|
United States170 Posts
Most of us here on TL.net (I think) are worried (at least somewhat) that Starcraft II will be a game that is overly automated/plays itself/is too noob friendly/takes less skill than BW/etc. However, this fear is usually rooted in the belief that one of the chief appeals of Starcraft is in the skill of execution that can be achieved after years of training and massgaming.
I'd like to propose that even with MBS and automine in the game, what makes Starcraft truly amazing both to play and to watch isn't how hard it is to macro off of 4 bases, but how hard it is to out-think, out-maneuver, out-tech, out-expand, and golden-mouse-July-style out-mindgame your opponent.
The following is David Sirlin's rationale for why he made the execution of moves in Street Fighter easier. Sirlin is one of the top US ST (Super Street Fighter II Turbo) players and the lead designer of Super Street Fighter II Turbo HD Remix.
On November 11 2008 11:11 David Sirlin wrote:
Easier Controls
Inside Street Fighter, there is a wonderful battle of wits, but many potential players are locked out of experiencing it because they can't dragon punch or do Fei Long's flying kicks, or whatever other joystick gymnastics. I'm reversing the trend. There's only so far I can go with this and still call it SF2, but wherever I could, I turned the knob towards easy execution of moves. Let's emphasize good decision making—the true core of competitive games—and get rid of artificially difficult commands.
This will get more players interested in the game, eventually leading to more competition. It will also get players past the awkward beginner phase faster and into the intermediate phase where the interesting strategy starts to emerge.
There are some players who wrongly believe that this "dumbs the game down." Actually, the opposite is true. Experts can perform special moves already, so the changes listed below have very little effect on them. Experts will care about actual balance changes such as hitboxes, recovery times, new properties for some moves, and so on. Making special moves easier, however, just allows everyone else to play the "real" game without needing to develop hundreds of hours of muscle memory just to perform the moves. It's actually sad to hear that some players think that their ability to execute a 360 command throw is why they are good, as opposed to the actual strategy of getting close enough to the opponent with Zangief to land the throw.
Another wrong-headed comment I often get is that easier controls don't leave enough skills in the game to separate good and bad players. The statement is absurd. Easier special moves don't change the strategic depth of the game at all (and the actual balance changes in HD Remix hopefully increase the strategic depth). Furthermore, there's no shortage of nuance for experts. Does Cammy's dragon punch beat Fei Longs? It depends on exactly who did it first, which means that 1/60th of a second timing is just as important as ever. So is positioning, spacing, the difficulty of performing combos, and the skill of reading the mind of the opponent.
I think I'm with the majority here (maybe) when I say I'd prefer that they leave automine and the gas mechanic out, but even with these in, I believe that Starcraft 2 will be inclusive to Starcraft vets, WC3 players, and new players alike. The highest levels of play honestly won't be damaged if some stuff is automated (but let's not get carried away) because after all, what truly separates the gold medalist from the silver medalist is his drive, his passion, his game knowledge, his ingenuity, his unpredictability, his ability to read and fake out his opponent, and his champion-like qualities.
Our most beloved Starcraft heroes are not revered for training >9000 hours a week to be able to multitask at 400+ apm. They are revered for their style, their ingenuity, and their ability to produce amazing Starcraft.
All in all, don't worry too much. Starcraft 2 will be great, we'll all play it, and it'll be fun.
Thanks for reading.
|
Agreed. It's going to be great. Just different. It's not a matter of whether or not it's going to be great, everyone knows that. Whether it's greater than BW is what matters, and how it impacts the BW community (Both pro and otherwise).
I hope for the sake of everyone that SC2 dominates SC1, to refrain from any sort of split community where part of the pros play SC2 and the other part play SC1.
|
The SF2 analogy is very apt, but I think part of high level starcraft is mechanics, in particular the perfect mechanics were are only just beginning to see now, 10 years after SC was released. In top level SF2, like sirlin said, everyone can execute moves flawlessly, but in top level SC not everyone has 400+ apm and can constantly macro while microing their army etc. etc. Decision making and mechanics have an approximately 50-50 importance at top level, some people can make split second perfect decisions, others have perfect mechanics.
Reducing the need for mechanics will increase the level of decision making and strategy, but I think the combination of the two is what really makes SC special.
|
This definitely expresses what I've been feeling for a long time, but never quite could find the words to say what I meant.
I'm still very light hearted on the subject of MBS, but this definitely has geared me a little bit to the pro-MBS side a bit...
|
On December 01 2008 15:31 Ronald_McD wrote:
This definitely expresses what I've been feeling for a long time, but never quite could find the words to say what I meant.
I'm still very light hearted on the subject of MBS, but this definitely has geared me a little bit to the pro-MBS side a bit...
never pro mbs. The beauty of SC is playing with a strategic mind while simultaneously microing and macroing like a god.
There is no argument. Street fighter two has two characters on a 2d screen. Nothing compared to starcraft's multitasking.
Think about it, pros are so amazing because they can do macro and micro while simultaneously thinking and making strategical decisions. That is why they are pro, and I am a scrub.
|
On December 01 2008 15:55 Misrah wrote:
never pro mbs. The beauty of SC is playing with a strategic mind while simultaneously microing and macroing like a god.
There is no argument. Street fighter two has two characters on a 2d screen. Nothing compared to starcraft's multitasking.
Think about it, pros are so amazing because they can do macro and micro while simultaneously thinking and making strategical decisions. That is why they are pro, and I am a scrub.
You have failed to convince me why.
But I'm not here to argue over MBS.
Street Fighter is a lot simpler, but it's a game nonetheless, and the principles of a game still apply.
|
On December 01 2008 15:31 Ronald_McD wrote:
This definitely expresses what I've been feeling for a long time, but never quite could find the words to say what I meant.
This, absolutely. It's exactly how I've felt since the whole debate began. To me the primary element in who wins a game should always be decision making, with mechanical execution a far second. I could go on a long rant on the subject, but we've had enough of those already.
|
The thing is that Starcraft lacks a significant amount of Yomi (mindgame layer, look it up if you don't know what it is) though, something that Street Fighter has a significantly larger amount of... to balance out the decrease in mechanics they really need to add some new stuff in that respect if they keep on this track imho.
|
Execution is a major part of SC. And it should be of any RTS. Without it there is too little left.
|
Doing that "360-whirl" takes time, if you just have to do a 180 it's less input needed, and easier and when stuff is easier its less impressive. Also if it's easier to do you see alot more of it and it becomes trivial
|
On December 01 2008 20:10 BlackStar wrote:
Execution is a major part of SC. And it should be of any RTS. Without it there is too little left.
Congrats. The point flew completely over your head. I'm not sure whether you even read the OP.
Love.Zelduck, I'm fairly confident in my belief, that any discussions on this matter are utterly useless and there won't be any good from this thread.
Interesting quote nonetheless, thanks ;P
|
sc2 can be whatever u want it to be, since it dont make bw die in s. korea
if it happens, well i just wasted my time, sadly for me it will never come back.
btw, sf comparison doesnt even make a point.
there are no special moves in starcraft, only thing you need is attention and awareness to remember its time to macro/re-macro, if you enemy is faster than you at GIVING ORDERS, so you punish him by removing this important part of REAL TIME? You can make special moves(SF) as easy as you want, but this doesnt have the same effect that macroing have in starcraft,
so what, attention and awareness arent useful things in a strategy game?
i dont talk about apm cause in street fighter you easily break the 200 apm barrier same needed in starcraft.
btw ur we all will play sc2
it depends on what is going to happen to this game and with the next games, cause atm i have no interest in buying it
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
this would make sense if mechanics weren't a gigantic part of competitive starcraft
the sf2 analogy doesnt really apply because not every 'expert' player can handle SK macro like Sea[Shield] or blanket storm a terran push like Jangbi
|
On December 01 2008 15:06 Love.Zelduck wrote:Most of us here on TL.net (I think) are worried (at least somewhat) that Starcraft II will be a game that is overly automated/plays itself/is too noob friendly/takes less skill than BW/etc. However, this fear is usually rooted in the belief that one of the chief appeals of Starcraft is in the skill of execution that can be achieved after years of training and massgaming. I'd like to propose that even with MBS and automine in the game, what makes Starcraft truly amazing both to play and to watch isn't how hard it is to macro off of 4 bases, but how hard it is to out-think, out-maneuver, out-tech, out-expand, and golden-mouse-July-style out-mindgame your opponent. The following is David Sirlin's rationale for why he made the execution of moves in Street Fighter easier. Sirlin is one of the top US ST (Super Street Fighter II Turbo) players and the lead designer of Super Street Fighter II Turbo HD Remix. Show nested quote +On November 11 2008 11:11 David Sirlin wrote:
Easier Controls
Inside Street Fighter, there is a wonderful battle of wits, but many potential players are locked out of experiencing it because they can't dragon punch or do Fei Long's flying kicks, or whatever other joystick gymnastics. I'm reversing the trend. There's only so far I can go with this and still call it SF2, but wherever I could, I turned the knob towards easy execution of moves. Let's emphasize good decision making—the true core of competitive games—and get rid of artificially difficult commands.
This will get more players interested in the game, eventually leading to more competition. It will also get players past the awkward beginner phase faster and into the intermediate phase where the interesting strategy starts to emerge.
There are some players who wrongly believe that this "dumbs the game down." Actually, the opposite is true. Experts can perform special moves already, so the changes listed below have very little effect on them. Experts will care about actual balance changes such as hitboxes, recovery times, new properties for some moves, and so on. Making special moves easier, however, just allows everyone else to play the "real" game without needing to develop hundreds of hours of muscle memory just to perform the moves. It's actually sad to hear that some players think that their ability to execute a 360 command throw is why they are good, as opposed to the actual strategy of getting close enough to the opponent with Zangief to land the throw.
Another wrong-headed comment I often get is that easier controls don't leave enough skills in the game to separate good and bad players. The statement is absurd. Easier special moves don't change the strategic depth of the game at all (and the actual balance changes in HD Remix hopefully increase the strategic depth). Furthermore, there's no shortage of nuance for experts. Does Cammy's dragon punch beat Fei Longs? It depends on exactly who did it first, which means that 1/60th of a second timing is just as important as ever. So is positioning, spacing, the difficulty of performing combos, and the skill of reading the mind of the opponent.
I think I'm with the majority here (maybe) when I say I'd prefer that they leave automine and the gas mechanic out, but even with these in, I believe that Starcraft 2 will be inclusive to Starcraft vets, WC3 players, and new players alike. The highest levels of play honestly won't be damaged if some stuff is automated (but let's not get carried away) because after all, what truly separates the gold medalist from the silver medalist is his drive, his passion, his game knowledge, his ingenuity, his unpredictability, his ability to read and fake out his opponent, and his champion-like qualities. Our most beloved Starcraft heroes are not revered for training >9000 hours a week to be able to multitask at 400+ apm. They are revered for their style, their ingenuity, and their ability to produce amazing Starcraft. All in all, don't worry too much. Starcraft 2 will be great, we'll all play it, and it'll be fun. Thanks for reading.
This is exactly my thoughts on the subject, I just havent been able to figure out how to write it down. Good someone else did it for me 
|
sf2 analogy fails on so many levels its ridiculous
while in sf2 not everyone can do the good moves; in starcraft everyone can build units // cast spells because the interface is already easy to use its just some players can do this things better then others wich greatly increases the competetion
and if you compare the time you have to make decisions between an sf2 with simple moves and an starcraft stripped of its mechanics you should come to the conclusion that sf2 decisions are still hard to come by in time while on starcraft you(at least the good players) end up waiting for things to happen
and the other stuff already mentioned
|
There are some players who wrongly believe that this "dumbs the game down." Actually, the opposite is true. Experts can perform special moves already, so the changes listed below have very little effect on them.
This doesn't apply to Starcraft since you don't just fail or succeed with a special move. You can always improve your mechanics.
Another wrong-headed comment I often get is that easier controls don't leave enough skills in the game to separate good and bad players. The statement is absurd.
If you took away the mechanics part of Starcraft, the strategic depth, great as it is, wouldn't be able to fill the whole gap. Luck would play a larger part. This is an old argument and the Street Fighter guy has nothing to say that refutes it.
|
This is regarding the concern that SC2 will allow players with a lower APM to be able to win more then they "should." This is a completely backwards way of thinking. A better interface in SC2 will actually stop the high APM from winning more than they "should." It will, in fact, allow players who are better at strategy and worse at clicking incredibly fast to win. That should be the desired state of affairs. Why would you want a game that so heavily favors a high APM? I can think of no reason other than personal bias amongst players who have already developed a high APM and consider that "skill." Yet it is a skill, but not a very interesting skill to base a competitive game around.
The idea of a skill ceiling is nonsense also. There is a A LOT to StarCraft. If there were no interface at all and people's brains directly controlled actions, it would still be a good competitive game. It's actually insulting to the game of StarCraft to say otherwise. Is it actually very shallow and bad, and only the test of high APM keeps it interesting? No, I don't think so. It is strategically interesting in spite of interface constraints, not because of them.
And finally, consider a game perhaps 1 million times simpler than StarCraft. My Kongai virtual card game with Kongregate.com. Even though it appears to be only about guessing with a bit of randomness thrown in, some players completely dominate at this game. The best player won 30-0 the other day. When you are given the tools in a game to make mind-reading decisions about other players, and the game has enough nuance to give you clues about other players' decisions, then the skill ladder goes surprisingly high, just based on that. Kongai far more of a skill ladder than you realize from first inspection. And StarCraft, oh my, with a million times more nuance, the idea that you'd simply hit a wall of skill and everyone would win equally is super crazy. That's really selling StarCraft short.
--Sirlin
http://forums.sirlin.net/showpost.php?p=1922&postcount=19
|
I've read this thread and most of it is bullshit. Uninformed people stating their ignorant opinions about StarCraft based on their experience with fighting games and F level StarCraft. ;;
|
"There are some players who wrongly believe that this "dumbs the game down." Actually, the opposite is true. Experts can perform special moves already, so the changes listed below have very little effect on them. Experts will care about actual balance changes such as hitboxes, recovery times, new properties for some moves, and so on. Making special moves easier, however, just allows everyone else to play the "real" game without needing to develop hundreds of hours of muscle memory just to perform the moves. It's actually sad to hear that some players think that their ability to execute a 360 command throw is why they are good, as opposed to the actual strategy of getting close enough to the opponent with Zangief to land the throw."
This is the most important part of the analogy, read it 10 times nay-sayers if you must. In short:
- Experts can perform special moves already (SC macro/micro)
- Experts will care about actual balance changes (SC is balanced but SC2 won't be)
- It's actually sad to hear that some players think that their ability to execute a 360 command throw is why they are good (SC as it is, favors mechanics a lot, when you start playing you will do a lot better if you just practice mechanics on 1 build and go with it rather than think about strategies that you can't pull off, leading to required hours spent training for "muscle memory". And its true, you have to spend a lot of time goint through simple mechanics until you reach a level where you can employ strategy effectively. If SC2 will be like this, it will kill new players, and without "noobs" you can't be pros.) The best point of the whole analogy, old SC veterans who spent years learning these mechanics, and they were years, are now pissed to learn that some of the automated (yes automated) skills they aquired are no longer used, and it is from this egoism that they protest, not admitting it ofc.
|
Dont whine before you played the game!!!!!
SC2 is totally awesome. It will be the best game ever. I promise. The graphics are awesome, not bad. MBS is okay, btw I was the biggest anti MBS guy ever before I played it.
The only problems so far is a few AI bugs but it will be fixed.
Blizzard I LOVE YOU!!! You are the only company that REALLY listen to your gamers!!!! THANK YOU
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
