-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
StarCraft 2 Beta |OT| (Beta Now Reopen, GL HF)
- Thread starter Scrow
- Start date
JSnake said:
And I posted this in the blizzard sc2 forums:
"I'm not much of an RTS gamer. I appreciate the genre but it was always bit too overwhelming for me to stick with one game for too long. Since I got into the SCII beta, though, I wanted to make an effort to really learn and understand it -- especially as I was one of the fortunate few to get into it so early. To my surprise, I've actually stuck with it and fallen in love.
Aside from the game being gorgeous and polished (as all blizzard games) what really keeps me digging into this ridiculously deep game is just how accessible it is. With all the statistics available, the feature rich replays, the help section available in game, and the friendly community I have not found myself overwhelmed or frustrated. Every defeat in a game is a lesson learned, and because of the wonderful replays, no defeat is a lesson I miss out on. It feels great to continue peeling layer after layer of the game, and growing as a player and I really have to give my respect to Blizzard for making sure this deep, brilliant game is as accessible as possible (and, of course, this is without having the single player campaign to use as a warm-up/tutorial).
So, thank you, Blizzard, as you've converted me into a lover of the RTS genre, and a gamer who will not just be purchasing SC2 for its single player campaign, but also to compete in multiplayer."
How much peon management is in SC2? If they really lowered the execution requirements I may give this a shot when it gets out of beta.
Someone I know got a beta key and it's already at 200 on Ebay. LOL.
Stardock disagrees. They think that having their side income and GC2 being profitable have allowed them to take their sweet time with their future games. (They're even planning an RPG for PC/360 with a 2nd studio)
Someone I know got a beta key and it's already at 200 on Ebay. LOL.
Fugu said:
Stardock disagrees. They think that having their side income and GC2 being profitable have allowed them to take their sweet time with their future games. (They're even planning an RPG for PC/360 with a 2nd studio)
notworksafe
Member
CcrooK said:
Earlier doesn't mean superior.
arstal said:
Less than Starcraft but more than Warcraft 3.
Freshly made workers now auto-mine when you rally them to minerals, and there is an idle worker indicator. They now split to mine more efficiently automatically. That makes them simpler to manage. However, SC2 still requires you to produce a lot of workers like SC1 did.
arstal said:
Have you played WC3? Worker management is basically the same. You can auto-mine, queue up construction, and there's an idle-worker button.
Edit: Anybody in the beta get any SCVs stuck? In normal Starcraft, every once in awhile I'll build a supply depot in the wrong place and my SCV will get trapped. :lol
Hole shiat at the comments. That is one a hell of a flame-hole.Spire said:
And I thank god for blizzard staying with current SC2. If somebody doesn't like that, they shouldn't bother then. If you don't like salmiac and you're a chocolate person, why bother arguing how bad salmiac tastes?
And, IMO there haven't been RTS innovations, more like degrading to cater casuals. If I wanted a mainstream RTS, I'd turn to EA.
54-46! said:
Capture point resource nodes are extremely lame. That prevents proper harassing. In Starcraft, you require something like 30 workers per base to saturate it to full capacity. If a Templar drop or other raid kills 20 workers, it takes a really long time to recover that lost income. That means a good worker raid seriously hampers the enemy, but a bad one still results in a small impairment. Recapturing a capture point always takes the same amount of time, so it only has a fail/success option.
CajoleJuice
Member
I've only run into friendly people. Even when I played a 2v2 and I totally sucked, my partner just said, "Practice some more before you play ranked matches. 
" (Although it technically wasn't ranked for me yet, at least.)
" (Although it technically wasn't ranked for me yet, at least.)I'm sure people are a lot more open to new players when the game hasn't even been in beta for a week. =PMoxManiac said:
But yeah, people on b.net are even bigger elitist dick holes than the people on SOCOM. Always makes me laugh when people bitch about the player base on XBOX Live, thinking of a hell on earth where b.net actually has voice chat.
The Starcraft community is actually quite friendly and helpful. The game has a really high skill ceiling, so there is a huge range in skill, but that doesn't mean people are too elitist about it. Before big matches, players will occasionally boast and act cocky, but that's because so much of the metagame at the highest levels involves mindgames and psychological warfare.
Minsc
Gold Member
Zzoram said:
I don't know, you could argue the simple act of capturing a resource node is not the goal, the goal is keeping it yours, to which there is a large degree of strategic balance between expanding / acquiring more, or fortifying the ones you have.
If you are simply capturing the resource points, then moving on elsewhere, they won't be yours for very long.
DoW's game play rewards expanding your control by allowing you to quicker amass an army, much in the same way a traditional RTS rewards you for having multiple expansions by increasing your income, allowing you to have larger armies quicker.
ZealousD said:
I'm just going by my old experiences playing SC1/D2/WC3 on bnet way way back when. The racist, bigotry, and general anti-social behavior that I remember there makes the worst of whatever XBLive has pretty tame.
I haven't played a battle.net game in eons, so I dunno if things have changed.
darkpaladinmfc
Member
Yes, you canMinsc said:
I can't hear the audio now, but can you really make a Gradius game using the SC2 editor? For some reason seeing a FPS like Halo with it doesn't surprise me nearly as much as that.
.I'm looking forward to SC2 as it is. I admit that early videos/screens showing the exact same gameplay as the first game received a raised eyebrow from me, but I don't think they really need to change up their gameplay just to be "innovative". Obviously their style of RTS works very well and a lot of people like it a lot.
To be fair, the resource nodes in Dawn of War 2 take a while to get back to full capacity as well. They start off giving you minuscule requisition when you first capture them, and then ramp up to full capacity after some time, so it is actually worth it to try and take them away from your opponent via harassment.
Also, games like Dawn of War (and CoH as well I think, haven't played it though) don't even really have bases. Your HQ is just a staging ground for your units to come in; bases are almost never attacked or even harassed. Then you have squad veterency, retreat options...
Basically they are entirely different games and I'm not sure why they should even be compared.
I'm not sure what you are referring to here. In DoW2 (similar to CoH in many ways), if you are caught out of position you can expect to lose your entire army. "Managing" troop positioning, finding/staying in cover, and flanking with melee units are all crucial to be successful at the game. The only thing the AI will do for you is that squads will usually "auto seek" cover, meaning they will dash to cover that is close by if they come under attack. What do you mean by "managing"?
Zzoram said:
To be fair, the resource nodes in Dawn of War 2 take a while to get back to full capacity as well. They start off giving you minuscule requisition when you first capture them, and then ramp up to full capacity after some time, so it is actually worth it to try and take them away from your opponent via harassment.
Also, games like Dawn of War (and CoH as well I think, haven't played it though) don't even really have bases. Your HQ is just a staging ground for your units to come in; bases are almost never attacked or even harassed. Then you have squad veterency, retreat options...
Basically they are entirely different games and I'm not sure why they should even be compared.
raphier said:
I'm not sure what you are referring to here. In DoW2 (similar to CoH in many ways), if you are caught out of position you can expect to lose your entire army. "Managing" troop positioning, finding/staying in cover, and flanking with melee units are all crucial to be successful at the game. The only thing the AI will do for you is that squads will usually "auto seek" cover, meaning they will dash to cover that is close by if they come under attack. What do you mean by "managing"?
Deadly said:
I might need to change that to D1, I actually don't think D2 was that bad, now that I think about it. In D1 though, I remember spending a lot of time hunting for people that actually wanted to play the game properly, but then some fuckwit with all kind cheats and hacks going on would come in and throw shit everywhere.
Dreavus said:
Well sometimes, with my luck the AI does something I don't want it to do. I want the unit go straight where I click and not go to nearest cover or in a heated battle when I click it to shoot, the unit moves to shoot, and then I click it to move little away, it does and then returns back to shoot, usually hold position resolves this, but then they dont shoot when threatened.
So basically by "managing" I mean that the AI listens 100% to you mouse and avoids to do what your mouse didn't tell it to. It's that one case where the AI is able to autonomously attack the enemy, while the mouse just points who to kill and they'd execute the rest themselves.
In RTS, atleast my opinion is that it's me who wants the full control of micro and macro and not let AI do the half of the job for you.
Ice Monkey
Member
suffice it to say, dow2 and sc2 are very different approaches to RTS, and I personally prefer SC2's approach much more. plus, the campaign has a lot thats yet to be seen but it looks to be shaping up to be a huge improvement and evolution of sc's or war3's campaign.
Can you blame blizz for trying to keep a lot of the core values of a game that's ten years old AND STILL KICKING?! They improved enough while still keeping it ridiculously addictive just as it has been the past ten years.
On another note, I just got done two amazing ffa games that basically boiled down to never being attacked until midgame, which is hilarious. I even prepared for early game but nobody came a knocking so i beat everyone's ass one after one.
The second game was particularly hilarious as I'm zerg vs two other zerg and a protoss, someone attacked the toss first and he's dead, then i picked off one guy's main with a nydus attack he somehow didnt expect, and he was no threat anymore so i picked the other guy off with a nydus attack and decimated him.
Most hilarious was the zerg i completely demolished with 15 mutas and 3 ultras and 7 hydras said "fuckin noob" and then bitches about how he "shouldnt have tried the new tactic"
Meanwhile this guy is a complete idiot if he thinks thats why he lost, I had double to triple the economy of every other player throughout the entire game and he kept trying to attack me with the most hilariously not thought out attacks of a few hydras roaches and mutas. New tactic my ass! :lol :lol :lol
Can you blame blizz for trying to keep a lot of the core values of a game that's ten years old AND STILL KICKING?! They improved enough while still keeping it ridiculously addictive just as it has been the past ten years.
On another note, I just got done two amazing ffa games that basically boiled down to never being attacked until midgame, which is hilarious. I even prepared for early game but nobody came a knocking so i beat everyone's ass one after one.
The second game was particularly hilarious as I'm zerg vs two other zerg and a protoss, someone attacked the toss first and he's dead, then i picked off one guy's main with a nydus attack he somehow didnt expect, and he was no threat anymore so i picked the other guy off with a nydus attack and decimated him.
Most hilarious was the zerg i completely demolished with 15 mutas and 3 ultras and 7 hydras said "fuckin noob" and then bitches about how he "shouldnt have tried the new tactic"
Meanwhile this guy is a complete idiot if he thinks thats why he lost, I had double to triple the economy of every other player throughout the entire game and he kept trying to attack me with the most hilariously not thought out attacks of a few hydras roaches and mutas. New tactic my ass! :lol :lol :lol
I wonder if the same people complaining about "lack of innovation" also run out and buy every new me too FPS that comes out. There hasn't been any innovation in that genre that since the original Half-Life.
Anyway, Blizzard made the game their fans wanted, nothing more and nothing less. Reinventing Starcraft would have been like changing the game of soccer. The single player campaign is where they are really going to push the boundaries of the RTS genre.
Anyway, Blizzard made the game their fans wanted, nothing more and nothing less. Reinventing Starcraft would have been like changing the game of soccer. The single player campaign is where they are really going to push the boundaries of the RTS genre.
Feel the Swift
Member
Downloaded the beta to watch replays, good to know I can watch on all Ultra.
...but while I enjoy watching people play, I can't help but try to click and move the units.
...but while I enjoy watching people play, I can't help but try to click and move the units.
CajoleJuice
Member
I'm sure this has been mentioned, but I liked the old stat breakdown more. The build order tab is a nice addition, but can I see how many units I killed somewhere? I'll always remember the nr20 3v3 noob match I played in original SC where I killed 1200 units. It was awesome.
Ice Monkey
Member
does anyone think I should post those ffa replays on youtube?
Not sure how enjoyable it would be since its not like it was a pro match or anything.
Not sure how enjoyable it would be since its not like it was a pro match or anything.
autobzooty
Member
Zzoram said:
I sort of agree with your point but...
smh
Ice Monkey
Member
i dont care enough to find out exactly who i disagree with in that RPS article, but i do know that one thing was hilariously misconstrued: he said something about how SC2 doesn't care to follow the recent trend of RTS doing something about how inaccessible RTSes are....I wholly disagree with this!
RTSes arent inaccessible that DoW2 for example comes along and makes it more accessible, they just get rid of the traditional/normal way to play an RTS! It isn't an rts at all barely anymore in DoW2's case as much as it is an RPG where you can control maybe 50- characters at once, like baldur's gate with 50 party members.
CNC4 is more of an RTS than DoW2 will ever be, just because basically what they've done is take the tech tree and put that into MW2-style experience points that carry over game after game, and put all the buildings into the godforsaken crawler. DoW2 matches are more like an arena battle in wow or something, whatever it is though I don't prefer it to a "traditional" base-building RTS.
I don't have anything against DoW2 for what it is, but the gameplay is basically like war3 with the altar of heroes mixed with a barracks and you just build like 25 total units then go have a brawl in the middle of the map. Then resource gathering is restricted to staying near a gold mine long enough for some magic-user to summon in 30 seconds a haunted gold mine on top of the mine with 5 acolytes pre-attached.
When you figure that you can take war3's multiplayer gameplay and mod it into what i just described above and you basically have the gist of DoW2, doesn't it seem upon first inspection this doesnt make the RTS more accessible but rather just remove a few steps that werent challenging to begin with? How hard is it to build a hatchery/cc/nexus near some resources anyway?
I KNOW many people might disagree with that but please understand its just IMHO. I'll tell you one thing, I would cry out in terror if blizzard decided with sc2 for example to have an alternate win condition that you win the game if you just control 66% of the map's expansion spots. I'd just hate the fact that it even existed as an official alternate win condition, despite the fact that if you have that much map control you're basically going to win anyway.
RTSes arent inaccessible that DoW2 for example comes along and makes it more accessible, they just get rid of the traditional/normal way to play an RTS! It isn't an rts at all barely anymore in DoW2's case as much as it is an RPG where you can control maybe 50- characters at once, like baldur's gate with 50 party members.
CNC4 is more of an RTS than DoW2 will ever be, just because basically what they've done is take the tech tree and put that into MW2-style experience points that carry over game after game, and put all the buildings into the godforsaken crawler. DoW2 matches are more like an arena battle in wow or something, whatever it is though I don't prefer it to a "traditional" base-building RTS.
I don't have anything against DoW2 for what it is, but the gameplay is basically like war3 with the altar of heroes mixed with a barracks and you just build like 25 total units then go have a brawl in the middle of the map. Then resource gathering is restricted to staying near a gold mine long enough for some magic-user to summon in 30 seconds a haunted gold mine on top of the mine with 5 acolytes pre-attached.
When you figure that you can take war3's multiplayer gameplay and mod it into what i just described above and you basically have the gist of DoW2, doesn't it seem upon first inspection this doesnt make the RTS more accessible but rather just remove a few steps that werent challenging to begin with? How hard is it to build a hatchery/cc/nexus near some resources anyway?
I KNOW many people might disagree with that but please understand its just IMHO. I'll tell you one thing, I would cry out in terror if blizzard decided with sc2 for example to have an alternate win condition that you win the game if you just control 66% of the map's expansion spots. I'd just hate the fact that it even existed as an official alternate win condition, despite the fact that if you have that much map control you're basically going to win anyway.
Zzoram said:
I haven't even played Uncharted 2, but I take your point. I love Dead Space, for example, and that game doesn't do anything new. The problem for me is Starcraft 2 doesn't feel fresh, the content doesn't feel new, it just doesn't give me any reason to buy it other than to see where the story goes in the campaign. I can get the exact same experience by playing the original game. At least with something like Dead Space I'm exploring new environments, using new weapons and fighting new enemies. SC2 follows the original to a fault, if someone sat me down in front of it and told me it was just a graphical update patch to the original game, I would have believed them. I understand for a lot of people (and the entire nation of Korea) that's perfectly fine and exactly what they wanted. I was just hoping for something more, I don't think that's a sin.