I agree with the guy who says this game lacks innovation. Fact, is creative minds are rare which is why most of the people on this forum don't get what you're talking about.
They'd rather play the same ole' game as if its really a "sport". Comparing starcraft to football or basketball is laughable to me. A REAL sport requires physical conditioning and feats of REAL human strength and agility... and there's not much of that when you sit on your ass clicking away on a mouse. Please stop talking about starcraft like its an actual sport. Its a VIDEOGAME and in all genres, it seems like innovation in gameplay has come to a grinding halt, in favor of flashy marketing and simple, dumbed-down playing.
I'm hoping for the single player to be immersive, because I can't be bothered with ultra-fast-clicking korean cheese power.
When I watch the youtube videos I get this brain-numbing feeling of how archaic this game feels. Gather the minerals, scout with the scv, oh no i better run away to save my unit, do I rush or try to take out his expansion... a "next-gen" RTS should take things sooo much farther than using these same old tricks that have gotten so boring to me.
Its been done for so long I simply can't define it as SKILL. Its more like clever exploitation of a well-known game code.
It makes good business sense for Blizzard to stick with what has worked so well, and that's why the game is being designed this way... since 2000... polish, business, sales, in all media, seem to get increasingly more important than innovation and originality.
They're not the same risk-taking innovative company they were back in 1998.
The hardcore starcraft fans like this because the so called "competition in this game" (awesome hotkey skillz and really KNOWING the game and being addicted to iti) is the peak of challenge & intelligence for them, they can't see beyond it.
I've always envisioned a legendary RTS sequel with MUCH bigger maps and a lot more space to operate. The paths and choke points make everything feel so pre-determined. If I end up getting SCII (dubious) it'll only be for the single player. As it stands I simply can't get excited seeing players using the same old cheesed!ck strategies to win.
I agree with the guy who says this game lacks innovation. Fact, is creative minds are rare which is why most of the people on this forum don't get what you're talking about.
They'd rather play the same ole' game as if its really a "sport". Comparing starcraft to football or basketball is laughable to me. A REAL sport requires physical conditioning and feats of REAL human strength and agility... and there's not much of that when you sit on your ass clicking away on a mouse. Please stop talking about starcraft like its an actual sport. Its a VIDEOGAME and in all genres, it seems like innovation in gameplay has come to a grinding halt, in favor of flashy marketing and simple, dumbed-down playing.
I'm hoping for the single player to be immersive, because I can't be bothered with ultra-fast-clicking korean cheese power.
When I watch the youtube videos I get this brain-numbing feeling of how archaic this game feels. Gather the minerals, scout with the scv, oh no i better run away to save my unit, do I rush or try to take out his expansion... a "next-gen" RTS should take things sooo much farther than using these same old tricks that have gotten so boring to me.
Its been done for so long I simply can't define it as SKILL. Its more like clever exploitation of a well-known game code.
It makes good business sense for Blizzard to stick with what has worked so well, and that's why the game is being designed this way... since 2000... polish, business, sales, in all media, seem to get increasingly more important than innovation and originality.
They're not the same risk-taking innovative company they were back in 1998.
The hardcore starcraft fans like this because the so called "competition in this game" (awesome hotkey skillz and really KNOWING the game and being addicted to iti) is the peak of challenge & intelligence for them, they can't see beyond it.
I've always envisioned a legendary RTS sequel with MUCH bigger maps and a lot more space to operate. The paths and choke points make everything feel so pre-determined. If I end up getting SCII (dubious) it'll only be for the single player. As it stands I simply can't get excited seeing players using the same old cheesed!ck strategies to win.
To tell the truth, I always hated the Innovation argument... While I agree it's important, and in games like portal, amazing.... really we all play games to while away some time, and have fun. That's about as subjective as you can get. Either this game does it for you or does not. There are plenty of other RTS games out there that Do innovate, with varying degrees of success.
I agree with the guy who says this game lacks innovation. Fact, is creative minds are rare which is why most of the people on this forum don't get what you're talking about.
They'd rather play the same ole' game as if its really a "sport". Comparing starcraft to football or basketball is laughable to me. A REAL sport requires physical conditioning and feats of REAL human strength and agility... and there's not much of that when you sit on your ass clicking away on a mouse. Please stop talking about starcraft like its an actual sport. Its a VIDEOGAME and in all genres, it seems like innovation in gameplay has come to a grinding halt, in favor of flashy marketing and simple, dumbed-down playing.
I'm hoping for the single player to be immersive, because I can't be bothered with ultra-fast-clicking korean cheese power.
When I watch the youtube videos I get this brain-numbing feeling of how archaic this game feels. Gather the minerals, scout with the scv, oh no i better run away to save my unit, do I rush or try to take out his expansion... a "next-gen" RTS should take things sooo much farther than using these same old tricks that have gotten so boring to me.
Its been done for so long I simply can't define it as SKILL. Its more like clever exploitation of a well-known game code.
It makes good business sense for Blizzard to stick with what has worked so well, and that's why the game is being designed this way... since 2000... polish, business, sales, in all media, seem to get increasingly more important than innovation and originality.
They're not the same risk-taking innovative company they were back in 1998.
The hardcore starcraft fans like this because the so called "competition in this game" (awesome hotkey skillz and really KNOWING the game and being addicted to iti) is the peak of challenge & intelligence for them, they can't see beyond it.
I've always envisioned a legendary RTS sequel with MUCH bigger maps and a lot more space to operate. The paths and choke points make everything feel so pre-determined. If I end up getting SCII (dubious) it'll only be for the single player. As it stands I simply can't get excited seeing players using the same old cheesed!ck strategies to win.
-So Blizzard isn't full of creative people?
-Golf isn't a sport? Racing isn't a sport? Chess isn't a sport? Starcraft is more popular than some typically defined sports, so why wouldn't it be considered one? You're disqualifying it based on the medium it's played on, not on the merits of the game itself.
-So do you get bored by the same football plays happening over and over? The same hook pass, the same blitz?
-In terms of skill, trying putting up with even half of the APM some of pro-gamers are putting out in the mid-to-late game and then you'll see where the skill is, both physically and mentally.
-Please tell us, what is beyond the highest levels of competition in a strategy game?
-The exact features you see on these smaller maps (chokepoints, ridgelines, etc.) would all be the same and present on larger ones. Having larger maps just means more space where your units are not.
They're not the same risk-taking innovative company they were back in 1998.
Also lol at this.
Shit Blizzard has done since 1998:
-Designed a whole MMO, a market they previously had never touched
-Redesigned their popular Warcraft RTS to a more RPG-RTS flavor
-Rebuilt much of the battle.net system from scratch, including across game integration and a unified account system
-Making a sequel to what many would consider the greatest RTS ever.
honestly if i didn't know, and someone asked me whether this or dawn of war 2 ('s multiplayer) in their respective currents states were in beta i would probably say dawn of war 2
all the points ive made seem to have fallen on deaf ears. oh well, i expected no less.
well when you make factually incorrect statements it's hard to listen to them
i don't care if you don't think it's a sport, it is a competitive televised industry in a nation where people train for days and days in order to play on sponsored teams or get invited to solo tournaments for decent sums of money
sounds like a sport to me
the rest of your points are more of a personal taste thing, so i'm sorry if you don't like sc2 but we all aren't going to drop what we're doing and go "oh this guy thinks it isn't fun pack it up game's a flop"
it's not so much that they fall on deaf ears, so much as, they are bad points
i mean, whether you agree that starcraft 2 is a sport or not, your definition of sport is stupid and bad
is chess not a sport?
for two, i don't really know what your 'next-gen' RTS is if starcraft 2 isn't it; it's certainly not dawn of war 2, which has had most of the depth taken away from it in favour of hard-counters and a minimal number of units, it's certainly not supreme commander 2, which has just gutted its resource system in favour of a system that dune 2 invented in the stone age, it's certainly not command and conquer 4, which is basically just apeing company of heroes...is it company of heroes?
as for the point about the game lacking innovation; that may well be the case! but an innovative game is not the same thing as being a good game. some games are incredibly innovative (trespasser did things that other games still haven't caught up with!) and are awful; other games barely have a whisper of an original idea (uncharted 2!) but are fan-fucking-tastic.
at the end of the day if you don't like the game, you don't like the game. but don't assert that people who do like the game are somehow worse than you, that's just being kind of a silly goose.
bongi on
0
Options
ShadowenSnores in the morningLoserdomRegistered Userregular
edited February 2010
There's also the fact that that was his first post and he registered today.
all the points ive made seem to have fallen on deaf ears. oh well, i expected no less.
I even offered my counter-points in a point by point format hoping it would be super simple to respond to each. If you're going to throw up your points and not support them like some Hollwood western town facade, then at least state so in your original post so we can all skip past it and its useless drivel.
I agree with the guy who says this game lacks innovation. Fact, is creative minds are rare which is why most of the people on this forum don't get what you're talking about.
They'd rather play the same ole' game as if its really a "sport". Comparing starcraft to football or basketball is laughable to me. A REAL sport requires physical conditioning and feats of REAL human strength and agility... and there's not much of that when you sit on your ass clicking away on a mouse. Please stop talking about starcraft like its an actual sport. Its a VIDEOGAME and in all genres, it seems like innovation in gameplay has come to a grinding halt, in favor of flashy marketing and simple, dumbed-down playing.
I'm hoping for the single player to be immersive, because I can't be bothered with ultra-fast-clicking korean cheese power.
When I watch the youtube videos I get this brain-numbing feeling of how archaic this game feels. Gather the minerals, scout with the scv, oh no i better run away to save my unit, do I rush or try to take out his expansion... a "next-gen" RTS should take things sooo much farther than using these same old tricks that have gotten so boring to me.
Its been done for so long I simply can't define it as SKILL. Its more like clever exploitation of a well-known game code.
It makes good business sense for Blizzard to stick with what has worked so well, and that's why the game is being designed this way... since 2000... polish, business, sales, in all media, seem to get increasingly more important than innovation and originality.
They're not the same risk-taking innovative company they were back in 1998.
The hardcore starcraft fans like this because the so called "competition in this game" (awesome hotkey skillz and really KNOWING the game and being addicted to iti) is the peak of challenge & intelligence for them, they can't see beyond it.
I've always envisioned a legendary RTS sequel with MUCH bigger maps and a lot more space to operate. The paths and choke points make everything feel so pre-determined. If I end up getting SCII (dubious) it'll only be for the single player. As it stands I simply can't get excited seeing players using the same old cheesed!ck strategies to win.
Oh hey look, SC2 is a game that focuses on competition!
Oh hey look, gigantic fucking maps that take forever to build bases on only to be torn down by one big rush is not fun gameplay
Oh hey look, it's a goddamn beta and what works now won't work in the next patch!
Pretty sure he's just trolling. Mommas don't make kids that stupid.
Neva on
SC2 Beta: Neva.ling
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
that said, the guy who said he wasn't gonna play the beta anymore because everybody plays it super competitively wasn't helping himself by being in this thread
Its funny how personally you guys take criticism of a game you adore so much.
I stated my opinion, and I stand by it. The game is too simplistic for me. I am not impressed with the strategies that people use to win: it requires exploitation and knowledge of the game code rather than ingenuity, and that is because of the outdated gameplay model.
If its your cup of tea, great! I might get it for the single player cause I enjoy the style, art, and story of a game, and sorry folks starcraft is NOT a real sport, for the love of god would you stop calling it that!
And just to piss you off more I think I'd rather play C&C3 multiplayer than Starcraft II Or even WoW pvp
I think we should spend more time rationalizing with a guy who signs up specifically to post in this thread. Says some stuff along the lines of this game isn't for me, yet I'm going to crap on it. Proceeds to ignore counterpoints, then promptly leaves likely to only come back to make lazy criticisms.
Blizzard has never been a company known for its innovation - usually they take all the good ideas everybody else came up with and then polish them into an incredible game. Thing is, this time around they looked at all the ideas RTSes have come up with in recent years, and they realized that everybody still likes Starcraft better, so they stuck with that. Maybe when another RTS comes out that can even think about standing on the same level as Starcraft they'll take notice.
Its funny how personally you guys take criticism of a game you adore so much.
I stated my opinion, and I stand by it. The game is too simplistic for me. I am not impressed with the strategies that people use to win: it requires exploitation and knowledge of the game code rather than ingenuity, and that is because of the outdated gameplay model.
If its your cup of tea, great! I might get it for the single player cause I enjoy the style, art, and story of a game, and sorry folks starcraft is NOT a real sport, for the love of god would you stop calling it that!
And just to piss you off more I think I'd rather play C&C3 multiplayer than Starcraft II Or even WoW pvp
deaf blind and dumb is no way to go through life son
I've just won a few games by teching to cloaked banshees as soon as possible while fending off rushes. The average person doesn't seem prepared to handle cloaked aerial units.
I basically just fend off a rush with a rax+reactor pumping out tons of marines behind a wall of supply depots. I'll make a few siege tanks too to help counter the mass of cheap units, followed by two star ports. One of them gets a reactor, the other gets a tech lab. I pump out Vikings with the reactor'd one and a Banshees with the other one. I use the cloaked banshees to raid mineral lines over and over, and as soon as they counter with void rays, phoenixes, vikings, or whatever, I move in the group of Vikings.
It works very well.
Also, Vikings seem to suck really really bad when they're on the ground.
I have been noticing nearly everyone is ready with detectors vs zerg now. I imagine they will be ready for cloaked banshees in a few days, now that it's a more viable tactic. Also vikings are fun for hit and run on buildings.
Wow, I didn't know this. Apparently you can build a Tech Lab with a Barracks, then move the Barracks out of the way and put another building there, like a Star Port. The Star Port will then have a Tech Lab.
Wow, I didn't know this. Apparently you can build a Tech Lab with a Barracks, then move the Barracks out of the way and put another building there, like a Star Port. The Star Port will then have a Tech Lab.
Pretty sure you can do the same thing for the reactor can't you? Good for fast mech
Wow, I didn't know this. Apparently you can build a Tech Lab with a Barracks, then move the Barracks out of the way and put another building there, like a Star Port. The Star Port will then have a Tech Lab.
Pretty sure you can do the same thing for the reactor can't you? Good for fast mech
Yeah, of course.
I might try this with my Banshee build. With the rax, I'll add a tech lab instead of a reactor, and once my Starport is done I'll swap them out and start researching cloak/building Banshees.
Melkster on
0
Options
Alfred J. Kwakis it because you were insultedwhen I insulted your hair?Registered Userregular
edited February 2010
Are there any unit models other then those of the 3 races? Would be quite a limitation for custom maps, at least WC3 had lots of creeps and neutral units to work with.
Are there any unit models other then those of the 3 races? Would be quite a limitation for custom maps, at least WC3 had lots of creeps and neutral units to work with.
blizz has stated that any cut units + all units in the original sc have been modeled and will be in the editor for use.
Posts
hey! add me!
perenold.czar
I won't be on until later tonight though.
I might not be on tonight but I'm sure we will run into each other eventually. Flea.pious here
name?
You sucky like me?
They'd rather play the same ole' game as if its really a "sport". Comparing starcraft to football or basketball is laughable to me. A REAL sport requires physical conditioning and feats of REAL human strength and agility... and there's not much of that when you sit on your ass clicking away on a mouse. Please stop talking about starcraft like its an actual sport. Its a VIDEOGAME and in all genres, it seems like innovation in gameplay has come to a grinding halt, in favor of flashy marketing and simple, dumbed-down playing.
I'm hoping for the single player to be immersive, because I can't be bothered with ultra-fast-clicking korean cheese power.
When I watch the youtube videos I get this brain-numbing feeling of how archaic this game feels. Gather the minerals, scout with the scv, oh no i better run away to save my unit, do I rush or try to take out his expansion... a "next-gen" RTS should take things sooo much farther than using these same old tricks that have gotten so boring to me.
Its been done for so long I simply can't define it as SKILL. Its more like clever exploitation of a well-known game code.
It makes good business sense for Blizzard to stick with what has worked so well, and that's why the game is being designed this way... since 2000... polish, business, sales, in all media, seem to get increasingly more important than innovation and originality.
They're not the same risk-taking innovative company they were back in 1998.
The hardcore starcraft fans like this because the so called "competition in this game" (awesome hotkey skillz and really KNOWING the game and being addicted to iti) is the peak of challenge & intelligence for them, they can't see beyond it.
I've always envisioned a legendary RTS sequel with MUCH bigger maps and a lot more space to operate. The paths and choke points make everything feel so pre-determined. If I end up getting SCII (dubious) it'll only be for the single player. As it stands I simply can't get excited seeing players using the same old cheesed!ck strategies to win.
To tell the truth, I always hated the Innovation argument... While I agree it's important, and in games like portal, amazing.... really we all play games to while away some time, and have fun. That's about as subjective as you can get. Either this game does it for you or does not. There are plenty of other RTS games out there that Do innovate, with varying degrees of success.
-So Blizzard isn't full of creative people?
-Golf isn't a sport? Racing isn't a sport? Chess isn't a sport? Starcraft is more popular than some typically defined sports, so why wouldn't it be considered one? You're disqualifying it based on the medium it's played on, not on the merits of the game itself.
-So do you get bored by the same football plays happening over and over? The same hook pass, the same blitz?
-In terms of skill, trying putting up with even half of the APM some of pro-gamers are putting out in the mid-to-late game and then you'll see where the skill is, both physically and mentally.
-Please tell us, what is beyond the highest levels of competition in a strategy game?
-The exact features you see on these smaller maps (chokepoints, ridgelines, etc.) would all be the same and present on larger ones. Having larger maps just means more space where your units are not.
Also lol at this.
Shit Blizzard has done since 1998:
-Designed a whole MMO, a market they previously had never touched
-Redesigned their popular Warcraft RTS to a more RPG-RTS flavor
-Rebuilt much of the battle.net system from scratch, including across game integration and a unified account system
-Making a sequel to what many would consider the greatest RTS ever.
Nope no risk taking here sorry folks!
bonngi.bonngi
apparently 'bong'i is an expletive!
edit: cheesed!ck is the official best internet insult
shit is that tight
// people don't agree with me = no one gets my point
well when you make factually incorrect statements it's hard to listen to them
i don't care if you don't think it's a sport, it is a competitive televised industry in a nation where people train for days and days in order to play on sponsored teams or get invited to solo tournaments for decent sums of money
sounds like a sport to me
the rest of your points are more of a personal taste thing, so i'm sorry if you don't like sc2 but we all aren't going to drop what we're doing and go "oh this guy thinks it isn't fun pack it up game's a flop"
Clearly if someone disagrees with you they must not be listening. If they have a different opinion, they must just be stubborn or retarded.
i mean, whether you agree that starcraft 2 is a sport or not, your definition of sport is stupid and bad
is chess not a sport?
for two, i don't really know what your 'next-gen' RTS is if starcraft 2 isn't it; it's certainly not dawn of war 2, which has had most of the depth taken away from it in favour of hard-counters and a minimal number of units, it's certainly not supreme commander 2, which has just gutted its resource system in favour of a system that dune 2 invented in the stone age, it's certainly not command and conquer 4, which is basically just apeing company of heroes...is it company of heroes?
as for the point about the game lacking innovation; that may well be the case! but an innovative game is not the same thing as being a good game. some games are incredibly innovative (trespasser did things that other games still haven't caught up with!) and are awful; other games barely have a whisper of an original idea (uncharted 2!) but are fan-fucking-tastic.
at the end of the day if you don't like the game, you don't like the game. but don't assert that people who do like the game are somehow worse than you, that's just being kind of a silly goose.
I even offered my counter-points in a point by point format hoping it would be super simple to respond to each. If you're going to throw up your points and not support them like some Hollwood western town facade, then at least state so in your original post so we can all skip past it and its useless drivel.
Oh hey look, SC2 is a game that focuses on competition!
Oh hey look, gigantic fucking maps that take forever to build bases on only to be torn down by one big rush is not fun gameplay
Oh hey look, it's a goddamn beta and what works now won't work in the next patch!
"Everyone who is capable of logical thought should be able to see why you shouldn't sell lifetime subscriptions to an MMO. Cell phone companies and drug dealers don't offer lifetime subscriptions either, guess why?" - Mugaaz
that said, the guy who said he wasn't gonna play the beta anymore because everybody plays it super competitively wasn't helping himself by being in this thread
you all are SERIOUS BUSINESS
I stated my opinion, and I stand by it. The game is too simplistic for me. I am not impressed with the strategies that people use to win: it requires exploitation and knowledge of the game code rather than ingenuity, and that is because of the outdated gameplay model.
If its your cup of tea, great! I might get it for the single player cause I enjoy the style, art, and story of a game, and sorry folks starcraft is NOT a real sport, for the love of god would you stop calling it that!
And just to piss you off more I think I'd rather play C&C3 multiplayer than Starcraft II
Steam id: skoot LoL id: skoot
edit: to shaft. Have fun duder.
edit: well it's either make fun of this duder or be mad i'm not in the beta
We'll prove to them that the game they like isn't as good as they think it is.
deaf blind and dumb is no way to go through life son
I've just won a few games by teching to cloaked banshees as soon as possible while fending off rushes. The average person doesn't seem prepared to handle cloaked aerial units.
I basically just fend off a rush with a rax+reactor pumping out tons of marines behind a wall of supply depots. I'll make a few siege tanks too to help counter the mass of cheap units, followed by two star ports. One of them gets a reactor, the other gets a tech lab. I pump out Vikings with the reactor'd one and a Banshees with the other one. I use the cloaked banshees to raid mineral lines over and over, and as soon as they counter with void rays, phoenixes, vikings, or whatever, I move in the group of Vikings.
It works very well.
Also, Vikings seem to suck really really bad when they're on the ground.
Pretty sure you can do the same thing for the reactor can't you? Good for fast mech
Yeah, of course.
I might try this with my Banshee build. With the rax, I'll add a tech lab instead of a reactor, and once my Starport is done I'll swap them out and start researching cloak/building Banshees.
blizz has stated that any cut units + all units in the original sc have been modeled and will be in the editor for use.