On January 03 2013 05:43 TheKefka wrote: Personally,I won't buy a single starcraft 2 expansion until the colossus is removed from the game,or gets rendered useless.
Its not mutch (bearly anything) but DB seems to be open to redesign the colosus (i totally think its one of the core problems with protoss). This is from a vague answer to one of my tweets a while ago. Source
"I hoped that Blizzard would try and fix WoL with HotS rather than trying to expand on this dying game. This might be my "elitist" opinion of things, but I just don't want to throw away more money towards empty Blizzard games. Already did it for D3 and SC2, and I'm not about to do it again." QFT. That's all there's to say for me on HotS. Personally I'm playing Broodwar again and I'm fucking glad that I do so. Fuck sc2.
People have impossible standards on new games if you ask me. They compare a new game to the games they played in the past with all the connotations it includes. Many of the things we remember that make us feel good about something actually have little to do with the actual game itself.
Nobody remembers how terrible some old games are until they pick them up and actually start playing them again.
I think that D3 was well worth the money. It wasn't the kind of game that you kept playing for more than a few hundred hours, but that is still a very long time. You will beat dozens of old pc or console games in that time. Same thing goes for the Sc2 campaign. I would buy sc2 even if I never intended to play online at all. The spectator part of it doesn't require me to buy the game either way.
As far as HotS is concerned I feel the same way. The campaign alone makes it worth the money. The new units are almost exclusively designed to diversify the game with high mobility, utility or range. It will be very hard to learn how to use them properly I think, but once that happens they game will benefit from it. It does not mean I agree with every single unit and ability, but overall I think the gameplay is heading in the right direction.
On January 03 2013 06:10 zbedlam wrote: Professional reviewers will usually give you an idea of the funding behind the game, saying that I would still take the word of a reviewer over a single random review.
But if there are masses of random people rating the game low there is a reason for that and I'm inclined to believe them more than reviewer scores, partly because they get more time to play the game than professional reviewers.
Diablo 3 would be a prime example of this.
To be fair Diablo was excellent on the first playthrough, which is all that reviewers base their reviews on and they were right to assign the game a high score. Just like how HotS will get a good score because the campaign will be casual friendly, fun and high quality, and the 10-20 MP games the reviewer played were fun too.
That's what 25 hours of entertainment for whatever price (50ish euros I guess) and the reviewers will be right assigning a high score for HotS too. Hardcore players, like in D3, SC2, or WoW, look at different things than the general public and its possible for them to complain about something reviewers would simply never look at.
This hits the nail right on the head. The hardcore, Diablo 2 super-fans are also the most likely people to take the time to create an account on metacritic for the sole purpose of give Diablo 3 a zero score. These are people devoted hundreds of hours to playing a 10 year old game in the pursuit of virtual loot and had refined the process down a razors edge. It was unlikely that Blizzard(or anyone) was every going to recreate the game and reasons they loved Diablo 2.
It is very likely that they would complain about it a lot, however.
I think there are enough ways to harass in HotS that if they fix the economic problems the game will be incredible. By economic problems I of course mean the power of a 3 base economy. Being up 2 bases on a 3 base toss needs to be a far greater advantage than it is now, for example.
On January 03 2013 06:38 Fenris420 wrote: People have impossible standards on new games if you ask me. They compare a new game to the games they played in the past with all the connotations it includes. Many of the things we remember that make us feel good about something actually have little to do with the actual game itself.
Nobody remembers how terrible some old games are until they pick them up and actually start playing them again.
I think that D3 was well worth the money. It wasn't the kind of game that you kept playing for more than a few hundred hours, but that is still a very long time. You will beat dozens of old pc or console games in that time. Same thing goes for the Sc2 campaign. I would buy sc2 even if I never intended to play online at all. The spectator part of it doesn't require me to buy the game either way.
As far as HotS is concerned I feel the same way. The campaign alone makes it worth the money. The new units are almost exclusively designed to diversify the game with high mobility, utility or range. It will be very hard to learn how to use them properly I think, but once that happens they game will benefit from it. It does not mean I agree with every single unit and ability, but overall I think the gameplay is heading in the right direction.
A lot of people saying SC 2 sucks are playing broodwar right now, there's no nostalgia because the game is still active. This isn't a bunch of people in their rockers recollecting times long past where they no longer are able to play the games they love. They can reevaluate how good they think the games are pretty easily since they're right at our fingertips. It's not hard to compare BW and SC 2 right now because we can all have first hand experience.
People expect more because more has been delivered over a decade ago, to have technology and budgets progress but quality decrease is ridiculous.
On January 03 2013 06:38 Fenris420 wrote: People have impossible standards on new games if you ask me. They compare a new game to the games they played in the past with all the connotations it includes. Many of the things we remember that make us feel good about something actually have little to do with the actual game itself.
Nobody remembers how terrible some old games are until they pick them up and actually start playing them again.
I think that D3 was well worth the money. It wasn't the kind of game that you kept playing for more than a few hundred hours, but that is still a very long time. You will beat dozens of old pc or console games in that time. Same thing goes for the Sc2 campaign. I would buy sc2 even if I never intended to play online at all. The spectator part of it doesn't require me to buy the game either way.
As far as HotS is concerned I feel the same way. The campaign alone makes it worth the money. The new units are almost exclusively designed to diversify the game with high mobility, utility or range. It will be very hard to learn how to use them properly I think, but once that happens they game will benefit from it. It does not mean I agree with every single unit and ability, but overall I think the gameplay is heading in the right direction.
A lot of people saying SC 2 sucks are playing broodwar right now, there's no nostalgia because the game is still active. This isn't a bunch of people in their rockers recollecting times long past where they no longer are able to play the games they love. They can reevaluate how good they think the games are pretty easily since they're right at our fingertips. It's not hard to compare BW and SC 2 right now because we can all have first hand experience.
People expect more because more has been delivered over a decade ago, to have technology and budgets progress but quality decrease is ridiculous.
That is well and good, but WoL released over 2 years ago and the time for complaining and comparing that it isn’t as “perfect” as BW was has well passed. There are only so many times someone can read the same regurgitated arguments across 15 different threads before they get feed up with it. People are tired of reading the game thing over and over from the same people. It has gotten to the point where I cannot even tell the opinions apart anymore and the group has become some weird hive-mind that always makes the same points.
There's nothing "expanded" upon to be honest. You can do everything you did in WoL here in HotS and be just fine(except TvT). The UI won't feel any different other than you get some neat menu that moves. Honestly, that refreshing feeling lasts for about 2 minutes before it gets old.
At this rate(even though its beta), this should be DLC and $9.99USD. I know campaign's important and all, but who's going to blow 40 bucks on this after initially blowing 60 bucks for the original? Oh yeah, you can't even trade it in for anything cause we're PC.
So if you can't return it, there should be some online multiplayer value right?
I foresee: Week 1: Everyone's on, everyone's playing. Week 2: Everyone beats campaign, they play unranked or team games. Week 3: Everyone stops playing and the only arcade map is "Nexus Wars". Week 4: You're friends list is nothing but people playing WoW. Week 5: You uninstall Starcraft 2 HOTS and double click "League of Legends" cause you actually have friends that actually play it.
I'm sure for a lot of people this sounds familiar from WoL. History will repeat itself probably. Blizzard likes to repeat history.
On January 03 2013 06:38 Fenris420 wrote: People have impossible standards on new games if you ask me. They compare a new game to the games they played in the past with all the connotations it includes. Many of the things we remember that make us feel good about something actually have little to do with the actual game itself.
Nobody remembers how terrible some old games are until they pick them up and actually start playing them again.
I think that D3 was well worth the money. It wasn't the kind of game that you kept playing for more than a few hundred hours, but that is still a very long time. You will beat dozens of old pc or console games in that time. Same thing goes for the Sc2 campaign. I would buy sc2 even if I never intended to play online at all. The spectator part of it doesn't require me to buy the game either way.
As far as HotS is concerned I feel the same way. The campaign alone makes it worth the money. The new units are almost exclusively designed to diversify the game with high mobility, utility or range. It will be very hard to learn how to use them properly I think, but once that happens they game will benefit from it. It does not mean I agree with every single unit and ability, but overall I think the gameplay is heading in the right direction.
A lot of people saying SC 2 sucks are playing broodwar right now, there's no nostalgia because the game is still active. This isn't a bunch of people in their rockers recollecting times long past where they no longer are able to play the games they love. They can reevaluate how good they think the games are pretty easily since they're right at our fingertips. It's not hard to compare BW and SC 2 right now because we can all have first hand experience.
People expect more because more has been delivered over a decade ago, to have technology and budgets progress but quality decrease is ridiculous.
I think his point is that there are many reasons, outside gameplay (e.g., you got your first handjob while playing BW -- only kidding), that might make someone like or not like a game. The rabid BW supporters likely have been playing that game for many years and therefore must clearly love it, especially now that there's no pro scene and given that the game hasn't been rebalanced for a long time. I'm guessing the BW diehards in part like to shit on SC2 because of some combination of the following factors: (i) SC2 has now officially replaced BW on the professional scene, (ii) most of their friends believe BW is superior to SC2, (iii) BW is less accessible to noobs, (iv) they're elitists and (v) they genuinely love BW and dislike many aspects of SC2.
It's difficult to know how seriously to take their opinions since they usually just seem to assume that BW was better. Also it's very easy to take a dump on something. No one cares enough about BW anymore to go on a rant about its flaws but you could easily find faults if you wanted to -- gameplay that emphasizes robotic mechanics over strategy, matchups where you are forced to go down a single tech path, a fair number of units that are seldom used in professional play, at best "wonky" unit pathing and control, etc. I watched BW and enjoyed it a fair amount but I like SC2 a lot better, and I'm guessing most people do; otherwise you would see more people staging BW tournaments. The demand, other than from a small, vocal group of diehards, is simply not there.
In sum, I don't put much weight on the opinion of a BW diehard who says the quality of the game has decreased from BW.
On January 03 2013 06:38 Fenris420 wrote: People have impossible standards on new games if you ask me. They compare a new game to the games they played in the past with all the connotations it includes. Many of the things we remember that make us feel good about something actually have little to do with the actual game itself.
Nobody remembers how terrible some old games are until they pick them up and actually start playing them again.
I think that D3 was well worth the money. It wasn't the kind of game that you kept playing for more than a few hundred hours, but that is still a very long time. You will beat dozens of old pc or console games in that time. Same thing goes for the Sc2 campaign. I would buy sc2 even if I never intended to play online at all. The spectator part of it doesn't require me to buy the game either way.
As far as HotS is concerned I feel the same way. The campaign alone makes it worth the money. The new units are almost exclusively designed to diversify the game with high mobility, utility or range. It will be very hard to learn how to use them properly I think, but once that happens they game will benefit from it. It does not mean I agree with every single unit and ability, but overall I think the gameplay is heading in the right direction.
I feel the exact same way. Very nicely phrased too, so I can't really add anything else..
Except maybe that I'm so psyched for the HotS campaign! :D
So you want us, in our own delicate opinion, to help dictate whether you want to spent money on a video game or not..
Opinion wise, Protoss is changed, Zerg is changed, both for the better, but Terran needs a boost. If you were bored with Starcraft 2, this will re interest you a lot. If you were bored with Starcraft, do something else. No need to make up stupid analogies and stories on a "dead" game.
I Pre ordered about a week ago, and I'm very excited about the campaign. WoL was worth it just for the campaign, I had a lot of fun playing it. So many missions, and each one felt unique. As for the multiplayer, I'd be lying if I said I was psyched. Blizzard did a good job identifying the problem in WoL (deathball play), and a shitty job at designing or redesigning units to fix said problem. I feel they've gotten lost in making units "cool"... which is fine because the warhound, replicant, shredder were all terrible... but then they got so caught up in their new unit lineup they forgot to address the major flaw in their game, deathball syndrome. They are adding cool new shit, but not fixing the holes in their fundamentals.
Overall, blizz has just been too adamant about avoiding Changing shit so it does not look or play like Broodwar. When you're trying your damnedest NOT to emulate the best rts ever made, you are bound to run into some problems. The swarmhost's dull, brood lord like design, spitting out masses of free, non micro intensive units from a supremely safe distance is the antithesis of what an rts should be.
However the campaign is still going to kick so much ass that I can't bring myself to be angry like some are. I guess people were just better at designing pc games back in the 90s. Can't expect blizzard to be magically immune.
On January 03 2013 06:56 Serpico wrote: A lot of people saying SC 2 sucks are playing broodwar right now, there's no nostalgia because the game is still active. This isn't a bunch of people in their rockers recollecting times long past where they no longer are able to play the games they love. They can reevaluate how good they think the games are pretty easily since they're right at our fingertips. It's not hard to compare BW and SC 2 right now because we can all have first hand experience.
People expect more because more has been delivered over a decade ago, to have technology and budgets progress but quality decrease is ridiculous.
If you watch Korean ProLeague, you may be see how tv studio are empty and how the korean crowd doesn't give a shit about sc2 right now. Just to remember : -> notice the crowd. Never seen that much for sc2 in korea.
I think HOTS worth it but I don't want to buy it, it's my way to "protest" against DKDB vision of the game. I want a BW-like game with cool units, well balanced and fun to play/watch and no 8 min games long 1A action.
On January 02 2013 18:43 playa wrote: In WoL, Terran can 1a with any kind of early attack and expect to win the majority versus Toss. In HotS, it's nothing but Terran tears. "Dustin Browder set me up. In WoL, all I had to do was 1/1/1 or proxy rax. Now you're telling me I have to learn to macro? Not all-in every single game? Can you direct me to a tutorial on how to be skilful?"
It's pretty much the most beautiful game I've ever played. It ranks up there with Goldeneye and Ocarina of Time. If you can play WoL, a clown game in comparison that should never be taken seriously, and you don't get HotS, then you're either a Terran player that never tried to play a real game or your ideal game is bl/infestor every game. If that's you, good riddance.
You're clearly a complete idiot judging by your post, but going further, Golden Eye and Ocarina of Time are not games you should be comparing HotS to--at least, they aren't the games you should be comparing it to if you want me to be excited about it. The games you should be comparing it to are StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty, StarCraft: Brood War, DotA, League of Legends, Counter Strike 1.6, or other games that have or have had a successful pro scene. You claim that WoL should not be taken seriously, but some of my favorite games are games that I don't take seriously, such as Golden Eye, Ocarina of Time, and Mario Party. I love those games, they're fantastic games, but they're not "serious" games, in the same sense that I expect and want StarCraft II to be. Any game can be played "not seriously" by casual players, but to create a game that is taken seriously enough to have a solid, stable professional scene is a difficult task. I hope that Heart of the Swam is more like Brood War in terms of it's ability to be taken "seriously," but I fear that it will be more along the lines of Golden Eye and Ocarina of Time--games that, while fun, are not terribly exciting for competition.
On January 03 2013 06:56 Serpico wrote: A lot of people saying SC 2 sucks are playing broodwar right now, there's no nostalgia because the game is still active. This isn't a bunch of people in their rockers recollecting times long past where they no longer are able to play the games they love. They can reevaluate how good they think the games are pretty easily since they're right at our fingertips. It's not hard to compare BW and SC 2 right now because we can all have first hand experience.
People expect more because more has been delivered over a decade ago, to have technology and budgets progress but quality decrease is ridiculous.
If you watch Korean ProLeague, you may be see how tv studio are empty and how the korean crowd doesn't give a shit about sc2 right now. Just to remember : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNTJs7OMnf0 -> notice the crowd. Never seen that much for sc2 in korea.
I think HOTS worth it but I don't want to buy it, it's my way to "protest" against DKDB vision of the game. I want a BW-like game with cool units, well balanced and fun to play/watch and no 8 min games long 1A action.
Imo the lack of viewership (stream and live) for Proleague is at least as much Kespa's fault with terrible production with terrible maps as it is Blizz's fault for the state of the game.
It's almost moot to talk about this right now though as I have a feeling Hots units aren't close to being set in stone yet.