• Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.

User Info: gogators4life

gogators4life
10 years ago#1
An interesting article from Gamasutra,

Question: I'd heard you actually tried to implement a Relic-style cover system, like in Company of Heroes or Dawn of War.

Blizzard: We did actually try a cover system. We tried it frequently, and what it did to our game was prevent a lot of movement from happening on the battlefield. It slowed the game down. Players would move to cover and stop. The other player is like, "Can I get around it? Screw it. I'll just fight." Or, "I'll just build up." The game stagnated.

Our game is about dancing: advance, retreat, advance, using the choke point -- until, "Oh no, the enemy went air, the choke is useless!" It's about give and take. For our game, it was a disaster.

It wasn't a perfect cover system. We never got that far, but the early indications were very poor. A lot of players view RTS as a continuum: RTS was this, and now changes have been made, and now RTS must start from there. We don't view it that way.

We think each game has its own style and flavor. Each game has its own strengths and weaknesses. What works for us would never work for a Dawn of War, and what works for Dawn of War would never work for us. They're different games, and that's the way it should be.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/5827/starcraft_ii_building_on_the_beta.php?page=2

User Info: asdf1234qwer

asdf1234qwer
10 years ago#2
They do have a cover system.

User Info: Atreides825

Atreides825
10 years ago#3
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

User Info: Atreides825

Atreides825
10 years ago#4
I read this and laughed, hard. It sounds to me that Blizzard should pay more attention to other developers and not simply assume that they're the best at what they do. The fact that they cannot implement something as simple as a cover system is a clear indicator of how far behind the times they really are.

The solution to a player over utilizing cover is to creat units/abilities that can negate it entirely. This isn't a very complicated concept.

It would have been fine if Blizzard simply would have said that they didn't want to implement cover because it's a different style of game, but that argument is invalid, simply because they tried to do so and failed. In other words, the different game styles comment, in this particular instance, is a way for Blizzard to avoid any potential criticisms. It's actually kind of sad, really.

Well, we can still hope that the overall single-player experience will be a decent one; even if playing the actual missions will be a chore.
---

---
"We're the Imperial fething Guard and it's our lot in life to be fethed."
- Major Rawne, Tanith First-and-Only

User Info: I3lackI2ogue

I3lackI2ogue
10 years ago#5
They do have a cover system.

a flat accuracy penalty under a tree =/= a cover system

User Info: Priss_Lance

Priss_Lance
10 years ago#6
The solution to a player over utilizing cover is to creat units/abilities that can negate it entirely. This isn't a very complicated concept.

You do realize that Starcraft, unlike DoW2 or Company of Heroes actually has active AIR UNITS, and therefore already has a potential means of completely negating cover.

And read the article again: They were able to implement it, but it didn't fit well with their intentions for the game, and hence they removed it. I can understand what they mean with stagnation: too many multiplayer CoH games I've been in have heavily defended static positions become the focus, and entire games basically became sieges.
"Warriors of fate, you shall dance bravely. Use your golden wings, and fly to the skies. "

User Info: I3lackI2ogue

I3lackI2ogue
10 years ago#7
too many multiplayer CoH games I've been in have heavily defended static positions become the focus, and entire games basically became sieges.

someone needs to play maps other than the scheldt imo.

They were able to implement it, but it didn't fit well with their intentions for the game, and hence they removed it

yea, their intention is to make starcraft 1 with a shinier paintjob because thats what koreans want. emperor forbid blizzard tries to advance the genre like everyone claims they do.

User Info: Priss_Lance

Priss_Lance
10 years ago#8
SC2's gameplay is sort of dated as far as mechanics go, but then again it does have the entire professional e-sport reputation resting on its shoulders, which limits the multiplayer to the tried and tested mechanics and rules (although the updated controls and interfaces make a good game even better). Besides if I want a game with cover system in SC2 I'll just make my own custom map using the provided Galaxy Editor.

And of course just because a game has newer, shinier and has more modern mechanics doesn't mean it's more fun or is better. Hence why trying to compare Starcraft 2 with DoW2/CoH is ultimately pointless. I play DoW2 for the SP campaign and squad tactics, I play CoH for the setting and the overall good gameplay, and I play SC2 because it's fun. No need to pit one game's e-peen over another.
"Warriors of fate, you shall dance bravely. Use your golden wings, and fly to the skies. "

User Info: I3lackI2ogue

I3lackI2ogue
10 years ago#9
SC2's gameplay is sort of dated as far as mechanics go, but then again it does have the entire professional e-sport reputation resting on its shoulders, which limits the multiplayer to the tried and tested mechanics and rules

which is its own problem, e-sport leagues form around GAMES not games get made revolving around e-sporters. if a game is fun and competitive, it will make it to the WCG and SC2 would have made it on name alone, this is no excuse to make a rehash of SC1 multiplayerwise.

Besides if I want a game with cover system in SC2 I'll just make my own custom map using the provided Galaxy Editor.

this is a weak argument due to the fact that were discussing the fact of whether or not blizzard should have implemented relics cover mechanics into SC2, not the ability to make scripted triggers that only work on a selected map.

Hence why trying to compare Starcraft 2 with DoW2/CoH is ultimately pointless.

they are the best examples of moving the genre forward, SC2 is using the same engine and is changing almost none of the core elements of the game. Think of it as "starcraft season 2" since everyone and their mother swears up and down its a sport to begin with. people forget this is a game and games have to be innovative to stand out, not have a legion of koreans that play it 20 hours a day.

User Info: gogators4life

gogators4life
10 years ago#10
Hey, SC 2's sp camp is pretty new to rts.
  • Topic Archived

GameFAQs Q&A