Anyone feel SC2 is getting worse with each update??

[Skyze]

I am pretty certain that blizzard stated in their ratings that Terran was losing more than winning in the high level play. So not sure where your getting this whole catering the balance changes towards casual players.

Artosis, the US shoutcaster who moved to Korea and has been covering BW Esports for the past ~2 years, has posted the top 20 ELO/ratings on the Asia server.. It consisted of something like 11 terran, 8 zerg and 1 protoss.

After the roach change, Artosis (who talks to all the progamers) commented that half of the pros are SWITCHING to terran, most notably the famous Protoss progamer Tester, was now in the top 10 as Terran.

And if you havent been watching foreign games lately, or even Day[9]s dailys, TheLittleOne introduced a literally UNBEATABLE TvZ strategy, which is so dominant he said he hasnt lost with it once yet (until today vs Sen, but to be fair, Sen is arguably the best zerg in the world, and TLO is an average random player, and Sen struggled hard)

this TLO strat has been dominating the foreign TvZ scene recently, and terrans have won almost every major tournament in the past 2 weeks.

and to make things WORSE; Blizzard makes this last patch that gives a BUFF to MMM, along with a nerf to void rays (not needed at all) and no nerfs to anything else Terran has, which tanks significantly need a nerf.

So yes, Terran is the strongest race at the moment by a large margin, as shown by all the Koreans switching to Terran. The US server "stats" of terrans only winning 46% is not reliable, because that is comprised of the server wide stats, not top gamers. You dont balance RTS games for the casual gamers, because then you have one race that is almost mandatory to play at the top level, which ruins competitive gaming, as Terran is doing right now.

The biggest example of how they are balancing the game for casual players instead of pro players is explained in the last patch by the Ultra change, Pro level players were complaining ultras DIED TOO FAST... nothing about not dealing enough dmg.. Yet blizzard nerfs their HP and gives them stuff they dont need. the most significant change that caters to casuals is the Void ray nerf, which any terran above platinum had NO PROBLEMS AT ALL vs void rays, it was very simple to counter.. yet void rays still got nerfed. What was blizzard thinking with those two changes? Certainly not balancing for high level play..

TLO, the most famous Random player in SC2 for the past 3 months, has now started picking terran 100% of his games in tournaments, because it gives him the best chance to win. I think that speaks for itself.

[spychi]

Spychi have you ever heard of a thing called inflation? Prices go up over time. Unless the product becomes obsolete then obviously the prices drop. Unless your talking about trying to buy unused technology like for say an 8mm player for somebody like me who has free movies sent by movie companies in 8mm format to watch. Look up how much it costs to buy an obsolete 8mm player from sony.

Battlefield Bad Company 2?
Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2?
Resident Evil 5?
Dragon Age: Origins?
Left4Dead 1 and 2?
Orange Box?
Gears of War?
Call of Duty 4?
Dead Space?
those are only few titles which I can bring right now for PC that are bestsellers, don't have retarded DLC's for money (exception ME2 - but their DLC despite the skin pack was awesome and mostly free) and are 1000X times better and longer gameplay than most of games these days

[Skyze]

Welcome Blackdog. I've seen worse first posts than that!



You know, I've never in my life met an "RTS gamer." For one thing, strictly speaking Blizzard most definitely does not have a monopoly over RTS; good, albeit unexceptional, RTS games are made all the time. For another -- let's say Blizz really did have a monopoly over RTS...

Who cares?

RTS isn't that hot a commodity, and doesn't have that many genre-blind fans, that it can survive on that alone. Blizz isn't banking on their RTS fans to carry them through, they're banking on a secured casual market, fueled by WoW fans and an influx of new generation gamers.

If they put out a product that is objectively observed to be sub-par, Western critics may or may not decide to not let Blizz get away with it. And the casual market just might listen. That has always been the concern. That's why Blizz renamed "Single Building Selection" to "Spawn Larva."

Really?? Just about EVERYONE I know that plays SC2, are "RTS only gamers".. Hell, i'd say 99% of them are Blizzard-only RTS gamers, in the sense that for the past 10 years, they have only played BW and Warcraft 3.. Nothing else. I fit into that category basically, other than a few months of CS, Halo 3 and HoN.

Almost anyone who plays competitive RTS, only plays BW or War3. SC2 was suppose to combine the communities and make the best of both worlds, but so far its clear SC2 is worse than either of them by a large margin.

[SaZun]

Mass Effect and Dragon Age DLC's cost money.
Gears of War games are Xbox exclusive
Call of duty 4: Modern Warfare charged for the map pack.
Battlefield Bad Company 2 charges for the DLCs on consoles.


@Skyze: I back down my claims for Terran not being overpowering based on your claims from a third party member based on word of mouth. Considering the fact that my Blizzard post I was basing it off is obsolete to an extent.

[pure.Wasted]

Really?? Just about EVERYONE I know that plays SC2, are "RTS only gamers".. Hell, i'd say 99% of them are Blizzard-only RTS gamers, in the sense that for the past 10 years, they have only played BW and Warcraft 3.. Nothing else. I fit into that category basically, other than a few months of CS, Halo 3 and HoN.

You're interpreting that to mean these people love RTS games so much.

My interpretation would be these people have grown so used to Blizzard's level of quality and polish that no (/few) other company, REGARDLESS of genre, can satisfy their demands.

Seriously, other (non-FPS) games can't hold my attention for more than two weeks at a time, max. That doesn't make me a fan of RTS games, although my gaming record suggests it. It makes me a fan of ridiculously high production values.

[spychi]

Mass Effect and Dragon Age DLC's cost money.
Gears of War games are Xbox exclusive
Call of duty 4: Modern Warfare charged for the map pack.
Battlefield Bad Company 2 charges for the DLCs on consoles.

Gears of War 1 is for PC
Mass Effect only had one paid DLC
ME 2 has only Kasumi Stolen memory as a paid DLC and the skin pack which is worth 2$
Dragon Age DLC's cost nothing if you buy the digital deluxe edition like i did, it is 15$ more expenisve but you have everything

Call of Duty 4 recived lately DLC, for few years it was all free, but when Battlefield Bad Company 2 kicked in I stopped playin MW, it charges 10$ if you buyed a used game which idea I like
for the new co-op addon Xbox360 users and PS3 users will be charged, the rest is free

[Cheesenium]

And they know people will be forced to buy SC2 because thats the only RTS in the past 5 years that is actually "decent".. They dont care about making it the best game it can be though, cause they have 99% of the target market in their hands.

Right,as if DoW2, C&C3, CoH, RA3 and so on are completely rubbish beyond recognition. Those are good games,with a lot of potential to be competitive games, but they all had a problem, lack of consistent support.

well if people are enough blind to buy the MW2 map pack for 25$, then what stops Acti to add skins for the multiplayer for the same ammount of money? and while some publishers like EA (which completly disapproves Activision way of selling CoD franchise in general and other games, while EA is their competition at the market they have proven that they can change their product selling policy in the past two years) other publishers will follow Acti's way of sales, which isn't good for us, a hyped game like MW2 can have influence not only on the developer's products but other's as well

so either we want games for 50$ max each or we want to be raped in the ass for a shitty game

oh and btw I will be buying SC2 for singleplayer mainly, yet restrictions like region lock pists me off



Dawn of War 2 sales are pretty big
add to that content like : map editor, patches, Last Stand (which is very awesome time after time), graphics, new addon like Chaos Rising (which is great), it is using Steam and GfWL
the multiplayer balance is broke in few ways, I will admit but not everything can be superb

Thats why i always say, EA is a much better company these days,compare to Activision who just raped their franchise till dead. They just killed CoD, especially the competitive part and charge everyone 15USD for 5 maps. No thanks,and i refuse to buy a product like this. I'll take BFBC2 at any day. What makes you think they wont pull of the same thing with SC2?

On the other hand, EA listens to what the community wants,mostly. Gives a couple of free stuff with each new copy in their Project 10 Dollar. Everyone's happy,as EA earn money, gamers are happy with the free stuff and interested to get the paid DLCs. At the same time, treating their community with respect. Did Activision do that?

DoW2's balance isnt that bad now. It's a bit stale,as there isnt any macro, but it's pretty well balanced now,with a few overpower units and abilities.

Back to the topic, i say Blizzard definitely have problems, with Kotick as CEO.

Battlenet isnt much better from,say GFWL in DoW2, Relic Online in CoH or Gamespy in C&C games. Except Battlenet is polished with much better UI and it's shiny. Still, it has it's own problems, region lock, no chat channels and lag. Also, games still lag,or worse, dropped off. Balance is still a problem, although i do agree that Blizzard is doing way better with balance in SC2, as they have a much longer development time. Sc2 is much more polished than it's competitor,also,again,they have a much longer development time.

Im fine with all these Battlenet problems if the game is planned to be released in say,in September,just like what you all say, it's a Beta and things should be broken. Not while the release date is just about 2 months away and there are still tonnes of problems.

[Cheesenium]

Mass Effect and Dragon Age DLC's cost money.
Gears of War games are Xbox exclusive
Call of duty 4: Modern Warfare charged for the map pack.
Battlefield Bad Company 2 charges for the DLCs on consoles.

One thing for sure is, EA isnt mliking their games as ridiculous as how Activision is doing to theirs.

Those Mass Effect and Dragon Age DLC dont cost as much as a MW2 map pack individually. It is planned since first day where all EA games will have paid DLC after a while.

[spychi]

One thing for sure is, EA isnt mliking their games as ridiculous as how Activision is doing to theirs.

Those Mass Effect and Dragon Age DLC dont cost as much as a MW2 map pack individually. It is planned since first day where all EA games will have paid DLC after a while.

yet those are worth the buck instead of few maps throwed for 15$

[SaZun]

yet those are worth the buck instead of few maps throwed for 15$

That is purely opinionated. What if I enjoy playing on a new set of maps more than doing one or two mesely missions on a RPG?