EPTMaking cliffed units completely shrouded is going to be interesting.
StarCraft II Panel discussion on art & gameplay - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
azndsh
United States4447 Posts
Making cliffed units completely shrouded is going to be interesting. | ||
|
XCetron
5225 Posts
On May 20 2007 12:57 azndsh wrote: More excited than ever right now. Making cliffed units completely shrouded is going to be interesting. Colossus gonna be a bit imba, start shooting to kite ground army then just walk on a cliff and shoot down and melt the army. Keeps repeating. | ||
|
Luddite
United States2315 Posts
So basically what will happen is that units that can jump up cliffs rape units that can't if those don't have a spotter. Just like how now, cloaked units rape non-cloaked units without a detector. | ||
|
EAGER-beaver
Canada2799 Posts
| ||
|
dudel
Germany188 Posts
| ||
|
davidgurt
United States1355 Posts
What. the. fuck. I always wonder how much time Blizzard has spent watching Koreans play Starcraft. Time and time again, it always seems as if they barely follow the gaming scene. I think that they could really improve their company by hiring some knowledgeable people in the scene like some of us in TL, they'd learn a lot more about proper publicity and of what the public fanbase for sc is looking for. | ||
|
Luhh
Sweden2974 Posts
BUT - here's a big but - if attack-move AI is very good, and firing animation last too long (for instance the zealot melee attack lasted about twice as long), then there won't be much room for microing. Judging by some of their answers, it looks like they want to do away with a bit of that. If the game gets streamlined too heavily, then BOs will be the major deciding factor. One thing though, why do they insist with the black shroud? Hopefully this was just a campaign or scenario map they showed so far, where uknown terrain can be viable, but it isn't in a multiplayer map. Cause if you've already played it once, it's not unkown anymore, and there's no point to it, other than messing up scouting and planning if your memory is a bit off. Prescouted map checkbox plz! (fog of war remains of course!) | ||
|
Sadir
Vatican City State1176 Posts
On May 20 2007 11:38 FrozenArbiter wrote: Speaking of moving terrain, what does everyone think of attacks affecting the terrain (at least visually)? Too cluttered maybe? Burning trees might be cool at least (had it in earlier - alpha, beta - versions of SC :D). that was exactly what I thought 2....the tanks exploding...puh....rather big visual effects... we hopefully can turn them down a little...so I can see my units fighting =) | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 20 2007 13:26 davidgurt wrote: "rather than requiring the micromanagement of high-level Warcraft III play." What. the. fuck. I always wonder how much time Blizzard has spent watching Koreans play Starcraft. Time and time again, it always seems as if they barely follow the gaming scene. I think that they could really improve their company by hiring some knowledgeable people in the scene like some of us in TL, they'd learn a lot more about proper publicity and of what the public fanbase for sc is looking for. Warcraft 3: 95% micromanagement 5% macro Starcraft: 50% macro 50% micro (maybe a bit more tilted towards macro) I'm pretty sure that was their point. | ||
Nyovne
Netherlands19130 Posts
On May 20 2007 13:37 FrozenArbiter wrote: Warcraft 3: 95% micromanagement 5% macro Starcraft: 50% macro 50% micro (maybe a bit more tilted towards macro) I'm pretty sure that was their point. Exactly, and losing one major battle in BW doesnt mean you lost the match, while losing many units in WC3 mostly means you lost the match as well. More macro oriented % in a game allows for more correctional things and more ways to control your playstyle. WC3 has less micro then BW since alot of things are autocast and the tab between unit possibility and just 1 caster casts when you got multiple selected. Considering absolutes SC is more complex by far in micro and macro but if you see it relatively WC3 is a much much more micro oriented game then SCBW. | ||
|
azndsh
United States4447 Posts
| ||
|
XDawn
Canada4040 Posts
| ||
|
XG3
United States544 Posts
On May 20 2007 13:37 FrozenArbiter wrote: Warcraft 3: 95% micromanagement 5% macro Starcraft: 50% macro 50% micro (maybe a bit more tilted towards macro) I'm pretty sure that was their point. You hit the nail right on the head. One example is economic management (which is considered macro), something that Warcraft 3 decided to stay away from. In War3, you have four peons max on the gold mine and you leave it at that. In StarCraft, econ management is something totally simple that separates bad players from good players from great players and that's just one example of how macro plays a much more important part in SC than WC. | ||
|
mel_ee
2448 Posts
On May 20 2007 13:26 davidgurt wrote: "rather than requiring the micromanagement of high-level Warcraft III play." What. the. fuck. I always wonder how much time Blizzard has spent watching Koreans play Starcraft. Time and time again, it always seems as if they barely follow the gaming scene. I think that they could really improve their company by hiring some knowledgeable people in the scene like some of us in TL, they'd learn a lot more about proper publicity and of what the public fanbase for sc is looking for. say hello to XG3... ^I think its 5 peons per gold mine, which IMO sucked since money was about the same as your opponent anyways I love how they are approaching the art and design. They got the key concepts of controlling color and detail to where they just need to be. So happy~ | ||
|
Guybrush
Spain4744 Posts
I liked the way he compared Warcraft 3 to BW. Probably pissed off a good share of Warcraft3ers to read that, but it's the truth.  | ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
On May 20 2007 13:26 davidgurt wrote: "rather than requiring the micromanagement of high-level Warcraft III play." What. the. fuck. I always wonder how much time Blizzard has spent watching Koreans play Starcraft. Time and time again, it always seems as if they barely follow the gaming scene. I think that they could really improve their company by hiring some knowledgeable people in the scene like some of us in TL, they'd learn a lot more about proper publicity and of what the public fanbase for sc is looking for. they should hire you | ||
|
XCetron
5225 Posts
| ||
|
useLess
United States4781 Posts
| ||
|
OMFGlearntoplay
32 Posts
On May 20 2007 10:23 PinoyTalaga324 wrote: Dilling explains that because SC2 is being developed with professional competition in mind, the sequel's special effects will be "tight, fast, and quick" such that they don't obscure the action or slow down your computer. However, "landmark events" like the summoning of the top-level protoss mothership unit will be accompanied by sufficient graphical fanfare to point out their importance. yay! Thanks u! Saying it is one thing. But you have seen the videos right? Seeing is believing... there has been some clutter already. It disappears after 4 or 5 seconds... disappears way too slow to matter in a real fight. But hopefully we can turn that crap off anyway. | ||
|
Myrmidon
United States9452 Posts
Didier explains that within the core philosophies of Blizzard art design, "nothing is subtle--every character is over-the-top; every environment is either beautiful or battle-scarred." T_T This is one of the reasons why critics are critical of video games? | ||
| ||
