Starcraft - Heart of the Swarm Announced!

[dave_the_nerd]

Best moment of SC1:

"Ah hayt compyooders..."

 

[thespyder]

I don't see why people keep saying RMAH is a driving force behind the game... IT'S NOT.

Most people don't use it, and there's only a few good items on the RMAH. The vast majority of the game still revolves around the gold AH, which is only a step up from the bartering system they had in D2. RMAH is overhyped and if people wanted to sell the godly gg items, they do it OUTSIDE of the RMAH because there's a $250 limit. And even then the vast majority of the gg items are sold IN GAME via the trade channel or on the gold ah: just like you would do normally in D2.

And there's multiple viable builds for DH, barbs, and wizards that are gear dependent just like in D2. I'd say doing away with the skill tree isn't necessarily bad, its just different. Don't play WD or monk myself so I can't say. I suspect the builds will diversify even more as PVP is introduced.

I played D2 to death and D3 in its current state is infinitely better than vanilla D2 without the expansion pack.

There is a big difference between concept and execution. The concept was to entice players to use the RMAH. In reality, (Most) players saw through the paper thin excuses and simply didn't use it. Clearly you didn't see through it.

As for your second point, there are no multiple builds in D3. Period. There is nothing that one 30th level DH can do that another can't do. Except the Gear. And that was a clear decision to make people want to use the AH and then by extension the RMAH.

Play D2 sometime and tell me that every single 30th level Amazon can do everything that every single other 30th level Amazon can do. They can't. Even with different equipment. That is WHY you have more replayability in D2. So you can have multiple capability builds for each character class. But again, with D3 the focus was so heavily focused on the equipment BECAUSE of the Auction houses. Pure and simple.

But this isn't a Diablo thread.

 

[TidusZ]

Diablo 3 doesn't rely on playing with others to create new fun experiences. It relies on the concepts of slot machines to keep a certain select population addicted....and it works best on them

I'm one of those slot machine people who played d2 for years, but d3 was over for me in like a month because its a bad game. It was all downhill after I killed inferno diablo 6 days after release and the only good thing about that game was the money I made when I quit.

 

[PowerYoga]

There is a big difference between concept and execution. The concept was to entice players to use the RMAH. In reality, (Most) players saw through the paper thin excuses and simply didn't use it. Clearly you didn't see through it.

As for your second point, there are no multiple builds in D3. Period. There is nothing that one 30th level DH can do that another can't do. Except the Gear. And that was a clear decision to make people want to use the AH and then by extension the RMAH.

Play D2 sometime and tell me that every single 30th level Amazon can do everything that every single other 30th level Amazon can do. They can't. Even with different equipment. That is WHY you have more replayability in D2. So you can have multiple capability builds for each character class. But again, with D3 the focus was so heavily focused on the equipment BECAUSE of the Auction houses. Pure and simple.

But this isn't a Diablo thread.

Completely disagree.

The RMAH was designed so people wouldn't be trying to sell stuff on ebay and other sites like in D2, which created a big problem for blizzard and other sites. The idea is to take that out of the equation while trying to make a bit of money out of it, but making money wasn't the primary concern. Blizzard even said themselves that the RMAH is negligible income for them, conspiracy theories or not.

There's a lot of different builds, "period". Try playing a tank build with lvl 30 dh skills and see how badly you fail. Not sure why you keep bringing up D2 skill trees as an argument: the only difference between d3 and d2 in this regard is you have to roll a new character to do the exact same thing you're doing in D3 by switching runes. I see this as a plus, and not a minus.

 

[thespyder]

Completely disagree.

Nuff said.

The RMAH was designed so people wouldn't be trying to sell stuff on ebay and other sites like in D2, which created a big problem for blizzard and other sites. The idea is to take that out of the equation while trying to make a bit of money out of it, but making money wasn't the primary concern. Blizzard even said themselves that the RMAH is negligible income for them, conspiracy theories or not.

Keep drinking the Kool-aid. And Clinton kept on saying that he did not have sexual relations with Monica.

There's a lot of different builds, "period". Try playing a tank build with lvl 30 dh skills and see how badly you fail. Not sure why you keep bringing up D2 skill trees as an argument: the only difference between d3 and d2 in this regard is you have to roll a new character to do the exact same thing you're doing in D3 by switching runes. I see this as a plus, and not a minus.

The bolded point IS THE DIFFERENCE. It makes all the difference in the world. And absolutely decreases replayability for D3. I say again, for those incapable of understanding. THERE IS NO REASON TO PLAY MORE THAN ONE OF ANY CLASS IN D3. You gain Nothing. Because no character of the same class/level has anything other than items to differentiate them from any other character of the same class/level. hence, NO BUILDS. There are different STRATEGIES. But that is a much different thing.

But for the last time. This is not a Diablo thread. So, on back to Starcraft please.

 

[Schfifty Five]

All you dolts talking about D2/D3, take it somewhere else. This an SC2 thread.

 

[KaOTiK]

*masturbates furiously*

 

[Aikouka]

*masturbates furiously*

Kerrigan, Nova or both? :biggrin:

 

[KaOTiK]

Kerrigan, Nova or both? :biggrin:

Nova, mostly, always had a thing for blondes

 

[Aikouka]

Nova, mostly, always had a thing for blondes

I'm guessing you didn't side with the Jamaican ghost in WoL then?

 

[KaOTiK]

I'm guessing you didn't side with the Jamaican ghost in WoL then?

Actually I haven't even played WoL yet. I'm not going to get SC2 till it is all finished. Makes it easier too because the Protoss are by faaaaaaaaaaar my fav race.

 

[Geosurface]

I wish whatever build they had of StarCraft: Ghost would have leaked.

Would be an interesting curiousity.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Actually I haven't even played WoL yet. I'm not going to get SC2 till it is all finished. Makes it easier too because the Protoss are by faaaaaaaaaaar my fav race.

Battle Chest edition in, what, 2016/17?

uuuugh.

 

[KaOTiK]

Battle Chest edition in, what, 2016/17?

uuuugh.

I'll actually buy the collectors edition for the Protoss

 

[Dumac]

Umm, people are playing SC2 like crazy. Are you not at all aware of whats going on?

No they aren't. Starcraft vs. LoL.

SC2 prize pool continues to go down, NASL was a huge failure, interests is waning, GomTV is showing LoL, etc.

With regards to SC2 and D3, I doubt there are more players playing the older versions of the series.

There are, at least in Korea (the place that matters). Starcraft is #7. SC2 doesn't even hit the top 10. LoL is number 1.

Haters gonna hate.

SC2 was awesome, much fun, and vastly superior to SC1 in almost every way. Improved path finding, extremely well balanced play tactics, and better graphics. They literally created a superior version of SC1, especially with regard to graphics, because they knew they had a good formula. Even with that they introduced new units, and new play dynamics that enhanced the overall meta-game. The only reason to play SCBW is if you simply prefer the slightly different gameplay style.

SC2 still has plenty of people playing, but after 3 years, its largely going to be the core crowd that care about this game...ie: the "loyal following".
Where is your proof to contrary?

More people are playing SC and SC2. SC2 was set up to bring e-sports to the world, but it failed. Interests in Starcraft plateaued, despite little to not competition. Now LoL is taking over, which SC2 pros quitting to play LoL.

Plenty of influential pros have posted about the shortcomings of SC2. Everyone was betting on HotS to fix it and revitalize interest, but it looks to be more of the same. People lost interests in the beta in less than a week.

You say that only the "loyal following" is left, but that isn't good enough. SC2 was supposed to hit it big as a spectator sport! Blizzard dropped the ball.

D2's "loyal following" is the exact same as what you attack SC2 for having - why cast the game is a positive light? Its simply a double standard you setup! Rosy glasses at all? The only reason i don't comment about any 'depth' in D2 vs D3' is because I never gave a damn about Diablo 2.

D3 was a giant disappoint in many ways. Built completely around the auctionhouse - the game simply isn't fun. Flavor of the month builds ruin any variety, and the player base has dropped substantially since release.

 

[Dumac]

Starcraft 1 had an campy yet amazing story.

Starcraft 2 had a campy yet crappy story that shits on the SC1 lore and basically all the development that Raynor had throughout the game.

Raynor vowed that he would never forgive Kerrigan for the atrocities she had committed and that he would seek vengeance until the day he died for the billions of humans and protoss she willingly killed. Starcraft 1 ended with the "queen bitch of the universe" enacting a massive holocaust against every non zerg living thing in the sector. She was dead to him on that day.

This story of revenge turned into a hollywood love story complete with into the sunset ending in less than one game with absolutely zero reason as to why it happened. "Sometimes, I think it would have been better if you had died that day." No, what? Did Raynor suddenly forget that he had enacted an eternal vengeance against Kerrigan for her series of betrayals and the dozen of times she tried to kill him, and the millions of humans and protess that she had killed? Apparently he did, and he also forgot his eternal oath.

Its almost funny to think that people consider SC2 to be a "heavy" story game. The entire game was modeled into a funny space western. There are stupid jokes and crap everywhere, starting from the first mission. SC1 was a serious space western. It had funny parts to it, but in a extremely dark way.

Nothing in SC2 competes with the cutscene involving the assault on the science vessel infested with zerg which starts off dramatic, has a funny scene, then suddenly devolves to pure horror, or the scene where a hundred dragoons warp onto a outpost, or hell the ending of brood war with the record player and the admirals sad letter to his wife. Now THAT was a dark and heavy game.

Yeah,the story in SC2 was a giant disappointment. The actual campaign missions themselves were a blast mechanically, but the plot was moronic.

"Oh the overmind totally wasn't bad guys, I swear!"

"I'm not really dead, but that's a tale for another time "

"Oh, we don't have the balls to kill kerrigan so lets turn her back into a human so her and Raynor can bone. But we'll keep her hair roach-like (with no explanation)."

Plus the writing was laughable. We go from Zeratul's speech about the mysteries of the universe in SC1 to "TIDINGS OF DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM" in SC2.

D3 suffered from the same downfalls.

"TEAAAROOOOOOOR"

 

[Geosurface]

Dumac I agree with you about D3's shortcomings, and I'd add to that the story being kind of stupid. Still, I enjoyed it's single player briefly, for someone who's been with Diablo series since the day the first game released, but who has never played it at that really crazy competitive serious level (I've always been pretty casual about all 3 games) I still got some enjoyment out of it for a month or so. I may have always been destined to drop it pretty fast because I just don't like to replay the same content over and over and over typically.

But as much as I agree with the stated shortcomings of D3, I'm left wondering... what are the shortcomings of SC2 as you and others see them?

I'm not saying I don't agree there are shortcomings for SC2... they just aren't as obvious to me as D3. Can you elaborate?

EDIT:

In the short time while I typed my post you quoted and made a post that talked somewhat about this, and I have to admit I agree with some of that. SC1 is doubtless the superior game. No doubt about that.

Still, SC2 coasts very far on the fact that it takes us back to those same buildings, units, and world... for the most part. I can't bring myself to hate it. But I definitely don't play it with the kind of zeal that I did SC1.

 

[Dumac]

Amazon is offering beta access for pre-orders.

Lol, I didn't even notice this. After talking crap about the game, I went ahead an ordered the Collector's edition (because I'm really a big fan at heart and want it to succeed).

Got my beta key!

In the short time while I typed my post you quoted and made a post that talked somewhat about this, and I have to admit I agree with some of that. SC1 is doubtless the superior game. No doubt about that.

Still, SC2 coasts very far on the fact that it takes us back to those same buildings, units, and world... for the most part. I can't bring myself to hate it. But I definitely don't play it with the kind of zeal that I did SC1.

Yeah, I agree. I still enjoyed the game a lot. I thought the campaign (excluding story) was actually better than SC1. I also loved the fluidity of the MP.

I just want it to grow in the world of e-sports, and I feel like Blizzard is trying SO HARD to balance it and make it a proper e-sports game that it is actually hurting the game in the long run. I also think there needs to be some kind of F2P option and less of a focus on laddering, as laddering can be intimidating to a lot of people. Laddering wasn't the focus of SC1 either.

 

[Geosurface]

Blizzard definitely suffers from being around too long now, there was more of a hands off attitude in earlier games, partly because of lack of precedent from other games, or technological limitations... and the company being smaller.

They patch their games to death now. They monitor them too closely, and strangle any sort of natural community development... they've got their nose too deep into their own shit. Too many cooks spoiling the soup, etc.

 

[PowerYoga]

Keep drinking the Kool-aid.

Don't forget your tinfoil hat.

 

[thespyder]

Blizzard definitely suffers from being around too long now, there was more of a hands off attitude in earlier games, partly because of lack of precedent from other games, or technological limitations... and the company being smaller.

They patch their games to death now. They monitor them too closely, and strangle any sort of natural community development... they've got their nose too deep into their own shit. Too many cooks spoiling the soup, etc.

I think they suffer more from a change in leadership and a stronger focus on the wider market rather than anything else. What the hard core 'Classic' game lovers of earlier franchise installments want isn't necessarily what the more casual gamers want. But there is more money in the casual gamer market. So.....

And there is more than a healthy dose of greed. something that fanbois apparently can't see for their noses.

 

[Chops McGandhi]

But the reason that D3 died so fast was because it was an obvious and blatant money grab and nothing more. D2 was a vastly superior game in terms of depth, content and overall just plain fun.

And SC2 with it's one expansion/per race is not a blatant money grab?
Not that I think SC2 is a bad game because SC2 did improve on SC1 in a number of ways.

 

[thespyder]

And SC2 with it's one expansion/per race is not a blatant money grab?
Not that I think SC2 is a bad game because SC2 did improve on SC1 in a number of ways.

Oh, i think there was a clear expectation of profits for SC2. And yeah, the whole $60 per race is a bit unusual. But to be honest, I felt that the campaign for WoL was substantial. I felt it was larger than 1/3 of what we got with SC1.

And no. I don't think it was as much of a money grab as D3. Certainly I didn't feel as ripped off after playing SC2 as I did with D3.

 

[Aikouka]

If I remember correctly, people were talking about wanting SC2 to be on sale. So... StarCraft II is currently on sale at Amazon for $18.50!

http://slickdeals.net/permadeal/83218/amazon.com-starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty-pc

 

[irishScott]

And SC2 with it's one expansion/per race is not a blatant money grab?
Not that I think SC2 is a bad game because SC2 did improve on SC1 in a number of ways.

I felt like I got my $60 worth from WoL. 30 hours campaign and much more via multiplayer. That's a more than fair deal for a quality RTS.

So long as the next two games keep that high bar, I'll consider them worthy investments as well.