|
United States4991 Posts
On April 09 2007 17:41 MYM.Testie wrote:
It should be a 2d format.
3d is not necessary for RTS.
I think, to go further than saying 3d is not necessary, I'll even say that 3d ends up detracting from an RTS. The fact is that RTSes should not be "visually" driven, but rather gameplay (and I'm including a lot of things in gameplay--the game pace, unit responses, pathing, etc.) oriented. Unit responses were a huge deal-breaker for me in war3. The units just frankly felt clunky. They turned slowly, moved dumbly, etc. Instant turning like in SC is an important aspect of it. Yes, it's not realistic, but neither is most of the stuff in the BW universe. The concept of gameplay is the most important. By the way, did I mention gameplay was important? [/repetition]
I'm not saying the graphics should be like SC's are, since the game would be spectacularly panned if that were the case, even if it had the best gameplay. However, graphics like war3's are also not good. I think the spell system on war3 is too "colorful". Actually, I'm not even sure that I like the idea of many buffs much, frankly. I think too much of a spell system ends up detracting from a game. A few positive/negative buffs are OK, perhaps, but too much and it becomes spell wars. More of a focus on micro/macro/unit production is important (I'm using macro here to include more abstract concepts such as expansion timing, whereas unit production to mean "are my gateways working all the time/pylons warping in time"). A big part of War3 is focused on spells, whereas I find it more fun using lots of "basic" units (which could even include shit like Carriers: I just mean units which attack and move, they don't cast fireball, storm bolt, and anti-magic shell). I'm not a zerg player, I personally find controling the sorts of numbers of units which a protoss has to be the most fun, but I don't think all races should have the same number of units, a variety like T/P/Z has is best!
Har, SC2 should basically just be SC with some changes/additions. I'm a little wary of multiple building selection, since I think it would eliminate a big part of unit production, which is frankly as valid a skill as micro and "strategic thinking" (although I don't think RTSes are nearly as much about strategy as the name might imply... many newbies seem convinced they would be the next Patton if the game were just slower, but when it comes down to it, if you want to play a game where you have time to think and ponder, you should play turn based strategy games).
I think multi-cast (or whatever the fuck it's called when you select a bunch of dark archons and hit c and only one casts mind control) is also not a good idea. It overpowers spells like mind control and makes capital ships nearly useless (or else you turn dark archons and units with similar "super" spells into capital-class units themselves).
"Smart rally" is fine (rally to minerals-->SCV mines; rally to unit-->units go there automatically; when you rally somewhere, if attacked the attacked unit will fight back [but not go running all over the map after some ling far away])
Quite a few words grown out of a response to a 12 word post.
|
My only opinion for now is whenever we hear about sc2, we have a couple fucken idiots just randomly act like a moron and scream, "plz dont make it" or it will kill starcraft. Who the hell cares? Their going to make a sequel, yea it will most likely suck, move the hell on. Starcraft will stay alive as long as people wouldn't mind still playing it.
|
On April 09 2007 17:49 SigrUn wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2007 17:46 ArC_man wrote:
They need to give Terran gundams so Terran actually have a melee unit that doesn't blow.
edit: fusiondf Stukov is dead, Duran killed him remember? (And so is Aldaris, I think you mean Artanis) Stukov is infested. I think he appears in Deception.
I meant artanis :S
And stukov is still alive, infested, and on board a protoss carrier I think
|
Blizzard will be releasing starcraft2, continuing story and background from the original and adding "kerrigan" race making total of 4.
There is a rumor of release of Starcraft2 among esport communities/businese groups.
Could someone clarify which is it at this point. Will it be released or is it a rumor?
|
This is a rumor but it comes from a more credible source than most rumors thus inspiring this discussion.
Edit: I always mistype the word from, it's so frustrating. T_T
|
United States7166 Posts
On April 09 2007 18:24 HnR)Insane wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2007 17:41 MYM.Testie wrote:
It should be a 2d format.
3d is not necessary for RTS. I think, to go further than saying 3d is not necessary, I'll even say that 3d ends up detracting from an RTS. The fact is that RTSes should not be "visually" driven, but rather gameplay (and I'm including a lot of things in gameplay--the game pace, unit responses, pathing, etc.) oriented. Unit responses were a huge deal-breaker for me in war3. The units just frankly felt clunky. They turned slowly, moved dumbly, etc. Instant turning like in SC is an important aspect of it. Yes, it's not realistic, but neither is most of the stuff in the BW universe. The concept of gameplay is the most important. By the way, did I mention gameplay was important? [/repetition] I'm not saying the graphics should be like SC's are, since the game would be spectacularly panned if that were the case, even if it had the best gameplay. However, graphics like war3's are also not good. I think the spell system on war3 is too "colorful". Actually, I'm not even sure that I like the idea of many buffs much, frankly. I think too much of a spell system ends up detracting from a game. A few positive/negative buffs are OK, perhaps, but too much and it becomes spell wars. More of a focus on micro/macro/unit production is important (I'm using macro here to include more abstract concepts such as expansion timing, whereas unit production to mean "are my gateways working all the time/pylons warping in time"). A big part of War3 is focused on spells, whereas I find it more fun using lots of "basic" units (which could even include shit like Carriers: I just mean units which attack and move, they don't cast fireball, storm bolt, and anti-magic shell). I'm not a zerg player, I personally find controling the sorts of numbers of units which a protoss has to be the most fun, but I don't think all races should have the same number of units, a variety like T/P/Z has is best! Har, SC2 should basically just be SC with some changes/additions. I'm a little wary of multiple building selection, since I think it would eliminate a big part of unit production, which is frankly as valid a skill as micro and "strategic thinking" (although I don't think RTSes are nearly as much about strategy as the name might imply... many newbies seem convinced they would be the next Patton if the game were just slower, but when it comes down to it, if you want to play a game where you have time to think and ponder, you should play turn based strategy games). I think multi-cast (or whatever the fuck it's called when you select a bunch of dark archons and hit c and only one casts mind control) is also not a good idea. It overpowers spells like mind control and makes capital ships nearly useless (or else you turn dark archons and units with similar "super" spells into capital-class units themselves). "Smart rally" is fine (rally to minerals-->SCV mines; rally to unit-->units go there automatically; when you rally somewhere, if attacked the attacked unit will fight back [but not go running all over the map after some ling far away]) Quite a few words grown out of a response to a 12 word post.
i agree with you pete 100%. I think Blizzard realizes this, because they havent announced any poor features like heroes, upkeep, or any huge gameplay-changing feature. I think the over 200 food limit is a great idea actually, it wont detract anything from the game and the only reason they had the 200 cap in the first place was because computers couldn't handle them well back in '98. And I like how theyre only adding a few new units and 1 new race, sounds like that is the main new features and that I can live with, as long as the units are acceptable and like you said not too spellcaster oriented.
So far, I'm very pleased. My faith in Blizzard endures.
|
i dont believe they will be able to balance 4 races, they didnt manage it with warcraft 3.
|
United States7166 Posts
On April 09 2007 19:48 MaxdigsSoda wrote:
i dont believe they will be able to balance 4 races, they didnt manage it with warcraft 3.
1. The 3 races in Starcraft: Brood War is already balanced, and they're simply adding 2 units to each race (same as what Brood War did to Starcraft).
2. Warcraft 3 was so very different, adding the new hero and RPG elements into the game was entirely new and also very very difficult to balance. so while sc2 is only adding 1 new race and 2 new units per old race, WC3 essentially not only added 2 new races and changed the existing races a great deal, they added new things like Heroes, Creeps, Items, Upkeep, Neutral Buildings, and basically made the macro part of an RTS trivially easy.
3. Adding a new race does add a lot of complexity yeah because now there are 3 new matchups to balance (new race mirror match doesnt count), that will be quite a monumental task but I think they can do it.
|
United States20661 Posts
SC2 LOOKS like it's going to be basically another expansion pack, from this interview.
New race, 2 units + per race, maybe some new tileset and added storyline. Sounds like expansion pack. Not like they're re-making each race and adding new graphics like they did between WC2 and WC3.
That's a good decision, I think. They realize that SC's popularity is in part DUE to its seeming simplicity, and trying to remake the thing would fail.
I'm fairly excited for it, if this is true.
|
On April 09 2007 20:10 Last Romantic wrote:
SC2 LOOKS like it's going to be basically another expansion pack, from this interview.
New race, 2 units + per race, maybe some new tileset and added storyline. Sounds like expansion pack. Not like they're re-making each race and adding new graphics like they did between WC2 and WC3.
That's a good decision, I think. They realize that SC's popularity is in part DUE to its seeming simplicity, and trying to remake the thing would fail.
I'm fairly excited for it, if this is true.
Ah, it's not an interview. It's a news article, full from fifo
|
They should make 2 versions: StarCraft 2 Pro and StarCraft 2 Chobo, the latter would have all the multipul building selection and auto-micro for the mass market.
|
On April 09 2007 20:14 SnoopySnacks wrote:
They should make 2 versions: StarCraft 2 Pro and StarCraft 2 Chobo, the latter would have all the multipul building selection and auto-micro for the mass market.
haha. That would be kinda weird.
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
+ extra race, + a bwtv feature, + better hack/piracy, working ladder = my wish list; + 2 new units/race = hard to pull off, but if they do <3
|
On April 09 2007 18:44 Lycaeus wrote:
My only opinion for now is whenever we hear about sc2, we have a couple fucken idiots just randomly act like a moron and scream, "plz dont make it" or it will kill starcraft. Who the hell cares? Their going to make a sequel, yea it will most likely suck, move the hell on. Starcraft will stay alive as long as people wouldn't mind still playing it.
I agree stracraft will stay alive, but that's not the point when people (like me) affirm that we dont want it. Your statement is cute but too simplist. If it wont kill starcraft, it will obviously weaken the active community a lot, like W3 did. W3 is sucky, many people here defend it (because its still better than other RTS games) but it has manys flaws compared to BW. Yet i live in France, and a HUGE part of the BW community left for the sucky game.
It is highly probable that SC2 will suck in order to make the maximum money. Simplist features, 3-D fucking graphics. Not me, not you, but a lot of people will be happy of it though. Lots of kids are happy of changes, even if its sucky, especially if its easier for them. Even here, inside the TL forums. And a huge active part of the community will leave once again, without even talking about the youngest that, for sure, SC will never attract anymore.
Sorry but it is a threat. So if they make it 2-D, improved graphics resolution and colors, and pay a lot of attention balancing the new units and race, adding also contextual features for Bnet, it could be fine. Else i DONT want it. But for god sake, no change for the only purpose of making a change. Wtf with this no limit thing ? Seriously.
|
United States20661 Posts
On April 09 2007 20:12 ilovezil wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2007 20:10 Last Romantic wrote:
SC2 LOOKS like it's going to be basically another expansion pack, from this interview.
New race, 2 units + per race, maybe some new tileset and added storyline. Sounds like expansion pack. Not like they're re-making each race and adding new graphics like they did between WC2 and WC3.
That's a good decision, I think. They realize that SC's popularity is in part DUE to its seeming simplicity, and trying to remake the thing would fail.
I'm fairly excited for it, if this is true. Ah, it's not an interview. It's a news article, full from fifo
why did I say interview O_Oi
article, sorry ^^;
|
Dangit, it's hard enough for me to control 100+ supply Zerg enough as it is. 
Also, I wonder what this new supply limit will do to map size, I can't imagine playing a game on a 256x256 map.
|
On April 09 2007 20:47 mahnini wrote:Dangit, it's hard enough for me to control 100+ supply Zerg enough as it is. Also, I wonder what this new supply limit will do to map size, I can't imagine playing a game on a 256x256 map.
thats because your monitor is 15 inches =].
|
On April 09 2007 20:10 Last Romantic wrote:
SC2 LOOKS like it's going to be basically another expansion pack, from this interview.
New race, 2 units + per race, maybe some new tileset and added storyline. Sounds like expansion pack. Not like they're re-making each race and adding new graphics like they did between WC2 and WC3.
That's a good decision, I think. They realize that SC's popularity is in part DUE to its seeming simplicity, and trying to remake the thing would fail.
I'm fairly excited for it, if this is true.
Even though a game released as a sequel 10 years later can hardly be called an expansion, i agree. There were just a few new units going from SC to BW but they had huge effects.
We really don't need any crazy graphics, but new ones would be nice  or a ton of new features. Just a few new things to keep us entertained.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
interesting, exciting and terrifying at the same time. Havent felt this way since the first time I was constipated.
|
intrigue
Washington, D.C9934 Posts
u r so clever 2day
edit:
starcraft's speed requirements make the skill scale huge, which is to me a great advantage for hardcore fans. thing is i wouldn't really mind an in-between of starcraft and war3, as long as pros can still do crazy shit that makes me go crazy. i don't see myself playing starcraft as much in a year from now anyway so it'll be nicer to have a newb-friendly base.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
