|
On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler ++ Show Spoiler + The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach.
Does the Starcraft 2 play like SC:BW? ._. .
|
On September 23 2013 10:15 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Does the Starcraft 2 play like SC:BW? ._. .
Have you ever read multiple comments on TL and Reddit of their differences?
|
On September 23 2013 10:18 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 10:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Does the Starcraft 2 play like SC:BW? ._. . Have you ever read multiple comments on TL and Reddit of their differences?
I think I've even stated it in this thread that I don't use Reddit at all unless I'm linked to something that was said on it. I simply don't use it and I find it bothersome to navigate.
|
On September 23 2013 10:33 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 10:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Does the Starcraft 2 play like SC:BW? ._. . Have you ever read multiple comments on TL and Reddit of their differences? I think I've even stated it in this thread that I don't use Reddit at all unless I'm linked to something that was said on it. I simply don't use it and I find it bothersome to navigate.
TL still matters here.
|
On September 23 2013 10:35 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 10:33 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Does the Starcraft 2 play like SC:BW? ._. . Have you ever read multiple comments on TL and Reddit of their differences? I think I've even stated it in this thread that I don't use Reddit at all unless I'm linked to something that was said on it. I simply don't use it and I find it bothersome to navigate. TL still matters here.
Why did you bring up the Reddit community? I'm not entirely sure where this conversation is going.
|
On September 23 2013 10:38 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 10:35 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:33 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Does the Starcraft 2 play like SC:BW? ._. . Have you ever read multiple comments on TL and Reddit of their differences? I think I've even stated it in this thread that I don't use Reddit at all unless I'm linked to something that was said on it. I simply don't use it and I find it bothersome to navigate. TL still matters here. Why did you bring up the Reddit community? I'm not entirely sure where this conversation is going.
I know, you are trying to dodge the fact that BW and SC2 are played differently from each other.
|
On September 23 2013 10:39 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 10:38 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:35 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:33 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Does the Starcraft 2 play like SC:BW? ._. . Have you ever read multiple comments on TL and Reddit of their differences? I think I've even stated it in this thread that I don't use Reddit at all unless I'm linked to something that was said on it. I simply don't use it and I find it bothersome to navigate. TL still matters here. Why did you bring up the Reddit community? I'm not entirely sure where this conversation is going. I know, you are trying to dodge the fact that BW and SC2 are played differently from each other.
You were the one who brought up Reddit not me man. I'm doing no such thing lol.
|
On September 23 2013 10:41 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 10:39 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:38 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:35 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:33 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Does the Starcraft 2 play like SC:BW? ._. . Have you ever read multiple comments on TL and Reddit of their differences? I think I've even stated it in this thread that I don't use Reddit at all unless I'm linked to something that was said on it. I simply don't use it and I find it bothersome to navigate. TL still matters here. Why did you bring up the Reddit community? I'm not entirely sure where this conversation is going. I know, you are trying to dodge the fact that BW and SC2 are played differently from each other. You were the one who brought up Reddit not me man. I'm doing no such thing lol.
Reddit is a legit source and my statement remains correct.
|
On September 23 2013 10:47 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 10:41 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:39 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:38 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:35 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:33 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:
[quote]
The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown.
The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Does the Starcraft 2 play like SC:BW? ._. . Have you ever read multiple comments on TL and Reddit of their differences? I think I've even stated it in this thread that I don't use Reddit at all unless I'm linked to something that was said on it. I simply don't use it and I find it bothersome to navigate. TL still matters here. Why did you bring up the Reddit community? I'm not entirely sure where this conversation is going. I know, you are trying to dodge the fact that BW and SC2 are played differently from each other. You were the one who brought up Reddit not me man. I'm doing no such thing lol. Reddit is a legit source and my statement remains correct.
What statement exactly? Don't be ambiguous. I don't comment on things I know not of. If you have a link to some sort of MMA with a Blizzard dev on the matter with regards to the development in Reddit then how about actually linking it instead of being a wise ass because everything I've read in terms of interviews from Blizzard employees says otherwise with regards to their process and I don't dodge anything. I don't care if Reddit is a legit source because TL gets a wealth of shit posted here even stuff from Reddit.
|
The real probleme of sc2:
early game: too much all in
later in the game : big army ball
for casual: the use map setting system is terrible
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On September 23 2013 10:54 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 10:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:41 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:39 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:38 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:35 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:33 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:
[quote]
Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again.
And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Does the Starcraft 2 play like SC:BW? ._. . Have you ever read multiple comments on TL and Reddit of their differences? I think I've even stated it in this thread that I don't use Reddit at all unless I'm linked to something that was said on it. I simply don't use it and I find it bothersome to navigate. TL still matters here. Why did you bring up the Reddit community? I'm not entirely sure where this conversation is going. I know, you are trying to dodge the fact that BW and SC2 are played differently from each other. You were the one who brought up Reddit not me man. I'm doing no such thing lol. Reddit is a legit source and my statement remains correct. What statement exactly? Don't be ambiguous. I don't comment on things I know not of. If you have a link to some sort of MMA with a Blizzard dev on the matter with regards to the development in Reddit then how about actually linking it instead of being a wise ass because everything I've read in terms of interviews from Blizzard employees says otherwise with regards to their process and I don't dodge anything. I don't care if Reddit is a legit source because TL gets a wealth of shit posted here even stuff from Reddit.
Let me break it down for you.
You said:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft.
I responded with:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so.
You got SEVERELY agitated with:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 09:00 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. What exactly are you trying to argue? I'm not only talking about the interviews with the likes of Mike Morhaime and Dustin Dustin Browder. So we're arguing about their statements let alone what Blizzard actually does when it comes to new releases? Okay then. Let's look at every single new RTS they release. You mean to tell me the original Warcraft plays like Warcraft II? How about Warcraft II to Starcraft? Starcraft to Warcraft III? Warcraft III to SC2? The big one! Compare what they did with SC:BW to SC2. Nah, man. Did they play around with such things as the rebus and defilers? Yep, and they even said it too. Oh wait, we're going back to your statement versus fact thing, right? Okay, let's not concern ourselves with what they said they did in alpha phases then. Even though they paid tribute to some of them in the campaign. For those interested Dustin said the rebus were too strong and they tinkered around with them but considering all the complaints about the engine and making the units clump is it any wonder why Blizzard would think a rebuuuu would be too strong? Doesn't surprise me hue. The funny thing Blizzard did play around with the idea of a lot of the original units, but we know this isn't EA Sports where they regurgitate what they did prior. Blizzard is always looking for new ways to come at the RTS generation. For some people going from SC:BW to WCIII it was jarring. I remember the first time playing WCIII and I went, "What the hell did Blizzard do?" I remember my first game was against Kain-the-Feared (an old school BW guy) where we played mirror NE. I went fast expo and it turned into a 30 minute game of sick micro. I lost and he complimented me for giving him his hardest win to date. Good times!
Trying to go off tangent with other games while my statement is just this:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach.
Which TLers and Redditers mostly agree with.
And then you are trying to dismiss the latter with post like this:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#403
and pretend to act all confused with these:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#405
When you clearly know the reason behind it.
and
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#407
In attempt to escape from the huge aggression toward my post on the legitimate hypocrisy of the Devs
And now you are trying to weasel your way out by calling me ambiguous.
*chuckles*
|
|
|
On September 23 2013 11:18 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 10:54 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:41 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:39 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:38 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:35 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:33 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:15 StarStruck wrote:
[quote]
Does the Starcraft 2 play like SC:BW? ._. . Have you ever read multiple comments on TL and Reddit of their differences? I think I've even stated it in this thread that I don't use Reddit at all unless I'm linked to something that was said on it. I simply don't use it and I find it bothersome to navigate. TL still matters here. Why did you bring up the Reddit community? I'm not entirely sure where this conversation is going. I know, you are trying to dodge the fact that BW and SC2 are played differently from each other. You were the one who brought up Reddit not me man. I'm doing no such thing lol. Reddit is a legit source and my statement remains correct. What statement exactly? Don't be ambiguous. I don't comment on things I know not of. If you have a link to some sort of MMA with a Blizzard dev on the matter with regards to the development in Reddit then how about actually linking it instead of being a wise ass because everything I've read in terms of interviews from Blizzard employees says otherwise with regards to their process and I don't dodge anything. I don't care if Reddit is a legit source because TL gets a wealth of shit posted here even stuff from Reddit. Let me break it down for you. You said: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. I responded with: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. You got SEVERELY agitated with: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 09:00 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. What exactly are you trying to argue? I'm not only talking about the interviews with the likes of Mike Morhaime and Dustin Dustin Browder. So we're arguing about their statements let alone what Blizzard actually does when it comes to new releases? Okay then. Let's look at every single new RTS they release. You mean to tell me the original Warcraft plays like Warcraft II? How about Warcraft II to Starcraft? Starcraft to Warcraft III? Warcraft III to SC2? The big one! Compare what they did with SC:BW to SC2. Nah, man. Did they play around with such things as the rebus and defilers? Yep, and they even said it too. Oh wait, we're going back to your statement versus fact thing, right? Okay, let's not concern ourselves with what they said they did in alpha phases then. Even though they paid tribute to some of them in the campaign. For those interested Dustin said the rebus were too strong and they tinkered around with them but considering all the complaints about the engine and making the units clump is it any wonder why Blizzard would think a rebuuuu would be too strong? Doesn't surprise me hue. The funny thing Blizzard did play around with the idea of a lot of the original units, but we know this isn't EA Sports where they regurgitate what they did prior. Blizzard is always looking for new ways to come at the RTS generation. For some people going from SC:BW to WCIII it was jarring. I remember the first time playing WCIII and I went, "What the hell did Blizzard do?" I remember my first game was against Kain-the-Feared (an old school BW guy) where we played mirror NE. I went fast expo and it turned into a 30 minute game of sick micro. I lost and he complimented me for giving him his hardest win to date. Good times! Trying to go off tangent with other games while my statement is just this: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Which TLers and Redditers mostly agree with. And then you are trying to dismiss the latter with post like this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#403and pretend to act all confused with these: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#405When you clearly know the reason behind it. and http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#407In attempt to escape from the huge aggression toward my post on the legitimate hypocrisy of the Devs And now you are trying to weasel your way out by calling me ambiguous. *chuckles*
I'm not weaseling out of anything lmao. I thought you were going off on an entirely different tangent altogether when you brought up Reddit, but now I can actually address you properly. Thank you for the break down.
I'll start with Blizzard employees. You don't think I take what they say with a grain of salt? I'm not referencing them like some Holy Bible. Also, I use what they've actually done to back up what I say when it comes to the development process let alone every RTS they release and you can there is merit there when it comes to revolutionizing the genre or at least attempting to and BW was dumb luck. Actions speak louder than words, no? I followed the process since they announced it and TL had good coverage of it.
With that said, SC2 is a different game. This goes back to what I said with regards to every new release and that's why I threw the timeline in there to make a point of every Blizzard RTS release being very different especially when you go from Brood War to WCIII. What do you think Blizzard wanted you consumers to do with WCIII? Using your terminology technically Blizzard wanted to replace BW with WCIII and what do you know? They did. Many players switched and played it and it was very successful. The publishers always want you to buy their new candy. This is just simple dumb logic. If that;s what you meant by replacing then sure but Blizzard wasn't trying to simply repeat the magic of Brood War.
P.S. I never brought up Reddit in the first place. You did and I had no idea why you did but now I understand it's because you're trying to say TLers and Redditers believe SC2 was supposed to replace BW. From a design perspective, no. SC2 was supposed to stand on it's own two legs and you can see that with everything from B.Net 2.0, the U.I., game flow & design. IF we're talking about replacing a game players are currently playing i.e. what I said about publishers always want you to buy and play their new releases then yes. Repeating myself just to bring the point home. I said that a few times now. Would Blizzard like to replicate the success of BW with that of SC2 (as in having the game go strong for a decade)? Surely. Goes back to what I said about BW success being dumb luck with the programming, design, Korea's internet infrastructure being set up at that time, PC Bangs being the craze, etc. You cannot simply replicate success and on a global scale SC2 is doing just fine.
It's weird that someone would think I'm defending the devs when I give them a ton of shit myself after reading such interviews wowza.
|
Everything aside it all comes down to game play, if the game becomes extremely fun to play with a game changing patch tomorrow I am back in a heartbeat to play it out. But if the game remains in this dull 1 battle 3 base turtle fuck fest, then I am staying on the sidelines along with hundreds of thousands of others, and if were not playing the game, you can sure as hell bet were not watching the game either.
Fuck the esports side of all of this stuff. Ive said this a couple of times in other similar threads and il say it again, all of these bullshit arguements like "OMG HE IS KILLING ESPORTS!" OMG TO MUCH TO MUCH!". are worthless because the real problem is that the GAME is NOT FUN!
Do you guys think that the guy who made basketball did what Blizz did and said Oh, let me design this sport so that it can be a Professional sport. No the guy fucking thought it would be fun to put a ball through a hoop and then it became fun and then it became a sport because people play it and enjoy watching the best play it.
|
On September 23 2013 11:37 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 11:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:54 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:41 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:39 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:38 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:35 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:33 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:18 Xiphos wrote:
[quote]
Have you ever read multiple comments on TL and Reddit of their differences? I think I've even stated it in this thread that I don't use Reddit at all unless I'm linked to something that was said on it. I simply don't use it and I find it bothersome to navigate. TL still matters here. Why did you bring up the Reddit community? I'm not entirely sure where this conversation is going. I know, you are trying to dodge the fact that BW and SC2 are played differently from each other. You were the one who brought up Reddit not me man. I'm doing no such thing lol. Reddit is a legit source and my statement remains correct. What statement exactly? Don't be ambiguous. I don't comment on things I know not of. If you have a link to some sort of MMA with a Blizzard dev on the matter with regards to the development in Reddit then how about actually linking it instead of being a wise ass because everything I've read in terms of interviews from Blizzard employees says otherwise with regards to their process and I don't dodge anything. I don't care if Reddit is a legit source because TL gets a wealth of shit posted here even stuff from Reddit. Let me break it down for you. You said: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. I responded with: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. You got SEVERELY agitated with: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 09:00 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. What exactly are you trying to argue? I'm not only talking about the interviews with the likes of Mike Morhaime and Dustin Dustin Browder. So we're arguing about their statements let alone what Blizzard actually does when it comes to new releases? Okay then. Let's look at every single new RTS they release. You mean to tell me the original Warcraft plays like Warcraft II? How about Warcraft II to Starcraft? Starcraft to Warcraft III? Warcraft III to SC2? The big one! Compare what they did with SC:BW to SC2. Nah, man. Did they play around with such things as the rebus and defilers? Yep, and they even said it too. Oh wait, we're going back to your statement versus fact thing, right? Okay, let's not concern ourselves with what they said they did in alpha phases then. Even though they paid tribute to some of them in the campaign. For those interested Dustin said the rebus were too strong and they tinkered around with them but considering all the complaints about the engine and making the units clump is it any wonder why Blizzard would think a rebuuuu would be too strong? Doesn't surprise me hue. The funny thing Blizzard did play around with the idea of a lot of the original units, but we know this isn't EA Sports where they regurgitate what they did prior. Blizzard is always looking for new ways to come at the RTS generation. For some people going from SC:BW to WCIII it was jarring. I remember the first time playing WCIII and I went, "What the hell did Blizzard do?" I remember my first game was against Kain-the-Feared (an old school BW guy) where we played mirror NE. I went fast expo and it turned into a 30 minute game of sick micro. I lost and he complimented me for giving him his hardest win to date. Good times! Trying to go off tangent with other games while my statement is just this: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Which TLers and Redditers mostly agree with. And then you are trying to dismiss the latter with post like this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#403and pretend to act all confused with these: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#405When you clearly know the reason behind it. and http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#407In attempt to escape from the huge aggression toward my post on the legitimate hypocrisy of the Devs And now you are trying to weasel your way out by calling me ambiguous. *chuckles* I'm not weaseling out of anything lmao. I thought you were going off on an entirely different tangent altogether when you brought up Reddit, but now I can actually address you properly. Thank you for the break down. I'll start with Blizzard employees. You don't think I take what they say with a grain of salt? I'm not referencing them like some Holy Bible. Also, I use what they've actually done to back up what I say when it comes to the development process let alone every RTS they release and you can there is merit there when it comes to revolutionizing the genre or at least attempting to and BW was dumb luck. Actions speak louder than words, no? I followed the process since they announced it and TL had good coverage of it. With that said, SC2 is a different game. This goes back to what I said with regards to every new release and that's why I threw the timeline in there to make a point of every Blizzard RTS release being very different especially when you go from Brood War to WCIII. What do you think Blizzard wanted you consumers to do with WCIII? Using your terminology technically Blizzard wanted to replace BW with WCIII and what do you know? They did. Many players switched and played it and it was very successful. The publishers always want you to buy their new candy. This is just simple dumb logic. If that;s what you meant by replacing then sure but Blizzard wasn't trying to simply repeat the magic of Brood War. P.S. I never brought up Reddit in the first place. You did and I had no idea why you did but now I understand it's because you're trying to say TLers and Redditers believe SC2 was supposed to replace BW. From a design perspective, no. SC2 was supposed to stand on it's own two legs and you can see that with everything from B.Net 2.0, the U.I., game flow & design. IF we're talking about replacing a game players are currently playing i.e. what I said about publishers always want you to buy and play their new releases then yes. Repeating myself just to bring the point home. I said that a few times now. Would Blizzard like to replicate the success of BW with that of SC2 (as in having the game go strong for a decade)? Surely. Goes back to what I said about BW success being dumb luck with the programming, design, Korea's internet infrastructure being set up at that time, PC Bangs being the craze, etc. You cannot simply replicate success and on a global scale SC2 is doing just fine. It's weird that someone would think I'm defending the devs when I give them a ton of shit myself after reading such interviews wowza.
^
Good, I'm glad that you were just misunderstanding a few aspects of the entire incident.
On some notes:
Never even said that you brought it nor am I stating that you did. The criticism is on your complete dismissal of a legit, majority consensus on the two games.
An addendum on the Reddit/TL argument, my argument was that the community believe that the games are played differently and, I explicitly said NOT the same way (as in design-wise).
On your rant of BW's succes. Well it's success wasn't exactly "dumb luck" per se. Sure the pathing was accidental as devs are trying to achieve a certain deadline. However the design and balances were utterly brilliantly orchestrated in the hand of former Blizzard employee, the units all had their own specialization that conceptually differentiate from other races. No units overlapped in roles with each other. It was carefully crafted in plethora of facets. And it WAS the golden age of RTS with RA2, AoE, AoM, and SupCom. It is no small feat that only BW capture the heart of many.
P.S. I don't think you were defending the devs at all but rather misunderstood some of my points and wasted a lot of time and pixels in attempt to prove something that should be laid rest.
|
On September 23 2013 12:01 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 11:37 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 11:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:54 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:41 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:39 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:38 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:35 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:33 StarStruck wrote:
[quote]
I think I've even stated it in this thread that I don't use Reddit at all unless I'm linked to something that was said on it. I simply don't use it and I find it bothersome to navigate.
TL still matters here. Why did you bring up the Reddit community? I'm not entirely sure where this conversation is going. I know, you are trying to dodge the fact that BW and SC2 are played differently from each other. You were the one who brought up Reddit not me man. I'm doing no such thing lol. Reddit is a legit source and my statement remains correct. What statement exactly? Don't be ambiguous. I don't comment on things I know not of. If you have a link to some sort of MMA with a Blizzard dev on the matter with regards to the development in Reddit then how about actually linking it instead of being a wise ass because everything I've read in terms of interviews from Blizzard employees says otherwise with regards to their process and I don't dodge anything. I don't care if Reddit is a legit source because TL gets a wealth of shit posted here even stuff from Reddit. Let me break it down for you. You said: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. I responded with: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. You got SEVERELY agitated with: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 09:00 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. What exactly are you trying to argue? I'm not only talking about the interviews with the likes of Mike Morhaime and Dustin Dustin Browder. So we're arguing about their statements let alone what Blizzard actually does when it comes to new releases? Okay then. Let's look at every single new RTS they release. You mean to tell me the original Warcraft plays like Warcraft II? How about Warcraft II to Starcraft? Starcraft to Warcraft III? Warcraft III to SC2? The big one! Compare what they did with SC:BW to SC2. Nah, man. Did they play around with such things as the rebus and defilers? Yep, and they even said it too. Oh wait, we're going back to your statement versus fact thing, right? Okay, let's not concern ourselves with what they said they did in alpha phases then. Even though they paid tribute to some of them in the campaign. For those interested Dustin said the rebus were too strong and they tinkered around with them but considering all the complaints about the engine and making the units clump is it any wonder why Blizzard would think a rebuuuu would be too strong? Doesn't surprise me hue. The funny thing Blizzard did play around with the idea of a lot of the original units, but we know this isn't EA Sports where they regurgitate what they did prior. Blizzard is always looking for new ways to come at the RTS generation. For some people going from SC:BW to WCIII it was jarring. I remember the first time playing WCIII and I went, "What the hell did Blizzard do?" I remember my first game was against Kain-the-Feared (an old school BW guy) where we played mirror NE. I went fast expo and it turned into a 30 minute game of sick micro. I lost and he complimented me for giving him his hardest win to date. Good times! Trying to go off tangent with other games while my statement is just this: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Which TLers and Redditers mostly agree with. And then you are trying to dismiss the latter with post like this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#403and pretend to act all confused with these: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#405When you clearly know the reason behind it. and http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#407In attempt to escape from the huge aggression toward my post on the legitimate hypocrisy of the Devs And now you are trying to weasel your way out by calling me ambiguous. *chuckles* I'm not weaseling out of anything lmao. I thought you were going off on an entirely different tangent altogether when you brought up Reddit, but now I can actually address you properly. Thank you for the break down. I'll start with Blizzard employees. You don't think I take what they say with a grain of salt? I'm not referencing them like some Holy Bible. Also, I use what they've actually done to back up what I say when it comes to the development process let alone every RTS they release and you can there is merit there when it comes to revolutionizing the genre or at least attempting to and BW was dumb luck. Actions speak louder than words, no? I followed the process since they announced it and TL had good coverage of it. With that said, SC2 is a different game. This goes back to what I said with regards to every new release and that's why I threw the timeline in there to make a point of every Blizzard RTS release being very different especially when you go from Brood War to WCIII. What do you think Blizzard wanted you consumers to do with WCIII? Using your terminology technically Blizzard wanted to replace BW with WCIII and what do you know? They did. Many players switched and played it and it was very successful. The publishers always want you to buy their new candy. This is just simple dumb logic. If that;s what you meant by replacing then sure but Blizzard wasn't trying to simply repeat the magic of Brood War. P.S. I never brought up Reddit in the first place. You did and I had no idea why you did but now I understand it's because you're trying to say TLers and Redditers believe SC2 was supposed to replace BW. From a design perspective, no. SC2 was supposed to stand on it's own two legs and you can see that with everything from B.Net 2.0, the U.I., game flow & design. IF we're talking about replacing a game players are currently playing i.e. what I said about publishers always want you to buy and play their new releases then yes. Repeating myself just to bring the point home. I said that a few times now. Would Blizzard like to replicate the success of BW with that of SC2 (as in having the game go strong for a decade)? Surely. Goes back to what I said about BW success being dumb luck with the programming, design, Korea's internet infrastructure being set up at that time, PC Bangs being the craze, etc. You cannot simply replicate success and on a global scale SC2 is doing just fine. It's weird that someone would think I'm defending the devs when I give them a ton of shit myself after reading such interviews wowza. ^ Good, I'm glad that you were just misunderstanding a few aspects of the entire incident. On some notes: Never even said that you brought it nor am I stating that you did. The criticism is on your complete dismissal of a legit, majority consensus on the two games. An addendum on the Reddit/TL argument, my argument was that the community believe that the games are played differently and, I explicitly said NOT the same way (as in design-wise). On your rant of BW's succes. Well it's success wasn't exactly "dumb luck" per se. Sure the pathing was accidental as devs are trying to achieve a certain deadline. However the design and balances were utterly brilliantly orchestrated in the hand of former Blizzard employee, the units all had their own specialization that conceptually differentiate from other races. No units overlapped in roles with each other. It was carefully crafted in plethora of facets. And it WAS the golden age of RTS with RA2, AoE, AoM, and SupCom. It is no small feat that only BW capture the heart of many. P.S. I don't think you were defending the devs at all but rather misunderstood some of my points and wasted a lot of time and pixels in attempt to prove something that should be laid rest.
I was never arguing against the fact that they played differently though. I still don't know where that comes from because I've argued against that point when people try to compare SC2 to SC:BW everywhere from the general section to the blog section. It was a fluke though, you remember those programming blogs we had not too long ago with the old alpha stages up to the beta and coding? The coders even said they didn't realize what they really had until after the fact and the first couple of patches were awesome and yes Blizzard can take full credit for those (the first couple of batches were excellent & really helped balance the game). Those were huge and then we had smaller ones right up to 1.06b (wasn't that when replays were released? everyone was like OH YEAH AWESOME when I was more concerned about players being able to keep their builds secret but you know how our community is when it comes to all the great third party programs to utilitize with the game). As for the units... dude they didn't plan a lot of them to be used in those ways with the coding and pathing as you so mentioned. Only reason we wasted time is because we were looking at the word replacing from different perspectives/angles.
|
All this doom and gloom. I don't see what the fuss is about. SC2 is awesome and I love it just as much now as I did the day it was released.
I don't think SC2 is inferior to BW, and yes I've played and watched SC1 since it was released. I do think that there is a lot more competition for games in general these days. There are so many good games out there that vie for gamers attention. With this in mind I think SC2 has been a big success. Long live Starcraft!
|
On September 23 2013 12:11 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 12:01 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 11:37 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 11:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:54 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:41 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:39 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:38 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:35 Xiphos wrote:
[quote]
TL still matters here. Why did you bring up the Reddit community? I'm not entirely sure where this conversation is going. I know, you are trying to dodge the fact that BW and SC2 are played differently from each other. You were the one who brought up Reddit not me man. I'm doing no such thing lol. Reddit is a legit source and my statement remains correct. What statement exactly? Don't be ambiguous. I don't comment on things I know not of. If you have a link to some sort of MMA with a Blizzard dev on the matter with regards to the development in Reddit then how about actually linking it instead of being a wise ass because everything I've read in terms of interviews from Blizzard employees says otherwise with regards to their process and I don't dodge anything. I don't care if Reddit is a legit source because TL gets a wealth of shit posted here even stuff from Reddit. Let me break it down for you. You said: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. I responded with: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. You got SEVERELY agitated with: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 09:00 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. What exactly are you trying to argue? I'm not only talking about the interviews with the likes of Mike Morhaime and Dustin Dustin Browder. So we're arguing about their statements let alone what Blizzard actually does when it comes to new releases? Okay then. Let's look at every single new RTS they release. You mean to tell me the original Warcraft plays like Warcraft II? How about Warcraft II to Starcraft? Starcraft to Warcraft III? Warcraft III to SC2? The big one! Compare what they did with SC:BW to SC2. Nah, man. Did they play around with such things as the rebus and defilers? Yep, and they even said it too. Oh wait, we're going back to your statement versus fact thing, right? Okay, let's not concern ourselves with what they said they did in alpha phases then. Even though they paid tribute to some of them in the campaign. For those interested Dustin said the rebus were too strong and they tinkered around with them but considering all the complaints about the engine and making the units clump is it any wonder why Blizzard would think a rebuuuu would be too strong? Doesn't surprise me hue. The funny thing Blizzard did play around with the idea of a lot of the original units, but we know this isn't EA Sports where they regurgitate what they did prior. Blizzard is always looking for new ways to come at the RTS generation. For some people going from SC:BW to WCIII it was jarring. I remember the first time playing WCIII and I went, "What the hell did Blizzard do?" I remember my first game was against Kain-the-Feared (an old school BW guy) where we played mirror NE. I went fast expo and it turned into a 30 minute game of sick micro. I lost and he complimented me for giving him his hardest win to date. Good times! Trying to go off tangent with other games while my statement is just this: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Which TLers and Redditers mostly agree with. And then you are trying to dismiss the latter with post like this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#403and pretend to act all confused with these: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#405When you clearly know the reason behind it. and http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#407In attempt to escape from the huge aggression toward my post on the legitimate hypocrisy of the Devs And now you are trying to weasel your way out by calling me ambiguous. *chuckles* I'm not weaseling out of anything lmao. I thought you were going off on an entirely different tangent altogether when you brought up Reddit, but now I can actually address you properly. Thank you for the break down. I'll start with Blizzard employees. You don't think I take what they say with a grain of salt? I'm not referencing them like some Holy Bible. Also, I use what they've actually done to back up what I say when it comes to the development process let alone every RTS they release and you can there is merit there when it comes to revolutionizing the genre or at least attempting to and BW was dumb luck. Actions speak louder than words, no? I followed the process since they announced it and TL had good coverage of it. With that said, SC2 is a different game. This goes back to what I said with regards to every new release and that's why I threw the timeline in there to make a point of every Blizzard RTS release being very different especially when you go from Brood War to WCIII. What do you think Blizzard wanted you consumers to do with WCIII? Using your terminology technically Blizzard wanted to replace BW with WCIII and what do you know? They did. Many players switched and played it and it was very successful. The publishers always want you to buy their new candy. This is just simple dumb logic. If that;s what you meant by replacing then sure but Blizzard wasn't trying to simply repeat the magic of Brood War. P.S. I never brought up Reddit in the first place. You did and I had no idea why you did but now I understand it's because you're trying to say TLers and Redditers believe SC2 was supposed to replace BW. From a design perspective, no. SC2 was supposed to stand on it's own two legs and you can see that with everything from B.Net 2.0, the U.I., game flow & design. IF we're talking about replacing a game players are currently playing i.e. what I said about publishers always want you to buy and play their new releases then yes. Repeating myself just to bring the point home. I said that a few times now. Would Blizzard like to replicate the success of BW with that of SC2 (as in having the game go strong for a decade)? Surely. Goes back to what I said about BW success being dumb luck with the programming, design, Korea's internet infrastructure being set up at that time, PC Bangs being the craze, etc. You cannot simply replicate success and on a global scale SC2 is doing just fine. It's weird that someone would think I'm defending the devs when I give them a ton of shit myself after reading such interviews wowza. ^ Good, I'm glad that you were just misunderstanding a few aspects of the entire incident. On some notes: Never even said that you brought it nor am I stating that you did. The criticism is on your complete dismissal of a legit, majority consensus on the two games. An addendum on the Reddit/TL argument, my argument was that the community believe that the games are played differently and, I explicitly said NOT the same way (as in design-wise). On your rant of BW's succes. Well it's success wasn't exactly "dumb luck" per se. Sure the pathing was accidental as devs are trying to achieve a certain deadline. However the design and balances were utterly brilliantly orchestrated in the hand of former Blizzard employee, the units all had their own specialization that conceptually differentiate from other races. No units overlapped in roles with each other. It was carefully crafted in plethora of facets. And it WAS the golden age of RTS with RA2, AoE, AoM, and SupCom. It is no small feat that only BW capture the heart of many. P.S. I don't think you were defending the devs at all but rather misunderstood some of my points and wasted a lot of time and pixels in attempt to prove something that should be laid rest. I was never arguing against the fact that they played differently though. I still don't know where that comes from because I've argued against that point when people try to compare SC2 to SC:BW everywhere from the general section to the blog section. It was a fluke though, you remember those programming blogs we had not too long ago with the old alpha stages up to the beta and coding? The coders even said they didn't realize what they really had until after the fact and the first couple of patches were awesome. Those were huge and then we had smaller ones right up to 1.06b. As for the units... dude they didn't plan a lot of them to be used in those ways with the coding and pathing as you so mentioned.
Not exactly, many fundamental units were used as they exactly intended to. Like MnMs were suppose to be used in combination. The Vultures were suppose to be the hit and run sort of weasels they are, Lurkers were suppose to be the hidden underground creepy crawlers that prey upon others, Reavers were suppose to hit a target and deal splash damage, Wraith provided a lot of cloak opportunities, etc. Those units absolutely had their own specific characteristics that was introduced in the game manual and players did those awesome tricks exactly the way the devs plan up to be. And none of them were incepted upon due to programming side effects.
|
On September 23 2013 12:18 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 12:11 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 12:01 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 11:37 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 11:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:54 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:41 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:39 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:38 StarStruck wrote:
[quote]
Why did you bring up the Reddit community? I'm not entirely sure where this conversation is going. I know, you are trying to dodge the fact that BW and SC2 are played differently from each other. You were the one who brought up Reddit not me man. I'm doing no such thing lol. Reddit is a legit source and my statement remains correct. What statement exactly? Don't be ambiguous. I don't comment on things I know not of. If you have a link to some sort of MMA with a Blizzard dev on the matter with regards to the development in Reddit then how about actually linking it instead of being a wise ass because everything I've read in terms of interviews from Blizzard employees says otherwise with regards to their process and I don't dodge anything. I don't care if Reddit is a legit source because TL gets a wealth of shit posted here even stuff from Reddit. Let me break it down for you. You said: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. I responded with: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. You got SEVERELY agitated with: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 09:00 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. What exactly are you trying to argue? I'm not only talking about the interviews with the likes of Mike Morhaime and Dustin Dustin Browder. So we're arguing about their statements let alone what Blizzard actually does when it comes to new releases? Okay then. Let's look at every single new RTS they release. You mean to tell me the original Warcraft plays like Warcraft II? How about Warcraft II to Starcraft? Starcraft to Warcraft III? Warcraft III to SC2? The big one! Compare what they did with SC:BW to SC2. Nah, man. Did they play around with such things as the rebus and defilers? Yep, and they even said it too. Oh wait, we're going back to your statement versus fact thing, right? Okay, let's not concern ourselves with what they said they did in alpha phases then. Even though they paid tribute to some of them in the campaign. For those interested Dustin said the rebus were too strong and they tinkered around with them but considering all the complaints about the engine and making the units clump is it any wonder why Blizzard would think a rebuuuu would be too strong? Doesn't surprise me hue. The funny thing Blizzard did play around with the idea of a lot of the original units, but we know this isn't EA Sports where they regurgitate what they did prior. Blizzard is always looking for new ways to come at the RTS generation. For some people going from SC:BW to WCIII it was jarring. I remember the first time playing WCIII and I went, "What the hell did Blizzard do?" I remember my first game was against Kain-the-Feared (an old school BW guy) where we played mirror NE. I went fast expo and it turned into a 30 minute game of sick micro. I lost and he complimented me for giving him his hardest win to date. Good times! Trying to go off tangent with other games while my statement is just this: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Which TLers and Redditers mostly agree with. And then you are trying to dismiss the latter with post like this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#403and pretend to act all confused with these: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#405When you clearly know the reason behind it. and http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#407In attempt to escape from the huge aggression toward my post on the legitimate hypocrisy of the Devs And now you are trying to weasel your way out by calling me ambiguous. *chuckles* I'm not weaseling out of anything lmao. I thought you were going off on an entirely different tangent altogether when you brought up Reddit, but now I can actually address you properly. Thank you for the break down. I'll start with Blizzard employees. You don't think I take what they say with a grain of salt? I'm not referencing them like some Holy Bible. Also, I use what they've actually done to back up what I say when it comes to the development process let alone every RTS they release and you can there is merit there when it comes to revolutionizing the genre or at least attempting to and BW was dumb luck. Actions speak louder than words, no? I followed the process since they announced it and TL had good coverage of it. With that said, SC2 is a different game. This goes back to what I said with regards to every new release and that's why I threw the timeline in there to make a point of every Blizzard RTS release being very different especially when you go from Brood War to WCIII. What do you think Blizzard wanted you consumers to do with WCIII? Using your terminology technically Blizzard wanted to replace BW with WCIII and what do you know? They did. Many players switched and played it and it was very successful. The publishers always want you to buy their new candy. This is just simple dumb logic. If that;s what you meant by replacing then sure but Blizzard wasn't trying to simply repeat the magic of Brood War. P.S. I never brought up Reddit in the first place. You did and I had no idea why you did but now I understand it's because you're trying to say TLers and Redditers believe SC2 was supposed to replace BW. From a design perspective, no. SC2 was supposed to stand on it's own two legs and you can see that with everything from B.Net 2.0, the U.I., game flow & design. IF we're talking about replacing a game players are currently playing i.e. what I said about publishers always want you to buy and play their new releases then yes. Repeating myself just to bring the point home. I said that a few times now. Would Blizzard like to replicate the success of BW with that of SC2 (as in having the game go strong for a decade)? Surely. Goes back to what I said about BW success being dumb luck with the programming, design, Korea's internet infrastructure being set up at that time, PC Bangs being the craze, etc. You cannot simply replicate success and on a global scale SC2 is doing just fine. It's weird that someone would think I'm defending the devs when I give them a ton of shit myself after reading such interviews wowza. ^ Good, I'm glad that you were just misunderstanding a few aspects of the entire incident. On some notes: Never even said that you brought it nor am I stating that you did. The criticism is on your complete dismissal of a legit, majority consensus on the two games. An addendum on the Reddit/TL argument, my argument was that the community believe that the games are played differently and, I explicitly said NOT the same way (as in design-wise). On your rant of BW's succes. Well it's success wasn't exactly "dumb luck" per se. Sure the pathing was accidental as devs are trying to achieve a certain deadline. However the design and balances were utterly brilliantly orchestrated in the hand of former Blizzard employee, the units all had their own specialization that conceptually differentiate from other races. No units overlapped in roles with each other. It was carefully crafted in plethora of facets. And it WAS the golden age of RTS with RA2, AoE, AoM, and SupCom. It is no small feat that only BW capture the heart of many. P.S. I don't think you were defending the devs at all but rather misunderstood some of my points and wasted a lot of time and pixels in attempt to prove something that should be laid rest. I was never arguing against the fact that they played differently though. I still don't know where that comes from because I've argued against that point when people try to compare SC2 to SC:BW everywhere from the general section to the blog section. It was a fluke though, you remember those programming blogs we had not too long ago with the old alpha stages up to the beta and coding? The coders even said they didn't realize what they really had until after the fact and the first couple of patches were awesome. Those were huge and then we had smaller ones right up to 1.06b. As for the units... dude they didn't plan a lot of them to be used in those ways with the coding and pathing as you so mentioned. Not exactly, many fundamental units were used as they exactly intended to. Like MnMs were suppose to be used in combination. The Vultures were suppose to be the hit and run sort of weasels they are, Lurkers were suppose to be the hidden underground creepy crawlers that prey upon others, Reavers were suppose to hit a target and deal splash damage, Wraith provided a lot of cloak opportunities, etc. Those units absolutely had their own specific characteristics that was introduced in the game manual and players did those awesome tricks exactly the way the devs plan up to be. And none of them were incepted upon due to programming side effects.
Yeah but they never knew what kind of execution could be done with a dozen of them. Fundamentally the game was built strong and yes the units were unique. You will always hear me giving them praise about such units and loathing a lot of the SC2 units for being boring if you go back far enough, but I learned to accept the units for what they are and understand they didn't just want to take everything from BW. The devs never planned for the kids to use them that WELL. You have no idea how successful a game will be or how well players can actually use those tools until you see them play the shit out of it. On a fundamental level yes they were conceptually great, but this goes back to the A.I. and U.I. Blizzard say they don't rush things but from their timetable and timeline to get the actual game out if it were ever going to get out? Eek. SO basically we're saying the same thing and I'm just adding the fact Blizzard had no idea of how well the tricks could be performed let alone bugs/glitches they didn't know like using patrol to skip attack animations on vultures for one. I don't think the coders planned that. Do you?
|
On September 23 2013 12:24 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 12:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 12:11 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 12:01 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 11:37 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 11:18 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:54 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 10:41 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 10:39 Xiphos wrote:
[quote]
I know, you are trying to dodge the fact that BW and SC2 are played differently from each other. You were the one who brought up Reddit not me man. I'm doing no such thing lol. Reddit is a legit source and my statement remains correct. What statement exactly? Don't be ambiguous. I don't comment on things I know not of. If you have a link to some sort of MMA with a Blizzard dev on the matter with regards to the development in Reddit then how about actually linking it instead of being a wise ass because everything I've read in terms of interviews from Blizzard employees says otherwise with regards to their process and I don't dodge anything. I don't care if Reddit is a legit source because TL gets a wealth of shit posted here even stuff from Reddit. Let me break it down for you. You said: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. I responded with: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. You got SEVERELY agitated with: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 09:00 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 07:47 Xiphos wrote:On September 23 2013 07:15 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 06:56 lamprey1 wrote:On September 23 2013 06:36 StarStruck wrote:On September 23 2013 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
Blizzard deliberately kept a lot of units from BW, they could easily have replaced way more of them. The game was always meant to replace Brood War, that's why there is a lack of innovation and new gameplay features. There are only a few deviations in terms of basic design elements and for each one of them you can see that Blizzard had a very good reason to change it that way. The engine and interface changes are to update the game for a modern audience, the macro mechanics are a direct response to complaints by BW players that the game would lack mechanical difficulty and they have a double function to reduce downtime in building up economy, there are only just enough unit changes to show that this is a sequel and not a remake etc. It was never meant to be a replacement. Blizzard employees have even said that: SC2 was meant to be a completely different game and I'm not going to touch the other hodge-podge you came up with because these so-called complaints are drivel. Activision-Blizzard employees say all kinds of stuff. They are being paid to represent Activision-Blizzard and not run around telling the gospel truth. Generally, the Blizzard part of the company is pretty honest, but I would not run around citing what the employees say "chapter and verse" as though we are always getting the 100% complete and full truth with every sentence any of them utter. SC2 is clearly aimed at the same audience as WC2, SC1, and WC3. The word "replace" is a loaded term. From the perspective every frigging new game is supposed to replace something, but we have the devs on record stating they weren't trying to reinvent Starcraft. ^Statement vs Fact: Getting rid of majority of iconic SC units. + Show Spoiler +http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9T-g9eL3tS0/UC6zI_QWtdI/AAAAAAAAAK8/3Gc77Y2ys6E/s1600/scumbag_steve_hat_vector_by_abiogenic-d4ton75.png ? I think so. What exactly are you trying to argue? I'm not only talking about the interviews with the likes of Mike Morhaime and Dustin Dustin Browder. So we're arguing about their statements let alone what Blizzard actually does when it comes to new releases? Okay then. Let's look at every single new RTS they release. You mean to tell me the original Warcraft plays like Warcraft II? How about Warcraft II to Starcraft? Starcraft to Warcraft III? Warcraft III to SC2? The big one! Compare what they did with SC:BW to SC2. Nah, man. Did they play around with such things as the rebus and defilers? Yep, and they even said it too. Oh wait, we're going back to your statement versus fact thing, right? Okay, let's not concern ourselves with what they said they did in alpha phases then. Even though they paid tribute to some of them in the campaign. For those interested Dustin said the rebus were too strong and they tinkered around with them but considering all the complaints about the engine and making the units clump is it any wonder why Blizzard would think a rebuuuu would be too strong? Doesn't surprise me hue. The funny thing Blizzard did play around with the idea of a lot of the original units, but we know this isn't EA Sports where they regurgitate what they did prior. Blizzard is always looking for new ways to come at the RTS generation. For some people going from SC:BW to WCIII it was jarring. I remember the first time playing WCIII and I went, "What the hell did Blizzard do?" I remember my first game was against Kain-the-Feared (an old school BW guy) where we played mirror NE. I went fast expo and it turned into a 30 minute game of sick micro. I lost and he complimented me for giving him his hardest win to date. Good times! Trying to go off tangent with other games while my statement is just this: + Show Spoiler +On September 23 2013 10:09 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2013 09:48 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 23 2013 09:34 jax1492 wrote:I watched some of the TLS today, 2 players i have never heard of before but BW is just amazing to watch, i don't know why it is, ill never watch a random Sc2 game, but ill tune in to the snipealot2 stream for an hour before i realize i have been watching for so long. For me its all about watchable, I don't know what happened but sc2 gets less and less interesting to watch maybe its the same players over and over, no story lines, not sure. I just hope something turns it around because when sc2 came out i couldn't watch enough. Sc2 needs more moments like this: + Show Spoiler +http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vpuv7VPb2rA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYLhOXn5rTw The novelty factor has a lot of weight into enjoyment. You said it yourself...you watched SC2 religiously when it first came out. You enjoy Brood War on the rare occasion it's being shown. The same is true for anything you start doing for the first time. The small things are more entertaining when you understand less, but as you get more experienced the routine details become routine, so now it's only the "big" moments that are entertaining. Pretty he meant that he watched SC2 religiously when it came out and then he started watching a bit of BW and now that he witness the magic of BW, he doesn't want to go back again. And to StarStruck, you said yourself that the Devs weren't trying to reinvent the game but obviously they don't practice what they preach. Which TLers and Redditers mostly agree with. And then you are trying to dismiss the latter with post like this: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#403and pretend to act all confused with these: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#405When you clearly know the reason behind it. and http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=429715¤tpage=21#407In attempt to escape from the huge aggression toward my post on the legitimate hypocrisy of the Devs And now you are trying to weasel your way out by calling me ambiguous. *chuckles* I'm not weaseling out of anything lmao. I thought you were going off on an entirely different tangent altogether when you brought up Reddit, but now I can actually address you properly. Thank you for the break down. I'll start with Blizzard employees. You don't think I take what they say with a grain of salt? I'm not referencing them like some Holy Bible. Also, I use what they've actually done to back up what I say when it comes to the development process let alone every RTS they release and you can there is merit there when it comes to revolutionizing the genre or at least attempting to and BW was dumb luck. Actions speak louder than words, no? I followed the process since they announced it and TL had good coverage of it. With that said, SC2 is a different game. This goes back to what I said with regards to every new release and that's why I threw the timeline in there to make a point of every Blizzard RTS release being very different especially when you go from Brood War to WCIII. What do you think Blizzard wanted you consumers to do with WCIII? Using your terminology technically Blizzard wanted to replace BW with WCIII and what do you know? They did. Many players switched and played it and it was very successful. The publishers always want you to buy their new candy. This is just simple dumb logic. If that;s what you meant by replacing then sure but Blizzard wasn't trying to simply repeat the magic of Brood War. P.S. I never brought up Reddit in the first place. You did and I had no idea why you did but now I understand it's because you're trying to say TLers and Redditers believe SC2 was supposed to replace BW. From a design perspective, no. SC2 was supposed to stand on it's own two legs and you can see that with everything from B.Net 2.0, the U.I., game flow & design. IF we're talking about replacing a game players are currently playing i.e. what I said about publishers always want you to buy and play their new releases then yes. Repeating myself just to bring the point home. I said that a few times now. Would Blizzard like to replicate the success of BW with that of SC2 (as in having the game go strong for a decade)? Surely. Goes back to what I said about BW success being dumb luck with the programming, design, Korea's internet infrastructure being set up at that time, PC Bangs being the craze, etc. You cannot simply replicate success and on a global scale SC2 is doing just fine. It's weird that someone would think I'm defending the devs when I give them a ton of shit myself after reading such interviews wowza. ^ Good, I'm glad that you were just misunderstanding a few aspects of the entire incident. On some notes: Never even said that you brought it nor am I stating that you did. The criticism is on your complete dismissal of a legit, majority consensus on the two games. An addendum on the Reddit/TL argument, my argument was that the community believe that the games are played differently and, I explicitly said NOT the same way (as in design-wise). On your rant of BW's succes. Well it's success wasn't exactly "dumb luck" per se. Sure the pathing was accidental as devs are trying to achieve a certain deadline. However the design and balances were utterly brilliantly orchestrated in the hand of former Blizzard employee, the units all had their own specialization that conceptually differentiate from other races. No units overlapped in roles with each other. It was carefully crafted in plethora of facets. And it WAS the golden age of RTS with RA2, AoE, AoM, and SupCom. It is no small feat that only BW capture the heart of many. P.S. I don't think you were defending the devs at all but rather misunderstood some of my points and wasted a lot of time and pixels in attempt to prove something that should be laid rest. I was never arguing against the fact that they played differently though. I still don't know where that comes from because I've argued against that point when people try to compare SC2 to SC:BW everywhere from the general section to the blog section. It was a fluke though, you remember those programming blogs we had not too long ago with the old alpha stages up to the beta and coding? The coders even said they didn't realize what they really had until after the fact and the first couple of patches were awesome. Those were huge and then we had smaller ones right up to 1.06b. As for the units... dude they didn't plan a lot of them to be used in those ways with the coding and pathing as you so mentioned. Not exactly, many fundamental units were used as they exactly intended to. Like MnMs were suppose to be used in combination. The Vultures were suppose to be the hit and run sort of weasels they are, Lurkers were suppose to be the hidden underground creepy crawlers that prey upon others, Reavers were suppose to hit a target and deal splash damage, Wraith provided a lot of cloak opportunities, etc. Those units absolutely had their own specific characteristics that was introduced in the game manual and players did those awesome tricks exactly the way the devs plan up to be. And none of them were incepted upon due to programming side effects. Yeah but they never knew what kind of execution could be done with a dozen of them. Fundamentally the game was built strong and yes the units were unique. You will always hear me giving them praise about such units and loathing a lot of the SC2 units for being boring if you go back far enough, but I learned to accept the units for what they are and understand they didn't just want to take everything from BW. The devs never planned for the kids to use them that WELL. You have no idea how successful a game will be or how well players can actually use those tools until you see them play the shit out of it. On a fundamental level yes they were conceptually great, but this goes back to the A.I. and U.I. Blizzard say they don't rush things but from their timetable and timeline to get the actual game out if it were ever going to get out? Eek. SO basically we're saying the same thing and I'm just adding the fact Blizzard had no idea of how well the tricks could be performed let alone bugs/glitches they didn't know like using patrol to skip attack animations on vultures for one. I don't think the coders planned that. Do you?
Absolutely not, the point being is that yes while some units awesomely displayed their prowess due to the coding side effect. However, not all the units were viable because of it. The majority of the BW units could function with superb maneuvers conceptually. While we are on the doormat of glitches and such, I would like to add that there existed several awe-inspiring bug induced tricks that WERE on the same level of execution as in BW, nevertheless the contemporary devs decide to deliberately reject them. This is a bad decision on their part that rendered the interest into the current state.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
