| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On January 20 2008 21:21 Fen wrote: These arguments will never be settled, because there are two groups of people. 1 group wants a sequel to starcraft. The other group just wants a new fancy RTS game. You mean, one group wants a sequel, the other group wants fancy new graphics and units for starcraft 1. | ||
|
Fen
Australia1848 Posts
On January 20 2008 21:52 Klockan3 wrote: You mean, one group wants a sequel, the other group wants fancy new graphics and units for starcraft 1. Ahh I see what you did there, you took my words and changed them to fit your argument. No. What I mean is that starcraft had a particular style. The only automation was in the form of rallypoints and build ques. Everything that needed doing was done by the player. It required intense multitasking and prioritisation skills and a strong mind to coordinate it all. A true sequel to starcraft would continue along that line. Instead what we are seeing people advocating for is another generic RTS where the game handles most of the multitasking for the player and just leaves the basic decisions and some unit micro left. I mean, they are also reducing the micro element as well with the addition of smartcasting. While a lot of the units in starcraft are continuing over, the gameplay is totally different and follows that of warcraft 3 (Blah blah yes ive heard the differences between warcraft 3 and starcraft plenty of times). Warcraft 3 was a micro orientated RTS. Nearly everything you did was related to your micro. This is NOT the style of starcraft and is something that I do not want to see in starcraft 2. | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On January 20 2008 22:24 Fen wrote: Ahh I see what you did there, you took my words and changed them to fit your argument. No. What I mean is that starcraft had a particular style. The only automation was in the form of rallypoints and build ques. Everything that needed doing was done by the player. It required intense multitasking and prioritisation skills and a strong mind to coordinate it all. A true sequel to starcraft would continue along that line. Instead what we are seeing people advocating for is another generic RTS where the game handles most of the multitasking for the player and just leaves the basic decisions and some unit micro left. I mean, they are also reducing the micro element as well with the addition of smartcasting. While a lot of the units in starcraft are continuing over, the gameplay is totally different and follows that of warcraft 3 (Blah blah yes ive heard the differences between warcraft 3 and starcraft plenty of times). Warcraft 3 was a micro orientated RTS. Nearly everything you did was related to your micro. This is NOT the style of starcraft and is something that I do not want to see in starcraft 2. You are mixing up what defined starcraft and what defined the old RTS's. Its like that in all of the old rts games that you did everything yourself and it was a chore to build units etc. Now, a sequel would put everything that made starcraft different from its competitors at that time into a game built on modern standards and thats pretty much what Blizzard is doing now. If what you say is true, then starcraft 2 wont even scratch the competetive scene of starcraft, so you will still have that left and starcraft 2 will just dominate the rest of the worlds RTS scene. And be happy that they didn't make a total remake of the whole game like wc2->wc3, they could have made the whole game into sim spacestation with combat elements if they wanted just to "Innovate" like all the game critics for some stupid reason seems to love. Warcraft 3 aint anything like wc1 or 2, while from what we have seen sc2 is pretty much the same game as sc1 but with updated unit lists and UI(Both wich are very common in sequels). Its defenitely a sequel, maybe not the sequel you want but its a sequel. | ||
|
cowpie
1 Post
You aren't a psychic and your claims are just as ludicrous as me saying we're all going to die in 30 years because of the depleted ozone. You aren't an expert and you don't know better than most of the reg's at TL.net. Sometimes its best for those who have more experience to make those decisions for other people because they know what is best and you aren't one of those people. You are a troll. Nothing more. You haven't played the f'ing demo so stop talking trash and GTFO. | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On January 20 2008 23:46 cowpie wrote: You aren't a psychic and your claims are just as ludicrous as me saying we're all going to die in 30 years because of the depleted ozone. What claims? You must have missundertstood something. I claimed that starcraft 2 as it is now is the best definition of a sequel ever, it has updated graphics, some mods in the unit lineups, updated UI and a new campaign. Thats the most standard sequel ever made. Sure there are sequels that don't change anything, just adds a new campaign. And there are also sequels that turns the whole game upside down so you barely recognize it, starcraft 2 however is just an ordinary sequel. Now, my other claim, that if these features are so extremely important then the competitive scene of starcraft wont get touched, how can that not be true? Or are you saying that the whole competitive scene of starcraft is so shallow and graphics driven that they will jump to sc2 just because its shinier? No that wont happen, people don't play starcraft just beacuse its starcraft, they play it beacuse its an awsome game just as you kindly pointed out.. Or are you saying that sc2 wont beat the crap out of the other competitors? Trust me, there is no doubt of that, the other RTS developers are so extremely clueless when it comes to balance and general unit counter design that mostly only a few races are viable and with them only a very limited amounth of bo's exist making the games very predictable. Note that i never said that sc2 wil for sure beat starcraft, but it will for sure beat every other game out there. | ||
|
Fen
Australia1848 Posts
However while we love starcraft, we are ready for something new and fresh, something that will become the next standard. Its been 10 years since starcraft has been released, and with all the new technologys and millions of dollars that have been put into RTS games over those years, we are still yet to see anything that rivals it. This is what everyones been waiting for. A chance for a game to be made that tops starcraft. Now I agree that they must work on improving starcraft, and yes thats means working on the UI. However it shouldnt be about automating parts of the game. It should be about making the UI more accessable while still requiring the player to coordinate everything. Here are what I believe are the best ways to implement the new features without the automation. MBS: 1 Building per hotkey Allows players to jump back to their base and double click all their production facilities so they can all build at once. This would be the method used by 99% of noobs if MBS was implemented anyway. Requires pro players to go back to base and coordinate when the game reaches later stages. Allows players to select multiple cannons for focus fire, or supply depots for quick walls etc. Automine: Add the idle worker button. Noobs will then be aware of when their workers are not mining. Will still require the action, but forgetting to tell your probes to mine will no longer be a problem. For pros, it will help as a reminder, but generally the pro's biggest concern is not remembering, but finding time. It makes the game only slightly easier for the pro. Smartcast: Add mana bar to grouped units and when alt is pressed No longer do players have to search around for their spellcasters with mana. Will allow spells to be the destructive forces that they currently are in starcraft 1. Will leave the door open to crazy manouvers that only the best of the best can acomplish. Either way, if MBS, Automine and Smartcasting destroyed the game for the noobs, then starcraft wouldnt have the massive fanbase that it currently has. So the argument that no-one will buy it if it doesnt have those features is wrong. By automating the game, you turn off the esports crowd. Now some people might complain about the lack of features. But if they were to condem an entire game for it, then chances are they were never going to enjoy starcraft 2 anyways. | ||
|
Reason
United Kingdom2770 Posts
| ||
|
prOxi.swAMi
Australia3091 Posts
On January 20 2008 18:24 Gobol wrote: I don't get most of the people that post here. For me, playing against a human is fun. Playing against a computer is not fun. Sending my probes to mine is not fun - because you're fighting the computer, you're not fighting a human. It's something that has to be done because the UI is limited. It's not dynamic, it's static. You're not competing against a human when you do it, you're just fighting a dumb machine. So for me it's not fun at all. Clicking frantically on my 10 gateways and hammering the keyboard is not fun. There's no human interaction. I'm not testing my mind and coordination against another human, I'm just fighting a computer. Hmm yes well please keep playing and you might some day find that your ability to do these things skillfully has a direct effect on how much you enjoy doing them. Seriously, nobody likes doing things they suck at, which explains why so many people want MBS and auto-mining in StarCraft 2. | ||
|
rpf
United States2705 Posts
| ||
|
sh02hp0869
Sweden460 Posts
| ||
|
GeneralStan
United States4789 Posts
I think a strong argument can be made that actions that cannot be performed better or worse have no place in a competitive game. Assigning workers to mine is the epitome of this condition. There is is nothing to the act, only that it needs to be done. I can see why most people don't consider making workers mine skillful, fun, or exciting. | ||
|
StylishVODs
Sweden5331 Posts
Starcraft is not all about the battles. Its about everything you do. Thats why i love it... automations will lead to an easier game. | ||
|
Fen
Australia1848 Posts
On January 21 2008 16:44 GeneralStan wrote: The problem I see with assigning workers to mine is that there is very little skill involved compared to unit micro. No matter who the player is, the act of assigning a worker to mine is a simple right click on a mineral patch. There is positioning, angle, distance, and a whole lot of metagaming in the position of two workers facing off (say at the entrance to a Terran base). Its not about the action itself being difficult to do, its about the multitude and variety of actions that need doing at a certain time. No-one is going to argue that telling a worker to mine is a hard thing to do. Its the fact that finding time to do it, or prioritising how important telling your workers to mine is against other actions is directly related to your ability to read and react to the game. Players should have to be aware of the entire map, making decisions based on things that are right in front of you, and things that are on the other side of the map. | ||
|
StylishVODs
Sweden5331 Posts
| ||
|
ForAdun
Germany986 Posts
On January 21 2008 14:13 rpf wrote: I'm against automation. If units automatically do anything on their own, I don't want it in a game. I'd really like to agree but I can't. Medics in SC don't move when lurkers or dt's attack them. Marines run. I don't like either. The argumentation against automining must be different e.g. simply "it's too easy". On January 21 2008 22:49 AnOth3rDAy wrote: its so easy to micro, you just select a unit and press where you want him to go or attack, there is no skill involved in that either -.- Everything's relative. Fast repetition and combination with other tasks makes it challenging. | ||
|
GeneralStan
United States4789 Posts
On January 21 2008 21:19 Fen wrote: Its not about the action itself being difficult to do, its about the multitude and variety of actions that need doing at a certain time. No-one is going to argue that telling a worker to mine is a hard thing to do. Its the fact that finding time to do it, or prioritising how important telling your workers to mine is against other actions is directly related to your ability to read and react to the game. Players should have to be aware of the entire map, making decisions based on things that are right in front of you, and things that are on the other side of the map. I agree that they are different, and I'm not trying to take down the strawman argument that telling workers to mine is "skillful". My point is that auto mine is good insofar is it shifts attention from trival tasks to non-trivial tasks. The point that micro is just attack + move is exactly the sort of thinking that I think automine can fix. Micro is a beautiful part of starcraft and i think it's a shame to see players amove their whole army while they send peons to the mine (I know this doesn't happen on a pro level, but one shouldn't have to be an expert player just to do what they find enjoyable about the game, which in many novice players is unit micro). The lack of focus on economy does concern me, because I agree that choice of focus on military and economy is an important part of starcraft. I just wish somebody could think of decisions to make in Economy that are non-trivial, something for economy and production other than a time-sink. | ||
|
ForAdun
Germany986 Posts
On January 22 2008 03:12 GeneralStan wrote: The lack of focus on economy does concern me, because I agree that choice of focus on military and economy is an important part of starcraft. I just wish somebody could think of decisions to make in Economy that are non-trivial, something for economy and production other than a time-sink. I think of it like, automining OFF is walking up the stairs and automining ON is using the elevator. I myself don't like using the elevator/escalator, I prefer walking, because I want to be fit. It doesn't bore me at all, actually it's more fun to me because I see all the lazy people on my sides standing/staring around like zombies. I feel good but at the same time I'm disappointed about their behaviour. Elevators are comfort for everyone. Sucks. Automining would completely remove one part of the game that makes me proud, gives me a good feeling. I like walking, I like sending workers to mineral patches by hand. I dislike unneccessary comfort in my life, is that a problem? PS @ GS: I know you're not against me, I just thought your post fits my opinion very well. | ||
|
GeneralStan
United States4789 Posts
 The problem I have is that Starcraft is the Empire State Building, and I don't feel like walking up 100 flights of stairs each day. Sometimes you need an elevator | ||
|
Kwidowmaker
Canada978 Posts
-edit- just to make this post more substantial: Elevator, of course. Otherwise you will lose. If it is a game of importance (and hey, most fun games as well), one won't take a handicap. So, given the option of auto-mine or not, knowing your opponent could take either (this is assuming you want to win), which would you take? (and of course, your opponent will likely take it). | ||
|
iloveHieu
United States1919 Posts
Poll: SIMPLY PUT, AUTOMINING, YES OR NO: (Vote): YES AUTOMINING FTW  (Vote): HELL NOOOO  | ||
| ||
The PiG Daily
Best Games of SC
Reynor vs Zoun
SHIN vs ByuN
herO vs sOs
Maru vs SHIN
Clem vs Bunny
PiGStarcraft614
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
RSL Revival
Maru vs MaxPax
BSL
RSL Revival
Cure vs Rogue
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
BSL
Afreeca Starleague
Wardi Open
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Kung Fu Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
