EPT[O] Dustin Browder Interview - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Suc
Australia1569 Posts
| ||
Aesop
Hungary11305 Posts
On May 09 2009 15:42 Suc wrote: Great link, but why is he Dustin Bowder? yuck, you're right, someone change title please  | ||
|
Gokey
United States2722 Posts
+2 I like Browder more and more with every new Q&A... He really does seem to be aware of what SC players want, even with his somewhat questionable C&C background... | ||
|
RA
Latvia791 Posts
| ||
|
jodogohoo
Canada2533 Posts
| ||
|
AdunToridas
Germany380 Posts
On May 09 2009 05:27 Aesop wrote: Q: In paris we noticed that the AI opponents play extremely strong at the highest difficulty setting. Are they cheating? A: Yes, on the highest setting "insane", the AI profits from additional resources. On all other settings, the opponents do not cheat. [...] C'mon.. this must be a joke. And a very bad one as well.. | ||
|
Aesop
Hungary11305 Posts
On May 09 2009 17:18 AdunToridas wrote: C'mon.. this must be a joke. And a very bad one as well.. Do you mind the AI cheating or do you find it implausible that the AI is not cheating at other difficulty settings? | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On May 09 2009 17:18 AdunToridas wrote: C'mon.. this must be a joke. And a very bad one as well.. Just don't play on highest if you do not like a cheating AI, also the AI cheated in sc1 and in wc3 and in almost every RTS you ever played. Do not read things out of context please, if you look you see that he discussed supreme commander just before so what he meant is that in starcraft most games ends before the 30 minute mark(Which is unlike supcom). Larger army limits as in supcom are therefore not really necessary (According to him) and might even be a bad thing since it can allow games to last even longer with people just building and building just like they do in supcom. | ||
|
AdunToridas
Germany380 Posts
On May 09 2009 18:00 Klockan3 wrote: Just don't play on highest if you do not like a cheating AI, also the AI cheated in sc1 and in wc3 and in almost every RTS you ever played. Really? Okay, in SC1 the AI always knows where you are and what you're doing. But has the AI some sort of additional minerals? And in WC3 as well?? From where do you know that? Just curious On May 09 2009 17:50 Aesop wrote: Do you mind the AI cheating or do you find it implausible that the AI is not cheating at other difficulty settings? Lol.. to me it sounds pretty weird that the AI is cheating.. I mean, it's like playing a 1v1 with a friend and your friend has a cheat for 10000 minerals in the beginning. Is not, y'know, equal? ^^ Seriously, I don't wanna play on Insane 'cause I'm pretty lame, but I thought it would be cool if the AI will beat you with pure strategy skills. No with some sort of cheating. Ah, nevermind =P | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On May 09 2009 18:57 AdunToridas wrote: Really? Okay, in SC1 the AI always knows where you are and what you're doing. But has the AI some sort of additional minerals? And in WC3 as well?? From where do you know that? Just curious Lol.. to me it sounds pretty weird that the AI is cheating.. I mean, it's like playing a 1v1 with a friend and your friend has a cheat for 10000 minerals in the beginning. Is not, y'know, equal? ^^ Seriously, I don't wanna play on Insane 'cause I'm pretty lame, but I thought it would be cool if the AI will beat you with pure strategy skills. No with some sort of cheating. Ah, nevermind =P There is no RTS AI ever which even comes close to being capable of beating even a mediocre player without money cheating, even if they see the whole map and so. And the money cheat is not that they start with more, they just harvest more per trip. | ||
|
Aesop
Hungary11305 Posts
On May 09 2009 18:57 AdunToridas wrote: Lol.. to me it sounds pretty weird that the AI is cheating.. I mean, it's like playing a 1v1 with a friend and your friend has a cheat for 10000 minerals in the beginning. Is not, y'know, equal? ^^ Seriously, I don't wanna play on Insane 'cause I'm pretty lame, but I thought it would be cool if the AI will beat you with pure strategy skills. No with some sort of cheating. Ah, nevermind =P Are you aware that the "hard" setting will be just that - an equal setup where the AI tries to "beat you with pure strategy skills"? The Insane mode is just for the players who want an additional challenge - what's wrong with that? | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
| ||
|
HiOT
Sweden1000 Posts
On May 09 2009 18:00 Klockan3 wrote: Just don't play on highest if you do not like a cheating AI, also the AI cheated in sc1 and in wc3 and in almost every RTS you ever played. Do not read things out of context please, if you look you see that he discussed supreme commander just before so what he meant is that in starcraft most games ends before the 30 minute mark(Which is unlike supcom). Larger army limits as in supcom are therefore not really necessary (According to him) and might even be a bad thing since it can allow games to last even longer with people just building and building just like they do in supcom. Then he would have said so? It clearly means that if you dont get an early advantage or have superior skills you will end up having a regular game that is around 30 minutes or more. And a Supcom game lasts for MAX 30 minutes. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
He is almost definitely tailoring his answers towards his audience. Every other instance (including the official page) they talk about "15-20 minutes". Not to mention the average game length of both SC and WC3 is 15 minutes. Don't make a hen out of a feather.. | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On May 09 2009 20:19 Lobbo wrote: Then he would have said so? It clearly means that if you dont get an early advantage or have superior skills you will end up having a regular game that is around 30 minutes or more. And a Supcom game lasts for MAX 30 minutes. Did you even read what he said? He said that in STARCRAFT (Not 2) the games lasts only half an hour! This have nothing to do with 2! Also noob games in supcom never ends early and I am sure that these guys are noobs or they wouldn't have asked that question which means that that response is 100% appropriate, only in the higher level games do they always end early since the game (supcom) do not really have a good rhythm. | ||
|
ocoini
648 Posts
Would it build and liftoff engineering bay's to get by a blocked choke to scout the main base. Or read our builds after a scout, to find out that something is missing from our build/ongoing upgrades/worker count? etc... hmmmmmm...... | ||
|
Aesop
Hungary11305 Posts
On May 09 2009 21:18 ocoini wrote: I am wondering how the AI would infact react to hidden tech. In SC1 we are getting more adapt at responding to it now, as many play very safe and the "only" timeing for hidden tech is right from the start of the game. Would it build and liftoff engineering bay's to get by a blocked choke to scout the main base. Or read our builds after a scout, to find out that something is missing from our build/ongoing upgrades/worker count? etc... hmmmmmm...... It would have to do something like guessing or inferring the most likely possibility, based on the current level of play. That's about impossible, since predicting standard strategy and openings just when the game comes out would be prophetic. | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
Q: But the day-night cycle and the weather effects wouldn't have any gameplay effects? What a fucking huge lack of vision. -10 points credibility in Blizzard.A: We talked about it, and even tested it, but the answer's: No. We do not want maps with differing rules. Just imagine a snowy area in which ground troops move more slowly. That would completely revert the balance. The Zerg would suffer a lot, since they are highly dependant on their speed. Or imagine rainy maps, on which the sight-range of flying units is reduced. The balance would be shaky and we would have to rebalance the races just because of the stupid rain. That might be an interesting idea for the future, but at the moment we don't want it. Maps are what kept their first game balanced and running for a long time. We wouldn't be playing it today if LT and the hunters were our only options. It is the map makers that balances the meta game as it develops. The more tools the map makers have to work with to balance the meta game in the map. The better. Worst case scenario: simply don't use it. Terrible terrible damage.. | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
On May 10 2009 00:20 VIB wrote: What a fucking huge lack of vision. -10 points credibility in Blizzard. Maps are what kept their first game balanced and running for a long time. We wouldn't be playing it today if LT and the hunters were our only options. It is the map makers that balances the meta game as it develops. The more tools the map makers have to work with to balance the meta game in the map. The better. Worst case scenario: simply don't use it. Terrible terrible damage.. Dude I think that day/night cycles and weather effects are going to be in, just that they won't affect any race in any way. They said their Map Editor will be pretty powerful, so I'd wager a guess that you could still add effects to cycles and weather. | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
On May 09 2009 14:08 GTR wrote: I don't know why people are negative about neutral buildings, they are there to serve a purpose similar to the neutral buildings in SC1 (like the Xel'Naga/Protoss Temples and Power Generators). Yeah, and they can be removed by the map makers if it doesn't work well. | ||
| ||
