EPT"Thank You Everyone!" David Kim leaves StarCraft 2 - Page 7
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Be civil. | ||
|
Ysellian
Netherlands9029 Posts
| ||
|
jimminy_kriket
Canada5525 Posts
| ||
|
Penev
28512 Posts
On April 08 2017 08:05 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: I'm still going to blame David for things, even if they are things he had nothing to do with. He's the new Obama omg imagine the guy who's replacing him | ||
|
Mahanaim
Korea (South)1002 Posts
| ||
|
blunderfulguy
United States1415 Posts
Oh... Oh sweet heavens... oh no oh nononononono D Kim come back I miss you already! D: | ||
|
Edpayasugo
United Kingdom2217 Posts
| ||
|
PharaphobiaSC
Czech Republic457 Posts
On April 08 2017 07:21 JackONeill wrote: On the one hand, I'm glad that he's stating that he'll be working on blizz's new project so i can avoid it like the plague. On the other hand, that means that blizz pulling ressources from SC2 multiplayer because it doesn't bring enough money has gone as far as re-allocating the "head" of the balance team, which means even less patches and changes. Overall i guess that means changes for SC2 multi are done, which finally extinguishes the last hope people unsatisfied with LOTV. I wonder if you did not read the post enough times or u just too (slow?) to process this? He himself wanted the change and there is no suprise after 6 years... you saw it with alot of ppl in Blizzard or anywhere else after some time the change is good. Im actually suprised that he were reading this toxic things for 6 years lol | ||
|
F1rstAssau1t
1341 Posts
| ||
|
MLuneth
Australia557 Posts
| ||
|
Oalfredo77
35 Posts
GG compadre. | ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
| ||
|
KingofdaHipHop
United States25602 Posts
| ||
|
Cricketer12
United States13990 Posts
| ||
|
AzAlexZ
Australia3303 Posts
On April 08 2017 08:05 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: I'm still going to blame David for things, even if they are things he had nothing to do with. He's the new Obama Awaiting the 'new Donald Trump' of SC2's Game designer All jokes aside, Thank you for everything done, David Kim! I am so happy to have gotten a chance (well, multiple chances) to enjoy this game! Thank you for all the hard work, contributions and sacrifices you have given to this game! Wish you the best in the Future! GL HF | ||
|
MushinSSC
31 Posts
| ||
|
RWLabs
Korea (South)273 Posts
| ||
|
ReachTheSky
United States3294 Posts
| ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12240 Posts
On April 08 2017 08:06 Eridanus wrote: You need 'boring' units. The end product is larger than the sum of all components. Units in SC were nice to micro. You got it backwards. The people that wrote the AI for SC2, the collision mechanics, the way position of units is determined in the game engine, how units move and rotate, those people never ever considered how it would 'feel' to control those units in battles, and how even beginning users would be able to improve the effectiveness of their armies by adjusting and improving upon the default unit behavior/AI. So maybe Blizzard thought about how the game would be a competitive game. But if so, they did it backwards. Instead of producing a game with good fundamentals, where you don't have units that have a mind of their own and fight your desire to control them, they tried really hard to come up with cool and special units. In the end that just led to gimmicky gameplay mechanics. Just take the simple example of zerg, creep and unit speed. It is a nice idea at the start. But when you think about it in gameplay terms, all it means is that zerg units are too slow to fight properly, unless the zerg fights on creep. Giving them a speed bonus on creep just means that overall the units have to be slower, or same speed and weaker. Same with warp gate. Blizzard doesn't get that. And their game engine is fundamentally unable to facilitate a game where you can properly control units. That's the worst thing. No balance or unit design can ever fix that. And neither did it make the game more fun. In the end you just need some basic simple units that can be properly controlled. The complexity of the game starts to take over perpetually. You do not try to force it. Just take PvP in SC. Two armies of just two boring units, fighting it out, at the start of the game. Yet in no way is it boring to play. Neither unit would ever be considered for SC2 (or SC3, WC4, etc). So yes, they also tried way too hard to make every unit, in itself, fun to play with. They thought way too long about how much of a 'wow' a unit would give the first moment you got it in single player. Not good for a game you hope to play 1vs1 in 2035. So I stand by my position. You have it backwards. In game design, there exist things called "core tenets", or "pillars". These are your absolute, most-fundamental, bedrock, foundational concepts that can never change. You construct these core tenets, then you build the rest of your game on top of them. In BW, the core tenets were clearly: 1. Make the races feel different and unique. 2. Give each unit a specific purpose. And that's probably about it. For SC2, it was probably the same. Except this is a sequel, so it has to be different enough to not be a replacement. This is the inherent difficulty in designing SC2. The core tenets were probably "do those things but MORE!" and they probably got too specific and narrow. That's how you end up with things like creep speed bonuses and warp-in and Planetary Fortresses. Once you've established those as your immovable principles, you have to build your game around them. They definitely went above and beyond BW's core tenets, and that was probably their goal. And the game does feel familiar but new and different at the same time. So I'd say you're exactly right about a lot of factors. I believe I recall reading that the first step in designing SC2 was to first build the engine and then recreate SC1 inside of it and work from there. Back in 2002 this was how they started with Diablo3: remake all your assets from D2 in the new engine and go from there. And "go from there" always means "improve it in some way" -- make it bigger, louder, more exciting, more impressive, whatever your design goal is. I'm sure as they played SC1 in the SC2 engine they brainstormed and iterated for years on how to make a proper sequel. I'm sure I would have taken the same approach: "make the races feel even MORE different, even from SC1" and "give the units even MORE specific roles". There's inherent danger in that path, though, as we understand. | ||
|
ruypture
United States367 Posts
| ||
|
Alienship
China27 Posts
God speed, David! | ||
| ||
