|
On February 17 2008 21:11 ForAdun wrote:Show nested quote +On February 07 2008 08:44 Meh wrote:
No guts no glory, you can't be afraid of change if you're going to try revolutionizing the genre again. Blizzard has phailed once, and that was WC3. Perhaps they learned a few things. Tell them they've failed with WC3 and they will be too puzzled to answer. They don't have the feeling they failed. They think it was a great success. This is why they don't realize how they're screwing up SC2.
Actually, as far as sales go the Warcraft series is more successful than the Starcraft series based on what Wikipedia says.
And that is without including World of Warcraft, you ca notice in their report Vivendi has a separate reference to it.
You can see that in the source that Wikipedia uses for this article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_game_franchises
Warcraft 43 Starcraft 85
Source:
http://www.vivendi.com/ir/download/pdf/VIVGames_EuropeRoadshow_June2006.pdf#page=4
Although the report is a bit outdated (June 2006).
Furthermore wikipedia considers War 3 to be the competitive game with the second biggest playerbase, with the first being Counter-Strike.
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-sports
Warcraft III
Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne – Real-Time Strategy (1vs1, PC)
Played professionally all around the world with hot spots in South Korea, China and Germany, there are a few dozen "professional" teams. The game lacks a uniting body and has no definable world championship.
The finals of tournaments all around the world are considered to be the biggest tournaments to win. These include the six "Major tournaments" listed below as well as events organised by Blizzard Entertainment, televised Korean leagues, several tournaments held in China (IEST & WEF), ESL's WC3L Series and NGL One.
Warcraft III is seen as the competitive game with the second biggest playerbase, with the number players online at Battle.net ranging between 70,000 and 100,000 at any given moment. It must also be noted that the Chinese scene, which has over three million players, uses their own clients for online competition due to a poor connection to the outside world.
Wiki articles about Warcraft III competitions include a historical overview of "world championships" as well as a ranking based on them and a number of player biographies such as: Zdravko "Insomnia" Georgiev, Xiaofeng "Sky" Li, Dae Hui "FoV" Cho, Jang "Spirit Moon" Jae Ho, Fredrik "MaDFroG" Johansson and Manuel "Grubby" Schenkhuizen.
StarCraft
StarCraft: Brood War – Real-Time Strategy (1vs1, 2vs2, PC)
This game has found a home in South Korea, where many play it professionally as a spectator sport. This game is also now breaching acceptance into mainland Asian countries such as Vietnam and China. StarCraft is the very first game to have been accepted into the World Cyber Games tournament and has a tournament at their events since inception. It also enjoys limited, but significant competitive popularity in the west.
|
Blizzard wrote:
Batch 2
Will players be able to select multiple buildings simultaneously?
We are directing much attention to polishing and improving the user interface. On that note, players will definitely be able to select and build from multiple buildings at the same time. You cannot drag-select buildings, but you can shift-click on them and add them to a control-group for ease of unit production.
Will workers auto-gather resources if the rally point is set to a mineral node or a geyser?
Of course.
Will we be able to select more than 12 units at the same time?
Currently, unit selection is unlimited, but this may change with further development and testing.
Of course it is clear that the people from Blizzard have no clue and will ruin the game unless it is outsourced to Korea.
|
We all know that SC requires hardcore multitasking, and that this adds to its competitiveness.
But a large amount of all macro-related tasks in SC1 is repetitive and "annoying". WE KNOW that the simple fact that they exist at all requires the player to be better at multitasking and splitting his attention etc...
But we want more meaningful tasks. A game in which there's still a lot of tasks to do, but almost none of the tasks feels stupid, repetitive, annoying or tedious would be the ideal.
Sure, maybe there's less to do in the early game, but high APM players will constantly spam commands anyway. As long as there's much going on during battles, it's perfectly fine.
It's a new game in a new environment, new multitasking opportunities and new areas of skill will probably appear. Or at least they should appear. If not, SC2 might suck.
That's why we're open to new ideas such as lowering the current mechanical macro requirements a bit and then seeing what happens.
Not being anti in this discussion has almost nothing to do with insufficient SC1 skill. It's just about trying a different approach, with a similar skill ceiling, and seeing if it will work or not. And we will only see that once the game is feature-complete and a beta version is being tested thoroughly.
No one here wants to have a "free win" button and a free invitation to become a progamer. But many dislike the current "feel" during playing SC1, which is why we want something different for its sequel.
|
If you feel that macro is 'meaningless, tedious and stupid', you're the stupid one for not understanding that it's pretty damn integral to the game.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On February 18 2008 03:24 Unentschieden wrote:Show nested quote +Blizzard wrote:
Batch 2
Will players be able to select multiple buildings simultaneously?
We are directing much attention to polishing and improving the user interface. On that note, players will definitely be able to select and build from multiple buildings at the same time. You cannot drag-select buildings, but you can shift-click on them and add them to a control-group for ease of unit production.
Will workers auto-gather resources if the rally point is set to a mineral node or a geyser?
Of course.
Will we be able to select more than 12 units at the same time?
Currently, unit selection is unlimited, but this may change with further development and testing.
Of course it is clear that the people from Blizzard have no clue and will ruin the game unless it is outsourced to Korea.
Hm wow, good thing you quoted this, it's been so long I actually did not remember you could only add them to hotkeys individually.
For people at blizzcon, was this the case there as well?
@Klouvious
There's been 3 warcraft games (and 1 expansion for WC2, 1 expansion for WC3) whereas there's been only one starcraft, and one expansion.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On February 18 2008 03:24 Unentschieden wrote:Show nested quote +Blizzard wrote:
Batch 2
Will players be able to select multiple buildings simultaneously?
We are directing much attention to polishing and improving the user interface. On that note, players will definitely be able to select and build from multiple buildings at the same time. You cannot drag-select buildings, but you can shift-click on them and add them to a control-group for ease of unit production.
Will workers auto-gather resources if the rally point is set to a mineral node or a geyser?
Of course.
Will we be able to select more than 12 units at the same time?
Currently, unit selection is unlimited, but this may change with further development and testing.
Of course it is clear that the people from Blizzard have no clue and will ruin the game unless it is outsourced to Korea.
Hm wow, good thing you quoted this, it's been so long I actually did not remember you could only add them to hotkeys individually.
For people at blizzcon, was this the case there as well?
@Klouvious
There's been 3 warcraft games (and 1 expansion for WC2, 1 expansion for WC3) whereas there's been only one starcraft, and one expansion. That has to be considered at least =]
On February 20 2008 01:17 Hawk wrote:
If you feel that macro is 'meaningless, tedious and stupid', you're the stupid one for not understanding that it's pretty damn integral to the game.
People are allowed to feel those actions are tedious, just as we enjoy them (at least I do).
|
Why the hell do u hav to lower mechanical macro requirements. They are part of the game's challenge and it makes it more competitive. Btw pros can macro fine without more automation. And for those saying sc1 is just a clickfest is a pretty retarded view. Plenty of players do well with a low apm. For example, from watching incontrol's rep pack he only has about 170ish apm or less for a midlength game yet hes obviously amazing. And I think you can play a pretty decent protoss even with only like 100ish. And there are plenty of players with high apm that play like shit.
But if you want to be able to play well and execute ur cool tactics and shit with only 50 apm... I dont think sc2 should cater to that mindset.
I'm not too much against increase or unlimited selection though. It's kinda gay even seeing pros fuck up army control. Unlimited sounds like a little too much so maybe a cap of 24 is reasonable.
|
@FrozenArbiter
Indeed the site doesn't state exact numbers for each game separately, and i haven't found actual sales number from an O.K. source yet. However the numbers for the two series in the Vivendi Report which is Wikipedia's article's source are as follows:
Warcraft series 19 million.
Starcraft series 9,5 million.
And I just can't believe that Warcraft 1+Warcraft 2+Beyond the Dark Portal managed to sale more than Starcraft+Brood War.
Actually on Blizzard's Warcraft 2 site it mentions that the Warcraft series has sold more than 4 million copies.
http://www.blizzard.com/us/war2bne/index.html#war2x
@ Everyone who is about to post something that has obvious and hillarious answers.
Please don't.
|
On February 20 2008 01:32 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Hm wow, good thing you quoted this, it's been so long I actually did not remember you could only add them to hotkeys individually.
Where does it say THAT? Please, do tell since I´m obviously blind or something.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On February 20 2008 08:25 Unentschieden wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2008 01:32 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Hm wow, good thing you quoted this, it's been so long I actually did not remember you could only add them to hotkeys individually.
Where does it say THAT? Please, do tell since I´m obviously blind or something.
Lol I was worried I misread something for a second here, but I THINK I'm reading it the right way:
We are directing much attention to polishing and improving the user interface. On that note, players will definitely be able to select and build from multiple buildings at the same time. You cannot drag-select buildings, but you can shift-click on them and add them to a control-group for ease of unit production.
|
You shift-select a bunch of buildings and hit ctrl+1. From what I can tell, that's what it says.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Oh I read it as you have to add them one by one with shift since you can't drag-select them.
|
I believe you both just stated the same thing
You cannot drag select buildings, you must select them one-by-one with shift. After, you can bind them all with ctrl+1.
|
I actually do not mind the automine for the workers you build. I think some people are being closed minded, wanting not just heavy multitasking in the game (nothing wrong with that) but the specific multitasking they are used to because it's already in SC1. I would encourage people to think a bit more positively because if SC2 proves to be anywhere as deep as SC1, there will be plenty of things old and new to occupy your time and force you to multitask very heavily at high levels of play.
The reason I do not mind automine in SC2 is because it seems that keeping it would just be for the purpose of complexity alone and nothing else. I think multitasking in a game should have better reasons than that.
|
On February 20 2008 18:01 phexac wrote:
I actually do not mind the automine for the workers you build. I think some people are being closed minded, wanting not just heavy multitasking in the game (nothing wrong with that) but the specific multitasking they are used to because it's already in SC1. I would encourage people to think a bit more positively because if SC2 proves to be anywhere as deep as SC1, there will be plenty of things old and new to occupy your time and force you to multitask very heavily at high levels of play.
The reason I do not mind automine in SC2 is because it seems that keeping it would just be for the purpose of complexity alone and nothing else. I think multitasking in a game should have better reasons than that.
The other reason you call "nothing else" is that workers are units like any other as well, there is no reason to set their priority back other than being lazy. Forcing the players to spend less time on their workers is a sign that blizzard lacks of interest in that unit-type.
I like workers as much as I like marines, I don't want them to become like a useless burden.
Blizzard shall not decrease my horizon, that's not their job. They shall provide me good games and that's it.
Don't get me wrong, when I was a bloody newbie I thought "why the hell didn't they make workers mine automatically?". But I was a bloody newbie back then but thigs changes and my point of view changed as well. Now I know why this sort of automation is bad.
|
On February 20 2008 19:17 ForAdun wrote:
The other reason you call "nothing else" is that workers are units like any other as well, there is no reason to set their priority back other than being lazy. Forcing the players to spend less time on their workers is a sign that blizzard lacks of interest in that unit-type.
Automine doesn't force you to spend less time on your workers. It just gives you the option to spend less attention on them if you wish. You can still do anything you like with your workers.You can still rally them next to the minerals and assign them individually.
I like workers as much as I like marines, I don't want them to become like a useless burden.
Blizzard shall not decrease my horizon, that's not their job. They shall provide me good games and that's it.
Workers are no useless burden. They are just as nesseccary as they were in Starcraft 1. Plus you can still do with them anything you could do in Starcraft 1.Block,scout,attack,etc..etc... Only thing thats different is that you can choose not to pay as much attention, choose not to do all those things you could possibly do, and just have them mine. And by giving you more options, they don't decrease your horizon.
Don't get me wrong, when I was a bloody newbie I thought "why the hell didn't they make workers mine automatically?". But I was a bloody newbie back then but thigs changes and my point of view changed as well. Now I know why this sort of automation is bad.
And here is were lies Blizzards desicion to include automine. They don't want every potential Starcraft 2 player who does not play Starcraft 1 to think "why the hell didn't they make workers mine automatically?" especially when every other RTS game in the last 5 years has it. That would only discourage other potential customers from buying Starcraft 2.
|
|
|
If you click at the little number near Starcraft in that list you quoted will see the source of the information that Wikipedia uses.
Its non other than the:
http://www.vivendi.com/ir/download/pdf/VIVGames_EuropeRoadshow_June2006.pdf#page=4
Notice the separate numbers for Warcraft series and World of Warcraft.
If you check the sources for the 3 mil and 1 mil for Warcraft 3 and its expansion that the site lists, you will see that the Blizzard announcements that mention those numbers were actually posted back in 2003.The first actually 2 days before Warcraft 3 was actually released. There were 2,5 mil orders before it was even on the shelves of the stores. The second refers only to the expansion and was made one month after its launch, 1 million in one month.
I stand by my statement.
|
On February 20 2008 19:17 ForAdun wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2008 18:01 phexac wrote:
I actually do not mind the automine for the workers you build. I think some people are being closed minded, wanting not just heavy multitasking in the game (nothing wrong with that) but the specific multitasking they are used to because it's already in SC1. I would encourage people to think a bit more positively because if SC2 proves to be anywhere as deep as SC1, there will be plenty of things old and new to occupy your time and force you to multitask very heavily at high levels of play.
The reason I do not mind automine in SC2 is because it seems that keeping it would just be for the purpose of complexity alone and nothing else. I think multitasking in a game should have better reasons than that. The other reason you call "nothing else" is that workers are units like any other as well, there is no reason to set their priority back other than being lazy. Forcing the players to spend less time on their workers is a sign that blizzard lacks of interest in that unit-type. I like workers as much as I like marines, I don't want them to become like a useless burden. Blizzard shall not decrease my horizon, that's not their job. They shall provide me good games and that's it. Don't get me wrong, when I was a bloody newbie I thought "why the hell didn't they make workers mine automatically?". But I was a bloody newbie back then but thigs changes and my point of view changed as well. Now I know why this sort of automation is bad.
Your reasoning is exactly the type of closed-mindedness that I was talking about. You want the very specific tasks to be in SC2 because they are already in SC1. The whole reasoning of less time spent with workers means Blizzard does not like them as much is about as convoluted out-of-thin-air a reason as I have seen. Blizzard's goal is to have players engage in other more productive and fun tasks instead of mechanically sending the workers to minerals. I have a very easy time believe there will be a large number of such tasks.
As far as your belief that only a newbie can possibly want automining and that if he because gosu like you, he would surely understand your point is just another sign of you not willing to think about the new possibilities for SC2.
|
Autoworkers is not going to happen, it would pretty much ensure that the Korean pro circuit never adopts SC2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
