|
Does DK actually have any say in the design of the units per se?
Without any solid information, I would assume that he is presented with units and concepts from the designers, and he is then asked about his opinion regarding the potential balance problems said concepts could trigger. But does he contribute to the creative process at all?
In the end, and while his way of absolutely not answering questions is certainly not commendable, he does not have that much power, and should not hold such a big part of the blame.
|
Part of being a good rts designer seems that you have to be a good politician... Never admit mistakes, just ignore problems.
|
On March 14 2014 02:12 404AlphaSquad wrote:
Part of being a good rts designer seems that you have to be a good politician... Never admit mistakes, just ignore problems.
its the PR spin all companies must put on all communications with all customers.
nothing special here.
david kim answered enough questions directly for my liking.
why don't u email EA and ask them how the next C&C is coming along.
see what kind of response you get.
i've spent about $1000 on Starcraft since 2000. I'm happy with every dime i've spent. i still have my SC64 cartridge.
On March 13 2014 06:56 Zealos wrote:
I like it. Basically it can be summed up: We hear your complaints. We are not changing anything.
i'm happy with teh game as is.
considering what small amount of money Blizz makes on RTS i'm just happy they are supporting the game so well.
thanks Blizzard.
thanks David Kim, Dustin Browder, et al.
|
I can appreciate most of his answers.
I actually blame the community kept repeating the same questions over and over again about forcefields and a huge overhaul redesign, it's been answered so many times already.
|
On March 13 2014 23:29 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 23:00 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:23 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:13 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:09 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:07 Plansix wrote:On March 13 2014 22:02 Big J wrote:
Btw the real sad story is how the most stupid questions get upvoted on reddit. There were reasonable questions like about Mech TvP, what he thinks about Immortal allins in ZvP, what about the one or other specific unit.
You know, stuff where he could actually say something meaningful. Instead we get those "are there big chances coming, tell us everything about your companies secrets please". "Why don't you redesign the game in a patch" bullshit questions that have been asked before and are vague as shit. Agreed. The fact that he was asked the same questions as last time is a bummer. I would have liked to see someone beyond "are you guys getting rid of warpgate and force field yet?" Those questions are a lot more important than asking about some random all-in from Toss. I dont care if they are more important to you personally. They dont yield anything. It's a waste of time to ask a firm about it's secrets... And I don't care if you think changing some numbers on some units is important because it makes one random Toss all-in out of a thousand less strong. Why even have an AMA if he can't answer any questions of substantial value? And besides, he did answer about their "secrets" although he answers like a politician. I find it pretty obvious from his answers that Blizzard thinks most of the core mechanics in SC2 are in a good state. Also, he said they won't risk changing anything fundamental unless it's "absolutely amazing" which means they won't change anything at all. So no, those questions were not a waste of time. Yes, he said that 5AMAs ago. Those are answers from 2011 and 2012. Why the fuck ask the same question again? It's a waste of time. He answered those things in the last AMA already, which was what, 2months ago. Yes, he answered like a politician. If he didn't, instead of 10page os "omg, he doesn't say anything"-bullshit, we'd now be reading through 100pages of "omg, they are going to introduce another splash unit for Protoss. Haven't they learned anything from the Colossus???????????????????" (assuming he reveals they have experimented with anything splash related). It would be even worse, even though the unit would not even make it into the game. That's why he rather says nothing that isn't at least 10% confirmed. You know, what's the safest scenario for blizzard: a) "yup, we will try a highground advantage for LotV" in 2014 - just that it may get cut again in 2015 b) "no, we heard you but we won't include highground advantages. We tried them, they are shit" in 2014 c) "we are trying it guys. But if it does not fit the game it won't make it in" in 2014 It's c). If they are not sure, they will not tell you. End of story. It makes the most sense. TBF though, the deathball, economy, high ground, etc questions, are more "this is what we want! please implement!" sort of feedback rather then just honest questions. It's Blizzards failure to categorically state their position that makes this sort of feedback keep coming up. This time though, he was very clear IMO about most of those things. Still, questions in the form of "wishlist" will still crop up. Like the situation with mech. One week they say "we want mech, we made new units to make it work" next week they say "we don't want mech, it's boring" and then back to "we want mech again". What the Hell is one supposed to think? They needed a new lead game designer after WOL IMO, someone with focus and a clear vision.
True, they were clear in this AMA and the last. Possibly too nice about it in saying "no" when a firmer "NO" would have been better. And as someone who is generally happy with the deathball, the economy, highground etc I am pleased there will be no major overhaul of core SC2 mechanics for LOTV. Any changes should come from within the existing framework of the game.
As for Mech (I take it you mean TvP) I think that's a response to the incessant pleading for it for 4 years. Blizzard do not really want to enable Mech in TvP (at least at the top level). If so, fair enough. Again, it's best if they just said "NO TANKS!".
|
On March 13 2014 23:41 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 23:29 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 13 2014 23:00 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:23 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:13 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:09 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:07 Plansix wrote:On March 13 2014 22:02 Big J wrote:
Btw the real sad story is how the most stupid questions get upvoted on reddit. There were reasonable questions like about Mech TvP, what he thinks about Immortal allins in ZvP, what about the one or other specific unit.
You know, stuff where he could actually say something meaningful. Instead we get those "are there big chances coming, tell us everything about your companies secrets please". "Why don't you redesign the game in a patch" bullshit questions that have been asked before and are vague as shit. Agreed. The fact that he was asked the same questions as last time is a bummer. I would have liked to see someone beyond "are you guys getting rid of warpgate and force field yet?" Those questions are a lot more important than asking about some random all-in from Toss. I dont care if they are more important to you personally. They dont yield anything. It's a waste of time to ask a firm about it's secrets... And I don't care if you think changing some numbers on some units is important because it makes one random Toss all-in out of a thousand less strong. Why even have an AMA if he can't answer any questions of substantial value? And besides, he did answer about their "secrets" although he answers like a politician. I find it pretty obvious from his answers that Blizzard thinks most of the core mechanics in SC2 are in a good state. Also, he said they won't risk changing anything fundamental unless it's "absolutely amazing" which means they won't change anything at all. So no, those questions were not a waste of time. Yes, he said that 5AMAs ago. Those are answers from 2011 and 2012. Why the fuck ask the same question again? It's a waste of time. He answered those things in the last AMA already, which was what, 2months ago. Yes, he answered like a politician. If he didn't, instead of 10page os "omg, he doesn't say anything"-bullshit, we'd now be reading through 100pages of "omg, they are going to introduce another splash unit for Protoss. Haven't they learned anything from the Colossus???????????????????" (assuming he reveals they have experimented with anything splash related). It would be even worse, even though the unit would not even make it into the game. That's why he rather says nothing that isn't at least 10% confirmed. You know, what's the safest scenario for blizzard: a) "yup, we will try a highground advantage for LotV" in 2014 - just that it may get cut again in 2015 b) "no, we heard you but we won't include highground advantages. We tried them, they are shit" in 2014 c) "we are trying it guys. But if it does not fit the game it won't make it in" in 2014 It's c). If they are not sure, they will not tell you. End of story. It makes the most sense. TBF though, the deathball, economy, high ground, etc questions, are more "this is what we want! please implement!" sort of feedback rather then just honest questions. It's Blizzards failure to categorically state their position that makes this sort of feedback keep coming up. This time though, he was very clear IMO about most of those things. Still, questions in the form of "wishlist" will still crop up. Like the situation with mech. One week they say "we want mech, we made new units to make it work" next week they say "we don't want mech, it's boring" and then back to "we want mech again". What the Hell is one supposed to think? They needed a new lead game designer after WOL IMO, someone with focus and a clear vision. Something potentially interesting is for David Kim to contrast the Starbow implementation of all these things with the Blizzard implementation. That would be productive probably, and give a clear idea of David Kim's true opinion. But of course he is not going to do that. Blizzard hasn't really given any meaningful statements on Starbow's design outside of implying that it serves a purpose in giving part of the fan base what it desires, but they haven't said that this reflects in any way on Starcraft 2. To be quite honest, someone in David Kim's position should be highly interested in Starbow. It's essentially an alternative approach to the game that he is responsible for and which calls into question many decisions that he has made in the past. From a professional perspective it should be fascinating, unless, of course, Blizzard has no real interest in making any significant changes to SC2 anymore.
I'm not sure why you think they should do that. Starbow remains what it is, a good mod that is a BW and SC2 knock-off. What would he need to comment on in comparison to SC2 and why? And no, I don't imagine any significant changes to SC2.
|
On March 13 2014 06:17 Liman wrote:Really ? WTF ?
hes talking about swarmhost and in this case he is 100% correct ... perhaps you need to learn to read more then 1 word ...
cry before reading everything is stupid as shit
|
On March 14 2014 03:10 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 23:41 Grumbels wrote:On March 13 2014 23:29 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 13 2014 23:00 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:23 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:13 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:09 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:07 Plansix wrote:On March 13 2014 22:02 Big J wrote:
Btw the real sad story is how the most stupid questions get upvoted on reddit. There were reasonable questions like about Mech TvP, what he thinks about Immortal allins in ZvP, what about the one or other specific unit.
You know, stuff where he could actually say something meaningful. Instead we get those "are there big chances coming, tell us everything about your companies secrets please". "Why don't you redesign the game in a patch" bullshit questions that have been asked before and are vague as shit. Agreed. The fact that he was asked the same questions as last time is a bummer. I would have liked to see someone beyond "are you guys getting rid of warpgate and force field yet?" Those questions are a lot more important than asking about some random all-in from Toss. I dont care if they are more important to you personally. They dont yield anything. It's a waste of time to ask a firm about it's secrets... And I don't care if you think changing some numbers on some units is important because it makes one random Toss all-in out of a thousand less strong. Why even have an AMA if he can't answer any questions of substantial value? And besides, he did answer about their "secrets" although he answers like a politician. I find it pretty obvious from his answers that Blizzard thinks most of the core mechanics in SC2 are in a good state. Also, he said they won't risk changing anything fundamental unless it's "absolutely amazing" which means they won't change anything at all. So no, those questions were not a waste of time. Yes, he said that 5AMAs ago. Those are answers from 2011 and 2012. Why the fuck ask the same question again? It's a waste of time. He answered those things in the last AMA already, which was what, 2months ago. Yes, he answered like a politician. If he didn't, instead of 10page os "omg, he doesn't say anything"-bullshit, we'd now be reading through 100pages of "omg, they are going to introduce another splash unit for Protoss. Haven't they learned anything from the Colossus???????????????????" (assuming he reveals they have experimented with anything splash related). It would be even worse, even though the unit would not even make it into the game. That's why he rather says nothing that isn't at least 10% confirmed. You know, what's the safest scenario for blizzard: a) "yup, we will try a highground advantage for LotV" in 2014 - just that it may get cut again in 2015 b) "no, we heard you but we won't include highground advantages. We tried them, they are shit" in 2014 c) "we are trying it guys. But if it does not fit the game it won't make it in" in 2014 It's c). If they are not sure, they will not tell you. End of story. It makes the most sense. TBF though, the deathball, economy, high ground, etc questions, are more "this is what we want! please implement!" sort of feedback rather then just honest questions. It's Blizzards failure to categorically state their position that makes this sort of feedback keep coming up. This time though, he was very clear IMO about most of those things. Still, questions in the form of "wishlist" will still crop up. Like the situation with mech. One week they say "we want mech, we made new units to make it work" next week they say "we don't want mech, it's boring" and then back to "we want mech again". What the Hell is one supposed to think? They needed a new lead game designer after WOL IMO, someone with focus and a clear vision. Something potentially interesting is for David Kim to contrast the Starbow implementation of all these things with the Blizzard implementation. That would be productive probably, and give a clear idea of David Kim's true opinion. But of course he is not going to do that. Blizzard hasn't really given any meaningful statements on Starbow's design outside of implying that it serves a purpose in giving part of the fan base what it desires, but they haven't said that this reflects in any way on Starcraft 2. To be quite honest, someone in David Kim's position should be highly interested in Starbow. It's essentially an alternative approach to the game that he is responsible for and which calls into question many decisions that he has made in the past. From a professional perspective it should be fascinating, unless, of course, Blizzard has no real interest in making any significant changes to SC2 anymore. I'm not sure why you think they should do that. Starbow remains what it is, a good mod that is a BW and SC2 knock-off. What would he need to comment on in comparison to SC2 and why? And no, I don't imagine any significant changes to SC2.
Seeing David Kim saying once again that Carriers are boring A-move units as if nothing could be done about it while amateur devs were able to make it interesting in Starbow is just infuriating.
(I haven't played Starbow so my example of the Carrier might be inacurate, yet a lot of units behavior has been made more interesting in Starbow so the point still stands)
|
On March 14 2014 03:10 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 23:41 Grumbels wrote:On March 13 2014 23:29 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 13 2014 23:00 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:23 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:13 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:09 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:07 Plansix wrote:On March 13 2014 22:02 Big J wrote:
Btw the real sad story is how the most stupid questions get upvoted on reddit. There were reasonable questions like about Mech TvP, what he thinks about Immortal allins in ZvP, what about the one or other specific unit.
You know, stuff where he could actually say something meaningful. Instead we get those "are there big chances coming, tell us everything about your companies secrets please". "Why don't you redesign the game in a patch" bullshit questions that have been asked before and are vague as shit. Agreed. The fact that he was asked the same questions as last time is a bummer. I would have liked to see someone beyond "are you guys getting rid of warpgate and force field yet?" Those questions are a lot more important than asking about some random all-in from Toss. I dont care if they are more important to you personally. They dont yield anything. It's a waste of time to ask a firm about it's secrets... And I don't care if you think changing some numbers on some units is important because it makes one random Toss all-in out of a thousand less strong. Why even have an AMA if he can't answer any questions of substantial value? And besides, he did answer about their "secrets" although he answers like a politician. I find it pretty obvious from his answers that Blizzard thinks most of the core mechanics in SC2 are in a good state. Also, he said they won't risk changing anything fundamental unless it's "absolutely amazing" which means they won't change anything at all. So no, those questions were not a waste of time. Yes, he said that 5AMAs ago. Those are answers from 2011 and 2012. Why the fuck ask the same question again? It's a waste of time. He answered those things in the last AMA already, which was what, 2months ago. Yes, he answered like a politician. If he didn't, instead of 10page os "omg, he doesn't say anything"-bullshit, we'd now be reading through 100pages of "omg, they are going to introduce another splash unit for Protoss. Haven't they learned anything from the Colossus???????????????????" (assuming he reveals they have experimented with anything splash related). It would be even worse, even though the unit would not even make it into the game. That's why he rather says nothing that isn't at least 10% confirmed. You know, what's the safest scenario for blizzard: a) "yup, we will try a highground advantage for LotV" in 2014 - just that it may get cut again in 2015 b) "no, we heard you but we won't include highground advantages. We tried them, they are shit" in 2014 c) "we are trying it guys. But if it does not fit the game it won't make it in" in 2014 It's c). If they are not sure, they will not tell you. End of story. It makes the most sense. TBF though, the deathball, economy, high ground, etc questions, are more "this is what we want! please implement!" sort of feedback rather then just honest questions. It's Blizzards failure to categorically state their position that makes this sort of feedback keep coming up. This time though, he was very clear IMO about most of those things. Still, questions in the form of "wishlist" will still crop up. Like the situation with mech. One week they say "we want mech, we made new units to make it work" next week they say "we don't want mech, it's boring" and then back to "we want mech again". What the Hell is one supposed to think? They needed a new lead game designer after WOL IMO, someone with focus and a clear vision. Something potentially interesting is for David Kim to contrast the Starbow implementation of all these things with the Blizzard implementation. That would be productive probably, and give a clear idea of David Kim's true opinion. But of course he is not going to do that. Blizzard hasn't really given any meaningful statements on Starbow's design outside of implying that it serves a purpose in giving part of the fan base what it desires, but they haven't said that this reflects in any way on Starcraft 2. To be quite honest, someone in David Kim's position should be highly interested in Starbow. It's essentially an alternative approach to the game that he is responsible for and which calls into question many decisions that he has made in the past. From a professional perspective it should be fascinating, unless, of course, Blizzard has no real interest in making any significant changes to SC2 anymore. I'm not sure why you think they should do that. Starbow remains what it is, a good mod that is a BW and SC2 knock-off. What would he need to comment on in comparison to SC2 and why? And no, I don't imagine any significant changes to SC2.
A LOT of things can be improved in SC2.
But oh wait if your thing is purely based upon a 15 minutes build into 10 seconds clash battle, then SC2 is definitely excellent for you.
However some us actually prefer to have multitasking all the over the map in attempt to kill expo and expo ourselves all over it to have more spread out battles, then we got a whole different philosophy going on.
One is simpler while the other is more complex.
|
On March 14 2014 03:38 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2014 03:10 aZealot wrote:On March 13 2014 23:41 Grumbels wrote:On March 13 2014 23:29 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 13 2014 23:00 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:23 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:13 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:09 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:07 Plansix wrote:On March 13 2014 22:02 Big J wrote:
Btw the real sad story is how the most stupid questions get upvoted on reddit. There were reasonable questions like about Mech TvP, what he thinks about Immortal allins in ZvP, what about the one or other specific unit.
You know, stuff where he could actually say something meaningful. Instead we get those "are there big chances coming, tell us everything about your companies secrets please". "Why don't you redesign the game in a patch" bullshit questions that have been asked before and are vague as shit. Agreed. The fact that he was asked the same questions as last time is a bummer. I would have liked to see someone beyond "are you guys getting rid of warpgate and force field yet?" Those questions are a lot more important than asking about some random all-in from Toss. I dont care if they are more important to you personally. They dont yield anything. It's a waste of time to ask a firm about it's secrets... And I don't care if you think changing some numbers on some units is important because it makes one random Toss all-in out of a thousand less strong. Why even have an AMA if he can't answer any questions of substantial value? And besides, he did answer about their "secrets" although he answers like a politician. I find it pretty obvious from his answers that Blizzard thinks most of the core mechanics in SC2 are in a good state. Also, he said they won't risk changing anything fundamental unless it's "absolutely amazing" which means they won't change anything at all. So no, those questions were not a waste of time. Yes, he said that 5AMAs ago. Those are answers from 2011 and 2012. Why the fuck ask the same question again? It's a waste of time. He answered those things in the last AMA already, which was what, 2months ago. Yes, he answered like a politician. If he didn't, instead of 10page os "omg, he doesn't say anything"-bullshit, we'd now be reading through 100pages of "omg, they are going to introduce another splash unit for Protoss. Haven't they learned anything from the Colossus???????????????????" (assuming he reveals they have experimented with anything splash related). It would be even worse, even though the unit would not even make it into the game. That's why he rather says nothing that isn't at least 10% confirmed. You know, what's the safest scenario for blizzard: a) "yup, we will try a highground advantage for LotV" in 2014 - just that it may get cut again in 2015 b) "no, we heard you but we won't include highground advantages. We tried them, they are shit" in 2014 c) "we are trying it guys. But if it does not fit the game it won't make it in" in 2014 It's c). If they are not sure, they will not tell you. End of story. It makes the most sense. TBF though, the deathball, economy, high ground, etc questions, are more "this is what we want! please implement!" sort of feedback rather then just honest questions. It's Blizzards failure to categorically state their position that makes this sort of feedback keep coming up. This time though, he was very clear IMO about most of those things. Still, questions in the form of "wishlist" will still crop up. Like the situation with mech. One week they say "we want mech, we made new units to make it work" next week they say "we don't want mech, it's boring" and then back to "we want mech again". What the Hell is one supposed to think? They needed a new lead game designer after WOL IMO, someone with focus and a clear vision. Something potentially interesting is for David Kim to contrast the Starbow implementation of all these things with the Blizzard implementation. That would be productive probably, and give a clear idea of David Kim's true opinion. But of course he is not going to do that. Blizzard hasn't really given any meaningful statements on Starbow's design outside of implying that it serves a purpose in giving part of the fan base what it desires, but they haven't said that this reflects in any way on Starcraft 2. To be quite honest, someone in David Kim's position should be highly interested in Starbow. It's essentially an alternative approach to the game that he is responsible for and which calls into question many decisions that he has made in the past. From a professional perspective it should be fascinating, unless, of course, Blizzard has no real interest in making any significant changes to SC2 anymore. I'm not sure why you think they should do that. Starbow remains what it is, a good mod that is a BW and SC2 knock-off. What would he need to comment on in comparison to SC2 and why? And no, I don't imagine any significant changes to SC2. A LOT of things can be improved in SC2. But oh wait if your thing is purely based upon a 15 minutes build into 10 seconds clash battle, then SC2 is definitely excellent for you. However some us actually prefer to have multitasking all the over the map in attempt to kill expo and expo ourselves all over it to have more spread out battles, then we got a whole different philosophy going on. One is simpler while the other is more complex.
Starbow hipsters telling us how much better their indie mod is then mainstream SC2. Seriously, I think I hade the same discussion last weekend about music and one guy dropped the "some of us prefer music wih some depth and texture,".
Starbow and BW hipsters telling us how our personal tastes are wrong.
|
blizzard imbalance team seems like they rly dont care about protoss is the most ez race in the game, especially in TvP... even a lot of pros protosses know this issue.. that makes me feel very sadly about the game
|
On March 14 2014 03:53 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2014 03:38 Xiphos wrote:On March 14 2014 03:10 aZealot wrote:On March 13 2014 23:41 Grumbels wrote:On March 13 2014 23:29 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 13 2014 23:00 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:23 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:13 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:09 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:07 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Agreed. The fact that he was asked the same questions as last time is a bummer. I would have liked to see someone beyond "are you guys getting rid of warpgate and force field yet?" Those questions are a lot more important than asking about some random all-in from Toss. I dont care if they are more important to you personally. They dont yield anything. It's a waste of time to ask a firm about it's secrets... And I don't care if you think changing some numbers on some units is important because it makes one random Toss all-in out of a thousand less strong. Why even have an AMA if he can't answer any questions of substantial value? And besides, he did answer about their "secrets" although he answers like a politician. I find it pretty obvious from his answers that Blizzard thinks most of the core mechanics in SC2 are in a good state. Also, he said they won't risk changing anything fundamental unless it's "absolutely amazing" which means they won't change anything at all. So no, those questions were not a waste of time. Yes, he said that 5AMAs ago. Those are answers from 2011 and 2012. Why the fuck ask the same question again? It's a waste of time. He answered those things in the last AMA already, which was what, 2months ago. Yes, he answered like a politician. If he didn't, instead of 10page os "omg, he doesn't say anything"-bullshit, we'd now be reading through 100pages of "omg, they are going to introduce another splash unit for Protoss. Haven't they learned anything from the Colossus???????????????????" (assuming he reveals they have experimented with anything splash related). It would be even worse, even though the unit would not even make it into the game. That's why he rather says nothing that isn't at least 10% confirmed. You know, what's the safest scenario for blizzard: a) "yup, we will try a highground advantage for LotV" in 2014 - just that it may get cut again in 2015 b) "no, we heard you but we won't include highground advantages. We tried them, they are shit" in 2014 c) "we are trying it guys. But if it does not fit the game it won't make it in" in 2014 It's c). If they are not sure, they will not tell you. End of story. It makes the most sense. TBF though, the deathball, economy, high ground, etc questions, are more "this is what we want! please implement!" sort of feedback rather then just honest questions. It's Blizzards failure to categorically state their position that makes this sort of feedback keep coming up. This time though, he was very clear IMO about most of those things. Still, questions in the form of "wishlist" will still crop up. Like the situation with mech. One week they say "we want mech, we made new units to make it work" next week they say "we don't want mech, it's boring" and then back to "we want mech again". What the Hell is one supposed to think? They needed a new lead game designer after WOL IMO, someone with focus and a clear vision. Something potentially interesting is for David Kim to contrast the Starbow implementation of all these things with the Blizzard implementation. That would be productive probably, and give a clear idea of David Kim's true opinion. But of course he is not going to do that. Blizzard hasn't really given any meaningful statements on Starbow's design outside of implying that it serves a purpose in giving part of the fan base what it desires, but they haven't said that this reflects in any way on Starcraft 2. To be quite honest, someone in David Kim's position should be highly interested in Starbow. It's essentially an alternative approach to the game that he is responsible for and which calls into question many decisions that he has made in the past. From a professional perspective it should be fascinating, unless, of course, Blizzard has no real interest in making any significant changes to SC2 anymore. I'm not sure why you think they should do that. Starbow remains what it is, a good mod that is a BW and SC2 knock-off. What would he need to comment on in comparison to SC2 and why? And no, I don't imagine any significant changes to SC2. A LOT of things can be improved in SC2. But oh wait if your thing is purely based upon a 15 minutes build into 10 seconds clash battle, then SC2 is definitely excellent for you. However some us actually prefer to have multitasking all the over the map in attempt to kill expo and expo ourselves all over it to have more spread out battles, then we got a whole different philosophy going on. One is simpler while the other is more complex. Starbow hipsters telling us how much better their indie mod is then mainstream SC2. Seriously, I think I hade the same discussion last weekend about music and one guy dropped the "some of us prefer music wih some depth and texture,". Starbow and BW hipsters telling us how our personal tastes are wrong.
DK himself says that carriers are crappy.
|
On March 14 2014 03:55 endy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2014 03:53 Plansix wrote:On March 14 2014 03:38 Xiphos wrote:On March 14 2014 03:10 aZealot wrote:On March 13 2014 23:41 Grumbels wrote:On March 13 2014 23:29 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 13 2014 23:00 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:23 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:13 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:09 Nauseam wrote:
[quote]
Those questions are a lot more important than asking about some random all-in from Toss. I dont care if they are more important to you personally. They dont yield anything. It's a waste of time to ask a firm about it's secrets... And I don't care if you think changing some numbers on some units is important because it makes one random Toss all-in out of a thousand less strong. Why even have an AMA if he can't answer any questions of substantial value? And besides, he did answer about their "secrets" although he answers like a politician. I find it pretty obvious from his answers that Blizzard thinks most of the core mechanics in SC2 are in a good state. Also, he said they won't risk changing anything fundamental unless it's "absolutely amazing" which means they won't change anything at all. So no, those questions were not a waste of time. Yes, he said that 5AMAs ago. Those are answers from 2011 and 2012. Why the fuck ask the same question again? It's a waste of time. He answered those things in the last AMA already, which was what, 2months ago. Yes, he answered like a politician. If he didn't, instead of 10page os "omg, he doesn't say anything"-bullshit, we'd now be reading through 100pages of "omg, they are going to introduce another splash unit for Protoss. Haven't they learned anything from the Colossus???????????????????" (assuming he reveals they have experimented with anything splash related). It would be even worse, even though the unit would not even make it into the game. That's why he rather says nothing that isn't at least 10% confirmed. You know, what's the safest scenario for blizzard: a) "yup, we will try a highground advantage for LotV" in 2014 - just that it may get cut again in 2015 b) "no, we heard you but we won't include highground advantages. We tried them, they are shit" in 2014 c) "we are trying it guys. But if it does not fit the game it won't make it in" in 2014 It's c). If they are not sure, they will not tell you. End of story. It makes the most sense. TBF though, the deathball, economy, high ground, etc questions, are more "this is what we want! please implement!" sort of feedback rather then just honest questions. It's Blizzards failure to categorically state their position that makes this sort of feedback keep coming up. This time though, he was very clear IMO about most of those things. Still, questions in the form of "wishlist" will still crop up. Like the situation with mech. One week they say "we want mech, we made new units to make it work" next week they say "we don't want mech, it's boring" and then back to "we want mech again". What the Hell is one supposed to think? They needed a new lead game designer after WOL IMO, someone with focus and a clear vision. Something potentially interesting is for David Kim to contrast the Starbow implementation of all these things with the Blizzard implementation. That would be productive probably, and give a clear idea of David Kim's true opinion. But of course he is not going to do that. Blizzard hasn't really given any meaningful statements on Starbow's design outside of implying that it serves a purpose in giving part of the fan base what it desires, but they haven't said that this reflects in any way on Starcraft 2. To be quite honest, someone in David Kim's position should be highly interested in Starbow. It's essentially an alternative approach to the game that he is responsible for and which calls into question many decisions that he has made in the past. From a professional perspective it should be fascinating, unless, of course, Blizzard has no real interest in making any significant changes to SC2 anymore. I'm not sure why you think they should do that. Starbow remains what it is, a good mod that is a BW and SC2 knock-off. What would he need to comment on in comparison to SC2 and why? And no, I don't imagine any significant changes to SC2. A LOT of things can be improved in SC2. But oh wait if your thing is purely based upon a 15 minutes build into 10 seconds clash battle, then SC2 is definitely excellent for you. However some us actually prefer to have multitasking all the over the map in attempt to kill expo and expo ourselves all over it to have more spread out battles, then we got a whole different philosophy going on. One is simpler while the other is more complex. Starbow hipsters telling us how much better their indie mod is then mainstream SC2. Seriously, I think I hade the same discussion last weekend about music and one guy dropped the "some of us prefer music wih some depth and texture,". Starbow and BW hipsters telling us how our personal tastes are wrong. DK himself says that carriers are crappy.
WTF? He did not say that at all. The only way he said that is if you remove a bunch of words and add "crappy".
|
On March 14 2014 03:54 HelteR wrote:
blizzard imbalance team seems like they rly dont care about protoss is the most ez race in the game, especially in TvP... even a lot of pros protosses know this issue.. that makes me feel very sadly about the game
So just like BW, right? 
|
On March 14 2014 03:38 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2014 03:10 aZealot wrote:On March 13 2014 23:41 Grumbels wrote:On March 13 2014 23:29 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 13 2014 23:00 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:23 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:13 Big J wrote:On March 13 2014 22:09 Nauseam wrote:On March 13 2014 22:07 Plansix wrote:On March 13 2014 22:02 Big J wrote:
Btw the real sad story is how the most stupid questions get upvoted on reddit. There were reasonable questions like about Mech TvP, what he thinks about Immortal allins in ZvP, what about the one or other specific unit.
You know, stuff where he could actually say something meaningful. Instead we get those "are there big chances coming, tell us everything about your companies secrets please". "Why don't you redesign the game in a patch" bullshit questions that have been asked before and are vague as shit. Agreed. The fact that he was asked the same questions as last time is a bummer. I would have liked to see someone beyond "are you guys getting rid of warpgate and force field yet?" Those questions are a lot more important than asking about some random all-in from Toss. I dont care if they are more important to you personally. They dont yield anything. It's a waste of time to ask a firm about it's secrets... And I don't care if you think changing some numbers on some units is important because it makes one random Toss all-in out of a thousand less strong. Why even have an AMA if he can't answer any questions of substantial value? And besides, he did answer about their "secrets" although he answers like a politician. I find it pretty obvious from his answers that Blizzard thinks most of the core mechanics in SC2 are in a good state. Also, he said they won't risk changing anything fundamental unless it's "absolutely amazing" which means they won't change anything at all. So no, those questions were not a waste of time. Yes, he said that 5AMAs ago. Those are answers from 2011 and 2012. Why the fuck ask the same question again? It's a waste of time. He answered those things in the last AMA already, which was what, 2months ago. Yes, he answered like a politician. If he didn't, instead of 10page os "omg, he doesn't say anything"-bullshit, we'd now be reading through 100pages of "omg, they are going to introduce another splash unit for Protoss. Haven't they learned anything from the Colossus???????????????????" (assuming he reveals they have experimented with anything splash related). It would be even worse, even though the unit would not even make it into the game. That's why he rather says nothing that isn't at least 10% confirmed. You know, what's the safest scenario for blizzard: a) "yup, we will try a highground advantage for LotV" in 2014 - just that it may get cut again in 2015 b) "no, we heard you but we won't include highground advantages. We tried them, they are shit" in 2014 c) "we are trying it guys. But if it does not fit the game it won't make it in" in 2014 It's c). If they are not sure, they will not tell you. End of story. It makes the most sense. TBF though, the deathball, economy, high ground, etc questions, are more "this is what we want! please implement!" sort of feedback rather then just honest questions. It's Blizzards failure to categorically state their position that makes this sort of feedback keep coming up. This time though, he was very clear IMO about most of those things. Still, questions in the form of "wishlist" will still crop up. Like the situation with mech. One week they say "we want mech, we made new units to make it work" next week they say "we don't want mech, it's boring" and then back to "we want mech again". What the Hell is one supposed to think? They needed a new lead game designer after WOL IMO, someone with focus and a clear vision. Something potentially interesting is for David Kim to contrast the Starbow implementation of all these things with the Blizzard implementation. That would be productive probably, and give a clear idea of David Kim's true opinion. But of course he is not going to do that. Blizzard hasn't really given any meaningful statements on Starbow's design outside of implying that it serves a purpose in giving part of the fan base what it desires, but they haven't said that this reflects in any way on Starcraft 2. To be quite honest, someone in David Kim's position should be highly interested in Starbow. It's essentially an alternative approach to the game that he is responsible for and which calls into question many decisions that he has made in the past. From a professional perspective it should be fascinating, unless, of course, Blizzard has no real interest in making any significant changes to SC2 anymore. I'm not sure why you think they should do that. Starbow remains what it is, a good mod that is a BW and SC2 knock-off. What would he need to comment on in comparison to SC2 and why? And no, I don't imagine any significant changes to SC2. A LOT of things can be improved in SC2. But oh wait if your thing is purely based upon a 15 minutes build into 10 seconds clash battle, then SC2 is definitely excellent for you. However some us actually prefer to have multitasking all the over the map in attempt to kill expo and expo ourselves all over it to have more spread out battles, then we got a whole different philosophy going on. One is simpler while the other is more complex.
A lot of things can be improved in SC2, I agree. But, what they are and how they might be achieved and what it might take to achieve and whether that is possible are all points to consider. I do not think that core changes to SC2 are necessary. Even if it were, the window for that is gone with HOTS. If the game was radically overhauled for LOTV (as many want), I think the game would die as you lose multiple years of sunk costs and the game is effectively "re-set" for no certain gain. A shrinking of the overall player base would be the result.
As players relearn the game, the quality of the pro product would also be poor further affecting player uptake and spectator base. SC2, overall, is in a better place than it has ever been. IEM Cologne was evidence of that. As is the number of good games of SC2 we have had so far this year. Will there be blips along the way? Sure. But the trend line is positive and upward. There is no need for core change. The evidence does not support it.
(Even if major changes are required, patches and piecemeal solutions may fix it. Sure, they may be ugly. But, I am happy to trade off achievable ugly changes against the beautiful design in my mind. The main thing is that it works.)
As to what the rest of your post is about, apart from being a load of condescending shit, I don't agree. At the highest level of play games are played with multiple bases and multiple fights. I play like that too in some of my games, albeit on a smaller scale, especially PvZ and PvP (but I do so badly because my mechanics are bad). As such, I still enjoy the game, to play and to watch. I really don't care that you do not; nothing is preventing you from playing (or watching) more Starbow (or anything else).
As to Starbow, it is a good game. I have played it. Starbow is funny though, it's a free game that more people seem to actually talk about playing than actually playing. I prefer SC2: to play and to watch. So, for that matter, it seems do a lot of people even if some of them appear to spend most of it complaining about SC2.
Still, I guess it shows they still care about the game. And that can only be a good thing. Maybe.
|
On March 13 2014 22:43 S1eth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 22:14 Tyrhanius wrote:
The problem is DK try to do as few changes as possible. But patchs are not important just for balance. Patchs are what increase the lengthtime of the game.
If you look at LOL/Dota2, they patch heroes, release new one. Each new season brings a new meta, different ways to play, and it's what keep players on the game, and make the game popular.
But on SC2 we have a minor patch each 3 months. And they don't bring new ways to play or make them more entertaining.
And if you look at HOTS patch history they have nearly only nerf OP stuff.
They only add no real content to the game, making the number of viewers to decrease, but they take very long to patch some broken stuff.
They act like they don't want to recognize something is too strong or they've made a mistake, so they let the thing a lot of time ("we wait the players learn to play to see if it needs a change").
And after they're blocked. Deathball toss are too strong, but Zerg has learn the only way to deal with it is to never engage it, and slowly kill it with SH. same with the new mech (due to DK's buff of raven/tank/banshee).
So they say the game are too long and sometimes boring, but if they nerf SH, they would crush balance because zerg wouldn't be able to win in late. So they can't really nerf SH now, beacause they haven't fixed the issue of lategame Toss when we have reported them.
Or DK makes 3-6 months to fix something obviously imbalance. Is it some nerf players wasn't asking for months he made ? Hellbats drops, WM, buff ghost, MSC nerf, etc... All the things he has done is waiting the longer he can before making something which has to be done, or make insignifiant change, or broken one's("hey it would be could if oracle are as fast as a mutalisk and kill a mineral line just when you press a touch"). If you could stop comparing a boxed copy RTS game with free-to-play MOBA games and could point out an RTS game maker that does a better job at patching/expanding their games than Blizzard does, that's be nice.
Decemberscalm and his team over at starbow currently fit the description of what you're asking to be pointed towards.
|
On March 14 2014 04:41 tehredbanditt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2014 22:43 S1eth wrote:On March 13 2014 22:14 Tyrhanius wrote:
The problem is DK try to do as few changes as possible. But patchs are not important just for balance. Patchs are what increase the lengthtime of the game.
If you look at LOL/Dota2, they patch heroes, release new one. Each new season brings a new meta, different ways to play, and it's what keep players on the game, and make the game popular.
But on SC2 we have a minor patch each 3 months. And they don't bring new ways to play or make them more entertaining.
And if you look at HOTS patch history they have nearly only nerf OP stuff.
They only add no real content to the game, making the number of viewers to decrease, but they take very long to patch some broken stuff.
They act like they don't want to recognize something is too strong or they've made a mistake, so they let the thing a lot of time ("we wait the players learn to play to see if it needs a change").
And after they're blocked. Deathball toss are too strong, but Zerg has learn the only way to deal with it is to never engage it, and slowly kill it with SH. same with the new mech (due to DK's buff of raven/tank/banshee).
So they say the game are too long and sometimes boring, but if they nerf SH, they would crush balance because zerg wouldn't be able to win in late. So they can't really nerf SH now, beacause they haven't fixed the issue of lategame Toss when we have reported them.
Or DK makes 3-6 months to fix something obviously imbalance. Is it some nerf players wasn't asking for months he made ? Hellbats drops, WM, buff ghost, MSC nerf, etc... All the things he has done is waiting the longer he can before making something which has to be done, or make insignifiant change, or broken one's("hey it would be could if oracle are as fast as a mutalisk and kill a mineral line just when you press a touch"). If you could stop comparing a boxed copy RTS game with free-to-play MOBA games and could point out an RTS game maker that does a better job at patching/expanding their games than Blizzard does, that's be nice. Decemberscalm and his team over at starbow currently fit the description of what you're asking to be pointed towards.
Except that Starbow is not a commercial product, which is a key part of his point.
|
What's the point of an AMA when most of your responses are "we're looking into it" and "we would like" and "we hope"? I was hoping for something a little bit more concrete.
|
"We also mentioned we would prefer not to make design changes in patches because we don't think it's good for the game to change too much and confuse returning players or players who just don't keep up with every single change we make to the game."
This is just utterly confusing to me.
I was confused when HotS came out, but I loved every single moment of it because it felt fresh.
|
On March 14 2014 05:06 Frex wrote:
"We also mentioned we would prefer not to make design changes in patches because we don't think it's good for the game to change too much and confuse returning players or players who just don't keep up with every single change we make to the game."
This is just utterly confusing to me.
I was confused when HotS came out, but I loved every single moment of it because it felt fresh.
so true this is just a ridiculous and tbh insulting statement to your playerbase
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
