On January 31 2016 17:31 Topdoller wrote: People must think there is a bottomless pit of money to throw at this game.Its currently the most popular RTS game in the world, be happy and play the game.
I am sure half of the people who post on here don't even log into it to even play it, they are just never happy no matter what Blizzard does and just want to bitch to satisfy their own egos
The other way around for me sadly. I used to play this game daily. I played like a thousand games in the LotV beta. But at the moment I don't feel like playing at all. ZvZ is still such a waste of time that I don't want to queue as zerg at all, Terran still has no reactive playstyle in LotV and I have never enjoyed playing Protoss though I tried them the first time since 2013 during the beta. Gameplay is just nowhere near what I would enjoy, even ZvT and TvT feel much worse than before.
I don't know what I should do at this point constructively. I think everybody has told them about tankivacs a hundred times and there have been like a 100 threads how to fix Mech/the siege tank in a different way. You get David Kim coming in and saying, "he doesn't quite know where Mech suffers". Then you go out and give feedback. Then he doesn't respond anymore to it. Maybe Adepts were a bigger issue right now for him, but honestly, as a player I don't care about the Korean prolevel that much, if I just can't play in the ways I like to play. I want to have a fun game now, if I should play now.
And ZvZ early game cheeses have not been adressed in 5 years, I don't know why they would adress them now regardless how often I say they should. It doesn't help that David Kim said in an interview he likes about ZvZ that it's so explosive and that anything can happen at any point in the game. That's exactly what I would describe as bad and unstable gameplay, but he even embraces it...
On January 31 2016 16:08 WrathSCII wrote: So... no hope for Warcraft 4?
Don't listen to what JimmyJRaynor says, all he does is run around and declare RTS games dead forever
numbers don't lie. Sigaty ain't lying either. he was asked and said it'll be 10 years and maybe more. no one is committing a AAA level investment to the RTS genre.. including ATVI.
all i'm doing is watching RTS dev studios either fold up or put out low budget garbage. Except for Blizzard. LotV is the genre's swan song.
On January 31 2016 16:08 WrathSCII wrote: So... no hope for Warcraft 4?
Don't listen to what JimmyJRaynor says, all he does is run around and declare RTS games dead forever
numbers don't lie. Sigaty ain't lying either. he was asked and said it'll be 10 years and maybe more. no one is committing a AAA level investment to the RTS genre.. including ATVI.
all i'm doing is watching RTS dev studios either fold up or put out low budget garbage. Except for Blizzard. LotV is the genre's swang song.
Can you refer me to the source of the 10 year comment? All I found is that he thinks that SC2 will be alive for another 10 years.
On January 31 2016 16:08 WrathSCII wrote: So... no hope for Warcraft 4?
Don't listen to what JimmyJRaynor says, all he does is run around and declare RTS games dead forever
numbers don't lie. Sigaty ain't lying either. he was asked and said it'll be 10 years and maybe more. no one is committing a AAA level investment to the RTS genre.. including ATVI.
all i'm doing is watching RTS dev studios either fold up or put out low budget garbage. Except for Blizzard. LotV is the genre's swang song.
Can you refer me to the source of the 10 year comment?
it was the WCS major event before Blizzcon.. i think in Poland.
the event before ( GamesCom i think ) that Morten ( producer) was oblique and vague about WC4 so some fanboys went crazy hoping WC4 was on the way. I said, u need a guy who makes money decisions to comment, not the producer. Sigaty is the executive producer and he commented directly. Executive producers make decision with money and budgets. Producers do not. Sigaty > Morten.
On January 31 2016 16:08 WrathSCII wrote: So... no hope for Warcraft 4?
Don't listen to what JimmyJRaynor says, all he does is run around and declare RTS games dead forever
numbers don't lie. Sigaty ain't lying either. he was asked and said it'll be 10 years and maybe more. no one is committing a AAA level investment to the RTS genre.. including ATVI.
all i'm doing is watching RTS dev studios either fold up or put out low budget garbage. Except for Blizzard. LotV is the genre's swang song.
Can you refer me to the source of the 10 year comment?
it was the WCS major event before Blizzcon.. i think in Poland.
the event before ( GamesCom i think ) that Morten ( producer) was oblique and vague about WC4 so some fanboys went crazy hoping WC4 was on the way. I said, u need a guy who makes money decisions to comment not the producer. Sigaty is the executive producer and he commented directly. Executive producers make decision with money and budgets. Producers do not. Sigaty > Morten.
If you mean that one
While Blizzard has a number of competitive games, Chris describes StarCraft as the "super-elite" that he wants people to still be playing in a decade. Did that mean they don't expect to develop the follow-up, whatever form it may take, before ten years is up?
"I can’t answer that because honestly we don’t know. Is it possible we work on something that steps on the toes of StarCraft? Yes, but there’s no intention to do that today, which is why I think it’s so critical and important how we treat it and how we continue to improve it and make things better - that matters. I think [StarCraft] absolutely stands as an amazing experience to both celebrate the people that get to that level of skill and quality and also to be able to watch and see that. While it’s possible we would [replace that], I don’t see it happening."
I think it's a very vague comment with the main statement being: "we are going to support SC2 for quite some time and we believe in this game". Maybe it means no RTS game in the near future, but I doubt that. Much rather it could mean no RTS like Starcraft in the near future. Which for example Warcraft isn't. Any interpretation of that comment is highly speculative. Meanwhile we have this very specific comment:
"It’s very rewarding for us to hear that there’s demand out there for more RTS content in the Warcraft universe so once we’re done with Void I think we’ll get together as a team and talk about what would inspire us to work on next. There’s no question, though, that we’ll consider Warcraft, StarCraft, or even new ideas. Anything is possible."
On January 31 2016 17:31 Topdoller wrote: People must think there is a bottomless pit of money to throw at this game.Its currently the most popular RTS game in the world, be happy and play the game.
I am sure half of the people who post on here don't even log into it to even play it, they are just never happy no matter what Blizzard does and just want to bitch to satisfy their own egos
The other way around for me sadly. I used to play this game daily. I played like a thousand games in the LotV beta. But at the moment I don't feel like playing at all. ZvZ is still such a waste of time that I don't want to queue as zerg at all, Terran still has no reactive playstyle in LotV and I have never playing Protoss though I tried them the first time since 2013 during the beta. Gameplay is just nowhere near what I would enjoy, even ZvT and TvT feel much worse than before.
I don't know what I should do at this point constructively. I think everybody has told them about tankivacs a hundred times and there have been like a 100 threads how to fix Mech/the siege tank in a different way. You get David Kim coming in and saying, "he doesn't quite know where Mech suffers". Then you go out and give feedback. Then he doesn't respond anymore to it. Maybe Adepts were a bigger issue right now for him, but honestly, as a player I don't care about the Korean prolevel that much, if I just can't play in the ways I like to play. I want to have a fun game now, if I should play now.
And ZvZ early game cheeses have not been adressed in 5 years, I don't know why they would adress them now regardless how often I say they should. It doesn't help that David Kim said in an interview he likes about ZvZ that it's so explosive and that anything can happen at any point in the game. That's exactly what I would describe as bad and unstable gameplay, but he even embraces it...
You sound like you are burnt out on the game. Take a break from it maybe?
I played Forged Alliance Forever as well, it is a fantastic game too if a different type of way, have you tried it?
As for ZvZ it will alway be a mess, as there is no wall ins or sim city to create a stable game.Brood war was no different
On January 31 2016 16:08 WrathSCII wrote: So... no hope for Warcraft 4?
Don't listen to what JimmyJRaynor says, all he does is run around and declare RTS games dead forever
numbers don't lie. Sigaty ain't lying either. he was asked and said it'll be 10 years and maybe more. no one is committing a AAA level investment to the RTS genre.. including ATVI.
all i'm doing is watching RTS dev studios either fold up or put out low budget garbage. Except for Blizzard. LotV is the genre's swang song.
Can you refer me to the source of the 10 year comment?
it was the WCS major event before Blizzcon.. i think in Poland.
the event before ( GamesCom i think ) that Morten ( producer) was oblique and vague about WC4 so some fanboys went crazy hoping WC4 was on the way. I said, u need a guy who makes money decisions to comment not the producer. Sigaty is the executive producer and he commented directly. Executive producers make decision with money and budgets. Producers do not. Sigaty > Morten.
While Blizzard has a number of competitive games, Chris describes StarCraft as the "super-elite" that he wants people to still be playing in a decade. Did that mean they don't expect to develop the follow-up, whatever form it may take, before ten years is up?
"I can’t answer that because honestly we don’t know. Is it possible we work on something that steps on the toes of StarCraft? Yes, but there’s no intention to do that today, which is why I think it’s so critical and important how we treat it and how we continue to improve it and make things better - that matters. I think [StarCraft] absolutely stands as an amazing experience to both celebrate the people that get to that level of skill and quality and also to be able to watch and see that. While it’s possible we would [replace that], I don’t see it happening."
I think it's a very vague comment with the main statement being: "we are going to support SC2 for quite some time and we believe in this game". Maybe it means no RTS game in the near future, but I doubt that. Much rather it could mean no RTS like Starcraft in the near future. Which for example Warcraft isn't. Any interpretation of that comment is highly speculative. Meanwhile we have this very specific comment:
"It’s very rewarding for us to hear that there’s demand out there for more RTS content in the Warcraft universe so once we’re done with Void I think we’ll get together as a team and talk about what would inspire us to work on next. There’s no question, though, that we’ll consider Warcraft, StarCraft, or even new ideas. Anything is possible."
no that is not it. he did a bunch of interviews in Poland. he was asked spefically about WC4. His reply was "nothing will compete in SC2's space for 10 years."
if you have some interview where Blizzard says they're working on WC4 post it.
As it stands... Blizzard used to be constantly pumping out new RTS content. Then we went from 1999 to 2002 to make a full game.... then it was 7 years for the next full game.and now,.. it takes 2.5 years to pump out a $40 expansion using the same 5 year old engine.
so the trend is clear... less and less content spaced over more and more years.
On January 31 2016 18:32 Big J wrote: I think it's a very vague comment with the main statement being: "we are going to support SC2 for quite some time and we believe in this game". Maybe it means no RTS game in the near future, but I doubt that. Much rather it could mean no RTS like Starcraft in the near future. Which for example Warcraft isn't. Any interpretation of that comment is highly speculative. Meanwhile we have this very specific comment:
"It’s very rewarding for us to hear that there’s demand out there for more RTS content in the Warcraft universe so once we’re done with Void I think we’ll get together as a team and talk about what would inspire us to work on next. There’s no question, though, that we’ll consider Warcraft, StarCraft, or even new ideas. Anything is possible."
this is pure unadulterated bullshit. Morten is just a producer.. .as i've already said. i covered that in my previous post. He makes no money decisions. He is a producer. Sigaty is the executive producer for BOTH HotS and Starcraft2.
Chris describes StarCraft as the "super-elite" that he wants people to still be playing in a decade. Did that mean they don't expect to develop the follow-up, whatever form it may take, before ten years is up?
"I can’t answer that because honestly we don’t know. Is it possible we work on something that steps on the toes of StarCraft? Yes, but there’s no intention to do that today, which is why I think it’s so critical and important how we treat it and how we continue to improve it and make things better - that matters. I think [StarCraft] absolutely stands as an amazing experience to both celebrate the people that get to that level of skill and quality and also to be able to watch and see that. While it’s possible we would [replace that], I don’t see it happening."
he got more specific with another interviewer who specifically mentioned WC4 during a stand-up interview.
once again, for the umpteenth time.
Sigaty > Morten. Sigaty is a Blizzard lifer. Morten joined when Victory Games was mothballed... another disappearing RTS studio.
Reading between the lines Sigaty makes it crystal clear there is no way ATVI is investing any cash in a new engine to support a new RTS game.
I agree with Jimmy, Morten is kinda low on the totem pole. He'd been only been with Blizzard for like a year? Not sure if I buy into the idea Blizzard is going to have 50-100 people or whoever the core of the SC2 is, working on SC2 full-time for the next 10 years (then again I'd imagine they'd switch between HOTS and SC2). I don't know if ATVI suit politics really come into play.
What's more believable? They have the entire SC2 team work on Hats/missions for the next 10 years in SC2, or they do something productive like start working on a SC3 or WC4. Hell, if they really gave a shit, they could just build off SC2's engine.
That being said, I think it would be the most amazing shit in the world if we had a SC2/WC4 be relevant in the competitive scene, like the mid-to-late 2000s where tournaments ran BW and WC3.
it takes 2.5 years to pump out a $40 expansion using the same 5 year old engine.
they'll slowly pull people off of the game and move them to projects producing more revenue that have more profit potential. same as they do for every other game. Will a skeleton staff still keep the ladder and BNet going? yes, of course.
there is no way LotV made even $0.1 Billion; ATVI counts revenue in billions not millions.
I have an idea lets change all the maps to completely horrible maps. This way everybody of the same race will veto the map that is awful for there race. this will create a more blanced game of play because if u don't wat t cr8 zerg then you can just veto zerg maps andu never have to facthem sry my English mbad it early dk is the best keep pumping shitty maps into the sence since they play better for some pthat like to actually cereate unique games
He talks about "new content and features" but doesn't say what kind of new content or features... In fact all he's talked about for a while now is balance and korean pro feedback.
Are these magical new features the new co-op stuff? Like why would this even concern David Kim...
Then goes on a rant about how negative feedback doesn't help their team when there's very little to give positive feedback on... Maybe if he talked about those new features he's got lined up it would help...
How can apparently grown up people employed at a respectable company be such whiny bitches? The last couple of paragraphs are really unbelievably childish. The whole notion of "constructive criticism" is just bullshit speak for "no, no, no, you aren't gonna say mean things about me or my mom will show you". If you can't handle people not treating you like a princess, get a job cutting trees in remote forests, not making stuff to be directly sold to real human customers.
On January 31 2016 23:30 opisska wrote: How can apparently grown up people employed at a respectable company be such whiny bitches? The last couple of paragraphs are really unbelievably childish. The whole notion of "constructive criticism" is just bullshit speak for "no, no, no, you aren't gonna say mean things about me or my mom will show you". If you can't handle people not treating you like a princess, get a job cutting trees in remote forests, not making stuff to be directly sold to real human customers.
And do you think you're behaving well? If they were your colleagues, are these the words you would write in your e-mail to them? You have more freedom to behave how you want when posting on this forum than they have at their jobs and yet you display even worse behavior than them.
On January 31 2016 23:30 opisska wrote: How can apparently grown up people employed at a respectable company be such whiny bitches? The last couple of paragraphs are really unbelievably childish. The whole notion of "constructive criticism" is just bullshit speak for "no, no, no, you aren't gonna say mean things about me or my mom will show you". If you can't handle people not treating you like a princess, get a job cutting trees in remote forests, not making stuff to be directly sold to real human customers.
And do you think you're behaving well? If they were your colleagues, are these the words you would write in your e-mail to them? You have more freedom to behave how you want when posting on this forum than they have at their jobs and yet you display even worse behavior than them.
First of all, the big difference is that I am not paid for it. Second, yes, if my colleagues acted like that, I would have told them that they are being stupid. If someone tells me they only wanted to hear "constructive criticism" or something along those lines, I don't give such people any feedback at all, because it's a waste of time working with this mentality. If I am working on something and I ask you for on opinion, I want to hear the absolutely hardest and most honest possible opinion that you have. I am not saying that I am going to ditch everything because one person tells me it's stupid, but I sure as hell want to know what negative things people think and why, because that's the most efficient way to improve. Patting each other on the back is not gonna make anything better.
I don't get how people get confused about this "constructive criticism" thing. It's not that DK asks for people just to agree with all of their decisions. Wtf
On February 01 2016 00:00 Penev wrote: I don't get how people get confused about this "constructive criticism" thing. It's not that DK asks for people just to agree with all of their decisions. Wtf
Because it's commonly used as a free pass to choose which kind of feedback you like and which you don't. Also, you might be surprised, but there are still people (and I know at least some besides me) who care about contents more than about form when it comes to communication.
On February 01 2016 00:00 Penev wrote: I don't get how people get confused about this "constructive criticism" thing. It's not that DK asks for people just to agree with all of their decisions. Wtf
Honestly, the community response have been REALLY reasonable.
There are only maybe 4% of the posts shitting on the devs/DK with one liner which they should learn to avoid reading anyways.
There have been PLENTY of posts with well thought out arguments like Depth of Micro out there.
But DK and team instead choose to avoid those posts and focus on the minority ones.
At this point, they are just making excuses to keep the community happy because they know that they got the money already.
On February 01 2016 00:00 Penev wrote: I don't get how people get confused about this "constructive criticism" thing. It's not that DK asks for people just to agree with all of their decisions. Wtf
Because it's commonly used as a free pass to choose which kind of feedback you like and which you don't. Also, you might be surprised, but there are still people (and I know at least some besides me) who care about contents more than about form when it comes to communication.
EPT
