|
Keep "my game is better than yours"-slapfights out of this. If the discussion devolves into simple bashing, this thread will be closed. |
On June 12 2014 13:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote:they are pretty vague with that comment. because i have not played the game i can only speculate. but the line before the line you highlight in your comment says "by placing emphasis on tactics over micro-management." so i'm thinking CoH1 style squad and cover mechanics where the squad will just naturally find "green cover" near the area u send them. OR it could be a variety of "squad stances" like in C&C3. or it could even be both they talk some big talk about revolutionizing the genre .. i guess that is to keep investors happy? i'll be happy if the games turns out to be as popular and fun as CoH1 and we get an alternative to Starcraft to play where i can hit the automatch button and be in a new game in less than 5 minutes.
What's vague about that? They explicitly said they want to dumb down the mechanical skill cap so they can let players focus on the 'real decisions' in a so called 'competitive' game. I call bullshit on that.
As for the tactics over micro-management? Yeah...... I don't know about that either. Aren't tactics a part of micro-management?
Don't get me wrong I liked CoH1, I didn't play it competitively but it was fun. However, I disliked the idea of indirect unit control. I don't know how I feel about that at a top level. I really like the granularity that Starcraft has to offer, I just have a higher respect and appreciation for the amount of time and work that goes into the depth of those skills. I think that indirect unit control might have a different depth, but not quite the same. But perhaps I simply cannot see it. I'd be open to discussion on that topic.
Yeah it might be as popular as CoH1..... we'll see.
|
how is sc2 doing in terms of viewrate right now? Haven't been following it much. The other day I tuned in to watch some stream, game is exactly the same as it was a year ago, was so boring to the point that I didn't even care who was playing. Granted LoL is stagnant too, same heroes every game. it has some exciting games, but nowhere near Dota 2. However!!! LoL still has bigger viewership, I guess it has to do with its large playerbase. So I guess if we want to revive sc2 we should increase its playerbase.
|
Too complicated for casuals? Bw is alot harder game, but a brilliant game for casuals.
|
I think the Grey Goo developers just misused the word micro in their FAQ. From spending some time on their forums and having seen a few video Q&A's with developers on youtube, I think that what they want to achieve is making the game be more about fights and unit selection without the mechanical barriers of entry that games like Starcraft have.
From the looks of the game, it appears they are after a slice of the moba crowd, and in that sense automation is a good thing. The key thing about the game is that the units themselves are interesting and allow for skilled players to get greater utility out of them than bad players.
|
On June 12 2014 17:00 saddaromma wrote:
how is sc2 doing in terms of viewrate right now? Haven't been following it much. The other day I tuned in to watch some stream, game is exactly the same as it was a year ago, was so boring to the point that I didn't even care who was playing. Granted LoL is stagnant too, same heroes every game. it has some exciting games, but nowhere near Dota 2. However!!! LoL still has bigger viewership, I guess it has to do with its large playerbase. So I guess if we want to revive sc2 we should increase its playerbase.
At homestory cup last week there were 60k watchers at one point, don't know what the peak was for the final. So I'm not sure that StarCraft 2 needs to be revived. $60k viewers seems a lot of a minor competition.
|
United States4130 Posts
They reveal the goo faction here which involves a building-less faction where the mother goo can wander over all terrain. That's pretty crazy.
|
On June 12 2014 16:07 Incognoto wrote:
I don't care about grey goo until I can play it and judge for myself. Micro is a very difficult thing to get rid of. I don't even understand why you would want one of the most interesting aspect of an RTS to go.
Well, nexus wars is pretty popular.. but taking micro away would leave a game unwatchable from a spectator point of view.
|
On June 13 2014 11:08 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2014 16:07 Incognoto wrote:
I don't care about grey goo until I can play it and judge for myself. Micro is a very difficult thing to get rid of. I don't even understand why you would want one of the most interesting aspect of an RTS to go. Well, nexus wars is pretty popular.. but taking micro away would leave a game unwatchable from a spectator point of view.
Can't believe they would go that way. Taking macro away, however, would be a completely differnet thing that would be a ton more popular amongst casual players. But micro?
|
United States4130 Posts
I think when they say "micro-management" they're referring to macro, not micro. Like micromanaging your base and workers (because I don't think there are worker/harvester units). It's just a poor choice of words. In the videos and such it looks like you're dealing with plenty of positioning and unit control.
But yea. "Micro-management" =/= Micro.
|
Bisutopia19256 Posts
Has anyone argued that RTS games have UMS maps that are incredibly fun to play? MOBA's have a few maps at most and limited game modes.
...and for reference I'm still talking RTS style UMS such as fastest map possible, starbow, macro/micro, monobattle, etc.
|
On June 13 2014 12:07 DoubleReed wrote:
I think when they say "micro-management" they're referring to macro, not micro. Like micromanaging your base and workers (because I don't think there are worker/harvester units). It's just a poor choice of words. In the videos and such it looks like you're dealing with plenty of positioning and unit control.
But yea. "Micro-management" =/= Micro.
Well, when they can't get the basic terms straight, I really doubt they can make a decent game at all. I really have no hope at all for this game. The artillery game has a bit more potenital, though I am very dissapointed that they didn't respond to my comments about micro. Seems like they haven't really studied yet which variables to tweak on in order to create micro interactions. That's a bit dissapointing when they already are 1 year into the project.
|
United States4130 Posts
On June 13 2014 12:44 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2014 12:07 DoubleReed wrote:
I think when they say "micro-management" they're referring to macro, not micro. Like micromanaging your base and workers (because I don't think there are worker/harvester units). It's just a poor choice of words. In the videos and such it looks like you're dealing with plenty of positioning and unit control.
But yea. "Micro-management" =/= Micro. Well, when they can't get the basic terms straight, I really doubt they can make a decent game at all. I really have no hope at all for this game. The artillery game has a bit more potenital, though I am very dissapointed that they didn't respond to my comments about micro. Seems like they haven't really studied yet which variables to tweak on in order to create micro interactions. That's a bit dissapointing when they already are 1 year into the project.
Well now you're just being silly. Micro-management is like a real word. You're allowed to use real words to describe your game.
I'm a bit skeptical of the game, because I can't really understand how scouting and harassment make any sense, but it looks pretty cool. There's no need to be silly.
|
On June 13 2014 12:25 BisuDagger wrote:
Has anyone argued that RTS games have UMS maps that are incredibly fun to play? MOBA's have a few maps at most and limited game modes.
...and for reference I'm still talking RTS style UMS such as fastest map possible, starbow, macro/micro, monobattle, etc.
yup, multiple times throughout the thread. Some people gloss over this because they want to focus on the core game itself though.
|
On June 13 2014 12:44 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2014 12:07 DoubleReed wrote:
I think when they say "micro-management" they're referring to macro, not micro. Like micromanaging your base and workers (because I don't think there are worker/harvester units). It's just a poor choice of words. In the videos and such it looks like you're dealing with plenty of positioning and unit control.
But yea. "Micro-management" =/= Micro. Well, when they can't get the basic terms straight, I really doubt they can make a decent game at all. I really have no hope at all for this game. The artillery game has a bit more potenital, though I am very dissapointed that they didn't respond to my comments about micro. Seems like they haven't really studied yet which variables to tweak on in order to create micro interactions. That's a bit dissapointing when they already are 1 year into the project. Actually Day9 had already said they were focusing on getting those kinds of variables just right when the game was first announced:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/1mpups/project_atlas_a_hardcore_rts_designed_by_day9/ccbhkay
|
On June 13 2014 12:59 DoubleReed wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2014 12:44 Hider wrote:On June 13 2014 12:07 DoubleReed wrote:
I think when they say "micro-management" they're referring to macro, not micro. Like micromanaging your base and workers (because I don't think there are worker/harvester units). It's just a poor choice of words. In the videos and such it looks like you're dealing with plenty of positioning and unit control.
But yea. "Micro-management" =/= Micro. Well, when they can't get the basic terms straight, I really doubt they can make a decent game at all. I really have no hope at all for this game. The artillery game has a bit more potenital, though I am very dissapointed that they didn't respond to my comments about micro. Seems like they haven't really studied yet which variables to tweak on in order to create micro interactions. That's a bit dissapointing when they already are 1 year into the project. Well now you're just being silly. Micro-management is like a real word. You're allowed to use real words to describe your game. I'm a bit skeptical of the game, because I can't really understand how scouting and harassment make any sense, but it looks pretty cool. There's no need to be silly.
Eh what are you talking about? If they don't know the difference between micro and macro and they are responsible for developing an RTS, I don't have very high hopes for them.
|
Can somebody pls link to the right time where they say this about micro?
|
Oooh Grey Goo is being developed by Petroglyph games, who made Universe at War which were made by the same people who made C&C. I guess the game would be the same kind of innovation and storyline mixed with the same kind of haphazard gamebalancing, ie if a unit or concept seems cool, include it, and stuff the game balancing.
|
On June 13 2014 21:30 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2014 12:59 DoubleReed wrote:On June 13 2014 12:44 Hider wrote:On June 13 2014 12:07 DoubleReed wrote:
I think when they say "micro-management" they're referring to macro, not micro. Like micromanaging your base and workers (because I don't think there are worker/harvester units). It's just a poor choice of words. In the videos and such it looks like you're dealing with plenty of positioning and unit control.
But yea. "Micro-management" =/= Micro. Well, when they can't get the basic terms straight, I really doubt they can make a decent game at all. I really have no hope at all for this game. The artillery game has a bit more potenital, though I am very dissapointed that they didn't respond to my comments about micro. Seems like they haven't really studied yet which variables to tweak on in order to create micro interactions. That's a bit dissapointing when they already are 1 year into the project. Well now you're just being silly. Micro-management is like a real word. You're allowed to use real words to describe your game. I'm a bit skeptical of the game, because I can't really understand how scouting and harassment make any sense, but it looks pretty cool. There's no need to be silly. Eh what are you talking about? If they don't know the difference between micro and macro and they are responsible for developing an RTS, I don't have very high hopes for them.
Well, the term micromanagment originates from managing a firms details and could very well be understood as "how you manage your economy". I'm not familiar how and whether the term is being used outside of starcraft in the RTS world. But knowing the term before starcraft, it did indeed not make too much sense in the beginning that you would call things like the queuing of singular units macromanagment, when it is actually just managing details.
Nevertheless, since Starcraft is the one and only real big RTS games currently, it would make senae to use the same words in the same sense
|
On June 13 2014 12:25 BisuDagger wrote:
Has anyone argued that RTS games have UMS maps that are incredibly fun to play? MOBA's have a few maps at most and limited game modes.
...and for reference I'm still talking RTS style UMS such as fastest map possible, starbow, macro/micro, monobattle, etc.
Have you seen Dota2 mods? There's even footman frenzy in development for dota. That UMS argument is totally irrelevant. It depends on the game not on the genre.
|
The essence of casual accessibility in RTS is defender's advantage.
Don't believe me? MOBAs are RTS with defender's advantage turned up to 11. Dota has high ground advantage, towers, and towers on the high ground combining both advantages. LoL has super-powered towers or turrets or whatever.
BW obviously had high ground advantage, and on pretty much every popular BW map the main was elevated to turn that into defender's advantage. WC3 didn't always have elevated mains, but your base and/or workers could always assist you in defense, whether it was militia, burrows, NE buildings, or ghouls. AoE I haven't played much of, but I believe you could send your workers into your main base to turn it into essentially a Planetary Fortress.
Now you might say, but Photon Overcharge and Force Fields suck, and they're defender's advantage! True, but one, FF is also an offensive spell, and two, both are bandaid fixes for one of Protoss' macro mechanics, warp gate, only giving an advantage to an offensive Protoss. This is as opposed to mules and injects which benefit both offensive and defensive players.
Want to make SC2 more casual friendly? Add some sort of high ground advantage that's not vision related (doesn't have to be an RNG miss chance) and remove warp gate. (add another protoss mechanic or buff chrono boost)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
