Karune posts regarding PC, Batch 53, and YouTube (09/25/09)

[ArcherofAiur]

It's a bit off-topic, but yes. It means that every MMO game after will be trying to copy WoW rather than making gameplay that doesn't blow ass.

It should also be noted that both of you ignored the substantive portion of my post. You know, where I eviscerated the points you were making. Are you therefore abandoning those arguments, or do you have something to logically defend those positions with?

Nicol Ive had these discussions with you over and over. Plus I think your recent posts were addressing Santrega.

I ask again, "What is your argument for these mechanics and against mechanics that require decision making?"

If you wanted to you could tear Starcraft apart and make it so that you have a game that allows for economic competition AND has decision making in every click. But you would be destroying so much else of what makes Starcraft in the process. I mean look at how hard it has been so far and it still falls short of SC's mechanic demand.

I think allot of all this has to do with priorities. In light of this the current macro model is probably the best option.

[Pandonetho]

Totally unrelated news guys. We have 1337 threads.

[Nicol Bolas]

I think allot of it has to do with priorities. If you wanted to you could tear Starcraft apart and make it so that you have a game that allows for economic competition AND has decision making in every click. But you would be destroying so much else of what makes Starcraft in the process.

That sounds suspiciously like you're saying that StarCraft is built on busywork, that you can't have something be StarCraft without busywork. If that's what you're saying, then there are two possibilities:

1: You severely lack imagination.

2: You're right. In which case StarCraft doesn't deserve to continue.

Also, what exactly does it mean to be StarCraft? With only one game, it's rather hard to tell what constitutes a defining quality.

My primary concern is competitive depth. That's the thing that makes StarCraft what it is in my eyes. It's clear that you can achieve that by throwing a bunch of busywork at the player, thereby stratifying players primarily based on mechanical ability. It is not clear what will happen if you throw a bunch of decision making at players.

Wouldn't it be a good idea to find out? Wouldn't it be interesting to see what would happen if you replaced busywork with actual thought? Might you then be able to stratify players based on a combination of mechanical ability and strategy?

What is StarCraft to you that decision making is an anathema to it?

[Santrega]

You know, where I eviscerated the points you were making.

Hmm, really? I didn't notice you eviscerating my points, only twisting the words to fit your argument, as you have done this entire time.

I ask again, "What is your argument for these mechanics and against mechanics that require decision making?"

The problem with this question, is that the current mechanics do involve decision making, just apparently not the kind of decision making you believe are decisions. If you had a clear definition of what a "decision" is to be made, then I feel we could make some progress in pointing the "decisions" out to you.

Secondly, I am all for mechanics that are fun, require skill, and increase resource harvesting. I guess the problem here is... Sc2 doesn't have 20 years for you to actually think a mechanic like that up for each race.

So, when you actually find some things which are fun, require skill, and increase resource harvesting for all 3 races in some way, then you can make the claim there are better options out there.

If your answer is simply, we should find those mechanics or simply do nothing, then I disagree, and this will not be a disagreement we can work out.

[ArcherofAiur]

That sounds suspiciously like you're saying that StarCraft is built on busywork, that you can't have something be StarCraft without busywork. If that's what you're saying, then there are two possibilities:

1: You severely lack imagination.

2: You're right. In which case StarCraft doesn't deserve to continue.

3: Starcraft isnt the game for Nicol.

Wouldn't it be a good idea to find out? Wouldn't it be interesting to see what would happen if you replaced busywork with actual thought? Might you then be able to stratify players based on a combination of mechanical ability and strategy?

I think an incredible amount of RTS gamees have already tried that.

[Kimera757]

And the insults fly again.

This is a 20-page thread and I've virtually avoided it till now. Just reading the last two pages proves I'm a sucker for punishment.

Maybe people have communication styles that don't mesh at all, and should put each other on their ignore lists. I'm a bit tired of any thread discussing macromanagement spiraling to absurd lengths with random insults, ignoring points and so forth.

[Pandonetho]

5 pages if you're cool like me and say it to 40 posts per page.

[Draco]

I try to keep my posts concise and make myself as unambiguous as possible.

The issue now seems to be the quibble over what is good "decision-making." Good decision requires a strategic choice that is based on your limited intelligence of the situation, and each option should carry risks along with gains. I'm sure everyone can agree that this is a good definition of "decision-making."

Now, in order for our complaints to be valid, we need to point out why the current state of things does not satisfy this condition sufficiently. PC and Mule may have good energy tension, and let's assume that for all intents and purposes, people love making good use of energy recharge and that amazing 8 supply. Why is there still something left to be desired? Because the dominant stance, the eco option, lacks strategy still. You still have the opportunity to add dimension to the ability you're going to be using the majority of the time.

Like Nicol said, this addition of dimension does not conflict with the values you guys hold, nor does it warrant the complacent attitudes that they're fine as is. It's no anathema, nor is it an unnecessary complaint. Pardon the presumptive attitude, but I assume Starcraft garners its lasting power from its strategic sophistication.

So, why bypass an opportunity to literally make this game better? It might be harder to balance, but that doesn't seem to be an argument anyone's concerned with. Balance shouldn't really be an argument to worry about until Beta. But, notice that the question of gameplay design transitions to balance design when Beta hits. Changing the fundamental gameplay for the better requires actions now, before Beta makes a stable enough model to where it's no longer worth going back to the drawing board.

[Xyvik]

I think an incredible amount of RTS gamees have already tried that.

I hate getting involved in these arguments, but this made me laugh. Name one RTS game that did this, please, other than Age of Empires. I'd love to hear your "incredible amount of games."

[Pandonetho]

Well, Dawn of War 2 tried that but it's a different case anyway (and not a valid example to point out IMO) since it's so opposite of Starcraft.