On April 11 2007 01:07 Fuu wrote: O my god it's scary. Do you think if they change major things we will have such a good game ? It is highly unlikely. The people who made starcraft did it carefully for sure, but it requires much more than that to do such a great game. It requires luck. Do you think the original programmers thought it will work that way ? Even if now they are aware of some recipes, it's almost sure it won't be as good, especially if it's 3-D and simplified.
Of course a lot of people here will like it and will settle for it. But explain to me what's the point in switching game if the new one sucks more, except from the first discovery weeks ? Saying that blizzard always did great games is true. Saying that blizzard will release something as great as starcraft is probably not. Warcraft 3 is not bad but it sucks compared to starcraft, it is blatant. I played both, and gave the former a fair chance... Yet a lot of people settle for it. Because they have reasons to prefer (it's cute!, i loose less, noob friendly), but probably not for the subtlest qualities of the game.
And for the last time, stop saying it won't be harmful for the sc1 community if sc2 sucks ass, cause you can't be further from the truth.
They should work on what they've already done. If they want to advance and try to revolutionize everything at least they could do it on another name and let the game in peace. Really i want to believe like i did before War3, but i'm scared. If they manage to do something as perfect, then <3. Else the stacraft community -1/3 will continue to survive, with even less attention and hope of new comers than before.
Meh, sure it's scary but come on - you can't choose to not do something just cause it's a little bit scary..
Blizzard has made 4 great RTS games, sure, war3 was not as good as their previous games in some peoples eyes (like mine), but they've made 2 games that I loved (I never really played warcraft 1) - Warcraft 2 and Starcraft, so clearly they are very capable people.
I have faith.
I like your optimism, and i am conscious that they are very very capable people. They did good on all their attempts but, as i already said, i think somehow starcraft evolved into something which was not really planed in the beginning. It can't be reproduced easy, especially if they introduce some shattering features - and yes i think 3-D is one.
Objectively, i dont see any flaws in the sc game today. So if we take apart changes in the sole purpose of making changes, what could really be improved ? Maybe more diversity and slightly better graphisms... Which would lead to a sort of extension set.
Note I am not saying it would be good for Blizzard and their sells on the game. I didn't say either it would be the best way to improve the european progaming, cause our western countries stay too focused on superficial parts of a game (accessibility, visual impression...) ; and a lot of these young new posters on TL.net. I am just speaking from my player point of view.
But i am convinced that, anyway, Blizzard will make changes in the sole purpose of making changes, to see if it works as well as the previous one with new attractive features for the wide newb public, and THIS is risky. Thats why i am worried.
Even if they tried to make it exactly the same but just updated the graphics and such there will be a lot of ppl who hate it, look at source. There they tried to make the game similar to the original cs and so many ppl just complained because they were so used to 1.6 and it's only just about catching up now. Good luck to blizzard.
Blizzard Entertainment is looking for a talented level designer with experience building levels using any popular 3D Real-Time Strategy game toolset (Warcraft 3, Rise of Legends, Command and Conquer, etc). ... Experience creating levels in 3D RTS game toolset (Warcraft 3, Rise of Legends, etc)
wouldnt this indicate they want SC2 to be 3D? yeah sure they havent filled the position yet but why haven't they closed it if they're going to make it 2D?
Blizzard Entertainment is looking for a talented level designer with experience building levels using any popular 3D Real-Time Strategy game toolset (Warcraft 3, Rise of Legends, Command and Conquer, etc). ... Experience creating levels in 3D RTS game toolset (Warcraft 3, Rise of Legends, etc)
wouldnt this indicate they want SC2 to be 3D? yeah sure they havent filled the position yet but why haven't they closed it if they're going to make it 2D?
I think it's understood at this point that games will be 3D. That doesn't mean they HAVE to be slow...just at this point, they tend to be.
Dealing with air is the most painful thing in WC3. Anyone who has played a lot against Destroyers knows what I'm talking about - large flying units stack all over the other units, and it's a pain to do all your important spells on specific targets.
On April 09 2007 15:37 semioldguy wrote: Thanks for the translation mk..))
That's some interesting stuff and answers a few of the question I've had, as well as many others I'm sure. I still maintain the hope that it remains a fast paced game, 3d is okay as long as the game remains high speed. It'd be nice if all SCBW hotkeys were retained in sc2 to allow for an ease of transition to the new game.
I still have my doubts that it will be any better than the starcraft we have now.
I hope they CHANGE hotkeys, because hotkeys chosen by initial letters is a very bad thing in the first place. Imagine CS where you'd switch to pistol with p and rifle with r, knife with k etc..
Will it hurt the SC community if it's bad. Certainly, just look at CS and CS:S.
Also, changes to hotkeyed buildings, resourcegathering etc aren't necessarily a bad thing, only if the changes are worse. I can think of lots of things in SC which doesn't add to the quality of the game and are just plain annoying. Black map anyone?
Wait and see I guess, but blizzards track record has been appaling these last 5+ years so..
they really just need to allow for ingame support of customizable hotkeys because [P]robe [P]ylons [P]atrol siege m[O]de b[U]rrow [M]arine [M]ove [I]rradiate dar[k] templar are all terrible hotkeys as they arent reachable w/ your left hand, i still often mis-press the hotkey and it has costed me the game several times when trying to b[U]rrow my lurkers and I press I or Y or something instead
Could be a coinsidence but i noticed in the burning crusade, expansion to WoW.. Alot of SC related words throughout the game. just a few... (maelstorm, wraith, nexus, ghost.. etc.. theres a bunch anyway.) I guess i dont care what they do cause they will do what they will.. but i just hope sc2 is good and i'll definitely give it a shot.
On April 11 2007 11:13 drift0ut wrote: Even if they tried to make it exactly the same but just updated the graphics and such there will be a lot of ppl who hate it, look at source. There they tried to make the game similar to the original cs and so many ppl just complained because they were so used to 1.6 and it's only just about catching up now. Good luck to blizzard.
Yeah its so true. Source doesnt even has as many players as 1.6 2+ years after release and it only looks worse with all the pub servers basically abandoning map variety in a similar fashion to what happened with BW and Lost Temple a few years after release.
It is just really hard to release an update to a hugely popular competitive game, I really think trying to appeal to the professional aspect of gaming is a mistake though. You just can't CREATE a game specifically for that, people have to CHOOSE the game they want to play. Look at a game like C&C3, they put all these features in.. But it won't have a huge competitive player base to begin with unless its really good(And I have my doubts, though I dont plan on playing it to find out). It just seems doomed to be forgotten by anyone but hardcore C&C fans in 6 months. The Relic RTS's are the same way.
Starcraft is a huge franchise but the only way I see it working out as a competitive platform is if it once again manages to pull in huge amounts of players. And it will only do that by actually being fun. So as much as players like Testie would be livid over the inclusion of newb friendly features like automining or being able to select more than 12 units, I just think at least some of it will be necessary for anyone semi casual to even bother playing fun big FFA or team matches and thereby boosting the amount of players who are interested in the game as spectators.
It can't do much worse than Warcraft 3 I guess. I think that game was kinda underwhelming commercially as well, maybe a reflection of how simple and boring it can be. And maybe had something to do with how taxing it was on mid level systems at the time of release, video cards had only been adopted by gamers so a lot of people didnt have them yet and doing long 4+ player matches would bring computers without a lot of ram and decent processors to a halt. Shit DOTA still manages to take 45 seconds to load for some people it would seem. Maybe going 3D would be a mistake.
But then again 10 fucking years is a long time to wait, im gonna be on my way to 25 when this shit POSSIBLY comes out and really I just wish BW would have gotten another expansion 2+ fuckin years ago.
People play(ed) BW FFAs for fun without being able to select more than 12 units or rally workers to automine - the result is that they play slightly worse, but I doubt the casual gamers care?
Sure, they have 5 workers waiting to mine, but so what?
On April 11 2007 18:20 FrozenArbiter wrote: People play(ed) BW FFAs for fun without being able to select more than 12 units or rally workers to automine - the result is that they play slightly worse, but I doubt the casual gamers care?
Sure, they have 5 workers waiting to mine, but so what?
Well, once you've got used to an easier system, it's hard to go back. I once downloaded Dune 2 and tried to play it again. I couldn't believe I couldn't select more than one unit at a time, and I couldn't believe how much that meant to me. I also installed Starcraft: BW on my laptop before going on a conference, without downloading the lastest patches. It was torture to play. No right clicking to set rally points?
Ok people listen up. I play both SC:BW and W3:TFT and both have different feels and gameplay as you all well know(as was intended by blizzard). They wanted W3 to have its own unique feel, seperate from Starcraft. I see people complaining about how Starcraft will be ruined, the new graphics will "slow the game down", not balanced, and wanting blizzard to keep Starcraft 2 like Starcraft was but just "rebuffed".
First off the original Starcraft released in 1998 people. The age where 3D graphics hadnt been widely used or good(no software of hardware for it). This is 2007. Blizzard will be expecting people to have decent an enough PC to run SC2 in at least a decent resolution. People want SC2 to be exactly as it is right now with better graphics and thats just setting SC2 up for failure with the rest of the people who didnt like SC from the start(or wernt a big fan).
I expect the speed of gameplay to be a little slower than Starcraft but significantly faster than W3. They will make games last longer than 2 minutes, slow down unit building time somewhat but most definatly keep a high unit production count(150-200). Units wont die in 1 second but rather have some type of micro-management ability where it would increase skill variety and gameplay(as apposed to just no micro management early game for SC, save protoss).
As far as balance goes, Blizzard knows the task at hand and the hype they have to live up to in order to make Starcraft 2 the best RTS to date(which i believe it will end up being). Quick gameplay mixed with micro and macro management skills as well as new special units,perhaps new features(perhaps say if a unit gets "X" amount of kills hes promotedand earns an ability?)as well as greater variety in strategy(4 races instead of 3).
Starcraft 2 will be a game to look forward to and i will be at the front lines primed and ready!!
EPT
