StarCraft II Beta available by pre-order
- Thread starter Raemon777
- Start date
- Status
It's not really luck if they started only mentioning that after a few weeks of massive backlash...
Doesn't SC1 has a spawn copy option that lets you play MP as long as the host has the CD in the computer?!
Something that's been bugging me, cross posted from the Blizzard forums:
My issue with Void Rays has nothing to do with their power level. I've seen enough evidence that if you actually know what you're doing you can deal with them just like any other unit. My issue is about a more elusive "fun balance" issue that's been bugging me. I believe a game should strive to be as fun as possible for as many different players as possible, and while they may not be unbalanced at the highest tiers of competitive play, there are issues in how players of other demographics use them.
Void Rays have all the coolness of a huge capital ship. And they spawn a lot faster and cheaper than a lot of huge capital ships do (Motherships and Carriers being the ones that actually matter in this context). There's a pretty sizable contingent of players who love to build big fleets of ships and swing in for a glorious kill. Ignore for a moment whether this is a viable strategy or not.
For such a player playing protoss, Void Rays are the first such ship that is available, and it is available as soon as you build your first Stargate. And it is cheaper and faster than the ships that come afterwards. And in low to mid level player, at least, it is a versatile enough ship that there's not a whole lot of reason to add other ships to the fleet. When I'm in the mood for a gloriously awesome protoss game... I honestly feel that there is only one "optimum build." I can try other builds if I want, to get variety, but whenever I do there's a nagging feeling that the game will either be less gloriously awesome or that I'll have to be waiting longer for something that isn't any more fun.
I actually have a somewhat similar issue regarding Battlecruisers (I've had this since StarCraft 1), which is that they are supposed to be this huge, awesome capital unit, but their attack is incredible slow and weak for what the unit is supposed to represent. Sure, you can do a Yamato blast, but then the unit goes back to slowly poking at the enemy in a manner highly ineffective considering how much you spent on the unit.
My issue with Void Rays has nothing to do with their power level. I've seen enough evidence that if you actually know what you're doing you can deal with them just like any other unit. My issue is about a more elusive "fun balance" issue that's been bugging me. I believe a game should strive to be as fun as possible for as many different players as possible, and while they may not be unbalanced at the highest tiers of competitive play, there are issues in how players of other demographics use them.
Void Rays have all the coolness of a huge capital ship. And they spawn a lot faster and cheaper than a lot of huge capital ships do (Motherships and Carriers being the ones that actually matter in this context). There's a pretty sizable contingent of players who love to build big fleets of ships and swing in for a glorious kill. Ignore for a moment whether this is a viable strategy or not.
For such a player playing protoss, Void Rays are the first such ship that is available, and it is available as soon as you build your first Stargate. And it is cheaper and faster than the ships that come afterwards. And in low to mid level player, at least, it is a versatile enough ship that there's not a whole lot of reason to add other ships to the fleet. When I'm in the mood for a gloriously awesome protoss game... I honestly feel that there is only one "optimum build." I can try other builds if I want, to get variety, but whenever I do there's a nagging feeling that the game will either be less gloriously awesome or that I'll have to be waiting longer for something that isn't any more fun.
I actually have a somewhat similar issue regarding Battlecruisers (I've had this since StarCraft 1), which is that they are supposed to be this huge, awesome capital unit, but their attack is incredible slow and weak for what the unit is supposed to represent. Sure, you can do a Yamato blast, but then the unit goes back to slowly poking at the enemy in a manner highly ineffective considering how much you spent on the unit.
R
Rubicon
I absolutely agree. This is why I find Mav's "already ruined SC2" talk to be somewhat strange, because his issue (so far anyway), doesn't seem to have anything to do with the changes (or lack thereof, debatably) in gameplay, but more around the "extras".
Also, granted, I find the whole "anti-DLC" mindset annoying. If a particular DLC isn't worth the cost, don't buy it. If enough people don't buy it, either the developer will stop putting out DLC, or work hard on making the next one better. If a DLC is worth the cost, then why get upset about it?[/QUOTE]
Lan play is considered an extra? That's the real big one for me, no lan play. Theyve effectively destroyed the competitive scene for SC2. Sure, they can be played out over bnet but its not just a problem of "a little laggy next to lan play" as Raemon says. Lan play offers a 0 ping environment. While not as extreme as a FPS game, its still a huge point of lan play, to have that low connection speed. And even if Blizzard held their own sanctioned tournaments or events, we'd still have to connect to bnet to play.. This has effectively put small LAN centers or parties etc who don't have big broadband connections out from playing SC2.. Combating piracy is one thing, completely throwing aspects of the game under the bus is another..
I really had wanted to try the game before making a choice. As much as I hate and loathe DLC (cause games should not be nickeled and dimed over time), I could live with it. But I'd like to check the game out before deciding if being split into 3 parts is worth it, not being able to realistically play in a lan setting is worth it, etc
As far as lan goes, see ScytheRexx's link above. It addresses all the concerns I have. As for checking the game to see if "splitting it up into three parts," well, the only way that works is you play the entire game before deciding to pay for it, which isn't a reasonable request at all. I still don't get why DLC is "nickle and diming you," so long as the things DLC offer do not give some players a competitive edge over others.
One thing to be aware, is that Blizzard knows how big the pro scene is with a game like StarCraft. While I can't say for certain, and this may not help you individually, I am pretty sure Blizzard is going to make a "pro-scene" version of the game that will run without Battle.net for Tournaments and approved LAN centers. The authentication and requirement for Battle.net is mostly being designed for individual copies, and is mostly there to prevent other online services from using the game, as they often go through the LAN. Yes, it does suck that the group of friends hanging out at home have to get an internet connection established for pseudo-LAN play, but it's not nearly as bad as you are making it out to be.
Not sure why people still keep saying "split into 3 parts" We are still getting a whole game at least twice as expansive as the first StarCraft for the first one, the only difference is Terran have more single player missions then Protoss and Zerg. The two expansions after that carry on the story from a dominate point of view of the other races, but still act just like Brood War in that they push the story forward after the first one. All we get is one extra expansion, which is welcome to me since we might not see StarCraft 3 for another 10 years.
Because that's not good enough, dammit!
I got the beta from pre-order today, and lo and behold it yields the best argument for LAN reliability. We're having issues with our DSL right now and our connection is bouncing back and forth between fast and slow. The pings can land anywhere from 23 to 7000 MS. So, my best friend and I have the game all loaded and updated, but can't play the game due to having to use Bnet as a dedicated server.
The lag even happens when I create a 1v1 game with a PC opponent.
The lag even happens when I create a 1v1 game with a PC opponent.
Have to realize though that this is beta, and the first game to be utilizing the new Battle.net 2.0
I have had my own connection issues here and there, but the majority of my games work just fine. It will be better once they get that persudo-LAN into the game, but for now the whole reason you Beta it to stress the servers and test balance, and it's hard to stress the servers if it already allowed you to peer-to-peer connect.
I have had my own connection issues here and there, but the majority of my games work just fine. It will be better once they get that persudo-LAN into the game, but for now the whole reason you Beta it to stress the servers and test balance, and it's hard to stress the servers if it already allowed you to peer-to-peer connect.
Help if I'm missing something obvious. A lot of times after a match I'll want to talk to someone I just played with (or against), but I have no idea how to do that. Friending them requires the identifier, and for some reason my match history only includes their first names. I can't believe they missed something this obvious. What am I overlooking?
I think you mean the Zerg get no missions and the Protoss have their buildings and units playable in some Raynor/Terran missions... while the story will move forward about as much as it did in SC1, which had an actual full story with some remainind plot hooks for the expansion. We certainly won't be seeing any UED-type story insertions in any of the expansions.
But yeah, a longer campaign for each race, with more variation between how it plays for each faction does sweeten the pill considerably... and it's all Relic's fault anyway...
C
Chazwozel
I used to play tournaments in SC, and while I was never any good at it I had fun. Without a LAN option, this severely hinders any kind of professional level playing of the game (note, I am not qualifying myself as a pro, I'm a n00b like most people), or at the very least forces non-Blizzard tournaments and ladders to have go to through Bnet and deal with lag/ping etc.
This.. is just Blizzard milking money. Did you see the news this past week about how Blizzard is pulling their affiliation with the largest pro gaming company in Korea? Even though the Koreans kept the game alive for 12 years, they are being snubbed, since Korea is where like 80-90% of all pro SC tournaments, ladders and players come from. As a result, Blizzard has chosen to go with other gaming organizations, prompting certain pro players and pro teams to NOT play in those tournaments and organizations since Blizzard decided to jump ship from one company to another. They just want even more money, want a SC2 tournament? it has to go through bnet. Ladder? bnet. Sure you can organize an unofficial of either of those but you still end up playing the game online, dealing with online gaming issues (ping, lag, location) in an environment that was built around lan play.
And yea custom maps costing money is bad, in several ways. One, remember back in the day, the first couple years of SC1, Blizz had a Map of the Week they made, every week, completely for free. Why all of a sudden is an RTS map, something to be considered DLC? DLC is exactly one chief reason why I am not a console gamer. My generation of gaming, you never paid for extra maps or little tiny additions to the game. Occasionally there might be an expansion pack to a game but those usually have a ton of content or major additions, worthy of the price. However with most PC games you could get free content, stuff that should never have cost money in the first place. Two, what types of maps will they allow players to make and charge for? Regular gameplay maps? Campaigns? Custom Use Map Setting style maps? If they allow you to charge for UMS, then they have just opened the flood gates for not only legal ramifications but spam. Ever play a UMS map in SC1? There's always like several games of the same type running, all running the exact same map except some jerk has slightly modded it to basically just include his / her name. Imagine having to navigate your way through some Bnet Store for custom maps to be purchased and there's 2000 copies of Sunken Defense or OMGNAZIZOMBIE or DragonBallZ RPG AttackX...
Basically, I can't stand to see Bnet destroyed like this. Nickel and diming us, forcing us to use it for a competitive function. This is the same type of shit console gamers deal with for multiplayer games. The most recent being Halo 2 on Xbox 1. You paid for the game, and the ability to play it online, but its up to someone else when you can play it, how long you can play it and when you may not play it again. With no LAN function, Blizzard has basically just put a kill switch in the game, if they no longer want you to play it, they can just remove it from Bnet, and no more multiplayer (unless there is some rudimentary 1v1 via tcp/ip).
Call it a rant if you wish, but I loved SC1. Loved it. It was one of the first few PC games that I got hooked into playing online the week it was released back in 98'. I have so many fond memories of playing SC1, Quake2, etc online around that time period, and it just saddens me to see how they've already ruined SC2
[/QUOTE]You are literally The KING of griping over the most irrelevant bullshit on the planet.
C
Chazwozel
I just think he doesnt want to pay for the game.
Dave
Staff member
I just think he doesnt want to pay for the game.
That's not necessarily true. For example, with Diablo, (IIRC) if you wanted to play with obviously altered characters or cheat codes you had to go LAN. Could this be maybe why? Or because LAN can be much faster? Or because he wants to have LAN parties where a group of people get together with their gear and have fun. Now these options have been taken away.
I fucking LOVE LAN parties but no why bother? It won't help the speed, it's a pain in the ass to lug the equipment around and who cares about getting together in real life instead of just being in the basement?
In the end it's their product, but there are other uses for a LAN than pirating.
C
Chazwozel
So how is telling Mav that he's full of shit trolling and infraction worthy if I'm not looking to incite a response from him but merely recounting the truth about the original statement. Gee golly, we can't have opinions with them being considering a trolling remark?
---------- Post added at 12:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:16 PM ----------
.[/QUOTE]
That's not necessarily true. For example, with Diablo, (IIRC) if you wanted to play with obviously altered characters or cheat codes you had to go LAN. Could this be maybe why? Or because LAN can be much faster? Or because he wants to have LAN parties where a group of people get together with their gear and have fun. Now these options have been taken away.
I fucking LOVE LAN parties but no why bother? It won't help the speed, it's a pain in the ass to lug the equipment around and who cares about getting together in real life instead of just being in the basement?
In the end it's their product, but there are other uses for a LAN than pirating.[/QUOTE]
DOTA comes to mind. Highly customized games over B-net.
---------- Post added at 12:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:16 PM ----------
I just think he doesnt want to pay for the game.
That's not necessarily true. For example, with Diablo, (IIRC) if you wanted to play with obviously altered characters or cheat codes you had to go LAN. Could this be maybe why? Or because LAN can be much faster? Or because he wants to have LAN parties where a group of people get together with their gear and have fun. Now these options have been taken away.
I fucking LOVE LAN parties but no why bother? It won't help the speed, it's a pain in the ass to lug the equipment around and who cares about getting together in real life instead of just being in the basement?
In the end it's their product, but there are other uses for a LAN than pirating.[/QUOTE]
DOTA comes to mind. Highly customized games over B-net.
C
Chazwozel
Defense of the Ancients is a custom user map for WarIII that's competitively played over B-net
C
Chazwozel
Sure they do. Get together and rock out with your friends.
C
Chibibar
I think the private LAN parties are gone (at least with current release) I don't think official Tournament will be effected by this. I'm sure the game will have local bnet server (especially since they are hosted by Bliz) for tournament purpose.
I don't think that's been enabled yet, AFAIK.
C
Chibibar
I don't think that's been enabled yet, AFAIK.[/QUOTE]
I must have miss that one, does the software prevent vent or skype to work while in game?
Hehe, oh Dave, we love you. You're so old.
E
edzepp
http://www.destructoid.com/starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty-dated-july-27-2010-172744.phtml
In short: Starcraft 2 will hit retail on July 27.
In short: Starcraft 2 will hit retail on July 27.
My birthday!
...Except I don't want it.
...Except I don't want it.
So it will be out in september then... good to know.
C
Chazwozel
So it will be out in september then... good to know.[/QUOTE]
Probably more like December for Christmas 2011.
Sure, if you want to be a realist... i'm an optimist for this week though.
I'm betting September, which means it'll likely come out on my birthday. Which will be awesome.
If by some miracle it DOES come in July, it'll probably arrive about 3 days afterwards because I pre-ordered, which means it'll show up just as I return from a week long CGI convention. Which will be almost as awesome.
If by some miracle it DOES come in July, it'll probably arrive about 3 days afterwards because I pre-ordered, which means it'll show up just as I return from a week long CGI convention. Which will be almost as awesome.
Wrath of the Lich King came out on time.
- Status