| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
lestye
United States4209 Posts
On March 20 2016 00:11 iamho wrote: Co-op is great but I wish they would speed up the rate of release on new missions. Yeah, it's going to be FOUR months in between missions, and it probably sucks if its only 1 new mission. Hopefully they'll put more resources into it if its so popular. But there also hasnt been any new ladder maps so I don't they're playing favorites :-P | ||
|
oGoZenob
France1503 Posts
| ||
|
MyrionSC
Denmark140 Posts
On March 20 2016 04:15 lestye wrote: Yeah, it's going to be FOUR months in between missions, and it probably sucks if its only 1 new mission. Hopefully they'll put more resources into it if its so popular. But there also hasnt been any new ladder maps so I don't they're playing favorites :-P It is mission packs, so probably 6-7? | ||
|
lestye
United States4209 Posts
I was referring to Co-Op. | ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
On March 20 2016 05:02 oGoZenob wrote: I read all of that before figuring out that PvP wasnt protoss vs protoss Real talk: so did I. I wouldn't mind them at least trying to update/improve SC2 as much as they can do, and updating the PvP system, and everything's a good way to begin doing it. | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
On March 19 2016 23:09 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Morten views balancing multiplayer as an almost impossible task. Contrast that with many of the junior game designers in various forums acting like they can solve everything in 4 sentences. Balancing multi-player is really easy if your development team is willing to make changes to the live game and iterate upon them, regardless of whether they work out on the first go round. We've seen with SC2, blizzard makes very few to no changes, and even says they will make changes and then 100% backtracks and gets scared of putting them into the game and ends up changing nothing. I mean, how can you expect to balance multi-player or keep the game fresh if you take 1-2 months to announce a change, 2-3 months after that announcing that you might put it on a test map, 1-2 months later saying you agree with players feedback, and then 1 month later you decide you're actually going to do none of that because you love bio too much and want to keep the tankivac. Viewership for SC2 was going up near the start of LOTV when people saw there were changes to the game, fun units, new things to play with, the metagame was changing and new. Viewership is tanking to hell right now because the userbase is getting tired of being yanked left and right about changes, and then not getting any patches/changes at all (in terms of balance/gameplay). I mean, come on. There's 0% mech games now at pro level, and they have killed mech on ladder as well which says a lot in itself. Like...you have to almost have purposely tried to have killed strategic diversity in SC2 to make mech worse than it was in HOTS/WOL when for 5 yrs people have been asking and pleading for viable mech play and even offering advice to blizzard to make it viable. Multi-player is not difficult to balance - it's time consuming to balance. And blizzard have a proven track record they won't put in the time to put out patches and see what happens in terms of multi-player balance. They are too set in stone thinking if they change up the game they'll "kill the game" for the top 5 korean players, when in fact they're killing the game by not doing anything at all. | ||
|
y0su
Finland7871 Posts
The failed arcade system and ZERO attention to 2v2 (and up) throughout SC2s life are IMO the biggest areas where blizzard has completely missed the mark. | ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
On March 20 2016 05:54 y0su wrote: Is playing with friends more popular than alone? Tonight at 10. The failed arcade system and ZERO attention to 2v2 (and up) throughout SC2s life are IMO the biggest areas where blizzard has completely missed the mark. I don't know what I wanna see 2v2 become. It'd be interesting if that was balanced separately from 1v1s. Probably a load of time would be spent on it though, but they do have a larger team now. | ||
|
FFW_Rude
France10201 Posts
On March 20 2016 05:48 avilo wrote: Balancing multi-player is really easy if your development team is willing to make changes to the live game and iterate upon them, regardless of whether they work out on the first go round. We've seen with SC2, blizzard makes very few to no changes, and even says they will make changes and then 100% backtracks and gets scared of putting them into the game and ends up changing nothing. I mean, how can you expect to balance multi-player or keep the game fresh if you take 1-2 months to announce a change, 2-3 months after that announcing that you might put it on a test map, 1-2 months later saying you agree with players feedback, and then 1 month later you decide you're actually going to do none of that because you love bio too much and want to keep the tankivac. Viewership for SC2 was going up near the start of LOTV when people saw there were changes to the game, fun units, new things to play with, the metagame was changing and new. Viewership is tanking to hell right now because the userbase is getting tired of being yanked left and right about changes, and then not getting any patches/changes at all (in terms of balance/gameplay). I mean, come on. There's 0% mech games now at pro level, and they have killed mech on ladder as well which says a lot in itself. Like...you have to almost have purposely tried to have killed strategic diversity in SC2 to make mech worse than it was in HOTS/WOL when for 5 yrs people have been asking and pleading for viable mech play and even offering advice to blizzard to make it viable. Multi-player is not difficult to balance - it's time consuming to balance. And blizzard have a proven track record they won't put in the time to put out patches and see what happens in terms of multi-player balance. They are too set in stone thinking if they change up the game they'll "kill the game" for the top 5 korean players, when in fact they're killing the game by not doing anything at all. I stopped reading at : "Balancing multi-player is really easy". | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On March 20 2016 06:09 FFW_Rude wrote: I stopped reading at : "Balancing multi-player is really easy". Balancing is really easy though, making good design decisions is hard. | ||
|
HewTheTitan
Canada331 Posts
| ||
|
HewTheTitan
Canada331 Posts
Wait, wut | ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
| ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On March 19 2016 13:36 JimmyJRaynor wrote: fascinating to see how polarized the mulitplayer community was leading up to the launch of the game about changes to macromechanics and we think our compromised approach was the correct response. lots of debate about the 12 worker start during beta. not much negative feedback after launch about this. Really...? Compromised approach was the correct response? Neither side has been happy with the "compromise"! And the last sentence.... I personally think it's the economic growth being out of control rather than the 12 worker start... but for them to actually claim there has not been much negative feedback...? I've seen so many people make that complaint, even if I don't agree with it, I don't know how they can claim there was not much negative feedback... | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
y0su
Finland7871 Posts
On March 20 2016 06:28 Spyridon wrote: Really...? Compromised approach was the correct response? Neither side has been happy with the "compromise"! And the last sentence.... I personally think it's the economic growth being out of control rather than the 12 worker start... but for them to actually claim there has not been much negative feedback...? I've seen so many people make that complaint, even if I don't agree with it, I don't know how they can claim there was not much negative feedback... I don't recall much complaining after launch. (there was definitely a lot of complaint during beta, especially camps that wanted to test DH or something) | ||
|
lestye
United States4209 Posts
On March 20 2016 06:14 404AlphaSquad wrote: Balancing is really easy though, making good design decisions is hard. Balancing CAN be easy. Balancing 3 asymmetrical races with varying units and playstyles having viablity, impact, in early-mid-late game, across a variety of maps with differentiating features while having the game stay fun and strategically interesting, is incredibly hard. | ||
|
jpg06051992
United States580 Posts
I think instead of being open to new units, every 12 months on the dot there should be a balance test map that tests more radical changes (within reason obviously) to units that don't see much use and trying to make sure that all units end up as at least semi viable, this will contribute dividends to the games longevity. One more thing I desperately wish was on the table, is for Blizzard to borderline surrender their map making entirely and foster the growth of the community maps like times 10 because yea, we all know that community maps >>>>>>> Blizzard maps. We've gotten the best maps we've ever had almost exclusively from the community and not Blizzard. Not saying Blizzard has never cranked out a good map, but our guys on the non company end have that real passion that makes sexy maps that stand the test of times. Would anyone really complained if they did added some of the more balanced old school maps in? I wouldn't, Overgrowth was awesome, even if it was small. Other then that, awesome news, especially for ladder revamps, tournaments are awesome and was totally a step in the right direction, the leagues seem distributed nicely. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
| ||
|
lestye
United States4209 Posts
On March 20 2016 07:19 andrewlt wrote: Are people really surprised that coop is more popular than pvp? Pvpers are louder but coop and solo players are the majority. Always been, always will be. Way too often, I get a feeling of a huge disconnect between the community and the developers. This is just them sugarcoating that fact by making it appear they were surprised too. I think its more like people are surprised of how long co-op has been more popular than co-op. The fact that more people came back to the game for Kerax, than the launch of LOTV, is awesome news. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
WardiTV Weekly
RSL Revival
RSL Revival
Bombastic Starleague
Kung Fu Cup
OSC
CrankTV Team League
Bombastic Starleague
Replay Cast
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
