EPTIdeas to help Starcraft grow? - Page 17
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
4ZakeN87
Sweden1071 Posts
| ||
|
aliquis
Austria38 Posts
I am not even kidding .. , dota was "kind of" a blizzard franchise once too, its succesor of course still has its flaws but just try to imagine how the game would have turned out if blizzard had made it (which they didnt because they thought of dota not beeing a good enough game to develop a succesor in the first place ) ... | ||
|
Zax19
Czech Republic1136 Posts
| ||
|
algorithm0r
Canada486 Posts
| ||
|
Esoterikk
Canada1256 Posts
On August 15 2013 11:34 DemigodcelpH wrote: -Remove the colossus -Remove Warpgate -Fix Protoss -Slow the game speed down. Battles should not end in 4 seconds; players should feel involved even when losing a battle. -Remove "Blizzard time" in-game clock and give us real time like BW. -Give us proper high ground advantage. -Fix tanks The reason SC2 isn't "as interesting" isn't because of mechanical difficulty (which hardly exists) it's because the game-play is based around death ball syndrome; just working on the issues noted above (that have been complained about for 3 years) would make the game a lot more interesting to play. Basically a lot of the things that made BW so fun have been neglected by the SC2 team since release out of a stubborn sense of pride (remember these minds are the ones behind Warpgate which is probably the single most poorly designed thing in the history of Starcraft gameplay). These kind of gameplay fixes combined with continued improvements (it shouldn't take like 3 days to get max level. wtf?) to battle.net 2.0 (HotS was a strong start in that direction) could make SC2 the game it should've been at release. I have to agree, I've been asking myself If I really enjoy playing Sc2 lately and the resounding answer I get from myself is I don't really enjoy macroing up to 185/200 and posturing around the middle of the map while using 15 supply to harass until someone fucks up. It's not fun, I'd like to be able to have more than one real battle, I'd like to not have a big giant battle and I would like to feel more involved in the fights. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On August 15 2013 11:34 DemigodcelpH wrote: -Remove the colossus -Remove Warpgate -Fix Protoss -Slow the game speed down. Battles should not end in 4 seconds; players should feel involved even when losing a battle. -Remove "Blizzard time" in-game clock and give us real time like BW. -Give us proper high ground advantage. -Fix tanks The reason SC2 isn't "as interesting" isn't because of mechanical difficulty (which hardly exists) it's because the game-play is based around death ball syndrome; just working on the issues noted above (that have been complained about for 3 years) would make the game a lot more interesting to play. Basically a lot of the things that made BW so fun have been neglected by the SC2 team since release out of a stubborn sense of pride (remember these minds are the ones behind Warpgate which is probably the single most poorly designed thing in the history of Starcraft gameplay). These kind of gameplay fixes combined with continued improvements (it shouldn't take like 3 days to get max level. wtf?) to battle.net 2.0 (HotS was a strong start in that direction) could make SC2 the game it should've been at release. Basically you agree with me that ... - economic speed boosts, - production speed boosts, - unlimited unit selection and - clumped up unit movement have to go. These four general mechanics are the reason why there are too many units on the battlefield AND they are in a too small area. More units in a smaller area means the army dps per area is higher and thus the kill speed ... which reduces the duration of battles. An analogy I came up with is that SC2 is a gunfight in a western. You have two guys standing on opposite ends of an empty lane and whoever pulls out his gun first wins. Any decent hit is lethal. In comparison BW is more like a duel of two knights with sword and shield ... much slower AND you have the opportunity to defend with your shield, which means that you can micro your units to save them in a battle. In SC2 that is only very very rarely possible, because the game has been designed with aggression (=offense) in mind and not with a balance between offense and defense. I really like battles of micro skill like we get to see in the "Zergling phase" at the beginning of a ZvZ and I absolutely hate the non-skill mass battles and "impossible to counter" skills like Abduct and Fungal Growth. I also hate the explosive shots of Siege Tanks, because they only give the illusion of dealing damage while not doing much at all against Zerglings. Warp Gate would only be ok if there was a choice to be made between "Gateways producing units faster" or "Warp Gates producing units slower but anywhere with power". The production difference needs to be significant! | ||
|
sh4w
United States713 Posts
This thread is full of interesting ideas, and I'm so glad the community wants SC2 to be a better game. Blizzard, however, is clearly not interested in these kinds of ideas though. Didn't the head SC2 guy say when people asked him if they would ever make SC2 more like BW, that people who wanna play BW should just play BW? And I'm not even saying the game should be more like Broodwar per-say, I just think the game should incorporate the same style, because really the only thing they really have in common is unit names. I will follow SC2 until LotV, and I will hope and pray that by then we have a worthy successor, because like I said, I WANT to love and play SC2 like I love and play broodwar even now. I don't believe for a second though, that they will change the game engine at all with the unit clumping etc, or that they will change major race mechanics like warpgates, or even stuff like defenders advantage. I wish they would prove me wrong. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On August 15 2013 20:55 sh4w wrote: I have honestly been thinking about why I dislike SC2 since the game came out, and what they could do to fix it, and I just don't think it is possible with the games current engine. I would sell my soul for a DOTA2 style rework on broodwar. Maybe I'm just a negative-nancy or a broodwar fanboy, feel free to flame me for that. But I hope people understand that most people that still play broodwar WANT to like SC2 so bad, but the game is like a completely different genre to me. This thread is full of interesting ideas, and I'm so glad the community wants SC2 to be a better game. Blizzard, however, is clearly not interested in these kinds of ideas though. Didn't the head SC2 guy say when people asked him if they would ever make SC2 more like BW, that people who wanna play BW should just play BW? And I'm not even saying the game should be more like Broodwar per-say, I just think the game should incorporate the same style, because really the only thing they really have in common is unit names. I will follow SC2 until LotV, and I will hope and pray that by then we have a worthy successor, because like I said, I WANT to love and play SC2 like I love and play broodwar even now. I don't believe for a second though, that they will change the game engine at all with the unit clumping etc, or that they will change major race mechanics like warpgates, or even stuff like defenders advantage. I wish they would prove me wrong. There is a difference between "I miss the small skirmishes in BW" and "Bring back the lurker!" One misses the aspect of BW that they enjoyed. The other misses BW as a game in and of itself. There is nothing wrong with missing the abstract aspects that made BW a joy to watch, but the specificity of unit design/gameplay mechanics is not what will bring those back. What's needed is a triad of rock-paper-scissor map mechanic that encourages multi-skirmish tactics. -Expanding should be better than turtling -So expansions should be far away from each other so they're difficult to defend -Attacking then becomes better than expanding -So defensive advantage must be high enough that turtling defeats attacking -Resources must then be scarce, in order to encourage expanding This was perfectly embodied in the small/midsized maps of 2010-2011 wherein the action was non-stop because expansions were so easy to hit. When a person turtled on 2base, the opponent would grab a third, upon grabbing his opponent grabbing a third, the turtler would shift to flat out aggression. Once that starts, one usually lost the third and turtled in response. The turtler then expands, causing the a counterattack. Remember Xel'Naga? How the gold bases were barely mined usually having 2-4 different town halls built on it per game. Or Shakuras where the map would be split and they would constantly trade each other's 4rths? Or do you remember how great the Scrap Station games were to watch up until the rocks fell down and suddenly it was steppes of war? | ||
|
KhaliWear
Canada159 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
Byyk
457 Posts
On August 11 2013 04:47 Rumpus wrote: I saw a great idea early, whether it was in this thread or another about making multiplayer aspects free and campaign and the arcade a monetized service in some capacity. Either way free helps but there is a lot of context to that that I never see anyone explain and it always get it. I have no problem paying for a game, honestly I don't think really any game is worth $50-60 anymore but there are a lot of factors, but what does bother me is paying money for a game and then downloading a free one that has more features, events, and a gross amount of content and items/drop mechanics....pretty much all free. If Blizzard had SC2 launch with new interesting features, smart and genuinely fun and good additions, I would drop money on it no problem, but they've taken years of development, and my money for nothing in comparison to what Valve has done with DOTA2. How do you justify that at all? I've said it a million times, make a quality product, make an interesting, good invest and people will buy it fairly regardless. But when you see Valve do DOTA2 and all they put into it, trying harder and harder to push limits. While Blizzard just...does nothing but destroy its own eSports image, let alone let the game rot away...it's sad. Well said. I have more fun reading this thread than playing the game. | ||
|
Aron Times
United States312 Posts
Basically, just add more options for personalization to give people a sense of achievement and ownership. Perhaps alternate color schemes (dark protoss instead of golden protoss), or alternate skins for buildings such as an infested look for terran, or a hybrid look for protoss and zerg. Each building and unit would still be recognizable and distinguishable, but they would look subtly different. | ||
|
JacobNX01a
United States65 Posts
| ||
|
Avs
Korea (North)857 Posts
| ||
|
Batiste
United Kingdom69 Posts
| ||
|
Ctone23
United States1839 Posts
For me personally, I get discouraged at the amount of games I have to play in order to rank up. The new system seems to demote players at the start of the season due to the fact you can no longer be demoted during the season. I work full time so it's frustrating to go from diamond one season, to plat to start out the next season, finish rank 2 plat, only to get demoted again the next season to gold. Something isn't right there... I think the gameplay can definitely be tweaked, but the precedent has been set with SC2 wol and hots, so I don't know how Blizz can change anything like game speed or unit pathing at this point. | ||
|
cutler
Germany609 Posts
There are already great sc2 projects...but most of the community only consumes...cause Valve/Riot serves them everything on a plate for free. I complained a lot about sc2 until i joined an small practise group...now it is really fun cause you can improve daily. I will try to join daily cups when i am back home although i am only in silver/gold league. | ||
|
cutler
Germany609 Posts
In Diablo3 a lot of people are doing legendary competitions... In Starcraft2 i miss that kind of attitude on the majority of the community. Even if you dont have ideas...support people who ideas and real passion instead of non stop complaining. | ||
|
Orangered
289 Posts
| ||
|
theBlues
El Salvador638 Posts
On October 16 2013 00:28 Orangered wrote: Big tournaments need to be more exclusive. And please no more noobs in the pro-scene, like incontrol who always says he is in the best shape of his life, or idra, or tlo and others who cant really compete on the highest level. Sorry to burst your bubble brah, but welcome to 2013 idra and incontrol are already retired as players, pretty much the same thing for TLO edit: though TLO is still competing despite health problems, and doing kinda good. | ||
|
aintz
Canada5624 Posts
the reason sc2 is on the decline is because the hype is mostly gone and the game is just plain too hard for most people and most ppl are simply watching and not playing. sc2 is just way too hard and stressful to be enjoyed. unlike the alternatives like dota and lol. | ||
| ||
