Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Looks like Blizzard is announcing a new game....

Lyric Suite

Converting to Islam
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
56,164
kingcomrade said:
No, the original wasn't very rock paper scissors. You had some units which did well against other units, but it wasn't as cleanly cut as it looks in the new one.

Perhaps, but it was still an important element in the original, particularly concerning special abilities.

kingcomrade said:

It's looks like a 2d game is what i'm saying.

kingcomrade said:
To be honest, C&C3 looks like it has better graphics.

Graphics, maybe, better visuals? well, i think i'll have to disagree. C&C 3 still has that annoying feel there's something wrong with the way it looks, a trait most 3d Isometric games seem to share.

From a technical point of view, this game may not have the same amount of polygons or 'next-gen' technical features, but it has such a perfect blend between detail, design and quality animations that it simply looks, feels and even moves right. Sure it's not as realistic looking, but who cares?

The first game is still a relatively good eye pleaser to this day for much the same reasons.
 

kingcomrade

Kingcomrade
Edgy
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
26,884
Location
Cognitive Elite HQ
Perhaps, but it was still an important element in the original, particularly concerning special abilities.
I don't get what you mean. The only ability which I can think of that is a "counter" to anything is psi storm, which counters marines, hydralisks, and air units, and that isn't rock paper scissors in nature because it is based on how the ability is used rather than background statistics.
but it has such a perfect blend between detail, design and quality animations that it simply looks, feels and even moves right
lol? Quality animation, maybe. The design for most of the units is goofy and the details I can see are pretty much just shiny neon shaders.
Sure it's not as realistic looking, but who cares?
I didn't mention realism.
 

kingcomrade

Kingcomrade
Edgy
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
26,884
Location
Cognitive Elite HQ
@NOVD:
If you can't tell the difference between the unit balance style in Starcraft and the unit balance style in a game like C&C3, then I can't communicate to you.
 

NOVD

Scholar
Joined
Sep 3, 2005
Messages
113
Location
Ann Arbor, MI
kingcomrade said:
@NOVD:
If you can't tell the difference between the unit balance style in Starcraft and the unit balance style in a game like C&C3, then I can't communicate to you.
I was comparing the "rock, paper, scissors" nature of SC1 with what we see in the SC2 video, so C&C and WC3 are pretty much irrelevant. To me, the balancing style is pretty much the same. The difference is that the demo sets up single units against other single units and then tells you that this unit is weak against the other. What do you think the difference is?
 

kingcomrade

Kingcomrade
Edgy
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
26,884
Location
Cognitive Elite HQ
C&C and WC3 are pretty much irrelevant.
orly? I brought up C&C and WC3 and I said they have a different style of unit balance from SC1, but the same type of balance as in SC2.
What do you think the difference is?
That SC2 seems to be mostly about rock paper scissors while SC1 was more about hard countering, versatility...gosh, I feel like I've already said this. :roll:
 

NOVD

Scholar
Joined
Sep 3, 2005
Messages
113
Location
Ann Arbor, MI
kingcomrade said:
C&C and WC3 are pretty much irrelevant.
orly? I brought up C&C and WC3 and I said they have a different style of unit balance from SC1, but the same type of balance as in SC2.
I don't thinkC&C and WC3 have the same type of balance as SC2 at all. See next quote.
That SC2 seems to be mostly about rock paper scissors while SC1 was more about hard countering, versatility...gosh, I feel like I've already said this. :roll:
I guess I was asking more for specific information than "it seems to be most about rock paper scissors." Some units were well suited against other unit types in SC1 as well. How is SC2 looking different? Or, moreover, in what ways is the balance style of SC2 different?
 

kingcomrade

Kingcomrade
Edgy
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
26,884
Location
Cognitive Elite HQ
4chan said:
Starcraft is pretty average compared to some of the other RTS's out there.

4chan said:
I played this game before when it was called Warhammer 40K
4chan response said:
DoW came out AFTER Starcraft, faggot. SC outdates it by some 10 years.

Fucking kids.

4chan said:
3D models. Enjoy your 10 FPS (fails per second).
 

Spazmo

Erudite
Joined
Nov 9, 2002
Messages
5,752
Location
Monkey Island
There's unit balance in C&C3? I thought it was just mammoth tanks >>>>>>> everything else.

As for SC2, the demo made it look rock paper scissory, yes, but it was scripted. As you said yourself, KC, this existed in the original but was a natural extension of game mechanics. It could be the same here. As for the mothership, the demoer guy clearly says the thing ought to run out of energy. Ideally I suppose it's a Protoss nuke: very expensive but only very useful if used intelligently.
 

Kortalh

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 9, 2003
Messages
278
NOVD said:
the units don't seem to be only meant for countering one type of unit.

That's how I understood it, as well. They likely only had the Reaper Marines attack the Immortals in order to show off their jetpacks. The speaker made it sound as though other units -- like regular Marines, Vultures, Goliaths, and such -- would have worked just as well. I suppose it's rock/paper/scissors still, but at least not to such an absurd level.

I'm sure every race will have a super unit. The speaker made it sound as though you only get one of them per game as opposed to just one at a time, like Dawn of War has. If that's the case, it might not be quite so bad. Then again, games in DoW rarely went long enough for a person to build a second superunit.
 

kingcomrade

Kingcomrade
Edgy
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
26,884
Location
Cognitive Elite HQ
The Reaper Marines seem really dumb to me. Taking out tanks with dual pistols? It doesn't matter how many pistols you have, you shouldn't be able to take out tanks.

Now, they should have given them flamethrowers and been Firebats + 1. That would have rocked.
 

Suicidal

Arcane
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
2,208
kingcomrade said:
I really hate superunits in games. In the original Starcraft you had very powerful units but they still fit into the unit structure of the game, they weren't uber. This mothership, with its ability to completely destroy a dozen battlecruisers with a single spell, looks a bit gimmicky. I hope this is a Protoss only thing, having a super unit.

I have nothing against superunits, but they just don't fit in a game like SC. This seems more of a DoW kind of thing. SC is about tonns of units tearing eachother to shreds in a small amount of time. An uber slow-moving unit that can eradicate a whole fleet of BCs and costs a fortune really seems out of place.

Oh and BTW, they showed those rolling zergling bombs in 1 of the videos. Powerful ability, but really weird and stupid looking.
 

Fez

Erudite
Joined
May 18, 2004
Messages
7,954
The RTS terms I've seen to describe what you mean are that the units are "soft" or "hard" counters for each other. Hard counters where it is rigidly rock, paper and scissors: A destroys B, but can't or hardly arms C; B can wipe out C, but can barely touch A, and so on. With soft counters one unit will have an advantage over the other, but it won't be a total walkover and the two units are capable of harming each other, so some skill, luck or awareness is still needed for both players.

I can remember the DoW system being changed a lot in that respect with the patches and expansions.
 

Suicidal

Arcane
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
2,208
What I don't understand is... why the fuck are they ROLLING zergling bombs. If they really wanted to give zerglings a suicidal ability, why couldn't they have just given them a scourge like suicide that does a little damage but without the ROLLING. Seriously, why do they have to roll.
 

Fez

Erudite
Joined
May 18, 2004
Messages
7,954
Funnel the rage into a plot for revenge. That will be much more healthy.
 

KreideBein

Scholar
Joined
Sep 19, 2006
Messages
957
comrade said:
I didn't say I stopped being pissed off, I just stopped frothing at the mouth.

I'm quite sure that Jennyfer would have a different view on the matter.
 

kingcomrade

Kingcomrade
Edgy
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
26,884
Location
Cognitive Elite HQ
I don't understand why I'm not a mod on that channel. It's not like I would abuse my powers any more than any of the other admins already do.
 

Solomon Doone

Novice
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
88
One thing I noticed was the cartoony graphics reminiscent of Warcraft 3 and to an extent DoW.

Not that I really care anyways, when I have uber RPG's like C&C3 to turn me in to the digital equivalent of Sherman at his proudest moment.

Haha, I jest; C&C3 sucks ass.
 

The Watchman

Novice
Joined
Feb 8, 2006
Messages
25
kingcomrade you are rigth that rts games are usually pc only, but CC3 have a shitbox version inc... saying that this area is pc only sounds too alike to what we said once about rpgs. I have no doubt that if the suits wanted they can dumb down any genre to the kiddies... anything for a profit.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom