EPTNevertheless, adding Brood War units to the game is really stupid, because those were created for a different engine, interacting with different units. If you think fixing Protoss is as easy as introducing the reaver then I don't want you to have any input on the design of this game. What Blizzard can do is to ask themselves why the Brood War units were good and then try and find similar solutions that accomplish the same thing. So that's why we get Blinding Cloud and not Dark Swarm. It's not because Blizzard has so much pride they don't want to reuse units, but it's because Dark Swarm would not work for this game anyway. (see how obnoxious PDD is)
Reluctance to Re-Introduce BW-Units - Page 27
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
Nevertheless, adding Brood War units to the game is really stupid, because those were created for a different engine, interacting with different units. If you think fixing Protoss is as easy as introducing the reaver then I don't want you to have any input on the design of this game. What Blizzard can do is to ask themselves why the Brood War units were good and then try and find similar solutions that accomplish the same thing. So that's why we get Blinding Cloud and not Dark Swarm. It's not because Blizzard has so much pride they don't want to reuse units, but it's because Dark Swarm would not work for this game anyway. (see how obnoxious PDD is) | ||
|
Nazza
Australia1654 Posts
On June 18 2012 20:23 fer wrote: I kept reading most of your replies, but quickly lost faith in you. You throw around your opinion on very subjective matters like it's fact, which just goes to further show that you simply want Starcraft 2 to become Starcraft Brood War. I'm sure this will be a surprise to you (though it really shouldn't) but a _ton_ of people love and enjoy Starcraft 2 just as it is today, regardless of Heart of the Swarm or future expansions. Arguably more people than Starcraft Brood War, and certainly exponentially more successful outside of South Korea. I'm sorry but you keep pretending you're somehow looking out for the good of Starcraft 2 by trying to turn it into Brood War. Just accept it. More people think Starcraft 2 is a better game overall than Brood War, at least as far as wanting to spend the time to spectate it goes. Remove your blindfold for a second please. The rest of this thread is pretty much the same story. I really hope none of the Blizzard developers read this thread and think absolutely anything of it, other than just another bunch of people stuck in the past. Edit: Just for the record, I was not talking about you specifically on my previous posts, but replied to you directly since it seemed appropriate now. You are accusing OneDer of being a butthurt BW elitist, when he's actually been giving good arguments for how units should be designed. And your arguments are that: 1) SC2 is more popular and enjoyed by more people and 2) You just want SC2 to become just like SC:BW! 3) A good majority of people think SC2 is better than SC:BW as a game. Firstly, 2 + 3 are not true at all. SC2 is SC2 and BW is BW, and OneDer has stated previously that he thinks some things in SC2 are really good ideas. The vast majority of SC2 players have never played BW competitvely. They may have played the game when it was released back in the day, but I would say a good 90% probably never played on iccup. and 1) is not a good argument at all. Popularity does not entitle good game design, nor vice versa. Not to mention, they haven't had anything to compare it too. SC2's one and only peer will be BW, whether you like it or not! What other RTS's can you compare it to? Secondly, what is wrong with comparing it to BW? Professional BW existed for over a decade, just as a testament to how great the game was. Surely they did something right if it existed for that long. Many people are quick to dismiss BW over minor things like 2D graphics, or lack of MBS and unlimited unit selection. If its just the second case that's been bothering you, I implore you to jump into a team melee (That's where 2 or more ppl control the same race. In this case, one person would just macro) with some BW players and try the game for yourselves. You can even PM me if you can't find anyone, I'd be open for something like this if it would help you to see something from our perspective. | ||
|
Garmer
1286 Posts
On June 18 2012 21:05 Nazza wrote: You are accusing OneDer of being a butthurt BW elitist, when he's actually been giving good arguments for how units should be designed. And your arguments are that: 1) SC2 is more popular and enjoyed by more people and 2) You just want SC2 to become just like SC:BW! 3) A good majority of people think SC2 is better than SC:BW as a game. Firstly, 2 + 3 are not true at all. SC2 is SC2 and BW is BW, and OneDer has stated previously that he thinks some things in SC2 are really good ideas.The vast majority of SC2 players have never played SC2 competitvely. They may have played the game when it was released back in the day, but I would say a good 90% probably never played on iccup. you mean BW? | ||
|
Nekovivie
United Kingdom2599 Posts
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? Came in to say this pretty much.. it's very difficult to keep everyone happy. If you compare it to the team behind WoW, they are constantly trying to take the game forward, without reusing old ideas. Perhaps the SC2 team feels the same way. | ||
|
Yorbon
Netherlands4272 Posts
I think Bw is still a better game, but for me, the difference is getting smaller, because of evolving of people's capabilites. (i hope no one has a problem with this, it makes more sense than it looks after giving it some thought) For example: slow zergling vs. zealot sc2 evolving. First i saw no micro, only a-move. Then i saw wounded zerglings being pulled back. Then i saw zealot stutterstep. Then i saw zealot stutterstepping so that the zerglings were in a line (taking longer to reach zealot again) Then i saw it optimized to 1 zealot killing up to 7 zerglings before dying, which was totally awesome. I personally think above evolving is underlighted is the discussion. Besides, I'm hating the tone of the debate. Calling someone a BW-elitist or sc2 fundamentally flawed without any arguments backing it up is throwing mud in someones face. Do you expect a happy conversation afterwards? Also, be careful with the words 'objective', 'worthy', 'superior', 'old', 'dying' and 'a-moving'; they are hurting e-sports  | ||
|
ancientmariner
116 Posts
On June 18 2012 21:57 Yorbon wrote: I don't consider Sc2 to be fundamentally flawed. I think Bw is still a better game, but for me, the difference is getting smaller, because of evolving of people's capabilites. (i hope no one has a problem with this, it makes more sense than it looks after giving it some thought) For example: slow zergling vs. zealot sc2 evolving. First i saw no micro, only a-move. Then i saw wounded zerglings being pulled back. Then i saw zealot stutterstep. Then i saw zealot stutterstepping so that the zerglings were in a line (taking longer to reach zealot again) Then i saw it optimized to 1 zealot killing up to 7 zerglings before dying, which was totally awesome. I personally think above evolving is underlighted is the discussion. Besides, I'm hating the tone of the debate. Calling someone a BW-elitist or sc2 fundamentally flawed without any arguments backing it up is throwing mud in someones face. Do you expect a happy conversation afterwards? Also, be careful with the words 'objective', 'worthy', 'superior', 'old', 'dying' and 'a-moving'; they are hurting e-sports It's mostly in the hands of the players to make SC2 into what Broodwar already is. Blizzard only has to supply the tools and fundamentals. When the tools are limited or simply bad they limit the potential of the game. If Blizzard is able to supply proper tools and maybe better the current ones then alright. If the introduce units limit the games diversity (in whatever way) then I would be happier to see old Broodwar units. In the end all that has to be similar between both games is the general feel and the excitement created by amazing games. edit: Luckily players can create a good game from close to nothing, as seen in your example. I'm generally hopeful that Blizzard will not screw up badly enough that it can not be fixed by the players. | ||
|
Yorbon
Netherlands4272 Posts
On June 18 2012 22:12 ancientmariner wrote: I agree with you, at least partially.It's mostly in the hands of the players to make SC2 into what Broodwar already is. Blizzard only has to supply the tools and fundamentals. When the tools are limited or simply bad they limit the potential of the game. If Blizzard is able to supply proper tools and maybe better the current ones then alright. If the introduce units limit the games diversity (in whatever way) then I would be happier to see old Broodwar units. In the end all that has to be similar between both games is the general feel and the excitement created by amazing games. edit: Luckily players can create a good game from close to nothing, as seen in your example. I'm generally hopeful that Blizzard will not screw up badly enough that it can not be fixed by the players. However, I'm currently not convinced that sc2 as a whole has too many units that do not fit that profile. I'm not a fan of the colossus, but above all, i feel there are very few units with there max reached. Also, while i felt there were some holes in the gameplay (too few choices in certain match-ups, at certain moments), current HOTS plans fill those holes, mostly. So personally, i'm not too worried.  | ||
|
Hijungle
Australia67 Posts
The thing is, in BW, mostly everything that could be perfected, was perfected. To put in BW units in Sc2 is basically making it scbw2.0, and that was never what Blizzard intended. Here's the thing, Sc2 and BW are two VERY different games with VERY different mechanics. What excites me is that, with Sc2.. I was watching NASL and I previously watched Flash v Jaedong in a WCG final on youtube (moletrap casted). Now, I think the players were... Polt and a Zerg who's name I can't remember... tomt... I was going to say Genius but he's a Protoss.. I digress. The difference between the players and their attention spans/skill was massive, Jaedong could catch a drop from anywhere on the map and his timings were spot on, the zerg let a few drops in his main, had his third destroyed and was eventually felled by a marine tank push. The difference was astounding, and that could only happen because of Sc2, not Scbw2.0, to bring in the same units with those mechanics would be kind of ruining the spirit of the first game. So, in conclusion, they wanted something 'new' and 'fresh'.. Blizzard is simply the provider, they provided us with new units to play with, mixing it up a bit and letting us, the players, experiment and find something that 'works'. If you want to play with BW units, play BW. If you want to play with Sc2 units, play Sc2. | ||
|
Xiphos
Canada7507 Posts
On June 18 2012 22:50 Rewdant wrote: Because I think the intention with Sc2 was to make a new game, not rehash an old one. The thing is, in BW, mostly everything that could be perfected, was perfected. To put in BW units in Sc2 is basically making it scbw2.0, and that was never what Blizzard intended. Here's the thing, Sc2 and BW are two VERY different games with VERY different mechanics. What excites me is that, with Sc2.. I was watching NASL and I previously watched Flash v Jaedong in a WCG final on youtube (moletrap casted). Now, I think the players were... Polt and a Zerg who's name I can't remember... tomt... I was going to say Genius but he's a Protoss.. I digress. The difference between the players and their attention spans/skill was massive, Jaedong could catch a drop from anywhere on the map and his timings were spot on, the zerg let a few drops in his main, had his third destroyed and was eventually felled by a marine tank push. The difference was astounding, and that could only happen because of Sc2, not Scbw2.0, to bring in the same units with those mechanics would be kind of ruining the spirit of the first game. So, in conclusion, they wanted something 'new' and 'fresh'.. Blizzard is simply the provider, they provided us with new units to play with, mixing it up a bit and letting us, the players, experiment and find something that 'works'. If you want to play with BW units, play BW. If you want to play with Sc2 units, play Sc2. What if it is not working out. Then why is it that ex Brood War players are able to get so good at this game if Sc2 and BW are two VERY different games with VERY different mechanics. Plus Blizzard didn't really bring anything new to the table. They used the model from the Tom Cruise movie, and then they used the helicopter unit from Avatar. Where is the creativity in that! And oh yeah while at it, they should remove every single BW/SC1 units and replace them with new ones if they want to have create something new. As for now they are pretty much replacing the role as a AoE control of Lurker, Spider Mines = Widow Mines and other stuff. Why re-introduce the same fundamental of those old unit? When they wanted something 'new' and 'fresh'. | ||
|
Greggle
United States1131 Posts
That said get the fuck rid of the colossus. In what way has this unit succeeded? Cliffwalking to harass? Oh dear, has anything ever failed so catastrophically? How about swarms of reapers jumping into your base and taking out your workers or a key tech bulding? When was the last time anyone saw that outside of the bronze league? The new health regen upgrade seems like such a feeble attempt to save this unit. Yeah, someone makes one or two early on now and then, but compare it to any other unit in the game and its role is practically non-existent. Even the hydralisk has a bigger job than this guy. And yeah, the reaver to me is the most iconic protoss unit from Brood War, more so than zealots, templar, archons or carriers. I miss it dearly =( | ||
|
StoRm_res
Switzerland891 Posts
Such a "rip-off" will always be less fun to play because the design is limited by the "don't"s you get from not wanting to copy the orignal unit.. And I totally agree with the poster above me, they should totally get rid of the colossus. In general the new protoss units are not what protoss needs to get more interesting games (yes, I think any matchups involving protoss are very undynamical). I'm no game designer, but the people who are paid for this should definitely be able to come up with something better ^^ Honestly I have no clue what they thought about when creating the tempest. I don't see this unit having a key roll in sc2, it looks like this unit can be used either as all in or to contribute to the death ball. But after all, it seems like thats how blizzard intends protoss to be played. | ||
|
Greggle
United States1131 Posts
I wish someone would ask in an interview how Blizzard feels about how the colossus turned out so I can decide on whether or not to give up hope of this shit unit ever going away. | ||
|
OSM.OneManArmy
United States509 Posts
| ||
|
1st_Panzer_Div.
United States621 Posts
I do however think they could and should have just done a proper lurker, though I think the swarm host will be more effective against a lot of the force-field heavy styles, it should force a lot of sentry energy usage too early. | ||
|
Greggle
United States1131 Posts
| ||
|
MugenXBanksy
United States479 Posts
On June 18 2012 17:43 iky43210 wrote: games aren't sports. Games revolved around storyline, graphic, game mechanics, style of play, etc. consumers taste changes drastically over time, and our technology improves many times more rapidly. There is a reason why CoD is the stable RTS of this generation than to say another counter strike clone aka cross fire or whatever it was called. Gamers from this generation don't like waiting forever to for a game to watch other people fail at their objectives, nor do gamers like the rather one dimensional maps in CS where there are generally 1 or 2 entrance point per game. Most gamers actually like being rewarded for their action, no matter how good/bad they are. perks, challenges, "achievements", tags, customizatable weapons, fast pace, vehicles are things that let gamers feel that they are progressing instead of doing the same thing over and over aka counter strike. Its one of the few reasons why battlefield 3 and Call of Duty are so popular Nobody is going to buy a rehash of the same game in higher quality, nor would it have any lasting power outside of nostalgia values. Above just a simple example on how gamers have changed in a relatively short period of time. As technology progresses, you have to adapt to the new gamers tastes ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bLnpG.jpg) are you just a impatient 16 year old, and yes people will Dota2 is a prime example people will buy the same thing if its been improved some how. Call of Duty or Call of Derp or my favorite Grenade of Grenade: Grenade Grenade is the simple minded brodouches and 12yr old boys who scream at you cause you don't have turtlebitch headset and can't do a 360 no-scope and Battlefield isn't actually that popular its like 1 BF3 : 5 CoD players which by the way is a made up statistical figure but I know for a fact that there are way more CoD players then people who play BF3 as all my bro says who play it are guys in like their 30s. Also CoD went from a fun FPS on the PC to the plague and a breeding ground for out of control 10yr olds with bad parents ruin everyone's experience on the dark place known as Xbox live Also Call of Duty is First Person Shooter or commonly as a FPS games like Starcraft , BroodWar, StarCraft 2 and Warcraft 2: tides of Darkness are Real time strategy also known as RTS And we all waited like what was it 10 or more years for D3 your statement is just full of bad examples that only apply to people on consoles or are like 14 and everything seems to take a eternity to happen but that's life. | ||
|
Kal_rA
United States2925 Posts
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? Guess they shouldn't have created the perfect game over a decade ago haha But seriously this is probably it... Although now theyre getting flamed for both with these cheap knock offs... lose-lose-lose gg. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
the number of spells available are about the same between sc2 and bw, core difference is that most of bw spells come mid to late game, some spells being boarderline OP like maelstrom or spawn broods or lock down or emp, however, they're costly spells and reserved for late game designed to end the game, like a sudden death mode. sc2 spells come early, perhaps for "terrible terrible damage" and for visual effects, but i think it hurts the game more than it helps. many spells carried over and have been nerfed to hell because its introduced so early. perhaps starcraft 2 needs to follow bw model when it comes to spells. early game should be battle of unit vs unit micro like vulture/goon, marine/bane and spells coming in later. just saying, the feel of wrong forcefield or just being ramp blocked by forcefield, getting all muta tangled up in a series of fungal is not fun and its something players constantly worry about which i dont think should be necessary. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
Secondly, THIS thread points out EXACTLY how pathing could be improved for excitement, legibility, and in a way that would allow more IMBA splash without breaking the game. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=223889 We are at a crossroads now. It is time to bring this to DB's attention. Not a hard fix. | ||
|
Plethora
United States206 Posts
Here's the thing. When we look at this historically, the game right now isn't going to mean a damn thing. WoL right now has issues and there are very few people who would disagree with that, even at Blizzard I think, if you put them on a lie detector anyway. But no matter what the game looks like now, its gonna get shaking up completely, and essentially reset, once HotS is released, and the same thing will happen over again when LotV is released after that. One can only hope that lessons get learned along the way, but really, the game right now will ultimately not matter at all. That's not to say there aren't reasons to be concerned. Like everyone else, I hate the colossus, but its not hopeless even if it stays in the game. Right now, its essential to balance that it stay in. If you just take it out, or nerf it to hell in the game as it is, Toss will just get stomped into the dirt. But if you're sitting in a Blizzard office planning for the future you can actually balance toss around a reduced colossus role without breaking the game. Give it a minimum range a la siege tanks, push it further down the tech tree, make it pricier and beefier. In short, turn it from a unit you get a lot of (which to me is why its such a boring unit) into something situational. Make it a game finisher when you already have a lead. That's just an example, but the point is, there are things that you can't do now that you could do later. Now, whether or not that happens is another story. But I really can't believe that the folks at Blizz are complete morons. I'm sure they have long term plans that no one here knows anything about, and only time will tell if those plans are any good. | ||
| ||
