|
On December 23 2008 02:04 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2008 01:50 GunsofthePatriots wrote:On December 22 2008 13:33 SaharaDrac wrote:
No, no!!! Starcraft 2 sucks, did you see those ROCKS? They were stupid, just like Xel'Naga watchtowers!!!! I hate how it looks like WC3, its like it ISN'T in 2D or something!!! What the fuck Blizz you retards!?
All this video was was Blizzard giving Western countries a small taste of what "e-sports" is about. Remember this is a foreign concept to most. They want it to become slowly palatable to our culture, so they introduced this simple video. Believe me, everyone knew how TL.net would react: like a bunch of stuck up, closed minded, backwards assholes. We didn't fail to deliver, either! You're angry because of fucking rocks and watch towers?... Seriously, get a life. EDIT: Oh, looks like he's been banned  Actually he's being sarcastic, the person complaining about the rocks was .risingdragoon
you were the original guy who made a huge point of pulling that one bit about rocks out of many points I mentioned. my original point was that it's a gimmick, before it got corrupted by everybody jumping on it all at once. yes, all blocking neutral buildings are gimmicky, these days they're just better designed than before.
the low hp rocks is stock, it's gonna be played. no I do not think rocks will ruin the game as we know it. it's still a carryover like neutral buildings that do things are carried over from c&c.
look, I don't care to make a strong issue either way about this, it's ongoing. just don't misrepresent what I said.
|
So better map making possibilities are a gimmick? T_____T
That just doesn't add up. ;;
|
It was a nice match to watch - bio terran vs zealot/colossus toss  .
But damn, the commentary was very nice to listen   .
|
The commentary was so corny =p. They tried to imitate Tasteless and it was pretty funny watching them ooh and ahh over basic micro (oh HE PULLED THE INURED UNIT BACK!!!).
I really hope hope the game can develop as much as Starcraft does. It looks promising as is, but it won't become Starcraft replacement until it starts evolving.
The HUD was kind cool - the one that displays active min/gas.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On December 23 2008 08:07 .risingdragoon wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2008 02:04 FrozenArbiter wrote:On December 23 2008 01:50 GunsofthePatriots wrote:On December 22 2008 13:33 SaharaDrac wrote:
No, no!!! Starcraft 2 sucks, did you see those ROCKS? They were stupid, just like Xel'Naga watchtowers!!!! I hate how it looks like WC3, its like it ISN'T in 2D or something!!! What the fuck Blizz you retards!?
All this video was was Blizzard giving Western countries a small taste of what "e-sports" is about. Remember this is a foreign concept to most. They want it to become slowly palatable to our culture, so they introduced this simple video. Believe me, everyone knew how TL.net would react: like a bunch of stuck up, closed minded, backwards assholes. We didn't fail to deliver, either! You're angry because of fucking rocks and watch towers?... Seriously, get a life. EDIT: Oh, looks like he's been banned Actually he's being sarcastic, the person complaining about the rocks was .risingdragoon you were the original guy who made a huge point of pulling that one bit about rocks out of many points I mentioned. my original point was that it's a gimmick, before it got corrupted by everybody jumping on it all at once. yes, all blocking neutral buildings are gimmicky, these days they're just better designed than before. the low hp rocks is stock, it's gonna be played. no I do not think rocks will ruin the game as we know it. it's still a carryover like neutral buildings that do things are carried over from c&c. look, I don't care to make a strong issue either way about this, it's ongoing. just don't misrepresent what I said.
I'm making a big deal out of this because you kept insisting that they were first from WC3 (they are in SC too) then that they didn't have enough HP like the "real blockades in SC" (they have the same amount and it can be tweaked).
They can be however gimmicky they want to be, they add options to the game, options are good.
I don't know what "low hp rocks is stock, it's gonna be played" means, but the HP is adjustable. And 2000 isn't low.
Here are some further examples of why I'm making a big deal out of this:
the rock barricade's a lame wc3 carryover
those aren't barricades to make semi-islands you fool. the only thing they do is block scouting. they don't take much of anything to take down unlike the real barricades in promaps with huge hp. that kind of rock barricades are lifted from wc3 singleplayer maps.
Yeah, it's one of the gimmickier aspect of mapping. Even so, those barricades in ur pic are well-designed. The rocks in the video are the same ones from wc3 singleplayer, ones you hit a few times and they crumble to dust.
If you weren't so insistant on repeating these false claims I wouldn't be so gungho about correcting them :/
But you just ignore every post pointing out the flaws with what you are saying and continue posting the same thing.
|
It bothered me that you couldn't see anything that happened below the piece of high ground when the terran attacked the protoss expo at 3. I do hope rotating the camera is easy and smooth, otherwise that will be a problem.
Also, I think the terran units are hard to tell apart. It might be because I haven't played the game, but even if it were my first time seeing starcraft played, I'd be able to make out different units. Right now I couldn't make out what anything was in that huge clump of marines, marauders and helions, unless I really carefully looked on their sizes. A bit different textures or models would help, especially if they plan on making this game accessible for e-sports, where lower quality streams would be hugely affected by it.
Otherwise I find the game looking quite good, except for the attack animations.
|
On December 23 2008 09:24 FrozenArbiter wrote:
If you weren't so insistant on repeating these false claims I wouldn't be so gungho about correcting them :/
But you just ignore every post pointing out the flaws with what you are saying and continue posting the same thing.
I'm not ignoring at all, I'm simply saying what I saw. in wc3 singleplayer there are rock barricades that crumble to dust after just a few hits, and since the team behind sc2 is from war3 I don't see this as a stretch.
there is a theme going on with sc2: people want a cost-reward exchange in many aspects of the game, like the ones in sc. Example: micro requires time and attention in exchange for precision. macro requires multitasking in exchange for production. A lot of things require intermittent breaks from ordinary intuitive control. SC2 is attempting to streamline that whole process with automine, attack move a.i., mbs, etc. obviously this is done to lessen the gap b/w ppl who do these things manually and people who can't do it/aren't willing to learn. this also closes the gaps b/w pros.
so far so good? now, there are also things being added that don't fall into this whole cost-reward thing. these rocks will have little to no effect on the game if 2stalkers and a zealot can take it down in a few seconds. and I don't know how the watertowers are suppose to be different from say, a scouting pylon or a scray ling or vulture, except for maybe a little more range. I can go on - the high-yield minerals are kindiva gimmick too, cus we know from sc that it's not the yield that makes us expand to a location, it's the proximity and the ability to defend it. and if you say hidden expo, a high-yield one will get scouted even more vigorously.
the point is these are all gimmicky stuff that, while nice to have (and kinda unnecessary since we can do most of that already), shouldn't be made to sound like some "prominent thing hanging in the balance" of the multiplayer vs, say, important things like moving shot, macro, graphic clarity, and non-clone-like group animation.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
these rocks will have little to no effect on the game if 2stalkers and a zealot can take it down in a few seconds.
4 zealots 3 dragoons
22 seconds
That is not "a few seconds", not to mention that the minerals can be set to *anything*.
High yield minerals add sooooo many options to mapmaking, and honestly - they hardly even mentioned them in this VOD. I think they talked about it.. once? They mentioned the Watch Towers like.. once in the beginning when they first showed one and then they pointed it out when the protoss started attacking the cliff, that the terran could see it from his Watch Tower.
Also, the Towers have significantly more range than a normal unit, probably like 2x (check the minimap when the Stalkers claim it, just before 6 minutes I think).
I don't even know why you are comparing these map features to gameplay mechanics btw :/
|
Is it just me that find all the units extremely dull and gimmicky?
|
Can't say I like the new units shown in this video. Might just take some getting used to (and pros to bring out their full potential), but BW units seem to have more character. Reavers and vultures just seem so much more interesting/exciting, not to mention wraiths cooler than banshees.
|
On December 23 2008 13:47 neliel wrote:
Is it just me that find all the units extremely dull and gimmicky?
No. You and all the 100 other new posters on the forum..
But seriously, the only one I don't like the look of is the marauder.
EDIT: Is it just me or these people with 20 posts getting more ridiculous by the second!?
|
On December 23 2008 14:10 exp wrote:
Can't say I like the new units shown in this video. Might just take some getting used to (and pros to bring out their full potential), but BW units seem to have more character. Reavers and vultures just seem so much more interesting/exciting, not to mention wraiths cooler than banshees.
What!? Banshees are fucking badass. If you were a true starcraft fan you would be welcoming a helicopter to the game Besides, they're like wraiths with no AA but insane AG attack.
Vultures = Helions?
Any more new members going to come and whine, because it seems like all the people with under 100 posts are all fucking pissed off about a casual battle report.
|
On December 23 2008 14:26 GunsofthePatriots wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2008 13:47 neliel wrote:
Is it just me that find all the units extremely dull and gimmicky? No. You and all the 100 other new posters on the forum.. But seriously, the only one I don't like the look of is the marauder. EDIT: Is it just me or these people with 20 posts getting more ridiculous by the second!?
Doubt that has anything to do with my postcount. I've been browsing these forums for MANY years and posting would clearly not change my opinions.
|
On December 23 2008 14:28 GunsofthePatriots wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2008 14:10 exp wrote:
Can't say I like the new units shown in this video. Might just take some getting used to (and pros to bring out their full potential), but BW units seem to have more character. Reavers and vultures just seem so much more interesting/exciting, not to mention wraiths cooler than banshees. What!? Banshees are fucking badass. If you were a true starcraft fan you would be welcoming a helicopter to the game Besides, they're like wraiths with no AA but insane AG attack. Vultures = Helions? Any more new members going to come and whine, because it seems like all the people with under 100 posts are all fucking pissed off about a casual battle report.
Banshees seem pretty insane indeed, and I'm not denying that, but it looks just like some generic unit from C&C. Can't say I particularly like Helions with their flame throwers either, vulture frag grenade base raiding just seems cooler. Mainly, its the new terran unts I dislike though, colossus still has some potential.
Don't know, my post is hardly a whine , It was just my thoughts based on the battle report. And notice how it was phrased "x seem more interesting".
|
On December 23 2008 14:26 GunsofthePatriots wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2008 13:47 neliel wrote:
Is it just me that find all the units extremely dull and gimmicky? No. You and all the 100 other new posters on the forum.. But seriously, the only one I don't like the look of is the marauder. EDIT: Is it just me or these people with 20 posts getting more ridiculous by the second!?
I dont think you should care about postcount. Everyone has to start as a new poster right? What if the guys with 10k posts would come and pick on you for having only that many =D
Anyway
I do think the units look gimmicky, i also think they look to be "hard counters" for each unit. Its not like in SC where any units can really beat about any units depending on amount, angles, and the place battle happens.
OK maybe Dragoons>Vultures, except vults have mines which can devastate dragoons with good micro (against lesser micro of dragoons).
This looks too red alert3-y. Too much rock-paper-scissor stuff.
And YES BW has some of that too, but not that excessively
|
On December 23 2008 14:26 GunsofthePatriots wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2008 13:47 neliel wrote:
Is it just me that find all the units extremely dull and gimmicky? I think my opinions are more important than anyone else's, but I can't think of any plausible counter-arguments so I'll belittle them for not having many posts
Fixed
|
vultures > hellions
banshees > wraiths
marauders look awesome
colossus sucks
Can we get over with this already?
|
On December 23 2008 17:16 MuR)Ernu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2008 14:26 GunsofthePatriots wrote:On December 23 2008 13:47 neliel wrote:
Is it just me that find all the units extremely dull and gimmicky? No. You and all the 100 other new posters on the forum.. But seriously, the only one I don't like the look of is the marauder. EDIT: Is it just me or these people with 20 posts getting more ridiculous by the second!? I dont think you should care about postcount. Everyone has to start as a new poster right? What if the guys with 10k posts would come and pick on you for having only that many =D Anyway I do think the units look gimmicky, i also think they look to be "hard counters" for each unit. Its not like in SC where any units can really beat about any units depending on amount, angles, and the place battle happens. OK maybe Dragoons>Vultures, except vults have mines which can devastate dragoons with good micro (against lesser micro of dragoons). This looks too red alert3-y. Too much rock-paper-scissor stuff. And YES BW has some of that too, but not that excessively
Not that excessively?! Stalker without blink can't deal with Marauder and Marauder without heal and support of other units on the open ground being easy target for zealots is too much for you??
|
On December 23 2008 14:28 GunsofthePatriots wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2008 14:10 exp wrote:
Can't say I like the new units shown in this video. Might just take some getting used to (and pros to bring out their full potential), but BW units seem to have more character. Reavers and vultures just seem so much more interesting/exciting, not to mention wraiths cooler than banshees. What!? Banshees are fucking badass. If you were a true starcraft fan you would be welcoming a helicopter to the game Besides, they're like wraiths with no AA but insane AG attack. Vultures = Helions? Any more new members going to come and whine, because it seems like all the people with under 100 posts are all fucking pissed off about a casual battle report.
What a joke, these units look like crap.. you can't tell the difference of which unit is which in the battle.. they are all clumped together in some straight line as they walk.. they dont even have battle formation or separation like in SC..
The part where the helions/marauders/marines go up to take down the proxy pylon they are all so small in contrast with the ramp that you can barely even see the units.. they are also filed together and just look like a black ball moving around..
A lot of the units (helion, marines) and their animations (flame thrower, the way the marine runs) look like command and conquer units in action.. go pull up command and conquer youtube vids and compare them to this SC2 vid.. a lot of the units move and look exactly the same.. its very gimmicky and the graphics just add on some newb friendly pizazz in order to attract more customers.
Isn't it ironic that dustin browder used to work on command and conquer?.. go compare the unit animations and unit size in comparison to the objects on the map.. it looks totally disproportional..
|
As another said here.. SC units have life/character.. each unit seems like its own being.. when you look at SC2.. it just looks like plastic tonka toys running around..
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
