|
On August 18 2014 23:45 meshfusion wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2014 23:24 FeyFey wrote:
even news about a therapist can go off topic like crazy and actually become interesting. Especially if uninformed that don't want to be informed face people that love to lecture and spread knowledge. And I know I belong to either on group most of the time.
Also people need a place where they can write down their blizzard hate. And Blizzard people threads are the thing for it. I mean there is even a d3 hate post in here lol. well, but the news of a new therapist would never be front page on ESPN or something like that, while on TL it happened to be the case (in the starcraft counter-part). I am not saying that a news about one couldn't become interesting, but I feel that this is totally misleading, there is a title in the front page saying that this guy is now "leading SC2" (not correct) and there's 10 pages of people debating how he could change or effect the game (also not correct) and then I realized that even a site like TL has actually very little clue about game development (and seems like, game development terminology). lol about the d3 hate post))) Show nested quote +On August 18 2014 23:31 JustPassingBy wrote:On August 18 2014 23:09 meshfusion wrote:
I still think that the fact that this is a news on the TL frontpage shows how little people actually know about game development. This guy is a producer and as such, he has no role in the design nor direction of the game.
There's 10 pages of posts of people wondering, debating about it and even a poll about this dude's addition to the team and how it may affect starcraft's future.
It's like if a football team gets a new injury/therapy guy for the matches and it goes front page and people start debating whether or not now manchester united will have tactical changes in the upcoming games What does a producer do then? A producer in a game production (and in this case, at Blizzard) is someone that deals with "production tasks" that have nothing to do with in game, design or balance. "Production" is the word used to indicate things like scheduling, managing, etc. in a game studio there are positions like "associate producer" for people that are starting out, and usually those have tasks like take notes during meetings, help coordinate things, send emails and reminders, then there's the producer who does the same but with less trivial tasks and then there's lead or senior producers who simply coordinate more producers, hire new ones and schedule/organize things from a bit of a higher up position rather than as the last spot of the food chain. Being a "producer" in games doesn't mean you actually ""work"" on the game, you are there as a support member of the actual developing team. The producers that actually do have powers are the ones in the live action and feature animation movies and in some cases, in the VFX shops, but not in games. I hope that helps clarify why this topic should have not existed in the first place.
Hm, given his former job at CnC and that these titles often just mean what you are in charge off, not that you cannot do something else as well, I could see him having some influence on game features too.
Like, DK has been the balance chief. But I think he has also openly talked about his involvment in unit design. Similarily, DB was the lead designer, but he was also the guy who brought us a lot of information about balance changes.
I could see Morten being a coordinator, but also someone who sits in gameplay discussions and brings input from his former design experience or plainly new ideas.
|
On August 18 2014 23:45 meshfusion wrote:
Being a "producer" in games doesn't mean you actually ""work"" on the game, you are there as a support member of the actual developing team. The producers that actually do have powers are the ones in the live action and feature animation movies and in some cases, in the VFX shops, but not in games.
I hope that helps clarify why this topic should have not existed in the first place.
If the producers role is entirely one of project manager than its rather odd that they'd seek out someone from a cancelled RTS. In many cases they're responsible for ensuring the direction of the project meets its intended goals in addition to simply assuring delivery.
As such there is scope for some impact on mechanics if improved gameplay, fun and esportyness is a stated goal of the project from effectively managing feedback and testing with respect to design. It feels like both sides of that coin are currently DK, which probably isn't an ideal model.
|
On August 17 2014 13:12 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2014 08:03 Existor wrote:On August 17 2014 07:42 halfaspider wrote:
RA3 was a great game IMO. Anybody who thinks it was shit probably didn't give it very much time. Agree. This great game just dead without support and patches. I never played it, but I watched some competitive matches and it really looked fun I thought.
RA3 was pretty damn good, and relatively balanced near the end of it's lifespan. Just didn't have the $$$ backing.
|
On August 19 2014 06:54 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2014 13:12 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On August 17 2014 08:03 Existor wrote:On August 17 2014 07:42 halfaspider wrote:
RA3 was a great game IMO. Anybody who thinks it was shit probably didn't give it very much time. Agree. This great game just dead without support and patches. I never played it, but I watched some competitive matches and it really looked fun I thought. RA3 was pretty damn good, and relatively balanced near the end of it's lifespan. Just didn't have the $$$ backing.
Yup RA3 was fun, some of the ideas in the RA universe like planes with limited ammo, running over infantry (and tanks), the hero infantry units, garrisons and some other stuff was great and could be great in sc2 I think.
Some other stuff sucked though, especially the mcv sell tactic which was quite good but not fun and the limitedness of just 1 resource. RA was basically beelining towards some strategy typically as there isn't really a equivalent to gas that keeps stuff back, whereas in sc2 teching is constrained by gas and time requirements.
|
On August 16 2014 19:08 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2014 18:54 Faust852 wrote:
I feel like sc2 is close to perfect, the only true anoyings things are how laggy and buggy the hub is, and the hackers. For the rest I'm pretty happy. To have this kind of opinion is fine, but it's so fucking stupid to call other peoples posts and opinions as trolls or haters or whatever just because they don't think the game is all wonderful. Show nested quote +On August 16 2014 08:52 Tresher wrote:
Man TL turned into a massive trollfest. I asked why people say "Cant get any worse". Two people after me make a post: "Cant get any worse"...
With people being in super dick mode like this, this forum is slowly turning into Bnet forums. Do people really have this much fun annoying other users? Sometimes I hate the Internet. People don't criticize the game to annoy you, they don't even care about you. Some people think the game is close to perfect, others that it's in a poor state. Neither of them is trolling.
That's the internet, though. People accusing others of being trolls in order to insult and marginalize the opinions of others. I don't like what you have to say, or magically find the tone of it offensive? TROLL! It's the most rampant word used on the internet vs anyone who has a different opinion and isn't being supplicating.
On August 16 2014 18:44 Timmsh wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2014 09:50 Ben... wrote:On August 16 2014 09:25 404AlphaSquad wrote:On August 16 2014 08:50 Prog455 wrote:On August 16 2014 07:41 BisuDagger wrote:
SC2 can't get worse. This is good news. that is all dandy, but anyone who have played this game since release will agree, that SC2 in its current form is no where near as bad as it has been. I disagree sc2 was in a better state before hots. Hell I even liked beta more than the stage the game is in now. and I have played since WOL Beta. Indeed. I would put pre-Queen Patch Wings of Liberty up as the pinnacle of SC2 so far. Like say April 2012 Wings of Liberty. The matchups were all relatively balanced and at the same time, all of the matchups were at least somewhat interesting if not significantly more interesting than they currently are. TvZ was about as good as it could get, PvZ was interesting, PvT was rather good and quite entertaining, and the mirror matchups were either the same or better than they currently. Marine/tank or mech vs. bio TvT on the maps of the time was a ton of fun to watch. I think you guys only remember the good stuff, and forget about the bad. Remember PvP? Colossis only and no way of expanding without getting hit by a 4 gate. Remember the 1 1 1 build in TvP? That was not to be called 'interesting'. Hell, even the msc which every terran hates, is better than the constant stupid forcefields in PvT (which are now almost gone in early game). I also think the reaper is a GREAT improvement in HOTS, you have ways of scouting without using a scan. And the widow mine gives a new dimension in TvZ. So overall, if you want to compare the two era's, it's just a matter of focus and it's very hard to compare because the game play itself was not truly developed yet in WOL.
There's a lot of gameplay About SC2 HotS that I think we can call uninteresting. Overcharge, Swarm host, oracle, etc.
I mean, look at the fact that they added the oracle, giving Protoss two early game harass options MSC, oracle, in addition to all the all ins. What can Zerg or Terran do early game vs T and/or Z/P respectively, apart from cheeses? It's a tiny sacrifice for Protoss to get an oracle that also delays Terran macro by the threat alone forcing large resource deviation. T and Z have no such similar openings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
