group being dragged left/right/up/down in an attempt to get a better position over the opposition. In BW you had to switch between multiple control groups to do the same. But what is the end result for the viewer? In SC2 you get two "deathballs" which engage each other and that doesnt involve a lot of strategy and battle tactics. Sure at the super top level the players will adjust the positioning during the battle, but does SC2 lend a hand to do that for lower level players? Not really, because it is hard to unlearn using the ez-mode big clump of units. So the new version introduced with SC2 is actually bad for the players. Think of it as being presented with a car to go to work in when you only had a bike a few years back, sure it is more comfortable, but you are nevertheless becoming lazy over time.
As an improvement I would think a limit of 24 units per control group should be enough, it just helps your lower level players to get used to controlling multiple groups at the same time. If we are honest to ourselves we should acknowledge that a basic human trait is lazyness and any limitation forces you to overcome this. I am just saying this to preempt comments of "oh people can put their units into several groups already" ... I know that, but the "weaker beings" will still go for the lazy 1-control-group option.
BW had clunky unit movement AI, SC2 has "perfect" unit movement
In BW it was a pain to position your dragoons in a tight formation to use recall on; in SC2 the units actually move together in a tight ball (depending on movement speed of the units) and rarely have to go around each other. This change between the two games has forced several major adjustments to the balancing for AoE effects (radius and damage) and it is the reason why buildings are destroyed very fast. Attacking dps is maximized for the area which the attackers occupy. It is also part of the reason why the Carrier is so useless, because the ball of marines is as tight as possible and thus very efficient in shooting down the interceptors. Spread out and deep defensive formations are more or less useless in SC2, but they were a tactical option in BW.
So the question becomes: Does this "perfection" really improve the gameplay or are there some things which get lost on the way? IMO there would be a gain from having units MOVE in a less than perfect fashion (imagine a "marine-sized hole" between each marine in a moving clump of marines), but once the fighting starts they would get a little closer. This would allow AoE effects to get a bigger radius again and it becomes a question of skill to dodge them by keeping your units spread out more ... which reduces the damage output per space occupied by the army.
BW had no reactor/larva inject/chronoboost/warp gate
These mechanics increase the production speed and seem to be speeding up the game. Notice that I said "seem to", because its actually not true. The fights simply had fewer units in them. Were they less exciting because of it? Not really, because you could focus more on individual units as a viewer. The three mechanics to speed up production are a nice and original thought, but they have pushed the game in a direction where production ability seems more important than actual battle skill. The slow reproduction speed for techlab-based units puts terrans at a distinct disadvantage in a "both armies killed each other" situation because the other two races can rebuild the core of their army a lot faster.
Personally I think these mechanics should be removed since the reactor cant really be adjusted due to the binary nature of it, but that seems kinda impossible. Maybe the reactor gets replaced by an upgrade in the tech lab which speeds up production in general (3 stages and +50% prodution speed total at level 3), but thats the only thing I can come up with. Larva inject then only produces 2 extra larvae and warp gate actually has an increased cooldown for warp gates ... which gives protoss the option to keep their gateways for faster production instead of the "produce anywhere under power".
To sum it up: There are quite a few ways to make SC2 more BW-like where BW had advantages. Currently SC2 seems to me like a bad sequel to a movie where the director/producers think they make a better movie by just increasing the kill count and scale of the explosions. The story and details are just as important IMO.
|
On June 18 2012 12:50 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 12:07 0neder wrote:On June 18 2012 10:39 IntoTheheart wrote:
I believe they did on paper when the game was being designed. I mean you can use units in "weird," sorts of ways that the game wasn't designed for.
Altogether remember that there are two more expansions to get all the kinks worked out. A splash air unit with exponentially scalable air superiority in no way is comparable to a non splash air unit of similar cost, even on paper. Also, this idea that expansions will make working kinks out easier is a farce. Two years into WoL, Blizzard is still messing up the game with unnecessary tweaks like the ghost and possibly the queen. If anything, HotS has shown that expansions actually reset nearly the entire game design. If proposing a silly 22 range or ridicu-splash air near-hero unit is Browder's definition of 'working out kinks' then there is little hope. The design team is doing so many things in backwards ways. The EXACT same "reset" happened when SC1 went into Brood War. Medics? Dark Templar? Lurkers? All of those units were potentially game breaking units and yet they somehow managed to work back then. There were issues in SC1 that weren't ever even solved by Blizzard but eventually later by tournament made maps. I find it so confusing and hypocritical that you're so eager to praise how good of a game Brood War is after years and years of evolution and yet are so reluctant to allow SC2 that same evolutionary process.
First of all, BW's units were actually preplanned when they released vanilla starcraft. Alot of the units they thought would work they "kept" behind for the expansion. (IIRC, the valkyrie was designed for starcraft, but they saved it for the expansion).
BW came out literally 6 months after vanilla starcraft though, so you could almost say that it can be considered a standalone product.
Personally I'm happy with the Phoenix and how it works out, save for the fact that it shoots while moving without you targeting anything. Contrary to what Oneder believes, I see it doing more or less the same role, scouting, denial of overlord scouting, and air superiority. It can even do some minor ground unit harassment, which is really nice bonus. However, the dynamic between scourge and corsairs is nowhere near as exciting to watch as the dynamic between phoenix and corruptors. In BW, air superiority went to the person with more control. In SC2, it's a lot harder to see that flash of brilliance, if at all, when one player suddenly wrestles control of the air from another and begins to abuse it.
I also don't really see why they are redesigning the tempest to be a siege unit when Carriers more or less could function the same way if they could be micro'd well.
It's also strange that they'd focus on splitting units into more specialized roles, since D. Browder tends to go on about having more units is a bad thing for players (which I think is right, no one really wants to memorize 28 different units for each race, and it's also burdensome for viewers/newer players). Things like the Viking/Banshee with the Wraith, and the Roach/Hydra with just the original Hydra would go a long way in making more versatile unit composition for each of the 3 races.
|
Something very interesting to me is how SC2 is basically turning into BW with better graphics. I guess some people take the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" approach more than others.
|
Canada11349 Posts
On June 18 2012 14:12 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 13:50 0neder wrote:
Would BW have been chosen as the competitive game if it wasn't really fun to play on a well-designed battle.net and tons of people hadn't been already playing it? Then it was built on a foundation of competition and excitement.
Was a good high ground mechanic luck/glitch?
Was units that don't clip each other luck/glitch?
Was good unit/race dynamic design luck/glitch?
I don't think so.
Sure, MutaStack, etc. were bugs, but I'm not talking about those. I'm talking about basic essential keys to success. Yes, units not clipping each other is fairly lucky. Have you seen BW pathing? If you click just right/wrong, they will do the stupidest things imaginable in spaces they should never be able to get through. By today's standards, things that units can screw up in BW should not even be possible. Yes, good unit/race dynamic was also luck. The designers clearly did things that would be cool, and tweaked things to a point where each race felt "equally cool". No design team is ever going to scrutinize balance for a scene that was ludicrous to even suggest at the time. SC2 started out with the expectation of "competitive balance", while BW started out as "look, RTS with 3 unique races! Awesome!" I'll give high ground to you.
Yes there were stupid things that BW units could do, but as someone who plays it at a relatively low level, it's not as bad as all that. But regardless, no-one is asking for buggy dragoons. I'm pretty sure you could get dynamic unit pathing without that. However, although your units could misbehave, they also had the capability of being controlled very precisely and THAT is what SC2 is missing in a lot of it's units. (Due to sluggish turn around time and lack of moving attack amongst other things. I wouldn't be suprised if Battlenet's latency was another limiting factor.)
Also, so what if some of the best things were not designed, but due to luck. Why not embrace it and put it in intentionally if it created so much good gameplay?
|
On June 18 2012 14:09 Benjamin99 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 13:05 0neder wrote:On June 18 2012 12:57 Benjamin99 wrote:
Why dont they use units from warcraft 3? Or Commander & Conquer?. Maybe becuase its a new game? I really dont understand why BW fans keep bitching about starcraft 2. Its not the same game its a new game!
If you dont like it dont play it its very simple! Unfortunately, I don't think your post was a troll attempt, but just to name a few: Blink - from WC3 Concussive shells - from WC3 Hero Units - from WC3 Super long range high supply units - from C&C And I'm not familiar with C&C, but based off what I've heard from TL, apparently most of the new SC2 units and their abilities directly correlate to C&C units, and many of SC2's current deficiencies parallel those of C&C. I like SC2. But LIKE isn't good enough. Ever seen Ratatouille. I don't just want to LIKE SC2. I want to LOVE it. It's not good enough right now to love. If you want to understand the critique, then you need to understand BW. I don't care about Brood War itself, but I love it because it was based on successful principles of game design, competition, and excitement. SC2 needs that complete foundation or it will fizzle fast. You can't just change major league baseball to teeball and say NEW GAME! BE HAPPY! No I dont troll, My point is starcraft 2 got nothing todo with BW just like it got nothing todo with warcraft 3. Yea it might have mechanics and spells that are similar but isnt that becuase the games are made from the same company? I really cant understand why BW fans keep trying to make starcraft 2 into BW. They are not the same just like football and handball arnt the same yea they might both be using a round ball to play the game but thats about it!
Thre's also the small point that it's...you know...STAR CRAFT and not "space fighters unite, version 1". And people want it to be as good as posible, not a BW clone. But at this point in time, BW is vastly superior at least as far as unit design goes. Time will tell, but DB ignoring all the major critiques and keeping the "go play BW" line...is disarming.
|
On June 18 2012 12:57 Benjamin99 wrote:
Why dont they use units from warcraft 3? Or Commander & Conquer?. Maybe becuase its a new game? I really dont understand why BW fans keep bitching about starcraft 2. Its not the same game its a new game!
If you dont like it dont play it its very simple!
People on SC2 forums/blogs whine about racial imbalance 24/7. Yet they still play the game.
Same goes here. Sc2 is a *good* game, but it is missing a lot of things that make it *great*.
|
On June 18 2012 10:17 Xiphos wrote:
Look guys here is the problems that most are having in StarCraft 2: Unit Clumping
Easy solution would be to increase AoE dmg so that you have the incentive of actually splitting your Units!
In Brood War, you can easily clump up your units as well due to archaic AI like Hydralisks are stuck together when moving to one location or Lurkers need to be spread out INDIVIDUALLY and same with tanks to prevent being stormed or hit by Stasis. In BW, there is just as much unit spreading needed. That's because Psionic Storm, Siege Tanks and all those area of effect spells dealt SOOO much more damage to their enemies (Vultures Mines are Area of Effect too).
This is where the argument of instroducing Lurkers instead of Swarm Host comes in. Swarm Hosts merely send out minions out of them. Still doesn't give me any reason for Terran to split as they can just clump up as one blob to fend off against it. You want to see players to do the most inhumane move possible, you want to add the Lurkers where one spine hit can annilate your entire force. Players will have to move their units one by one and that is APM taxing.
But I know that SC2 is meant to target onto a casual fanbase so I doubt they will attempt introducing harder mechanics.
Also the pathing. We obviously don't want BW pathing but something similar to WC3's would probably be better.
|
On June 18 2012 09:12 alexanderzero wrote:
Everyone is like "oh it's easy to remove unit clumping" but it's not that easy. You have to do one of two things:
-Make the hitboxes for every unit artificially large.
-Make the units NOT take the shortest path to their destination.
Those are both terrible choices. Which one would you pick?
Bullshit. Try playing armies of Exigo. It's a game really similar to BW gameplay wise. Its pathing works just as fine as SC2's, except there is no unit clumping the way you see in SC2, and by extension, no deathballs.
You don't have to break the engine to fix that issue. The only thing required is blizzard swallowing their pride and admitting that the most advanced engine is not necesserily the best one gameplay wise.
On June 18 2012 09:07 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 07:34 maybenexttime wrote:On June 18 2012 07:24 Ownos wrote:
Because it's Starcraft *2* More like "random RTS 2", as blizzard did not want to capture any of StarCraft's beauty. If it didn't look like StarCraft in terms of graphics/unit names, etc. people would have a hard time finding similarities between the two beyond the superficial level. Does it really matter? I would argue that the jump from WC2 -> WC3 is a 10x bigger gap than BW -> SC2. And WC3 is a great RTS game. (Unless you are talking about nostalgia? I'm not really sure why a sequel needs to mimic its predecessor)
Except BW -> SC2 was clearly not meant t be the kind of a jump WC2 -> WC3 was. Blizzars aimed for a standard RTS, but refused to study BW's gameplay and thus ignored nearly all the concepts that made BW so successful. At east they accidentally did some things well, e.g. Marines.
|
On June 18 2012 14:10 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 14:09 Benjamin99 wrote:On June 18 2012 13:05 0neder wrote:On June 18 2012 12:57 Benjamin99 wrote:
Why dont they use units from warcraft 3? Or Commander & Conquer?. Maybe becuase its a new game? I really dont understand why BW fans keep bitching about starcraft 2. Its not the same game its a new game!
If you dont like it dont play it its very simple! Unfortunately, I don't think your post was a troll attempt, but just to name a few: Blink - from WC3 Concussive shells - from WC3 Hero Units - from WC3 Super long range high supply units - from C&C And I'm not familiar with C&C, but based off what I've heard from TL, apparently most of the new SC2 units and their abilities directly correlate to C&C units, and many of SC2's current deficiencies parallel those of C&C. I like SC2. But LIKE isn't good enough. Ever seen Ratatouille. I don't just want to LIKE SC2. I want to LOVE it. It's not good enough right now to love. If you want to understand the critique, then you need to understand BW. I don't care about Brood War itself, but I love it because it was based on successful principles of game design, competition, and excitement. SC2 needs that complete foundation or it will fizzle fast. You can't just change major league baseball to teeball and say NEW GAME! BE HAPPY! No I dont troll, My point is starcraft 2 got nothing todo with BW just like it got nothing todo with warcraft 3. Yea it might have mechanics and spells that are similar but isnt that becuase the games are made form the same company? I really cant understand why BW fans keep trying to make starcraft 2 into BW. They are not the same just like football and handball arnt the same yea they might be using a round ball but thats about it! Because we are trying to help.
Help who? I'd guess many are quite happy as is.
|
On June 18 2012 14:09 Benjamin99 wrote:
No I dont troll, My point is starcraft 2 got nothing todo with BW just like it got nothing todo with warcraft 3. Yea it might have mechanics and spells that are similar but isnt that becuase the games are made from the same company?
If you call it Starcraft 2, it automatically has something to do with BW, even if it's a Mario game. Don't be ridiculous.
Why not look at BW and take ALL of what worked and redo the rest? Why be selective about the things that really worked well and add to that?
|
On June 18 2012 14:41 Eventine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 14:10 Xiphos wrote:On June 18 2012 14:09 Benjamin99 wrote:On June 18 2012 13:05 0neder wrote:On June 18 2012 12:57 Benjamin99 wrote:
Why dont they use units from warcraft 3? Or Commander & Conquer?. Maybe becuase its a new game? I really dont understand why BW fans keep bitching about starcraft 2. Its not the same game its a new game!
If you dont like it dont play it its very simple! Unfortunately, I don't think your post was a troll attempt, but just to name a few: Blink - from WC3 Concussive shells - from WC3 Hero Units - from WC3 Super long range high supply units - from C&C And I'm not familiar with C&C, but based off what I've heard from TL, apparently most of the new SC2 units and their abilities directly correlate to C&C units, and many of SC2's current deficiencies parallel those of C&C. I like SC2. But LIKE isn't good enough. Ever seen Ratatouille. I don't just want to LIKE SC2. I want to LOVE it. It's not good enough right now to love. If you want to understand the critique, then you need to understand BW. I don't care about Brood War itself, but I love it because it was based on successful principles of game design, competition, and excitement. SC2 needs that complete foundation or it will fizzle fast. You can't just change major league baseball to teeball and say NEW GAME! BE HAPPY! No I dont troll, My point is starcraft 2 got nothing todo with BW just like it got nothing todo with warcraft 3. Yea it might have mechanics and spells that are similar but isnt that becuase the games are made form the same company? I really cant understand why BW fans keep trying to make starcraft 2 into BW. They are not the same just like football and handball arnt the same yea they might be using a round ball but thats about it! Because we are trying to help. Help who? I'd guess many are quite happy as is.
not LoL happy. SC should be more than LoL happy.
|
On June 18 2012 14:18 Rabiator wrote:
BW had a limit of 12 for groups, SC2 has no limit.
As an improvement I would think a limit of 24 units per control group should be enough, it just helps your lower level players to get used to controlling multiple groups at the same time. If we are honest to ourselves we should acknowledge that a basic human trait is lazyness and any limitation forces you to overcome this. I am just saying this to preempt comments of "oh people can put their units into several groups already" ... I know that, but the "weaker beings" will still go for the lazy 1-control-group option.
That's really not the problem. It's not laziness, it's that everything dies extremely fast and that there's not much to optimize. Anything but the smallest of adjustments have questionable gains, as anytime you move your army it'll suffer a devastating loss of dps. The game simply rewards deathballs and big amove engagements more than skirmishes, and that's really why a lot of people are upset with the game. The skill ceiling has been set very low through the game's mechanics. Trying to push it higher has been very difficult.
On June 18 2012 14:18 Rabiator wrote:
Currently SC2 seems to me like a bad sequel to a movie where the director/producers think they make a better movie by just increasing the kill count and scale of the explosions.
That seems to be Blizzard as of late.
|
On June 18 2012 14:41 Eventine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 14:10 Xiphos wrote:On June 18 2012 14:09 Benjamin99 wrote:On June 18 2012 13:05 0neder wrote:On June 18 2012 12:57 Benjamin99 wrote:
Why dont they use units from warcraft 3? Or Commander & Conquer?. Maybe becuase its a new game? I really dont understand why BW fans keep bitching about starcraft 2. Its not the same game its a new game!
If you dont like it dont play it its very simple! Unfortunately, I don't think your post was a troll attempt, but just to name a few: Blink - from WC3 Concussive shells - from WC3 Hero Units - from WC3 Super long range high supply units - from C&C And I'm not familiar with C&C, but based off what I've heard from TL, apparently most of the new SC2 units and their abilities directly correlate to C&C units, and many of SC2's current deficiencies parallel those of C&C. I like SC2. But LIKE isn't good enough. Ever seen Ratatouille. I don't just want to LIKE SC2. I want to LOVE it. It's not good enough right now to love. If you want to understand the critique, then you need to understand BW. I don't care about Brood War itself, but I love it because it was based on successful principles of game design, competition, and excitement. SC2 needs that complete foundation or it will fizzle fast. You can't just change major league baseball to teeball and say NEW GAME! BE HAPPY! No I dont troll, My point is starcraft 2 got nothing todo with BW just like it got nothing todo with warcraft 3. Yea it might have mechanics and spells that are similar but isnt that becuase the games are made form the same company? I really cant understand why BW fans keep trying to make starcraft 2 into BW. They are not the same just like football and handball arnt the same yea they might be using a round ball but thats about it! Because we are trying to help. Help who? I'd guess many are quite happy as is.
They mean how BW was able to attract so much support in the foreign scene.
They mean how BW is outdoing SC2 in Korea in terms of support and broadcasting.
Because isn't it obvious? BW was bigger in the foreign scene than SC2 and Kespa prefers BW over SC2 in Korea.
We should learn from BW on how to...
Wait what? Foreign support of BW was near non-existent and Kespa is switching to SC2? Hmm.... I guess.... What does SC2 have to learn from BW again?
|
On June 18 2012 14:09 Benjamin99 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 13:05 0neder wrote:On June 18 2012 12:57 Benjamin99 wrote:
Why dont they use units from warcraft 3? Or Commander & Conquer?. Maybe becuase its a new game? I really dont understand why BW fans keep bitching about starcraft 2. Its not the same game its a new game!
If you dont like it dont play it its very simple! Unfortunately, I don't think your post was a troll attempt, but just to name a few: Blink - from WC3 Concussive shells - from WC3 Hero Units - from WC3 Super long range high supply units - from C&C And I'm not familiar with C&C, but based off what I've heard from TL, apparently most of the new SC2 units and their abilities directly correlate to C&C units, and many of SC2's current deficiencies parallel those of C&C. I like SC2. But LIKE isn't good enough. Ever seen Ratatouille. I don't just want to LIKE SC2. I want to LOVE it. It's not good enough right now to love. If you want to understand the critique, then you need to understand BW. I don't care about Brood War itself, but I love it because it was based on successful principles of game design, competition, and excitement. SC2 needs that complete foundation or it will fizzle fast. You can't just change major league baseball to teeball and say NEW GAME! BE HAPPY! No I dont troll, My point is starcraft 2 got nothing todo with BW just like it got nothing todo with warcraft 3. Yea it might have mechanics and spells that are similar but isnt that becuase the games are made from the same company? I really cant understand why BW fans keep trying to make starcraft 2 into BW. They are not the same just like football and handball arnt the same yea they might both be using a round ball to play the game but thats about it!
How can you write this in the same sentence you claim not to be trolling?
|
On June 18 2012 15:08 jsdk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 14:18 Rabiator wrote:
BW had a limit of 12 for groups, SC2 has no limit.
As an improvement I would think a limit of 24 units per control group should be enough, it just helps your lower level players to get used to controlling multiple groups at the same time. If we are honest to ourselves we should acknowledge that a basic human trait is lazyness and any limitation forces you to overcome this. I am just saying this to preempt comments of "oh people can put their units into several groups already" ... I know that, but the "weaker beings" will still go for the lazy 1-control-group option. That's really not the problem. It's not laziness, it's that everything dies extremely fast and that there's not much to optimize. Anything but the smallest of adjustments have questionable gains, as anytime you move your army it'll suffer a devastating loss of dps. The game simply rewards deathballs and big amove engagements more than skirmishes, and that's really why a lot of people are upset with the game. The skill ceiling has been set very low through the game's mechanics. Trying to push it higher has been very difficult. Show nested quote +On June 18 2012 14:18 Rabiator wrote:
Currently SC2 seems to me like a bad sequel to a movie where the director/producers think they make a better movie by just increasing the kill count and scale of the explosions. That seems to be Blizzard as of late.
is that why the top SC2 players win through spread out small engagements instead of death balls? Because a lot of what you're talking about sounds like user error. Play better.
|
Blizz is making their game too noob friendly, just like what happened with WoW. They want casual gamers to buy the game and play too. bad idea imo. anyways i digress.
I do not want sc2 have all the similar/same units as bw. I love bw, sc2 will never top it, cuz the lack of graphics, the glitches, mechanical flaws, etc are what made bw great. Somehow all those 'flaws' made the game very balanced and require high skill level. If sc2 has all same units only difference would be the graphics and that it now is noob friendly with everything in one group, grids in building placement, etc. Sc2 is a different game on its own. not a sequel of bw.
Thus, sc2 needs sc2 units. All their 'new' units in HoTS (announced so far) are pretty much ideas that came from bw, or prev sc2. nothing new sadly. viper is very similar to defiler (consume changed from unit to buildings, very original...), swarmhost (cross between lurkers and bl), that thing with entomb (arbiter, except stasis field is imba ass mineral block), mothership core (pretty much protoss planetary, seriously).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
