|
On July 29 2012 23:26 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 23:14 Toadvine wrote:On July 29 2012 23:11 Talin wrote:Despite all that I think about SC2 development and direction (none of it being very good in my eyes), I still can't help but like Dustin Browder.  He does seem like a nice, reasonable person. It's kind of unfortunate that he ended up in a position that is way out of his depth. What do you mean "way out of his depth"? Who would you recommend as a Lead RTS Designer? I mean there may be some other guys within Blizzard, but that doesn't really matter, as they'll share a similar vision and do communicate together anyways. And considering that other than Starcraft 2 there haven't been any great RTS lately and even less so RTS with that kind of gameplay, who's a better fit for Lead Designer? Or is there just none? ;P
That is actually a very difficult question, one which I don't know how to answer. It's a lot easier to criticize specific decisions the SC2 team had made, than to point out a person who could make it all work right. And yes, SC2 is a very good RTS, probably one of the best in recent memory. So in that sense, Browder has proven his qualifications. Where he is out of his depth, is as an overseer of the most competitive e-sport on the planet. When I listen to his interviews, he still seems like he's balancing C&C for a relatively small online community, and thinking in terms that would make sense there, but are woefully misplaced for SC2.
I mean, listen to him talk about Phoenix, and how maxed Protosses lose to mass Muta, and how they could've easily afforded some Phoenix with the range upgrade. That's the kind of naive counter-based thought process that would be fine for most RTSes, but for a game with as powerful of a pro community as SC2, it's just stupid and inadequate. There's a very good reason you don't see reactive Phoenix against Mutas, and the fact that Browder doesn't understand it even after 2 years of professional SC2, is, to me, more proof of how out of place he is. You can see this every time some kind of high level problem with the game gains traction in the community and he gets asked about it in an interview, and is surprised that this kind of thing even happens. See the MLG interview on Mothership vs Broodlord/Infestor for an example.
On July 29 2012 23:43 monkybone wrote:
Funny thing is that Browder is 1000 times better at balancing this game than anyone in this thread.
The stuff he says is at about the level of a typical b.net forum poster. Listen to his opinion on Phoenix vs Muta again and repeat what you just said with a straight face.
|
|
|
That is actually a very difficult question, one which I don't know how to answer. It's a lot easier to criticize specific decisions the SC2 team had made, than to point out a person who could make it all work right. And yes, SC2 is a very good RTS, probably one of the best in recent memory. So in that sense, Browder has proven his qualifications. Where he is out of his depth, is as an overseer of the most competitive e-sport on the planet. When I listen to his interviews, he still seems like he's balancing C&C for a relatively small online community, and thinking in terms that would make sense there, but are woefully misplaced for SC2.
I mean, listen to him talk about Phoenix, and how maxed Protosses lose to mass Muta, and how they could've easily afforded some Phoenix with the range upgrade. That's the kind of naive counter-based thought process that would be fine for most RTSes, but for a game with as powerful of a pro community as SC2, it's just stupid and inadequate. There's a very good reason you don't see reactive Phoenix against Mutas, and the fact that Browder doesn't understand it even after 2 years of professional SC2, is, to me, more proof of how out of place he is. You can see this every time some kind of high level problem with the game gains traction in the community and he gets asked about it in an interview, and is surprised that this kind of thing even happens. See the MLG interview on Mothership vs Broodlord/Infestor for an example.
Keep in mind that Dustin doesn't work alone. They have balance team which is lead by David Kim Who problably know about high level SC2 more than anyone here. Do you even believe that Dustin doesn't even watch high level SC game like us? It's his job. Blizzard won't keep him in the position if he doesn't do his work. People like to nitpick things. If you said even 1 little thing wrong they will try to pick you apart. I don't even see anything wrong with what he said in the interview eventhough I don't really like the state of TvZ right now but I agree with him that it needs time.
|
This was a phenomenal interview! Good work interviewers with good questions. I feel as if I am the minority here but I am very happy in the way that Dustin Browder and his team have been with SC2 also I feel as if they hold off on many major changes (ie battle.net not balance) until there next major product. I'm also very hopeful that WCS becomes as staple tournament, the true Olympics of Starcraft. My main worry about that though is who is paying for it? Who is paying for all those plane trips and hotel rooms and the such for so many players from all over the world? I hope whoever it is they make all that money back and continue to reinvest in that tournament. Also I hope the prise pool for the World Championship is absolutely gignatic (ie $100,000 or more to first place) that would be the coolest ending to the tournament.
|
On July 30 2012 01:34 Rhodon wrote:
This was a phenomenal interview! Good work interviewers with good questions. I feel as if I am the minority here but I am very happy in the way that Dustin Browder and his team have been with SC2 also I feel as if they hold off on many major changes (ie battle.net not balance) until there next major product. I'm also very hopeful that WCS becomes as staple tournament, the true Olympics of Starcraft. My main worry about that though is who is paying for it? Who is paying for all those plane trips and hotel rooms and the such for so many players from all over the world? I hope whoever it is they make all that money back and continue to reinvest in that tournament. Also I hope the prise pool for the World Championship is absolutely gignatic (ie $100,000 or more to first place) that would be the coolest ending to the tournament.
Blizzard pays for all of it. I could be wrong though.
|
God damn someof you guys are so rude and vicious.
No wonder Blizz is so hesitant to communicate with you @.@
I think Browder's "wait-and-see" methodology of dealing with issues in the game is the best way to approach balance in a game that is so complex. There's so much to go through before someone can confidently say, "yes, this is broken and there is NOTHING that can be done about it."
If Blizzard implemented changes rapidly then the metagame would have no time at all to develop. Shit, half of the amazing stuff in BW was discovered because people lhad to scrounge out just that last tiny little advantage. That's how BW was balanced - over huge amounts of playtime.
BW wasn't balanced because Blizzard interfered with it constantly. SC2 is rough, still has 2 expansions to go through, and needs a lot of settling before it can be polished. IMO.
|
On July 30 2012 00:03 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 23:45 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:On July 29 2012 23:34 Xiphos wrote:On July 29 2012 23:26 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:On July 29 2012 23:14 Toadvine wrote:On July 29 2012 23:11 Talin wrote:Despite all that I think about SC2 development and direction (none of it being very good in my eyes), I still can't help but like Dustin Browder. He does seem like a nice, reasonable person. It's kind of unfortunate that he ended up in a position that is way out of his depth. What do you mean "way out of his depth"? Who would you recommend as a Lead RTS Designer? I mean there may be some other guys within Blizzard, but that doesn't really matter, as they'll share a similar vision and do communicate together anyways. And considering that other than Starcraft 2 there haven't been any great RTS lately and even less so RTS with that kind of gameplay, who's a better fit for Lead Designer? Or is there just none? ;P I would honestly just hire the original SC producers and directors. DB belongs into a whole another universe (CnCs) and he is better off ameliorating that series. I guess what I am saying is that he changed the Terran race so drastically from its lore. Urgh. So because Dustin Browder has worked on other (successful) RTS titles, which actually adds to his qualification, you claim he ... I don't even really know what. "He changed the Terran race so drastically from its lore" What's that even supposed to mean and who says that has to do anything with his previous RTS titles he worked on in the past? What's so drastically different within the Terran lore now and back then. Do you want all the units from BW back and have a BW2 instead of Sc2? Also DB doesn't make the decisions all on his own, you know. And he especially doesn't have too much to say about the lore. You sound kinda like a prick when you act like you know better where a very successful, long-time RTS developer belongs to. What qualifies you to make such a claim? A big part of me wasn't expecting a BW2 but a better game in terms of designs and innovation. To which I was greatly disappointed. Many, many units aspects of the sequel are trumped by its big brother counterpart if we are talking about the entertainment values . Now I'm not saying that ALL angles are badly designed. There are some unit that have plenty room for maneuverability. To list them all: Stalker's blink ability, you can certainly accomplish much with this. Sentry's forcefield: clutch when utilized right. Pheonix is a worthy replacement for Corsairs because it offers something awesome and refreshing. Moving on to Zerg, oh yeah Roaches are really cool ideas that offer great ambushes and fun factor, then You got the Creep Spread which I really think lore-wise makes sense for a Zerg to gain an advantage while on it. Onto Terran, they got a unit that COULD be built by itself and I really like how the Ghost's Nuke is faster and easier to use than BW. But then the rest of the units are all the generic 1A ones that require little skills to control while in BW, pretty much more or less, every single facet of the game have those little intricacy listed above in SC2. Sequels are suppose to be an improvement upon the original one, I really do hope to see that philosophy to manifest itself in SC2 in the gameplay department.
So you like roaches but dislike generic 1A units? Roaches are pretty much THE spammable generic 1A unit. I really don't get where you're coming from except distorted nostalgia.
|
NASL sound guy again?
|
On July 30 2012 00:53 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 23:34 Xiphos wrote:On July 29 2012 23:26 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:On July 29 2012 23:14 Toadvine wrote:On July 29 2012 23:11 Talin wrote:Despite all that I think about SC2 development and direction (none of it being very good in my eyes), I still can't help but like Dustin Browder. He does seem like a nice, reasonable person. It's kind of unfortunate that he ended up in a position that is way out of his depth. What do you mean "way out of his depth"? Who would you recommend as a Lead RTS Designer? I mean there may be some other guys within Blizzard, but that doesn't really matter, as they'll share a similar vision and do communicate together anyways. And considering that other than Starcraft 2 there haven't been any great RTS lately and even less so RTS with that kind of gameplay, who's a better fit for Lead Designer? Or is there just none? ;P I would honestly just hire the original SC producers and directors. DB belongs into a whole another universe (CnCs) and he is better off ameliorating that series. I guess what I am saying is that he changed the Terran race so drastically from its lore. Chances are they couldn't do a better job at all. I always considered BW balance more of a "happy accident" rather than a miracle of game design. Just look at how many things are completely unintentional but end up working in favor of the game, for example muta stacking. Keep in mind, when BW was designed stuff like competitive RTS didn't even exist.
But it's still possible to capture BW's spirit. Armies of Exigo did that better than SC2. That's because Blizzard were completely ignorant of BW after they ditched it (around the time they released WC3), whereas the developers of AoX were hardcore BW players for the most part. I remember how around beta someone asked Browder if they analyzed BW before designing SC2, and he outright lied that they did. Lied, because he couldn't name a single BW players aside from BoxeR at that time.
The main problem is how arrogant Browder is. Just like other Blizzard developers, he nearly never admits his mistakes. He botched so many aspects of SC2, but will not fix them due to his pride. "Don't want deathballs? Go play BW"...
|
Good, long interview with all the gory details! Me like a lot!
|
On July 30 2012 00:03 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 23:45 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:On July 29 2012 23:34 Xiphos wrote:On July 29 2012 23:26 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:On July 29 2012 23:14 Toadvine wrote:On July 29 2012 23:11 Talin wrote:Despite all that I think about SC2 development and direction (none of it being very good in my eyes), I still can't help but like Dustin Browder. He does seem like a nice, reasonable person. It's kind of unfortunate that he ended up in a position that is way out of his depth. What do you mean "way out of his depth"? Who would you recommend as a Lead RTS Designer? I mean there may be some other guys within Blizzard, but that doesn't really matter, as they'll share a similar vision and do communicate together anyways. And considering that other than Starcraft 2 there haven't been any great RTS lately and even less so RTS with that kind of gameplay, who's a better fit for Lead Designer? Or is there just none? ;P I would honestly just hire the original SC producers and directors. DB belongs into a whole another universe (CnCs) and he is better off ameliorating that series. I guess what I am saying is that he changed the Terran race so drastically from its lore. Urgh. So because Dustin Browder has worked on other (successful) RTS titles, which actually adds to his qualification, you claim he ... I don't even really know what. "He changed the Terran race so drastically from its lore" What's that even supposed to mean and who says that has to do anything with his previous RTS titles he worked on in the past? What's so drastically different within the Terran lore now and back then. Do you want all the units from BW back and have a BW2 instead of Sc2? Also DB doesn't make the decisions all on his own, you know. And he especially doesn't have too much to say about the lore. You sound kinda like a prick when you act like you know better where a very successful, long-time RTS developer belongs to. What qualifies you to make such a claim? A big part of me wasn't expecting a BW2 but a better game in terms of designs and innovation. To which I was greatly disappointed. Many, many units aspects of the sequel are trumped by its big brother counterpart if we are talking about the entertainment values . Now I'm not saying that ALL angles are badly designed. There are some unit that have plenty room for maneuverability. To list them all: Stalker's blink ability, you can certainly accomplish much with this. Sentry's forcefield: clutch when utilized right. Pheonix is a worthy replacement for Corsairs because it offers something awesome and refreshing. Moving on to Zerg, oh yeah Roaches are really cool ideas that offer great ambushes and fun factor, then You got the Creep Spread which I really think lore-wise makes sense for a Zerg to gain an advantage while on it. Onto Terran, they got a unit that COULD be built by itself and I really like how the Ghost's Nuke is faster and easier to use than BW. But then the rest of the units are all the generic 1A ones that require little skills to control while in BW, pretty much more or less, every single facet of the game have those little intricacy listed above in SC2. Sequels are suppose to be an improvement upon the original one, I really do hope to see that philosophy to manifest itself in SC2 in the gameplay department.
I believe that's only partialy true. The ideas for units in SC2 are mostly good in my opinion, each unit having something special about them that was either exploring new mechanics in SC2 or creating new synergies/bettering old units in some way. Most of the flak or uselessness of units comes from overnerfing some of these abilities which were either too strong or too weak (hard to balance) and from the new pathing/better AI and animation. Only a couple of units were very badly designed or typical 1A units and that should be fixed.
But what we forget is BW had a lot of that too. Thing is, units had such bad AI (for instance dragoons which were either typical idiotic 1A units or poetry in motion in the hands of pro players) but that came not from brilliant design but from pathing and AI fallacies not the plethora of blink like skills they possessed (there was the range upgrade tho :D). Another thing is the game was much much slower and micro even from the most basic no special abilities units was promoted because they mattered and could be saved and be very useful throughout the entire game. For instance when you think of zealots in SC2 you think freaking A-move mobile wall, but in BW even tho they didn't have more inherent abilities they could be microed to much greater effect because the game was slower and everything was spread out, harder to control and not clumped for optimal damage.
But that's the bed they made for themselves. They would rather die than give up some of improvements they build in the engine so they have to balance around that AND not changing core units (like marines). I swear if only they kept the maximum unit selection smaller (like I thought they will when I first saw SC2 alpha footage i thought you can select only 4x8 units) things would already be miles better.
|
On July 30 2012 01:52 Serelitz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 00:03 Xiphos wrote:On July 29 2012 23:45 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:On July 29 2012 23:34 Xiphos wrote:On July 29 2012 23:26 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:On July 29 2012 23:14 Toadvine wrote:On July 29 2012 23:11 Talin wrote:Despite all that I think about SC2 development and direction (none of it being very good in my eyes), I still can't help but like Dustin Browder. He does seem like a nice, reasonable person. It's kind of unfortunate that he ended up in a position that is way out of his depth. What do you mean "way out of his depth"? Who would you recommend as a Lead RTS Designer? I mean there may be some other guys within Blizzard, but that doesn't really matter, as they'll share a similar vision and do communicate together anyways. And considering that other than Starcraft 2 there haven't been any great RTS lately and even less so RTS with that kind of gameplay, who's a better fit for Lead Designer? Or is there just none? ;P I would honestly just hire the original SC producers and directors. DB belongs into a whole another universe (CnCs) and he is better off ameliorating that series. I guess what I am saying is that he changed the Terran race so drastically from its lore. Urgh. So because Dustin Browder has worked on other (successful) RTS titles, which actually adds to his qualification, you claim he ... I don't even really know what. "He changed the Terran race so drastically from its lore" What's that even supposed to mean and who says that has to do anything with his previous RTS titles he worked on in the past? What's so drastically different within the Terran lore now and back then. Do you want all the units from BW back and have a BW2 instead of Sc2? Also DB doesn't make the decisions all on his own, you know. And he especially doesn't have too much to say about the lore. You sound kinda like a prick when you act like you know better where a very successful, long-time RTS developer belongs to. What qualifies you to make such a claim? A big part of me wasn't expecting a BW2 but a better game in terms of designs and innovation. To which I was greatly disappointed. Many, many units aspects of the sequel are trumped by its big brother counterpart if we are talking about the entertainment values . Now I'm not saying that ALL angles are badly designed. There are some unit that have plenty room for maneuverability. To list them all: Stalker's blink ability, you can certainly accomplish much with this. Sentry's forcefield: clutch when utilized right. Pheonix is a worthy replacement for Corsairs because it offers something awesome and refreshing. Moving on to Zerg, oh yeah Roaches are really cool ideas that offer great ambushes and fun factor, then You got the Creep Spread which I really think lore-wise makes sense for a Zerg to gain an advantage while on it. Onto Terran, they got a unit that COULD be built by itself and I really like how the Ghost's Nuke is faster and easier to use than BW. But then the rest of the units are all the generic 1A ones that require little skills to control while in BW, pretty much more or less, every single facet of the game have those little intricacy listed above in SC2. Sequels are suppose to be an improvement upon the original one, I really do hope to see that philosophy to manifest itself in SC2 in the gameplay department. So you like roaches but dislike generic 1A units? Roaches are pretty much THE spammable generic 1A unit. I really don't get where you're coming from except distorted nostalgia.
It's almost like making a slow armored unit without bonus damage against anything, and giving it a weak ability that requires multiple expensive and slow upgrades...isn't smart
|
On July 30 2012 01:07 Wildmoon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 23:34 Xiphos wrote:On July 29 2012 23:26 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:On July 29 2012 23:14 Toadvine wrote:On July 29 2012 23:11 Talin wrote:Despite all that I think about SC2 development and direction (none of it being very good in my eyes), I still can't help but like Dustin Browder. He does seem like a nice, reasonable person. It's kind of unfortunate that he ended up in a position that is way out of his depth. What do you mean "way out of his depth"? Who would you recommend as a Lead RTS Designer? I mean there may be some other guys within Blizzard, but that doesn't really matter, as they'll share a similar vision and do communicate together anyways. And considering that other than Starcraft 2 there haven't been any great RTS lately and even less so RTS with that kind of gameplay, who's a better fit for Lead Designer? Or is there just none? ;P I would honestly just hire the original SC producers and directors. DB belongs into a whole another universe (CnCs) and he is better off ameliorating that series. I guess what I am saying is that he changed the Terran race so drastically from its lore. Except the SC:BW lead designer is there at Blizzard to help him. Dustin is not alone. Rob Pardo(lead designer of SC:BW),Frank Pearce, Bob Fitch and many more. I think the SC2 team did a really good job so far but there will still be people who don't like it anyway. You can't please everyone. Everyone has his/her own opinion.:D
If Rob Pardo have a place in this project to help DB, then I honestly don't know what goes around in the development of SC2. I fear for its legacy.
On July 30 2012 01:52 Serelitz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 00:03 Xiphos wrote:On July 29 2012 23:45 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:On July 29 2012 23:34 Xiphos wrote:On July 29 2012 23:26 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:On July 29 2012 23:14 Toadvine wrote:On July 29 2012 23:11 Talin wrote:Despite all that I think about SC2 development and direction (none of it being very good in my eyes), I still can't help but like Dustin Browder. He does seem like a nice, reasonable person. It's kind of unfortunate that he ended up in a position that is way out of his depth. What do you mean "way out of his depth"? Who would you recommend as a Lead RTS Designer? I mean there may be some other guys within Blizzard, but that doesn't really matter, as they'll share a similar vision and do communicate together anyways. And considering that other than Starcraft 2 there haven't been any great RTS lately and even less so RTS with that kind of gameplay, who's a better fit for Lead Designer? Or is there just none? ;P I would honestly just hire the original SC producers and directors. DB belongs into a whole another universe (CnCs) and he is better off ameliorating that series. I guess what I am saying is that he changed the Terran race so drastically from its lore. Urgh. So because Dustin Browder has worked on other (successful) RTS titles, which actually adds to his qualification, you claim he ... I don't even really know what. "He changed the Terran race so drastically from its lore" What's that even supposed to mean and who says that has to do anything with his previous RTS titles he worked on in the past? What's so drastically different within the Terran lore now and back then. Do you want all the units from BW back and have a BW2 instead of Sc2? Also DB doesn't make the decisions all on his own, you know. And he especially doesn't have too much to say about the lore. You sound kinda like a prick when you act like you know better where a very successful, long-time RTS developer belongs to. What qualifies you to make such a claim? A big part of me wasn't expecting a BW2 but a better game in terms of designs and innovation. To which I was greatly disappointed. Many, many units aspects of the sequel are trumped by its big brother counterpart if we are talking about the entertainment values . Now I'm not saying that ALL angles are badly designed. There are some unit that have plenty room for maneuverability. To list them all: Stalker's blink ability, you can certainly accomplish much with this. Sentry's forcefield: clutch when utilized right. Pheonix is a worthy replacement for Corsairs because it offers something awesome and refreshing. Moving on to Zerg, oh yeah Roaches are really cool ideas that offer great ambushes and fun factor, then You got the Creep Spread which I really think lore-wise makes sense for a Zerg to gain an advantage while on it. Onto Terran, they got a unit that COULD be built by itself and I really like how the Ghost's Nuke is faster and easier to use than BW. But then the rest of the units are all the generic 1A ones that require little skills to control while in BW, pretty much more or less, every single facet of the game have those little intricacy listed above in SC2. Sequels are suppose to be an improvement upon the original one, I really do hope to see that philosophy to manifest itself in SC2 in the gameplay department. So you like roaches but dislike generic 1A units? Roaches are pretty much THE spammable generic 1A unit. I really don't get where you're coming from except distorted nostalgia.
I said Roaches to throw a bone @ Zerg race's unit design. Otherwise, Zergs really have little to nothing of marvel with only Bannelings. You are just countering my points by...proving me right.
And on the talk of nostalgia, I don't care even if SCVs, Probes, Zerglings, Zealots and etc. are taken out. But as long as the dynamics relations between the units is there with innovative control and designs, that's all that matters.
On July 30 2012 00:53 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 23:34 Xiphos wrote:On July 29 2012 23:26 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:On July 29 2012 23:14 Toadvine wrote:On July 29 2012 23:11 Talin wrote:Despite all that I think about SC2 development and direction (none of it being very good in my eyes), I still can't help but like Dustin Browder. He does seem like a nice, reasonable person. It's kind of unfortunate that he ended up in a position that is way out of his depth. What do you mean "way out of his depth"? Who would you recommend as a Lead RTS Designer? I mean there may be some other guys within Blizzard, but that doesn't really matter, as they'll share a similar vision and do communicate together anyways. And considering that other than Starcraft 2 there haven't been any great RTS lately and even less so RTS with that kind of gameplay, who's a better fit for Lead Designer? Or is there just none? ;P I would honestly just hire the original SC producers and directors. DB belongs into a whole another universe (CnCs) and he is better off ameliorating that series. I guess what I am saying is that he changed the Terran race so drastically from its lore. Chances are they couldn't do a better job at all. I always considered BW balance more of a "happy accident" rather than a miracle of game design. Just look at how many things are completely unintentional but end up working in favor of the game, for example muta stacking. Keep in mind, when BW was designed stuff like competitive RTS didn't even exist.
There is an article on TL about the recreation of WarCraft. It mentioned that the design of limited control group was strategical and not because of some random chance. I wonder what other tweaks there and there were made by design.
If BW was a truly 'accident', then I guess SC2 won't ever surpass itspredecessor. You can't beat luck.
|
On July 30 2012 02:28 Xiphos wrote:
I said Roaches to throw a bone @ Zerg race's unit design. Otherwise, Zergs really have little to nothing of marvel with only Bannelings. You are just countering my points by...proving me right.
...
If BW was a truly 'accident', then I guess SC2 won't ever surpass itspredecessor. You can't beat luck.
I said it because you were being inconsistent in your own argument. If you think the problem with SC2 is its' generic 1A units that's a solid opinion but not anything that's going to change. It's exactly those fundamental mechanical differences that seperate BW and SC2.
IMO it's to make the game more accessible to less competitive players - the only reason my friends played BW at all was because it was so easy to pirate. The only other option if you're making a game focused 100% on competitiveness is to be F2P and SC2 didn't pick that business model.
|
On July 29 2012 20:26 Serelitz wrote:Transcript. Show nested quote +00:08 Dustin Browder, Game Director of Starcraft 2
00:14 How do you feel about the growth and success of e-sports? And what does it need to continue?
-Blown away by what's happening in Starcraft 2.
-Expected sizes of crowds of 50-60 people, maybe more in Korea.
-Kept growing, growing growing, huge venues all over the world with thousands of people watching.
-In terms of where it's going, Blizzard is in the dark. No master plan.
02:03 How close is the connection between Blizzard and the major events around the world?
-Try to make a product that's viable for them to use
-Go to events as much as possible
-Also working with them a lot for WCS
02:55 Is there a struggle between the needs of the community and the needs of the company?
-No.
-Blizzard would balance the game even if e-sports didn't exist, for fans so that when Blizzard releases a new product those fans come back for more.
04:04 Is e-sports a byproduct of Starcraft 2?
-Starcraft 2 was built for e-sports, Warcraft 3 was as well. Starcraft 2 had an advantage thanks to Brood War.
-Even some of the story elements are influenced by it.
05:23 Do you have any plans to support the community more directly?
-Lots of stuff done recently like TLMC/GSL/MLG maps into ladder, HotS battle reports with Day9.
06:38 What are your most memorable moments from the last two years of Starcraft 2?
-Nestea vs Anypro's sunken rush, they discussed something like it in ~2008 but completely forgot about that until this match.
-GSL October finals at Blizzcon crowd.
09:00 What is the Blizzard Vision for the WCS?
-Create environment for non-pros to show off and maybe become pros.
-Create tournaments in places where they aren't held as much.
10:06 Local players in the WCS
-Try to convince players who otherwise wouldn't participate to join in tournaments and find new talent
10:42 Is WCS the replacement for Blizzcon this year?
-Not the reasoning but certainly very nice bonus.
10:54 Will WCS continue after this season?
-Not sure but that's the plan.
11:07 Any hope of auto tournaments returning to battle.net?
-Absolutely, definitely on the list.
-The list is very long and Blizzard knows that.
12:01 Will we see new ranking systems implemented in battle.net?
-Ladder ranking is a Bell curve - Gold is closest to eachother in skill level, GM/master and bronze leagues are much more varied in skill level.
-Possible solutions are more subdivisions (bronze 8,9,10), this goes for GM as well. But Grand Master does exist in a way for that.
-Dustin Browder was diamond, now platinum.
-The community has gotten better and that can be very demoralizing if you don't and get demoted despite getting better.
15:04 Why hide players' true rankings?
-This is still being discussed a lot.
-Showing MMR might demoralize people even more if they hit their 'true skill cap' - which of the 2 options is worse is still being discussed.
16:22 What about better stat tracking within battle.net?
-Want it badly
-Dustin Browder plays random because he has to be unbiased.
17:34 Does Blizzard ever look to the community for inspiration?
-Yes, but infrequently and they want to do it more.
18:12 When can we play Heart of the Swarm beta?
-Very Soon.
-Number of variables like D3 and MoP patches and balance/battle.net changes that affect it.
18:45 How long will there be between beta and launch?
-3 to 6 month beta is the goal.
19:00 What about Warcraft 4?
-Later, much later. 'was gonig to say soon but that seems wrong'.
-HotS first, LoV after, lots of battle.net changes to come in as well first.
-No idea what to implement for multiplayer in LoV.
20:01 Did you ever envision the metagame developing to this point?
-Metagame does what metagame does.
-No specific metagame in mind.
-They had vague ideas toward the end of the beta like Zerg units being weaker due to the larva mechanic and the '300/200 remax'.
21:45 When you make small changes to a unit is it intended to push players in that direction?
-Never intentional. Done during beta but not for a live game.
-Community can overreact to small changes and 'overuse' a unit after buffing though sometimes the community is right and the buff is way more than anticipated
-Queen buff example, wasn't to buff Z but to give them a response to Hellions denying/controlling creep.
22:53 Thinking of the ZvP metagame, are you focusing on the 2 base dilemma faced by the Protoss players?
-Deep sigh
-More confidence in the community than in ourselves to solve things like this.
-Community can sometimes be wrong or overlooking something with tunnelvision.
-When mutas come into play, Phoenixes could be used way more even without the upgrade. 200/200 Protoss armies losing to mass muta, 'you dont have the money' doesnt work in that case.
-Community has a right to panic and they should since that leads to solutions one way or another.
24:45 How do you feel about the changes made to the Queen at this point?
-Terrans still doing runby's with hellions, and banshees and drops.
-Not 100% sure
-Everything looks balanced from ladder statistics, tournament statistics, tournament results.
-Big change but Terran had been dominating for months.
-Open to being wrong.
26:27 How do you feel about 'Ultimate Endgame', especially Infestor/Broodlord and Mothership/Archon?
-We'll see
-HotS coming up which may change that.
-Starcraft 2 isn't considered as done.
-MVP vs Squirtle, what if he yamato'd the mothership? What if he EMP'd it? Still so much potential possibilities.
-Ravens and seeker missiles against zerg, hadn't expected to see it initially. Little sloppily executed by pro standard [in that first game where he saw that used], but with more practice pros might be able to make it work.
-Pros are never done, the metagame is never finished, especially for the end game.
28:40 Final thoughts?
-You're awesome. There you go.
Thank you very much
|
On July 30 2012 02:28 Xiphos wrote:
There is an article on TL about the recreation of WarCraft. It mentioned that the design of limited control group was strategical and not because of some random chance. I wonder what other tweaks there and there were made by design.
If BW was a truly 'accident', then I guess SC2 won't ever surpass itspredecessor. You can't beat luck.
Well, just because they limited that doesn't mean that they foresaw the future metagame and balanced BW around that. I think its pretty silly to assume that BW as it is today had much to do with the original design at all.
BW and SC2 are very different in the way that they're balanced, mostly because with SC2 there is so much more feedback that didn't exist with BW. The pro scene and the balance team are constantly changing things on both sides, trying to make for the best game possible.
Ultimately the thing that made BW more "balanced" was the fact that mechanics matttered so much. You could always squeeze out wins just by having more APM and better macro than your opponent. I doubt it would be as balanced if stuff like MBS and auto-mining were added to the game. Whether you want your RTS to be based on mechanics or strategy is another thing entirely.
|
On July 30 2012 01:26 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 23:26 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:On July 29 2012 23:14 Toadvine wrote:On July 29 2012 23:11 Talin wrote:Despite all that I think about SC2 development and direction (none of it being very good in my eyes), I still can't help but like Dustin Browder. He does seem like a nice, reasonable person. It's kind of unfortunate that he ended up in a position that is way out of his depth. What do you mean "way out of his depth"? Who would you recommend as a Lead RTS Designer? I mean there may be some other guys within Blizzard, but that doesn't really matter, as they'll share a similar vision and do communicate together anyways. And considering that other than Starcraft 2 there haven't been any great RTS lately and even less so RTS with that kind of gameplay, who's a better fit for Lead Designer? Or is there just none? ;P That is actually a very difficult question, one which I don't know how to answer. It's a lot easier to criticize specific decisions the SC2 team had made, than to point out a person who could make it all work right. And yes, SC2 is a very good RTS, probably one of the best in recent memory. So in that sense, Browder has proven his qualifications. Where he is out of his depth, is as an overseer of the most competitive e-sport on the planet. When I listen to his interviews, he still seems like he's balancing C&C for a relatively small online community, and thinking in terms that would make sense there, but are woefully misplaced for SC2. I mean, listen to him talk about Phoenix, and how maxed Protosses lose to mass Muta, and how they could've easily afforded some Phoenix with the range upgrade. That's the kind of naive counter-based thought process that would be fine for most RTSes, but for a game with as powerful of a pro community as SC2, it's just stupid and inadequate. There's a very good reason you don't see reactive Phoenix against Mutas, and the fact that Browder doesn't understand it even after 2 years of professional SC2, is, to me, more proof of how out of place he is. You can see this every time some kind of high level problem with the game gains traction in the community and he gets asked about it in an interview, and is surprised that this kind of thing even happens. See the MLG interview on Mothership vs Broodlord/Infestor for an example.Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 23:43 monkybone wrote:
Funny thing is that Browder is 1000 times better at balancing this game than anyone in this thread. The stuff he says is at about the level of a typical b.net forum poster. Listen to his opinion on Phoenix vs Muta again and repeat what you just said with a straight face.
How long are you people are gonna take this and similar things that have been explained a 100 times before, most frequently in the same damn thread the interview was posted out of context to prove your point and/or discredit everything DB says. Enough. Someone might actually take you seriously if he had been following his interviews closely.
The muta problem he addresses here is specifically after the initial harassment comes and the Protoss stabilizes, gets his third base and the zerg is maxed on muta/ling for some time. Now, the problem with going apeshit 3 freaking stargates and pump only pheonix is the switch to roaches that could just murder you, but if you already have a Sgate, put down another one chrono 10 pheonix, chrono the upgrade and fucking kite and murder his 2000/2000 in mutas. Slight exaggeration in this example aside, if youtry and miss the point in a time constrained interview in everything he or any other Blizzard representative says, they might as well be speaking Protoss to you because you wouldn't understand crap either way.
|
On July 30 2012 02:34 Serelitz wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 02:28 Xiphos wrote:
I said Roaches to throw a bone @ Zerg race's unit design. Otherwise, Zergs really have little to nothing of marvel with only Bannelings. You are just countering my points by...proving me right.
...
If BW was a truly 'accident', then I guess SC2 won't ever surpass itspredecessor. You can't beat luck. I said it because you were being inconsistent in your own argument. If you think the problem with SC2 is its' generic 1A units that's a solid opinion but not anything that's going to change. It's exactly those fundamental mechanical differences that seperate BW and SC2. IMO it's to make the game more accessible to less competitive players - the only reason my friends played BW at all was because it was so easy to pirate. The only other option if you're making a game focused 100% on competitiveness is to be F2P and SC2 didn't pick that business model.
+ 1 on this post.
On July 30 2012 02:41 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 02:28 Xiphos wrote:
There is an article on TL about the recreation of WarCraft. It mentioned that the design of limited control group was strategical and not because of some random chance. I wonder what other tweaks there and there were made by design.
If BW was a truly 'accident', then I guess SC2 won't ever surpass itspredecessor. You can't beat luck. Well, just because they limited that doesn't mean that they foresaw the future metagame and balanced BW around that. I think its pretty silly to assume that BW as it is today had much to do with the original design at all. BW and SC2 are very different in the way that they're balanced, mostly because with SC2 there is so much more feedback that didn't exist with BW. The pro scene and the balance team are constantly changing things on both sides, trying to make for the best game possible. Ultimately the thing that made BW more "balanced" was the fact that mechanics matttered so much. You could always squeeze out wins just by having more APM and better macro than your opponent. I doubt it would be as balanced if stuff like MBS and auto-mining were added to the game. Whether you want your RTS to be based on mechanics or strategy is another thing entirely.
I think that the thing that BW more balanced is because it was balanced upon unbalanced. Every single units have its like "omg this race is so imba!!!" but then your race have its imbalanced weapon in the repertoire to 'counter'.
The non MBS and auto-mining aspect only comes into the play in terms of game pace to make comeback more possible. Every one can pretty much micro their units one way or another. Mutalisk micro? Practice the UMS for couple of hours and you'll have Jaedong-esque control. Vulture micro? UMS maps are made just for that. But the key is to be able to perform these things while macroing, keep on watch of the mineral lines for dual purpose: 1. harassment and 2. sending your guys to mine. That separates the good players from great players.
But however, this doesn't mean that you can't have any strategical plays that can catch the top opponents off guard. In the case of players like TurN, Iris, Kwanro, Calm, Shine, Leta, Movie, and many more relies on their wonky and off the wall builds to hit at specific timings from the opposition's weak point. They make up their lack in multitask with the build and when they work, its really magical.
|
On July 29 2012 21:26 Kaos_StarCraft wrote:
Wow whats with all the people riding DBs dick?
If only his game design was even half as good as his PR abilities.
AHAHAA "best of 8"
Dude it's not all fake. Listen to the story at 7:30, he even refers to the spinecrawler as a sunken. Why? Because he has as deep a history with the game as us and in BW they were sunken colonies not spinecrawlers. I think that's kind of an awesome little mistake.
|
On July 30 2012 01:42 BoX wrote:
God damn someof you guys are so rude and vicious.
No wonder Blizz is so hesitant to communicate with you @.@
I think Browder's "wait-and-see" methodology of dealing with issues in the game is the best way to approach balance in a game that is so complex. There's so much to go through before someone can confidently say, "yes, this is broken and there is NOTHING that can be done about it."
If Blizzard implemented changes rapidly then the metagame would have no time at all to develop. Shit, half of the amazing stuff in BW was discovered because people lhad to scrounge out just that last tiny little advantage. That's how BW was balanced - over huge amounts of playtime.
BW wasn't balanced because Blizzard interfered with it constantly. SC2 is rough, still has 2 expansions to go through, and needs a lot of settling before it can be polished. IMO.
People are rude and vicious because they have heard the same beat around the bush philosophy every time from DB? I'm not saying Blizzard should just flip a coin of what buff they want to implement, but it comes down to designing the game for the players.
D3 is a prime example. They leave everyone in the dark, and throw out these patches which cause constant problems. There's a reason why that game has the highest declining player base this year.
The thing is, it needs to come down to the developers being open with the community. That's how Blizzard got successful in the first place. The queen buff had MASSIVE disapproval by pros all over for ZvT. This includes pro Zergs, Terrans and Protoss players realizing it's not the correct buff. This included so far, two months in a row of ZvT being over 5% internationally. Looking at the MMR statistics thread, it showed Zerg being ahead nearly every point in the game, with about a 60% WLR in ZvT and a Master/GM level.
As soon as this buff got implemented, and they had such an uprise against it, they should have reverted it. What they did is equivalent to buffing marine DPS, and saying, "Well, we're going to wait it out and see how it goes."
Edit:
BW was a game that had literally an unlimited skill cap. Any race could always get better, to the point imbalances could have been made up by additional skill.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
