EPTvoid rays, void rays, gotta mass up myyyyyy vooiiiid raays.
David Kim interview @ DH Montreal: What's the end game for…
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
TheLordofAwesome
Korea (South)2656 Posts
void rays, void rays, gotta mass up myyyyyy vooiiiid raays. | ||
|
sc2chronic
United States777 Posts
On August 19 2016 06:04 NewSunshine wrote: I might not like the answers completely, but I liked the questions a lot. Nice interview. Exactly how I feel. Just because ur passionate about something doesn't make you good at it. He's a typical CEO type who thinks he knows what's best and does something just to exercise his power. 4 teenagers balancing StarBow blows his idea of a competent design team out of the water. Reminds me of the classic Skinner mindset: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/03RboXk.png) But what can we do? We are all consumers of his product and in the end he gets the last word. Lucky kid. | ||
|
Aegwynn
Italy460 Posts
On August 19 2016 08:14 TheLordofAwesome wrote: My favorite part is where he confirms that official stats say that the favorite unit of bronze/silver players is the VOID RAY! void rays, void rays, gotta mass up myyyyyy vooiiiid raays. yeah, and the following is even better; "engagement started, press one button, everything powers up, and I can kill everything" | ||
|
MoonyD
Australia191 Posts
| ||
|
Jett.Jack.Alvir
Canada2250 Posts
On August 19 2016 08:10 ROOTFayth wrote: "I have an example when new designers come in and they say like “it’s only about the data, not what people think.” When they say that, my extreme example is “say the numbers are 50/50 but everyone thinks the balance sucks right now—is that a good place to be in?” Obviously not, right? So my response to that is, yeah, then the game’s not balanced." this is so wrong though, the people with negative feedbacks will speak a lot more and much louder than people who feel the game is ok I don't think the negative feedback is the problem. I think its about Blizzard filtering out the noise and poor feedback so they can get to the productive feedback. Sometimes, the signal to noise ratio can be so high Blizzard might miss an important piece of information. | ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
| ||
|
imre
France9263 Posts
On August 19 2016 09:33 MoonyD wrote: When are these new patch changes coming into effect? Would be nice if Blizzard implemented them after the finals of SSL and GSL. Kind of sucks for the pro-gamers to have to adapt in the middle of a tournament and especially near the end of it. After blizzcon. Basically it's an offseason patch which is the best timing possible for something that huge. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17598 Posts
On August 19 2016 09:46 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote: I don't think the negative feedback is the problem. I think its about Blizzard filtering out the noise and poor feedback so they can get to the productive feedback. Sometimes, the signal to noise ratio can be so high Blizzard might miss an important piece of information. i'd say the signal to noise ratio is low and also various competing interests make it tough. its hard to make the game balanced at the top level and fun at 5 or 10 other levels of play. | ||
lichter
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On August 19 2016 09:46 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote: I don't think the negative feedback is the problem. I think its about Blizzard filtering out the noise and poor feedback so they can get to the productive feedback. Sometimes, the signal to noise ratio can be so high Blizzard might miss an important piece of information. this is what the summits are presumably for | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2657 Posts
On August 19 2016 08:10 ROOTFayth wrote: "I have an example when new designers come in and they say like “it’s only about the data, not what people think.” When they say that, my extreme example is “say the numbers are 50/50 but everyone thinks the balance sucks right now—is that a good place to be in?” Obviously not, right? So my response to that is, yeah, then the game’s not balanced." this is so wrong though, the people with negative feedbacks will speak a lot more and much louder than people who feel the game is ok Maybe but the idea is good. During the broodlord/infestor era PvZ was rather balanced because of immortal/sentry, but was that good? Just because the data shows a MU is balanced doesn't means the game is in a good state. | ||
|
bjornkavist
Canada1235 Posts
| ||
|
Noocta
France12578 Posts
Executives are tired of putting ressources into starcraft 2 and want as little to do with it as possible once it's in this "finished state" they keep talking about so they can developp something else. | ||
|
Thouhastmail
Korea (North)876 Posts
It’s a very ironic situation where the West is asking for things to be more like Brood War while the Koreans say that the game is too hard. Afaik, both Koreans and Westerners want the game to be like BW; the thing is, Koreans consider that BW is 'uncomfortable but does not requires much micro to play', while Westerners think that BW requires more micro. | ||
|
Darkn3ssFallz
Australia114 Posts
On August 19 2016 06:39 JimmyJRaynor wrote: seriously though, i want a game where 1 player can be more of a macro player and lean on that to win at the top level and another player can have sloppy macro but amazing micro and win at the top level by leaning on his micro strengths. I want hugely divergent styles all having a legit shot to win at the top level. At the top level players there are a lot of players that can do both. IMO multitasking is what's more important right now. That said MyuNgSiK is the perfect example of someone with terrible macro but amazing strategy/micro. sOs was like that for a period but he's now solid all around. As for players who are more macro oriented - any zerg LUL. Solar, Rogue and Dark have some sick micro though. There was another zerg who'd recently impressed me with their fungal/bile usage though. I think it might have been Dark but the confidence to drop the biles as soon as you throw out the fungal (before it connects) is something few zergs currently do. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
Obviously i have no source or anything, but it imo would make more sense this way? Also wanting the game to be more like bw doesn't necessarly include the mechanical limitations and thus "fighting the ui", which is why i think that question is phramed in a quite dishonest way tbh  | ||
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
Wasn't harassement the coolest thing in the game??? More seriously, useless PR is useless. The guy is simply stating stuff that will make him look good, or saying he doesn't know. His denial that there's so much BS abilities in the game is revolting though | ||
|
Bareleon
371 Posts
I feel like the interviewer should of asked DK if there were any major changes coming to protoss for players like Bisu :p | ||
|
dgwow
Canada1024 Posts
-Test map matchmaking -Achievements for playing test maps -A box where players can write feedback in game after every match. | ||
|
MifuneKinski
United States42 Posts
| ||
|
RKC
2848 Posts
On August 19 2016 11:29 The_Red_Viper wrote: I would assume that koreans are more talking about the general pace of sc2, it's so quick, everything dies fast, it snowballs pretty hard, etc when they talk about "hard to play". Obviously i have no source or anything, but it imo would make more sense this way? Also wanting the game to be more like bw doesn't necessarly include the mechanical limitations and thus "fighting the ui", which is why i think that question is phramed in a quite dishonest way tbh Things can get lost in translation, and what Koreans mean by 'hard' may not be what we English-speakers understand as 'hard' in the literal sense. Maybe 'hard' here means 'hard to juggle so many things at once, especially when dropping a single ball means an auto-loss'. The game is too punishing and volatile. It's 'hard' to practice and master a game where the basic skills needed are so high (i.e. juggling 10 balls at minimum). Whereas an 'easy' game is where you only start with 3 balls, and the goal is to juggle as fast and long as possible (and maybe score points on finesse, almost like artistic juggling). It may be easy to pick up the game, but at competitive levels, it becomes difficult to out-juggle your opponent. And I feel that's the difference between SC2 and BW. SC2 has too many balls, BW has less. SC2 games end fast and anti-climatically because it forces so many required actions on the players, hence likely for a player to drop a ball within the first minute. But BW can go on and on, back and forth, because the game takes on more depth as it stretches on. Not sure if I'm making sense with the analogy. | ||
| ||
