|
On November 29 2016 02:36 Raneth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 28 2016 19:24 lestye wrote:On November 28 2016 19:13 BlueStar wrote:On November 28 2016 03:48 chocomaro wrote:
Every month or two there's a balance change.
And significant changes are often enough that it puts off people like me who feels like "welp gotta learn a new way to play the game again".
I started telling myself a few years back "when the patching is stabilized and not so frequent i'll REALLY get into it".
That never stopped, and it's just annoying that they're trying to make every unit in the game used. ^ this The reverse is even worse imo. Having to deal with really bad design that doesn't work itself out, refusing to patch, got us into some terrible times in WoL. No we didnt. The meta was never allowed to settle. Whenever a strategy came to prominence it was patched out after no more than a month. The balance cries that fuelled the patching lead to a game where it was almost impossible to generate interesting spectator narratives around champions because as soon as anyone started dominating, their build orders got hit with the nerf bat. In my opinion that is the main reason for the loss of interest in the competitive scene. How can you root for your favourite player when he's bouncing between winning tournaments and being relegated after a month of patches?
What? Do you even remember how long that entire era was ? It was allowed to settle, and we got was something completely awful.
|
There really isn't tangible scene aka tournaments next year?
Everything is just "most likely some tournament will happen in DH or somewhere else."
Where did the WCS system go?
|
On November 29 2016 02:59 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 01:48 Little-Chimp wrote:
The OP is decent but these comments lol. So many shit tier opinions it's hard to know where to start.
- don't blame UMS. It's 2016 and there are F2P games everywhere and full AAA games for 2 bucks on steam. The arcade doesn't matter
- patches every month has it's positives but you'll never have a savior, bisu or jaedong meta changing moment shifting the patches every month.
- melee at it's most alive is not as alive as starcraft in its graveyard. I have to give its community credit though for having such a great and positive scene playing through dolphin and LAN while SC2 players are constantly shitting themselves for not being the biggest esport of all time anymore while still retaining 200k players on a regular basis I don't know about "shit tier opinions", but yours is mostly crap. - While there are free to play games and games for 2 bucks on Steam, Arcade matters and it keeps the game fresh for those people who are casual players and cannot be bothered to be competitive. It's how DotA/LoL came. It was a UMS map in WarCraft. I'm guessing if mods count, you could also argue that's how Counter-Strike came from Half-Life as well.
Your opinion is crap. My opinion is right. I'm glad we're having such a productive discussion here.
There is a greater diversity in games now, DotA and LoL came before SC2 so I don't see what that has to do with anything. Why would you play a Half Life mod if someone released a full game that does the same thing but better?
On November 29 2016 03:02 Ryndika wrote:
There really isn't tangible scene aka tournaments next year?
Everything is just "most likely some tournament will happen in DH or somewhere else."
Where did the WCS system go?
Nowhere, WCS is still around next year. In fact we've already started the first tournament for it with IEM Gyeonggi qualifiers. They need to announce details but it is obviously happening.
|
On November 29 2016 02:59 Shield wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 01:48 Little-Chimp wrote:
The OP is decent but these comments lol. So many shit tier opinions it's hard to know where to start.
- don't blame UMS. It's 2016 and there are F2P games everywhere and full AAA games for 2 bucks on steam. The arcade doesn't matter
- patches every month has it's positives but you'll never have a savior, bisu or jaedong meta changing moment shifting the patches every month.
- melee at it's most alive is not as alive as starcraft in its graveyard. I have to give its community credit though for having such a great and positive scene playing through dolphin and LAN while SC2 players are constantly shitting themselves for not being the biggest esport of all time anymore while still retaining 200k players on a regular basis I don't know about "shit tier opinions", but yours is mostly crap. - While there are free to play games and games for 2 bucks on Steam, Arcade matters and it keeps the game fresh for those people who are casual players and cannot be bothered to be competitive. It's how DotA/LoL came. It was a UMS map in WarCraft. I'm guessing if mods count, you could also argue that's how Counter-Strike came from Half-Life as well. - It's true Blizzard patched game too quickly at some points, but there were times when they let meta game develop. For instance, 200/200 at 12 min by Stephano was figured out at some point. The problem really is, as other people have pointed out already, if you leave meta unchanged for too long, you'll make people quit. How do you define how long should meta game last before a balance patch? There's no fast and hard rule about this. One of the reasons it worked for Brood War is because Blizzard stopped patching it after some time, so you're left with balancing maps or coming up with build orders. I doubt it was because Blizzard employees were so smart that figured out balance patches will never be needed.
I'm aware of where dota and CS came from, but I don't see how this matters. Again, it's 2016, not 2003. UMS in warcraft 3 and brood war was insanely popular because it was a large source of free and fun mini games. Back then these games were in competition with what, flash games?
UMS now competes with steam, humble bundles, a zillion phone games, etc. UMS will never save sc2. I agree that it is a neat tool for an up and coming game dev to maybe try and create something in though.
|
France1919 Posts
10/10 vid, I agree with everything.
Now Firecake gogo redo it in english.  =
|
On November 29 2016 03:15 Little-Chimp wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 02:59 Shield wrote:On November 29 2016 01:48 Little-Chimp wrote:
The OP is decent but these comments lol. So many shit tier opinions it's hard to know where to start.
- don't blame UMS. It's 2016 and there are F2P games everywhere and full AAA games for 2 bucks on steam. The arcade doesn't matter
- patches every month has it's positives but you'll never have a savior, bisu or jaedong meta changing moment shifting the patches every month.
- melee at it's most alive is not as alive as starcraft in its graveyard. I have to give its community credit though for having such a great and positive scene playing through dolphin and LAN while SC2 players are constantly shitting themselves for not being the biggest esport of all time anymore while still retaining 200k players on a regular basis I don't know about "shit tier opinions", but yours is mostly crap. - While there are free to play games and games for 2 bucks on Steam, Arcade matters and it keeps the game fresh for those people who are casual players and cannot be bothered to be competitive. It's how DotA/LoL came. It was a UMS map in WarCraft. I'm guessing if mods count, you could also argue that's how Counter-Strike came from Half-Life as well. - It's true Blizzard patched game too quickly at some points, but there were times when they let meta game develop. For instance, 200/200 at 12 min by Stephano was figured out at some point. The problem really is, as other people have pointed out already, if you leave meta unchanged for too long, you'll make people quit. How do you define how long should meta game last before a balance patch? There's no fast and hard rule about this. One of the reasons it worked for Brood War is because Blizzard stopped patching it after some time, so you're left with balancing maps or coming up with build orders. I doubt it was because Blizzard employees were so smart that figured out balance patches will never be needed. I'm aware of where dota and CS came from, but I don't see how this matters. Again, it's 2016, not 2003. UMS in warcraft 3 and brood war was insanely popular because it was a large source of free and fun mini games. Back then these games were in competition with what, flash games? UMS now competes with steam, humble bundles, a zillion phone games, etc. UMS will never save sc2. I agree that it is a neat tool for an up and coming game dev to maybe try and create something in though.
Not to mention paid & free, big content patches of games people already own.
Unless a mod brings a completely new experience that no other game can replicate, I don't think we'll see that kind of big UMS scene. The last real big one was DayZ.
But I digress, I think the above is ultimately the reason why SC2/Dota 2 will never replicate WC3's custom map scene.
Zealot/Footmen Frenzy clones aren't going to save RTS esports.
|
I'm aware of where dota and CS came from, but I don't see how this matters. Again, it's 2016, not 2003. UMS in warcraft 3 and brood war was insanely popular because it was a large source of free and fun mini games. Back then these games were in competition with what, flash games?
Very important fact that alot of people seem to forget.
The only way a proper custom game/arcade scene could have worked was if Blizzard implemented matchmaking into them and allowed developers to find ways to monetize them.
|
There is still not a single reason for a game 10 years in development to have the UMS so much worse then the 10 year old Warcraft one. From the editor to the arcade section to the lobbies, everything felt shit right from the get go.
Coustom was the place to play Warcraft if you were younger and looked for casual experience and from there people transitioned to the melee maps once in a while. In SC II it was just downright trash.
Same goes for overall Bnet 2.0 and the long time needed implement simple changes. There is also no excuse for not trying to sign Icefrog in 2009/2010 (or whoever was then in Charge) and get him right on the track to make a better Dota in SC II with the support of Blizzard. Instead they never recognized the dota scene and finally after Valve made their move (because they are not stupid) they announced some kind of "Blizzard Dota" which then needed 3 more years of development (of which they used after the release of Hearth of the Swarm over half of the SC II team for a year) to bring out a Moba that cant stand LoL or Dota II in any way.
I guess the code of SC II must be extremly frustrating to work with and very bad programmed that it take them ages to get basic features (like community funded tournaments by chest/compendiums/skins/portraits/stickers) in their game. Valve showed how to do it right from 2013 on, community asks since 2014, we get it in 2017.
|
On November 28 2016 22:30 Salteador Neo wrote:
- Pay2play (three times because of the expansions!) compared to all the free mobas/card/other games.
Legacy is standalone.
|
The fact that you have to pay was not a big issue at launch. Lots of ppl bought the game. But bnet 2 being so bad didnt help.
Back in bw i would sometimes just sit and chat on a channel for a while, playing a game or 2 in 4 hours. It was fun, it was social.
Ladder could have used separate mmr for each race from the start , funnier team games (i mean 2v2 and all suck... Whereas i have so many crazy memories on 4v4 hunters)
The design was also at fault. Ppl had high hopes for hots then felt disapointed and left. I stayed until lotv but adding even more gimmicky units killed the game for me
|
On November 29 2016 03:01 lestye wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 02:36 Raneth wrote:On November 28 2016 19:24 lestye wrote:On November 28 2016 19:13 BlueStar wrote:On November 28 2016 03:48 chocomaro wrote:
Every month or two there's a balance change.
And significant changes are often enough that it puts off people like me who feels like "welp gotta learn a new way to play the game again".
I started telling myself a few years back "when the patching is stabilized and not so frequent i'll REALLY get into it".
That never stopped, and it's just annoying that they're trying to make every unit in the game used. ^ this The reverse is even worse imo. Having to deal with really bad design that doesn't work itself out, refusing to patch, got us into some terrible times in WoL. No we didnt. The meta was never allowed to settle. Whenever a strategy came to prominence it was patched out after no more than a month. The balance cries that fuelled the patching lead to a game where it was almost impossible to generate interesting spectator narratives around champions because as soon as anyone started dominating, their build orders got hit with the nerf bat. In my opinion that is the main reason for the loss of interest in the competitive scene. How can you root for your favourite player when he's bouncing between winning tournaments and being relegated after a month of patches? What? Do you even remember how long that entire era was ? It was allowed to settle, and we got was something completely awful.
Yes I do remember, I was playing very close to competitively at the time. The scene was NEVER allowed to settle. Broodwar had YEARS of people losing to the same builds at a time. The bisu build ended like 3 years of Protoss getting completely creamed by zergs.
Whenever the was a dominant race in broodwar, it was left to the players to figure it out, in SC2 it was patched -very- quickly, and -very- often.
|
On November 29 2016 04:05 WGT-Baal wrote:
The fact that you have to pay was not a big issue at launch. Lots of ppl bought the game. But bnet 2 being so bad didnt help.
Back in bw i would sometimes just sit and chat on a channel for a while, playing a game or 2 in 4 hours. It was fun, it was social.
Ladder could have used separate mmr for each race from the start , funnier team games (i mean 2v2 and all suck... Whereas i have so many crazy memories on 4v4 hunters)
The design was also at fault. Ppl had high hopes for hots then felt disapointed and left. I stayed until lotv but adding even more gimmicky units killed the game for me
A lot of people have already said it... but for most gamers the UMS scene was bigger than the melee map scene. IN BW and WC3 especially... there were hundreds of thousands more people playing those than the ladder.
And BNET 2.0 completely KILLED that scene... because the new UI was absolute dogshit for: finding games, joining games, seeing what games were popular, seeing what games were getting a lot of attention.
In BNET 2.0 all of the UMS creators stopped trying, because they realized it was most likely that none of their maps will ever even get seen let alone played.
How you can go backwards 10 years after the original... is a truely special Feat that Blizz pulled off with 2.0
All they needed was to return to Bnet 1 from BW/WC3 and it would have given their game sO MUCH MORE LIFE.
Then we get to the multiplayer ladder experience... which was balanced/designed by people who dont understand what people appreciate about RTS games. I dont play RTS games expecting them to play like Fighting games.... I dont need big explosions of 200 units crashing into 200 other units...
The damage was so turned up on everything that the fights were over in 2 seconds regardless.
Go watch a BW stream (Jaedong is streaming right now) you can see the battles ebb and flow, going back and forth.
In sc2 literally 90% of fights were over within 2 seconds of engaging.
Then you throw in stupid design units like: Colossus, Widow Mines, Banelings and its EASY to see why this game was never going to succeed. Then Blizz decides "You know whats wrong with our game? We arent getting to 200/200 fast enough... lets add more workers to the start!"
Most people were complaining about how the game devolved into every match being a race to 3-4base 200/200 so they made that race even faster... hell they should have jsut made that the way the match starts. Both players start with 3 bases and full worker saturation... since thats all Blizz thought we wanted form a RTS why even go with the half-measure of just increasing starting workers. Go big or go home.
This game was not what anyone hoped for, and every expansion made the game worse....added more and more ridiculously stupid units... id rather play Wings of Liberty than Legacy of the Void.
Blizzard decided to make a game that didnt appeal to casuals OR hardcore RTS fans. Instead they made this game that hovers in the middle.. that neither group cares enough about to stay interested.... which is why their game/scene is now dead. They needed to either go full LoL and make it super casual friendly and get rid of the cheesy units like Banelings/widowmines that have a chance of ending the game immediately... or they needed to slow down the game and let it become about strategy again.
Any/everyone who has been on this site since before SC2 saw what SC2 was and how it wouldnt have a long life because it didnt appeal to the people who were actually fans of the genre. But then TL got flooded by 100000 new fans of SC who refused to listen to anything negative.
And i feel obligated to mention... that Blizz's idea to sell this as 3 full priced individual games... was a giant slap in the face, especially in an era of gaming riddled with DLC... they sold expansion packs at the same price of the original, and they were NOWHERE near worth that. And thats from someone who LOVED the campaign. they didnt sell BW as 3 individual games, they didnt sell WC3 as 3 individual games...there was no reason to do that with Sc2 except because they thought they could get away with it because they were making the sequel to BW, a huge success.
|
On November 29 2016 03:44 Clonester wrote:
There is still not a single reason for a game 10 years in development to have the UMS so much worse then the 10 year old Warcraft one. From the editor to the arcade section to the lobbies, everything felt shit right from the get go.
Coustom was the place to play Warcraft if you were younger and looked for casual experience and from there people transitioned to the melee maps once in a while. In SC II it was just downright trash.
Same goes for overall Bnet 2.0 and the long time needed implement simple changes. There is also no excuse for not trying to sign Icefrog in 2009/2010 (or whoever was then in Charge) and get him right on the track to make a better Dota in SC II with the support of Blizzard. Instead they never recognized the dota scene and finally after Valve made their move (because they are not stupid) they announced some kind of "Blizzard Dota" which then needed 3 more years of development (of which they used after the release of Hearth of the Swarm over half of the SC II team for a year) to bring out a Moba that cant stand LoL or Dota II in any way.
I guess the code of SC II must be extremly frustrating to work with and very bad programmed that it take them ages to get basic features (like community funded tournaments by chest/compendiums/skins/portraits/stickers) in their game. Valve showed how to do it right from 2013 on, community asks since 2014, we get it in 2017.
Icefrog was already working at Valve by 2009.
I'm not saying that Starcraft 2 didnt have tons of awful problems with UMS at the beginning, but ultimately in this day and age, the UMS scene would not sustain and survive because of everything we talked about in previous posts. It's why CS:GO mods aren't as big as half-life/cs 1.6 mods were.
On November 29 2016 04:16 Raneth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 03:01 lestye wrote:On November 29 2016 02:36 Raneth wrote:On November 28 2016 19:24 lestye wrote:On November 28 2016 19:13 BlueStar wrote:On November 28 2016 03:48 chocomaro wrote:
Every month or two there's a balance change.
And significant changes are often enough that it puts off people like me who feels like "welp gotta learn a new way to play the game again".
I started telling myself a few years back "when the patching is stabilized and not so frequent i'll REALLY get into it".
That never stopped, and it's just annoying that they're trying to make every unit in the game used. ^ this The reverse is even worse imo. Having to deal with really bad design that doesn't work itself out, refusing to patch, got us into some terrible times in WoL. No we didnt. The meta was never allowed to settle. Whenever a strategy came to prominence it was patched out after no more than a month. The balance cries that fuelled the patching lead to a game where it was almost impossible to generate interesting spectator narratives around champions because as soon as anyone started dominating, their build orders got hit with the nerf bat. In my opinion that is the main reason for the loss of interest in the competitive scene. How can you root for your favourite player when he's bouncing between winning tournaments and being relegated after a month of patches? What? Do you even remember how long that entire era was ? It was allowed to settle, and we got was something completely awful. Yes I do remember, I was playing very close to competitively at the time. The scene was NEVER allowed to settle. Broodwar had YEARS of people losing to the same builds at a time. The bisu build ended like 3 years of Protoss getting completely creamed by zergs. Whenever the was a dominant race in broodwar, it was left to the players to figure it out, in SC2 it was patched -very- quickly, and -very- often.
Not towards the end which is what I was referring to. It was patched constantly late 2010 early 2011 but not as much after.
But ultimately, I don't think SC2 or any other game could stand that test of time like BW did, in regards to those times of questionable balance.
|
On November 29 2016 04:34 MaestroSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 04:05 WGT-Baal wrote:
The fact that you have to pay was not a big issue at launch. Lots of ppl bought the game. But bnet 2 being so bad didnt help.
Back in bw i would sometimes just sit and chat on a channel for a while, playing a game or 2 in 4 hours. It was fun, it was social.
Ladder could have used separate mmr for each race from the start , funnier team games (i mean 2v2 and all suck... Whereas i have so many crazy memories on 4v4 hunters)
The design was also at fault. Ppl had high hopes for hots then felt disapointed and left. I stayed until lotv but adding even more gimmicky units killed the game for me A lot of people have already said it... but for most gamers the UMS scene was bigger than the melee map scene. IN BW and WC3 especially... there were hundreds of thousands more people playing those than the ladder. And BNET 2.0 completely KILLED that scene... because the new UI was absolute dogshit for: finding games, joining games, seeing what games were popular, seeing what games were getting a lot of attention. In BNET 2.0 all of the UMS creators stopped trying, because they realized it was most likely that none of their maps will ever even get seen let alone played. How you can go backwards 10 years after the original... is a truely special Feat that Blizz pulled off with 2.0 All they needed was to return to Bnet 1 from BW/WC3 and it would have given their game sO MUCH MORE LIFE. Then we get to the multiplayer ladder experience... which was balanced/designed by people who dont understand what people appreciate about RTS games. I dont play RTS games expecting them to play like Fighting games.... I dont need big explosions of 200 units crashing into 200 other units... The damage was so turned up on everything that the fights were over in 2 seconds regardless. Go watch a BW stream (Jaedong is streaming right now) you can see the battles ebb and flow, going back and forth. In sc2 literally 90% of fights were over within 2 seconds of engaging. Then you throw in stupid design units like: Colossus, Widow Mines, Banelings and its EASY to see why this game was never going to succeed. Then Blizz decides "You know whats wrong with our game? We arent getting to 200/200 fast enough... lets add more workers to the start!" Most people were complaining about how the game devolved into every match being a race to 3-4base 200/200 so they made that race even faster... hell they should have jsut made that the way the match starts. Both players start with 3 bases and full worker saturation... since thats all Blizz thought we wanted form a RTS why even go with the half-measure of just increasing starting workers. Go big or go home. This game was not what anyone hoped for, and every expansion made the game worse....added more and more ridiculously stupid units... id rather play Wings of Liberty than Legacy of the Void. Blizzard decided to make a game that didnt appeal to casuals OR hardcore RTS fans. Instead they made this game that hovers in the middle.. that neither group cares enough about to stay interested.... which is why their game/scene is now dead. They needed to either go full LoL and make it super casual friendly and get rid of the cheesy units like Banelings/widowmines that have a chance of ending the game immediately... or they needed to slow down the game and let it become about strategy again. Any/everyone who has been on this site since before SC2 saw what SC2 was and how it wouldnt have a long life because it didnt appeal to the people who were actually fans of the genre. But then TL got flooded by 100000 new fans of SC who refused to listen to anything negative. And i feel obligated to mention... that Blizz's idea to sell this as 3 full priced individual games... was a giant slap in the face, especially in an era of gaming riddled with DLC... they sold expansion packs at the same price of the original, and they were NOWHERE near worth that. And thats from someone who LOVED the campaign. they didnt sell BW as 3 individual games, they didnt sell WC3 as 3 individual games...there was no reason to do that with Sc2 except because they thought they could get away with it because they were making the sequel to BW, a huge success.
Wow dude nice job. You reiterated complaints from 2010 that have been written 1000 times and largely have been fixed at this point.
What would be more useful is realizing games like CSGO and Melee started at far worse points than SC2 and had dramatic revivals. I dont believe in "too little too late" when you look at these examples. We should be asking how to get there instead of cluttering up the thread with 2010 BNET 2.0 complaints.
|
On November 29 2016 04:42 lestye wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 03:44 Clonester wrote:
There is still not a single reason for a game 10 years in development to have the UMS so much worse then the 10 year old Warcraft one. From the editor to the arcade section to the lobbies, everything felt shit right from the get go.
Coustom was the place to play Warcraft if you were younger and looked for casual experience and from there people transitioned to the melee maps once in a while. In SC II it was just downright trash.
Same goes for overall Bnet 2.0 and the long time needed implement simple changes. There is also no excuse for not trying to sign Icefrog in 2009/2010 (or whoever was then in Charge) and get him right on the track to make a better Dota in SC II with the support of Blizzard. Instead they never recognized the dota scene and finally after Valve made their move (because they are not stupid) they announced some kind of "Blizzard Dota" which then needed 3 more years of development (of which they used after the release of Hearth of the Swarm over half of the SC II team for a year) to bring out a Moba that cant stand LoL or Dota II in any way.
I guess the code of SC II must be extremly frustrating to work with and very bad programmed that it take them ages to get basic features (like community funded tournaments by chest/compendiums/skins/portraits/stickers) in their game. Valve showed how to do it right from 2013 on, community asks since 2014, we get it in 2017. Icefrog was already working at Valve by 2009. I'm not saying that Starcraft 2 didnt have tons of awful problems with UMS at the beginning, but ultimately in this day and age, the UMS scene would not sustain and survive because of everything we talked about in previous posts. It's why CS:GO mods aren't as big as half-life/cs 1.6 mods were.
Starcraft II development started in 2004! 2000 fucking 4. And they never thought in the next 7 years of development to include the most popular western and chinese map into the their very next RTS. No matter when Valve sniped Icefrog down, Blizzard could easy do it before with their very own plattform. Instead they never supported Dota in any way and ultimativly lost the founder and best itteration of the newest PC game genre to Valve.
Maybe UMS could never be to SC2 what it was to Wc3. But it could be much much more to SC II then it actually was to SC II. The scene was hungry for SC 2, new possibilites, fresh graphics. And 2 month after founding out of annoying it is to work with the new editor and how much more annoying the new arcade section is, they either went back to Wc3 or they left.
Yes Wc3s arcade section was not perfect, fresh maps needed to be distributed by hosting games or on Hiveworkshop, the map browser was a pain in the ass, but SC II made everything worse. 10 years after Wc3 Blizzard could not make a Bnet 2.0 (and arcade section 2.0), that was better then the old one, but made it significant worse.
Was bnet the ultimate and UMS the ultimate reason why SC II went downhill? No. but is one of the many annoying things the games had or still have which werent needed and are by no means justified.
Yes SC II is still great game, a great RTS. But from a company that made 3 stellar RTS games back to back to back (WC 2, BW, Wc3) you expected another big shot. And the shoot is good, the game is a freaking good RTS. But in every corner you find this small annoying pieces, from Bnet 2.0 over game design over addon releases over economy modell, that nip after nip after nip fuck you up till you tilt, either start BW/Wc3 (where ever you come from) again or swap over to Dota II.
SC II is for me still the very best esport to watch (well, after Wc3 for me, but thats just a much smaller scene with less events and money), it is so much easier to follow an 1v1 RTS then a Moba or FPS. But in every corner of SC II you find some thing that either offends you or has offended you for years.
On November 29 2016 05:12 Little-Chimp wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 04:34 MaestroSC wrote:On November 29 2016 04:05 WGT-Baal wrote:
The fact that you have to pay was not a big issue at launch. Lots of ppl bought the game. But bnet 2 being so bad didnt help.
Back in bw i would sometimes just sit and chat on a channel for a while, playing a game or 2 in 4 hours. It was fun, it was social.
Ladder could have used separate mmr for each race from the start , funnier team games (i mean 2v2 and all suck... Whereas i have so many crazy memories on 4v4 hunters)
The design was also at fault. Ppl had high hopes for hots then felt disapointed and left. I stayed until lotv but adding even more gimmicky units killed the game for me A lot of people have already said it... but for most gamers the UMS scene was bigger than the melee map scene. IN BW and WC3 especially... there were hundreds of thousands more people playing those than the ladder. And BNET 2.0 completely KILLED that scene... because the new UI was absolute dogshit for: finding games, joining games, seeing what games were popular, seeing what games were getting a lot of attention. In BNET 2.0 all of the UMS creators stopped trying, because they realized it was most likely that none of their maps will ever even get seen let alone played. How you can go backwards 10 years after the original... is a truely special Feat that Blizz pulled off with 2.0 All they needed was to return to Bnet 1 from BW/WC3 and it would have given their game sO MUCH MORE LIFE. Then we get to the multiplayer ladder experience... which was balanced/designed by people who dont understand what people appreciate about RTS games. I dont play RTS games expecting them to play like Fighting games.... I dont need big explosions of 200 units crashing into 200 other units... The damage was so turned up on everything that the fights were over in 2 seconds regardless. Go watch a BW stream (Jaedong is streaming right now) you can see the battles ebb and flow, going back and forth. In sc2 literally 90% of fights were over within 2 seconds of engaging. Then you throw in stupid design units like: Colossus, Widow Mines, Banelings and its EASY to see why this game was never going to succeed. Then Blizz decides "You know whats wrong with our game? We arent getting to 200/200 fast enough... lets add more workers to the start!" Most people were complaining about how the game devolved into every match being a race to 3-4base 200/200 so they made that race even faster... hell they should have jsut made that the way the match starts. Both players start with 3 bases and full worker saturation... since thats all Blizz thought we wanted form a RTS why even go with the half-measure of just increasing starting workers. Go big or go home. This game was not what anyone hoped for, and every expansion made the game worse....added more and more ridiculously stupid units... id rather play Wings of Liberty than Legacy of the Void. Blizzard decided to make a game that didnt appeal to casuals OR hardcore RTS fans. Instead they made this game that hovers in the middle.. that neither group cares enough about to stay interested.... which is why their game/scene is now dead. They needed to either go full LoL and make it super casual friendly and get rid of the cheesy units like Banelings/widowmines that have a chance of ending the game immediately... or they needed to slow down the game and let it become about strategy again. Any/everyone who has been on this site since before SC2 saw what SC2 was and how it wouldnt have a long life because it didnt appeal to the people who were actually fans of the genre. But then TL got flooded by 100000 new fans of SC who refused to listen to anything negative. And i feel obligated to mention... that Blizz's idea to sell this as 3 full priced individual games... was a giant slap in the face, especially in an era of gaming riddled with DLC... they sold expansion packs at the same price of the original, and they were NOWHERE near worth that. And thats from someone who LOVED the campaign. they didnt sell BW as 3 individual games, they didnt sell WC3 as 3 individual games...there was no reason to do that with Sc2 except because they thought they could get away with it because they were making the sequel to BW, a huge success. Wow dude nice job. You reiterated complaints from 2010 that have been written 1000 times and largely have been fixed at this point. What would be more useful is realizing games like CSGO and Melee started at far worse points than SC2 and had dramatic revivals. I dont believe in "too little too late" when you look at these examples. We should be asking how to get there instead of cluttering up the thread with 2010 BNET 2.0 complaints.
Fixed complains? The game designs core has been focused with each expansion on more terrible terrible worker line damage and super annoying to play and watch unit designs. Thats a 2016 problem, not 2010. WoL was better to play and watch then where we got now.
|
On November 29 2016 05:14 Clonester wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 04:42 lestye wrote:On November 29 2016 03:44 Clonester wrote:
There is still not a single reason for a game 10 years in development to have the UMS so much worse then the 10 year old Warcraft one. From the editor to the arcade section to the lobbies, everything felt shit right from the get go.
Coustom was the place to play Warcraft if you were younger and looked for casual experience and from there people transitioned to the melee maps once in a while. In SC II it was just downright trash.
Same goes for overall Bnet 2.0 and the long time needed implement simple changes. There is also no excuse for not trying to sign Icefrog in 2009/2010 (or whoever was then in Charge) and get him right on the track to make a better Dota in SC II with the support of Blizzard. Instead they never recognized the dota scene and finally after Valve made their move (because they are not stupid) they announced some kind of "Blizzard Dota" which then needed 3 more years of development (of which they used after the release of Hearth of the Swarm over half of the SC II team for a year) to bring out a Moba that cant stand LoL or Dota II in any way.
I guess the code of SC II must be extremly frustrating to work with and very bad programmed that it take them ages to get basic features (like community funded tournaments by chest/compendiums/skins/portraits/stickers) in their game. Valve showed how to do it right from 2013 on, community asks since 2014, we get it in 2017. Icefrog was already working at Valve by 2009. I'm not saying that Starcraft 2 didnt have tons of awful problems with UMS at the beginning, but ultimately in this day and age, the UMS scene would not sustain and survive because of everything we talked about in previous posts. It's why CS:GO mods aren't as big as half-life/cs 1.6 mods were. Starcraft II development started in 2004! 2000 fucking 4. And they never thought in the next 7 years of development to include the most popular western and chinese map into the their very next RTS. No matter when Valve sniped Icefrog down, Blizzard could easy do it before with their very own plattform. Instead they never supported Dota in any way and ultimativly lost the founder and best itteration of the newest PC game genre to Valve. Maybe UMS could never be to SC2 what it was to Wc3. But it could be much much more to SC II then it actually was to SC II. The scene was hungry for SC 2, new possibilites, fresh graphics. And 2 month after founding out of annoying it is to work with the new editor and how much more annoying the new arcade section is, they either went back to Wc3 or they left. Yes Wc3s arcade section was not perfect, fresh maps needed to be distributed by hosting games or on Hiveworkshop, the map browser was a pain in the ass, but SC II made everything worse. 10 years after Wc3 Blizzard could not make a Bnet 2.0 (and arcade section 2.0), that was better then the old one, but made it significant worse. Was bnet the ultimate and UMS the ultimate reason why SC II went downhill? No. but is one of the many annoying things the games had or still have which werent needed and are by no means justified. Yes SC II is still great game, a great RTS. But from a company that made 3 stellar RTS games back to back to back (WC 2, BW, Wc3) you expected another big shot. And the shoot is good, the game is a freaking good RTS. But in every corner you find this small annoying pieces, from Bnet 2.0 over game design over addon releases over economy modell, that nip after nip after nip fuck you up till you tilt, either start BW/Wc3 (where ever you come from) again or swap over to Dota II. SC II is for me still the very best esport to watch (well, after Wc3 for me, but thats just a much smaller scene with less events and money), it is so much easier to follow an 1v1 RTS then a Moba or FPS. But in every corner of SC II you find some thing that either offends you or has offended you for years. Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 05:12 Little-Chimp wrote:On November 29 2016 04:34 MaestroSC wrote:On November 29 2016 04:05 WGT-Baal wrote:
The fact that you have to pay was not a big issue at launch. Lots of ppl bought the game. But bnet 2 being so bad didnt help.
Back in bw i would sometimes just sit and chat on a channel for a while, playing a game or 2 in 4 hours. It was fun, it was social.
Ladder could have used separate mmr for each race from the start , funnier team games (i mean 2v2 and all suck... Whereas i have so many crazy memories on 4v4 hunters)
The design was also at fault. Ppl had high hopes for hots then felt disapointed and left. I stayed until lotv but adding even more gimmicky units killed the game for me A lot of people have already said it... but for most gamers the UMS scene was bigger than the melee map scene. IN BW and WC3 especially... there were hundreds of thousands more people playing those than the ladder. And BNET 2.0 completely KILLED that scene... because the new UI was absolute dogshit for: finding games, joining games, seeing what games were popular, seeing what games were getting a lot of attention. In BNET 2.0 all of the UMS creators stopped trying, because they realized it was most likely that none of their maps will ever even get seen let alone played. How you can go backwards 10 years after the original... is a truely special Feat that Blizz pulled off with 2.0 All they needed was to return to Bnet 1 from BW/WC3 and it would have given their game sO MUCH MORE LIFE. Then we get to the multiplayer ladder experience... which was balanced/designed by people who dont understand what people appreciate about RTS games. I dont play RTS games expecting them to play like Fighting games.... I dont need big explosions of 200 units crashing into 200 other units... The damage was so turned up on everything that the fights were over in 2 seconds regardless. Go watch a BW stream (Jaedong is streaming right now) you can see the battles ebb and flow, going back and forth. In sc2 literally 90% of fights were over within 2 seconds of engaging. Then you throw in stupid design units like: Colossus, Widow Mines, Banelings and its EASY to see why this game was never going to succeed. Then Blizz decides "You know whats wrong with our game? We arent getting to 200/200 fast enough... lets add more workers to the start!" Most people were complaining about how the game devolved into every match being a race to 3-4base 200/200 so they made that race even faster... hell they should have jsut made that the way the match starts. Both players start with 3 bases and full worker saturation... since thats all Blizz thought we wanted form a RTS why even go with the half-measure of just increasing starting workers. Go big or go home. This game was not what anyone hoped for, and every expansion made the game worse....added more and more ridiculously stupid units... id rather play Wings of Liberty than Legacy of the Void. Blizzard decided to make a game that didnt appeal to casuals OR hardcore RTS fans. Instead they made this game that hovers in the middle.. that neither group cares enough about to stay interested.... which is why their game/scene is now dead. They needed to either go full LoL and make it super casual friendly and get rid of the cheesy units like Banelings/widowmines that have a chance of ending the game immediately... or they needed to slow down the game and let it become about strategy again. Any/everyone who has been on this site since before SC2 saw what SC2 was and how it wouldnt have a long life because it didnt appeal to the people who were actually fans of the genre. But then TL got flooded by 100000 new fans of SC who refused to listen to anything negative. And i feel obligated to mention... that Blizz's idea to sell this as 3 full priced individual games... was a giant slap in the face, especially in an era of gaming riddled with DLC... they sold expansion packs at the same price of the original, and they were NOWHERE near worth that. And thats from someone who LOVED the campaign. they didnt sell BW as 3 individual games, they didnt sell WC3 as 3 individual games...there was no reason to do that with Sc2 except because they thought they could get away with it because they were making the sequel to BW, a huge success. Wow dude nice job. You reiterated complaints from 2010 that have been written 1000 times and largely have been fixed at this point. What would be more useful is realizing games like CSGO and Melee started at far worse points than SC2 and had dramatic revivals. I dont believe in "too little too late" when you look at these examples. We should be asking how to get there instead of cluttering up the thread with 2010 BNET 2.0 complaints. Fixed complains? The game designs core has been focused with each expansion on more terrible terrible worker line damage and super annoying to play and watch unit designs. Thats a 2016 problem, not 2010. WoL was better to play and watch then where we got now.
You said 2009, not me. Icefrog started working on Dota as the lead developer in 2005. So they only had 3-4 years to recruit him before Valve did. And they did fly out Icefrog to Blizzard, but they wanted to focus on WoW at the time, as the company was growing so much. That's the story for that.
And how did they not support Dota in any way when they had a Dota tournament in 2005? And had specific patches specifically to help Dota?
And yeah, it did use an outdated model, but like you said, it was developed in 2004 and they were too slow to change course.
It could be better, but I think the state of custom games in Dota 2 and in general kinda shows how there's much less interest in it nowadays. Especially in the later years of WC3 where it was NOTHING but Dota, because Dota was a unique experience you could only get through Warcraft III and nowhere else.
|
On November 29 2016 05:14 Clonester wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 04:42 lestye wrote:On November 29 2016 03:44 Clonester wrote:
There is still not a single reason for a game 10 years in development to have the UMS so much worse then the 10 year old Warcraft one. From the editor to the arcade section to the lobbies, everything felt shit right from the get go.
Coustom was the place to play Warcraft if you were younger and looked for casual experience and from there people transitioned to the melee maps once in a while. In SC II it was just downright trash.
Same goes for overall Bnet 2.0 and the long time needed implement simple changes. There is also no excuse for not trying to sign Icefrog in 2009/2010 (or whoever was then in Charge) and get him right on the track to make a better Dota in SC II with the support of Blizzard. Instead they never recognized the dota scene and finally after Valve made their move (because they are not stupid) they announced some kind of "Blizzard Dota" which then needed 3 more years of development (of which they used after the release of Hearth of the Swarm over half of the SC II team for a year) to bring out a Moba that cant stand LoL or Dota II in any way.
I guess the code of SC II must be extremly frustrating to work with and very bad programmed that it take them ages to get basic features (like community funded tournaments by chest/compendiums/skins/portraits/stickers) in their game. Valve showed how to do it right from 2013 on, community asks since 2014, we get it in 2017. Icefrog was already working at Valve by 2009. I'm not saying that Starcraft 2 didnt have tons of awful problems with UMS at the beginning, but ultimately in this day and age, the UMS scene would not sustain and survive because of everything we talked about in previous posts. It's why CS:GO mods aren't as big as half-life/cs 1.6 mods were. Starcraft II development started in 2004! 2000 fucking 4. And they never thought in the next 7 years of development to include the most popular western and chinese map into the their very next RTS. No matter when Valve sniped Icefrog down, Blizzard could easy do it before with their very own plattform. Instead they never supported Dota in any way and ultimativly lost the founder and best itteration of the newest PC game genre to Valve. Maybe UMS could never be to SC2 what it was to Wc3. But it could be much much more to SC II then it actually was to SC II. The scene was hungry for SC 2, new possibilites, fresh graphics. And 2 month after founding out of annoying it is to work with the new editor and how much more annoying the new arcade section is, they either went back to Wc3 or they left. Yes Wc3s arcade section was not perfect, fresh maps needed to be distributed by hosting games or on Hiveworkshop, the map browser was a pain in the ass, but SC II made everything worse. 10 years after Wc3 Blizzard could not make a Bnet 2.0 (and arcade section 2.0), that was better then the old one, but made it significant worse. Was bnet the ultimate and UMS the ultimate reason why SC II went downhill? No. but is one of the many annoying things the games had or still have which werent needed and are by no means justified. Yes SC II is still great game, a great RTS. But from a company that made 3 stellar RTS games back to back to back (WC 2, BW, Wc3) you expected another big shot. And the shoot is good, the game is a freaking good RTS. But in every corner you find this small annoying pieces, from Bnet 2.0 over game design over addon releases over economy modell, that nip after nip after nip fuck you up till you tilt, either start BW/Wc3 (where ever you come from) again or swap over to Dota II. SC II is for me still the very best esport to watch (well, after Wc3 for me, but thats just a much smaller scene with less events and money), it is so much easier to follow an 1v1 RTS then a Moba or FPS. But in every corner of SC II you find some thing that either offends you or has offended you for years. Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 05:12 Little-Chimp wrote:On November 29 2016 04:34 MaestroSC wrote:On November 29 2016 04:05 WGT-Baal wrote:
The fact that you have to pay was not a big issue at launch. Lots of ppl bought the game. But bnet 2 being so bad didnt help.
Back in bw i would sometimes just sit and chat on a channel for a while, playing a game or 2 in 4 hours. It was fun, it was social.
Ladder could have used separate mmr for each race from the start , funnier team games (i mean 2v2 and all suck... Whereas i have so many crazy memories on 4v4 hunters)
The design was also at fault. Ppl had high hopes for hots then felt disapointed and left. I stayed until lotv but adding even more gimmicky units killed the game for me A lot of people have already said it... but for most gamers the UMS scene was bigger than the melee map scene. IN BW and WC3 especially... there were hundreds of thousands more people playing those than the ladder. And BNET 2.0 completely KILLED that scene... because the new UI was absolute dogshit for: finding games, joining games, seeing what games were popular, seeing what games were getting a lot of attention. In BNET 2.0 all of the UMS creators stopped trying, because they realized it was most likely that none of their maps will ever even get seen let alone played. How you can go backwards 10 years after the original... is a truely special Feat that Blizz pulled off with 2.0 All they needed was to return to Bnet 1 from BW/WC3 and it would have given their game sO MUCH MORE LIFE. Then we get to the multiplayer ladder experience... which was balanced/designed by people who dont understand what people appreciate about RTS games. I dont play RTS games expecting them to play like Fighting games.... I dont need big explosions of 200 units crashing into 200 other units... The damage was so turned up on everything that the fights were over in 2 seconds regardless. Go watch a BW stream (Jaedong is streaming right now) you can see the battles ebb and flow, going back and forth. In sc2 literally 90% of fights were over within 2 seconds of engaging. Then you throw in stupid design units like: Colossus, Widow Mines, Banelings and its EASY to see why this game was never going to succeed. Then Blizz decides "You know whats wrong with our game? We arent getting to 200/200 fast enough... lets add more workers to the start!" Most people were complaining about how the game devolved into every match being a race to 3-4base 200/200 so they made that race even faster... hell they should have jsut made that the way the match starts. Both players start with 3 bases and full worker saturation... since thats all Blizz thought we wanted form a RTS why even go with the half-measure of just increasing starting workers. Go big or go home. This game was not what anyone hoped for, and every expansion made the game worse....added more and more ridiculously stupid units... id rather play Wings of Liberty than Legacy of the Void. Blizzard decided to make a game that didnt appeal to casuals OR hardcore RTS fans. Instead they made this game that hovers in the middle.. that neither group cares enough about to stay interested.... which is why their game/scene is now dead. They needed to either go full LoL and make it super casual friendly and get rid of the cheesy units like Banelings/widowmines that have a chance of ending the game immediately... or they needed to slow down the game and let it become about strategy again. Any/everyone who has been on this site since before SC2 saw what SC2 was and how it wouldnt have a long life because it didnt appeal to the people who were actually fans of the genre. But then TL got flooded by 100000 new fans of SC who refused to listen to anything negative. And i feel obligated to mention... that Blizz's idea to sell this as 3 full priced individual games... was a giant slap in the face, especially in an era of gaming riddled with DLC... they sold expansion packs at the same price of the original, and they were NOWHERE near worth that. And thats from someone who LOVED the campaign. they didnt sell BW as 3 individual games, they didnt sell WC3 as 3 individual games...there was no reason to do that with Sc2 except because they thought they could get away with it because they were making the sequel to BW, a huge success. Wow dude nice job. You reiterated complaints from 2010 that have been written 1000 times and largely have been fixed at this point. What would be more useful is realizing games like CSGO and Melee started at far worse points than SC2 and had dramatic revivals. I dont believe in "too little too late" when you look at these examples. We should be asking how to get there instead of cluttering up the thread with 2010 BNET 2.0 complaints. Fixed complains? The game designs core has been focused with each expansion on more terrible terrible worker line damage and super annoying to play and watch unit designs. Thats a 2016 problem, not 2010. WoL was better to play and watch then where we got now.
I meant in terms of Bnet features, it's actually really good right now. Gameplay is subjective and I agree it could be much better, but it's certainly better than WOL.
Like I guess if force fields and fungal growth is the pinnacle of gameplay for you 2010 was pretty good? Only thing I remember being better than now was ZvT as marine tank vs baneling muta was super super fun until widow mines came to town.
|
I've never expected to see SC2 as popular as it could have been.. it's just obvious that a RTS will never be as popular as any other action games, period.
The absolute irony of SC2, is that it's probably the closest game of any "esport" games to be called "sport".
|
On November 29 2016 05:26 Little-Chimp wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 05:14 Clonester wrote:On November 29 2016 04:42 lestye wrote:On November 29 2016 03:44 Clonester wrote:
There is still not a single reason for a game 10 years in development to have the UMS so much worse then the 10 year old Warcraft one. From the editor to the arcade section to the lobbies, everything felt shit right from the get go.
Coustom was the place to play Warcraft if you were younger and looked for casual experience and from there people transitioned to the melee maps once in a while. In SC II it was just downright trash.
Same goes for overall Bnet 2.0 and the long time needed implement simple changes. There is also no excuse for not trying to sign Icefrog in 2009/2010 (or whoever was then in Charge) and get him right on the track to make a better Dota in SC II with the support of Blizzard. Instead they never recognized the dota scene and finally after Valve made their move (because they are not stupid) they announced some kind of "Blizzard Dota" which then needed 3 more years of development (of which they used after the release of Hearth of the Swarm over half of the SC II team for a year) to bring out a Moba that cant stand LoL or Dota II in any way.
I guess the code of SC II must be extremly frustrating to work with and very bad programmed that it take them ages to get basic features (like community funded tournaments by chest/compendiums/skins/portraits/stickers) in their game. Valve showed how to do it right from 2013 on, community asks since 2014, we get it in 2017. Icefrog was already working at Valve by 2009. I'm not saying that Starcraft 2 didnt have tons of awful problems with UMS at the beginning, but ultimately in this day and age, the UMS scene would not sustain and survive because of everything we talked about in previous posts. It's why CS:GO mods aren't as big as half-life/cs 1.6 mods were. Starcraft II development started in 2004! 2000 fucking 4. And they never thought in the next 7 years of development to include the most popular western and chinese map into the their very next RTS. No matter when Valve sniped Icefrog down, Blizzard could easy do it before with their very own plattform. Instead they never supported Dota in any way and ultimativly lost the founder and best itteration of the newest PC game genre to Valve. Maybe UMS could never be to SC2 what it was to Wc3. But it could be much much more to SC II then it actually was to SC II. The scene was hungry for SC 2, new possibilites, fresh graphics. And 2 month after founding out of annoying it is to work with the new editor and how much more annoying the new arcade section is, they either went back to Wc3 or they left. Yes Wc3s arcade section was not perfect, fresh maps needed to be distributed by hosting games or on Hiveworkshop, the map browser was a pain in the ass, but SC II made everything worse. 10 years after Wc3 Blizzard could not make a Bnet 2.0 (and arcade section 2.0), that was better then the old one, but made it significant worse. Was bnet the ultimate and UMS the ultimate reason why SC II went downhill? No. but is one of the many annoying things the games had or still have which werent needed and are by no means justified. Yes SC II is still great game, a great RTS. But from a company that made 3 stellar RTS games back to back to back (WC 2, BW, Wc3) you expected another big shot. And the shoot is good, the game is a freaking good RTS. But in every corner you find this small annoying pieces, from Bnet 2.0 over game design over addon releases over economy modell, that nip after nip after nip fuck you up till you tilt, either start BW/Wc3 (where ever you come from) again or swap over to Dota II. SC II is for me still the very best esport to watch (well, after Wc3 for me, but thats just a much smaller scene with less events and money), it is so much easier to follow an 1v1 RTS then a Moba or FPS. But in every corner of SC II you find some thing that either offends you or has offended you for years. On November 29 2016 05:12 Little-Chimp wrote:On November 29 2016 04:34 MaestroSC wrote:On November 29 2016 04:05 WGT-Baal wrote:
The fact that you have to pay was not a big issue at launch. Lots of ppl bought the game. But bnet 2 being so bad didnt help.
Back in bw i would sometimes just sit and chat on a channel for a while, playing a game or 2 in 4 hours. It was fun, it was social.
Ladder could have used separate mmr for each race from the start , funnier team games (i mean 2v2 and all suck... Whereas i have so many crazy memories on 4v4 hunters)
The design was also at fault. Ppl had high hopes for hots then felt disapointed and left. I stayed until lotv but adding even more gimmicky units killed the game for me A lot of people have already said it... but for most gamers the UMS scene was bigger than the melee map scene. IN BW and WC3 especially... there were hundreds of thousands more people playing those than the ladder. And BNET 2.0 completely KILLED that scene... because the new UI was absolute dogshit for: finding games, joining games, seeing what games were popular, seeing what games were getting a lot of attention. In BNET 2.0 all of the UMS creators stopped trying, because they realized it was most likely that none of their maps will ever even get seen let alone played. How you can go backwards 10 years after the original... is a truely special Feat that Blizz pulled off with 2.0 All they needed was to return to Bnet 1 from BW/WC3 and it would have given their game sO MUCH MORE LIFE. Then we get to the multiplayer ladder experience... which was balanced/designed by people who dont understand what people appreciate about RTS games. I dont play RTS games expecting them to play like Fighting games.... I dont need big explosions of 200 units crashing into 200 other units... The damage was so turned up on everything that the fights were over in 2 seconds regardless. Go watch a BW stream (Jaedong is streaming right now) you can see the battles ebb and flow, going back and forth. In sc2 literally 90% of fights were over within 2 seconds of engaging. Then you throw in stupid design units like: Colossus, Widow Mines, Banelings and its EASY to see why this game was never going to succeed. Then Blizz decides "You know whats wrong with our game? We arent getting to 200/200 fast enough... lets add more workers to the start!" Most people were complaining about how the game devolved into every match being a race to 3-4base 200/200 so they made that race even faster... hell they should have jsut made that the way the match starts. Both players start with 3 bases and full worker saturation... since thats all Blizz thought we wanted form a RTS why even go with the half-measure of just increasing starting workers. Go big or go home. This game was not what anyone hoped for, and every expansion made the game worse....added more and more ridiculously stupid units... id rather play Wings of Liberty than Legacy of the Void. Blizzard decided to make a game that didnt appeal to casuals OR hardcore RTS fans. Instead they made this game that hovers in the middle.. that neither group cares enough about to stay interested.... which is why their game/scene is now dead. They needed to either go full LoL and make it super casual friendly and get rid of the cheesy units like Banelings/widowmines that have a chance of ending the game immediately... or they needed to slow down the game and let it become about strategy again. Any/everyone who has been on this site since before SC2 saw what SC2 was and how it wouldnt have a long life because it didnt appeal to the people who were actually fans of the genre. But then TL got flooded by 100000 new fans of SC who refused to listen to anything negative. And i feel obligated to mention... that Blizz's idea to sell this as 3 full priced individual games... was a giant slap in the face, especially in an era of gaming riddled with DLC... they sold expansion packs at the same price of the original, and they were NOWHERE near worth that. And thats from someone who LOVED the campaign. they didnt sell BW as 3 individual games, they didnt sell WC3 as 3 individual games...there was no reason to do that with Sc2 except because they thought they could get away with it because they were making the sequel to BW, a huge success. Wow dude nice job. You reiterated complaints from 2010 that have been written 1000 times and largely have been fixed at this point. What would be more useful is realizing games like CSGO and Melee started at far worse points than SC2 and had dramatic revivals. I dont believe in "too little too late" when you look at these examples. We should be asking how to get there instead of cluttering up the thread with 2010 BNET 2.0 complaints. Fixed complains? The game designs core has been focused with each expansion on more terrible terrible worker line damage and super annoying to play and watch unit designs. Thats a 2016 problem, not 2010. WoL was better to play and watch then where we got now. I meant in terms of Bnet features, it's actually really good right now. Gameplay is subjective and I agree it could be much better, but it's certainly better than WOL. Like I guess if force fields and fungal growth is the pinnacle of gameplay for you 2010 was pretty good? Only thing I remember being better than now was ZvT as marine tank vs baneling muta was super super fun until widow mines came to town.
its easy to point at Borfestor (with fungal) and Soul trains (with force fields), but the first one only became in issue thanks to queen range buff and ghost nerf and the soul train wasnt looking that unbalanced. Mostly annoying to play against, you are right. But guess what, instead of removing them, they are still in the game.
For me it is HotS>WoL>>>>LotV. I never got used to LotVs fast terrible terrible damage and left the 1v1 soon after release of it. HotS looked very balanced long time (after WM rebuff), the games could be stale, but I personally enjoyed long drawn out games where one was sitting on a knifes edge in holding infnite amounts of bullshit (aka free units and spells) while trying to get the last free base on the map. Both WoL and HotS had bad unit concept in them, but LotV took it to a whole different level with these kind of units and someone else described it very well:
Nobody wants 2 secs 200/200 fights after 12 minutes of macro up. So the answer of Blizzard was not to make evergoing battles possible, but to skip the first 2 minutes and speed up the macro phase while also speed up the worker killing significant, so more games end before 2 sec 200/200 fights thanks to terrible terrible damage. I hate this decision.
And you have to take a lot with a grain of salt. The game got out in 2010, but only now the Bnet features are actuelly really good? Thats just way too late and in these thread alot of people (like me) come here, who disliked things from 2010 ongoing (where I even didnt know what TL is, I just played the game during that time) and see that in a phase of rapid decline finally things work out like they should have 6 years ago. That makes me and others mad and they keep rephrasing the old posts from back then, because it took so long to get it right. When CS:GO was fucked up and meant to die in 2012, Valve found solutions within one year and in late 2013 the game was growing again. And CS:GO also came from 2 split up communities (just like SC II) and was highly controvers in the beginning.
Everything I write is a piece of a salty ass fan of Blizzards old RTS and the madness of Blizzard invested so much in this game (millions in WCS, millions in development over the years) and it took them so long to figure out whats wrong with the plattfrom and now we are here with an iteration of SC II i clearly dont like, while I really liked Hearth of the swarm.
|
On November 29 2016 05:12 Little-Chimp wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 04:34 MaestroSC wrote:On November 29 2016 04:05 WGT-Baal wrote:
The fact that you have to pay was not a big issue at launch. Lots of ppl bought the game. But bnet 2 being so bad didnt help.
Back in bw i would sometimes just sit and chat on a channel for a while, playing a game or 2 in 4 hours. It was fun, it was social.
Ladder could have used separate mmr for each race from the start , funnier team games (i mean 2v2 and all suck... Whereas i have so many crazy memories on 4v4 hunters)
The design was also at fault. Ppl had high hopes for hots then felt disapointed and left. I stayed until lotv but adding even more gimmicky units killed the game for me A lot of people have already said it... but for most gamers the UMS scene was bigger than the melee map scene. IN BW and WC3 especially... there were hundreds of thousands more people playing those than the ladder. And BNET 2.0 completely KILLED that scene... because the new UI was absolute dogshit for: finding games, joining games, seeing what games were popular, seeing what games were getting a lot of attention. In BNET 2.0 all of the UMS creators stopped trying, because they realized it was most likely that none of their maps will ever even get seen let alone played. How you can go backwards 10 years after the original... is a truely special Feat that Blizz pulled off with 2.0 All they needed was to return to Bnet 1 from BW/WC3 and it would have given their game sO MUCH MORE LIFE. Then we get to the multiplayer ladder experience... which was balanced/designed by people who dont understand what people appreciate about RTS games. I dont play RTS games expecting them to play like Fighting games.... I dont need big explosions of 200 units crashing into 200 other units... The damage was so turned up on everything that the fights were over in 2 seconds regardless. Go watch a BW stream (Jaedong is streaming right now) you can see the battles ebb and flow, going back and forth. In sc2 literally 90% of fights were over within 2 seconds of engaging. Then you throw in stupid design units like: Colossus, Widow Mines, Banelings and its EASY to see why this game was never going to succeed. Then Blizz decides "You know whats wrong with our game? We arent getting to 200/200 fast enough... lets add more workers to the start!" Most people were complaining about how the game devolved into every match being a race to 3-4base 200/200 so they made that race even faster... hell they should have jsut made that the way the match starts. Both players start with 3 bases and full worker saturation... since thats all Blizz thought we wanted form a RTS why even go with the half-measure of just increasing starting workers. Go big or go home. This game was not what anyone hoped for, and every expansion made the game worse....added more and more ridiculously stupid units... id rather play Wings of Liberty than Legacy of the Void. Blizzard decided to make a game that didnt appeal to casuals OR hardcore RTS fans. Instead they made this game that hovers in the middle.. that neither group cares enough about to stay interested.... which is why their game/scene is now dead. They needed to either go full LoL and make it super casual friendly and get rid of the cheesy units like Banelings/widowmines that have a chance of ending the game immediately... or they needed to slow down the game and let it become about strategy again. Any/everyone who has been on this site since before SC2 saw what SC2 was and how it wouldnt have a long life because it didnt appeal to the people who were actually fans of the genre. But then TL got flooded by 100000 new fans of SC who refused to listen to anything negative. And i feel obligated to mention... that Blizz's idea to sell this as 3 full priced individual games... was a giant slap in the face, especially in an era of gaming riddled with DLC... they sold expansion packs at the same price of the original, and they were NOWHERE near worth that. And thats from someone who LOVED the campaign. they didnt sell BW as 3 individual games, they didnt sell WC3 as 3 individual games...there was no reason to do that with Sc2 except because they thought they could get away with it because they were making the sequel to BW, a huge success. Wow dude nice job. You reiterated complaints from 2010 that have been written 1000 times and largely have been fixed at this point. What would be more useful is realizing games like CSGO and Melee started at far worse points than SC2 and had dramatic revivals. I dont believe in "too little too late" when you look at these examples. We should be asking how to get there instead of cluttering up the thread with 2010 BNET 2.0 complaints.
And by the time they were "fixed" the game had bled out more than an order of magnitude of its players.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
