This guy got through to Blizzard

[Deathcom3s]

Quite honestly, I cannot describe how pleased i am with the blog/thread i am about to link below. This guy has gotten through to Blizzard just how terrible B.net 2.0 is, as well as the editor.

Just read them.

Now.

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=127066&currentpage=All

http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=123080

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

Yes, in the beginning I didnt like TL as I thought of them as war3 haters but one SC player brought some very nice suggestions coming from war3 bnet when saying what features it needs to have, so I afterall find them OK. They do bring good topics sometimes and I have seen that one.

But..what can I say, it's like the same answer as to the question - 'why not added the channels so far, why cant we find the maps we downloaded, why not all in 1 folder, 'why not single ladder and these leagues ', why keep history of the custom games played,why is all made in such irrational way' ?

The same answer is for all these questions, incl those in the TL forum. - Because Blizzard thought by going this different way it will be 'better'.

 

[Deathcom3s]

TL is full of Wc3 haters. It's a professional StarCraft gaming website. Wc3 is the antithesis of StarCraft in many regards, and as such, there are plenty Wc3 haters on TL.

I highly recommend you read TL if you want to gain any insight into just what kind of impact these last few patches have made on the overall balance of the game. The hardcore SC community is in uproar.

But that aside, i posted these links because they pertain to the modding community at large.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

Still you don't usually see a SC pro player in TL offering blizzard to make it like war3 bnet (as it was posted http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=126853) features cause it is not about hate, war3 bnet was exemplary even if one hates war3. I know, this is a mapmaking site. Even those who dont play a single melee don't wanna have ranks and low league stats right? And only those who play hard should be rewarded with such, it would just irritate those who dont play melee to have stats at all. That's why bnet features concern all.

 

[mrzwach]

WC3 bnet is simply an enhanced version of SC1 bnet. They are both much more closely related to eachother than to SC2 bnet, which is a complete and utter failure.

 

[Gyrosphinx]

I really hope Blizzard will read those and take all his comments in mind, because they are really neccesary to create the Starcraft 2 we have been waiting for!

 

[peterpants]

I don't see the part where he gets through to blizzard? Just seems like a neater form of what everyone has been posting on the b.net forums

 

[Helwet]

I feel for the second guy..
Makes me feel bad about liking the gameplay of SC2.I feel the same about the Data editor ... its a fucking mess. Just as i was getting used to the twisted mess it was .. patch 13

PS those mods hes made for SC:BW are fucking insane.

 

[Deathcom3s]

I don't see the part where he gets through to blizzard? Just seems like a neater form of what everyone has been posting on the b.net forums

His exceptionally long track record as a modder grants him more of a voice in things such as this, moreso than a random, relatively unknown user on b.net. He doesn't specifically note it, but he's basically the reason the data editor now has tabs of all things. Hopefully he's the catalyst which brings forth even more changes for the better.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

I really hope Blizzard will read those and take all his comments in mind, because they are really neccesary to create the Starcraft 2 we have been waiting for!

Eh, everyone's been complaining since the start and Blizzard has only seemed to make everything worse as they continue on.

Seriously?
-Removal of Text based editing
-Commercializing modding
-Facebook integration
-A mess of an editor

It doesn't seem to be getting any better, and I don't really foresee Blizzard taking into account what these sorts of people are saying, I'm sure enough people have already complained about the way Blizz has decided to move through with Sc2.

 

[Deathcom3s]

While they may have already made their decision as to which direction they're taking things, they will still be able to fix things through post-release patches.

Though I must admit that i'm skeptical that Blizzard will really make the changes necessary, despite their claims that they are willing to.

 

[Just_Spectating]

you know. readiing these (completely, very interesting) makes me hope that they will change their release date to at least another year of modification.


what i want to see,
is simplicity and efficiency

 

[killer1390]

I agree with the second post as much as a modder wannabe can.

 

[Dr Super Good]

The person who you linked is living in the clouds. His arguments can be thrown down a toliet as they are just pointless whining.

"Oh I prefer this so everything else is wrong but this!"
Is basically what he is saying.

He obviously has not worked on sets, relationships and databased before. If he did he would soon realise why blizzard has done what they have.

Also he is compairing SC2's water with other games with out realising how SC2's supports a lot more. Did the other games support reflections, distortions, HDR and directions?

He also failed to realise that SC2 mods are data packs and not the traditional mods. They will probably be the large source of moddels for custom maps as they do not (or should not) add to map size.

Thus ofcourse blizzard does not listen to him. He appears just like all the people spamming that protoss are too weak or mauerders need nerfing.

I am sure if he ran a proper full HCI evaluation using proper recognized sampling techniques to random target people he would be more beliveable, but currently he just is complaining, and I am sure he does that for every game.

He also clearly has not made his own games, as those are a lot more technicall handeling all the leaks and making sure it does not crash.

I do agree than SC2 aint perfect.
Filling non popular maps is impossible cause no one ever joins. (they need a currently being hosted list)
Map publishing needs a revision, you should be allocated more space if your resources are popular (so people who diserve more space get it).
The player slots should have 2 display modes, vision impared (current) and compact (all players shown on screen). Like he said it looks nice but is kind of stupid having players so big that you must scrole down (guess its cause people like to scrole now due to all the smart phones).
Lack of simple custom script input in trigger editor.

If anything the SC2 editor still is not technical enough, the triggers are handicapped and you still can not view/edit raw terrain data (the values saved for the terrain and stuff).
I am a computer scientist, not some 12 year old. I do not want to see friendly interfaces that make understanding stuff earier for people who should not be modding.

Also the SC2 editor has a lot of robustness problems currently. Locking some team settings data for a game type causes publishing of a map to fail.

 

[Just_Spectating]

im sure issues will iron out with time

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

im sure issues will iron out with time

Not if Blizzard is so sure in it's cause. They've made it an objective to make GE as simple as possible, aside from failing at that already they're not going to listen to what the people who actually mod it are saying because they probably think they can get more non-advanced mappers to make maps because its so much simpler, and thus make up for the people who are actually complaining.

It's sort of like simplifying a rubiks cube from 3 by 3 to 2 by 2.
The people who really enjoy it and practice all the time are going to be PISSED, but in the long run the company will make more money as more people, even the dead head who just runs in brute forcing the thing into shape, will be able to solve it.

 

[Mooglefrooglian]

they probably think they can get more non-advanced mappers to make maps because its so much simpler,

Have you used the data editor?

 

[Dr Super Good]

Yes, and it is noticably aimed at simpler people, as it now lacks the support for raw input which even WC3 had.

 

[bboy-tiger-]

And what is the conclusion ? As always. Its golden rule.

1. Developers earn money from 1 success = WoW in this case.
2. Then they invent whatever they like = Facebook integration into bnet (this is hilarious for me).
3. Now the golden rule; if people pay for that product, what will that mean for developer ? Success = Meaning that they did good job.

People cant realize that. Sadly. Tho I dont care. I just hope that game(generally, any) will turn good. If its good, I buy that game. If not, who cares...

So, people will buy this game however its made. We already seen this with Aliens vs Predator. Now game died. But on release people defended the game, they had hope, living in clouds... xD
Same here... Tho I am not on Bnet forums so I dont know if they are listening to fans anymore.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

Hahahaa! MAy I also add this 2nd link in TL beats the records of tons of text. Those who make such long posts really need to get a life. Post it in few paragraphs not in endless Everest-High mountain of text. I never read such, haha that's like reading a book wtf... and what if no one cares if one likes sc2 or not? Just a big waste of text and time. At least summarize what you want to say so that ppl actually read the summary.. gg

 

[KaboomMaster]

The person who you linked is living in the clouds. His arguments can be thrown down a toliet as they are just pointless whining.

"Oh I prefer this so everything else is wrong but this!"
Is basically what he is saying.

So basically what you were doing wasn't whining either?

I am a computer scientist, not some 12 year old. I do not want to see friendly interfaces that make understanding stuff easier for people who should not be modding.

Who gave you the right to determine who can and can't make user applications (mods, maps, resources, ect.). Honestly the reason I'm not a "computer scientist" is because I determined that my time can better serve society in other scientific pursuits.

I really find it funny in fact to see Hive users making fun of Clan TL users. Some of you may remember back when I accumulated all the negative rep I used to have on this site and wondered why I was such an *******, well the reason for that was I was sick of seeing all the bullshit elitism that goes on at this site and wanted to just be a pain in the ass to the mods. Seriously a large majority of you act like arrogant ************* who think that modding is only your super secret club and anyone who doesn't agree with you is ******** or an *******. If you really want to know why other Warcraft and Starcraft groups dislike you then you should pay attention to your own actions rather then their comments.

At least summarize what you want to say so that ppl actually read the summary.. gg

Oh and by the way I read all of both of IskatuMesk's posts to the end, and I can say they are definitely a lot more thought out and tested than some of the complaints you two have given.

 

[AKAIMAX]

Also he is compairing SC2's water with other games with out realising how SC2's supports a lot more. Did the other games support reflections, distortions, HDR and directions?

He never said it sucks. He said its a mess of a UI and said that it has much more options, but its not presented well. I do not have sc2 but the amount of people complaining shows the UI has a lot to improve on.

He also failed to realise that SC2 mods are data packs and not the traditional mods. They will probably be the large source of moddels for custom maps as they do not (or should not) add to map size.

If that was so, why would Blizzard call it mods? Didn't they say they want people to completely change the game? Because with the things I have noticed is that yes, the model file type does reduce its size but the size of the models we would want to make will still take up a lot of space in the map. And yea there will be large sources of models that add more size to your map. Blizzard will never release a patch with a bunch of models in it for us mapmakers to use if thats what your getting at.

 

[Vengeancekael]

Somebody close this thread, this is going to become a flame war again <.<

 

[PurplePoot]

I find it hilarious that he goes on about how Browder likes big numbers (Immortals are a bit ridiculous but otherwise the stats are fine) and then shows screenshots/videos of his 1000 crappy maps where he took a unit, gave it 999999 health, made it 10.0 scale, and then said LOL IT'S A BOSS.

Celebrated modder? How about no.

 

[Just_Spectating]

i've never heard of his name either.

 

[mrzwach]

I like the part where the guy is wondering why games don't feature the same level of complexity as DF2.

Also,

Chances are if you've modded Starcraft you've heard my name.

I would be lying if I said my mods were successful, because they weren't. Nothing I have ever done has tasted the waters of success.

 

[PurplePoot]

Because he has no idea how to design a successful game. DF is unpopular because it is cryptic (I play it, but I understand why most don't).

 

[Dr Super Good]

He looks like a kid with a lot of determination to me. As long as the tools are easy enough to be self explanatory he will make stuff and not whine. The stuff he makes might not be good but it works cause the engines he mods are robust. As soon as he is given tools targeting adults or more serious developers he will whine as he actually needs to learn stuff and the flexible engine means making stuff that works is difficult.

Modding games is not like changing from 1 car to another car of the same model. You will have a learning curve and the tools will all be different. Blizzards current editor might not be the best, but it probably will end up better maintained than WC3's cause it seems it is build more flexibly.

SC2 for example is the first game where it is possible to make towers not shoot 360 degrees if you leave a 360 turrent off them or forget to set weapon arc to 360. Red Circle TD suffered from this problem when doing something as straight foward as a simple tower defense. SC2 work needs serious testing as bugs or oversights are likly to occur due to the flexibility. However once you have done, product can feel very refined.

 

[AKAIMAX]

He looks like a kid with a lot of determination to me. As long as the tools are easy enough to be self explanatory he will make stuff and not whine. The stuff he makes might not be good but it works cause the engines he mods are robust. As soon as he is given tools targeting adults or more serious developers he will whine as he actually needs to learn stuff and the flexible engine means making stuff that works is difficult.

Modding games is not like changing from 1 car to another car of the same model. You will have a learning curve and the tools will all be different. Blizzards current editor might not be the best, but it probably will end up better maintained than WC3's cause it seems it is build more flexibly.

SC2 for example is the first game where it is possible to make towers not shoot 360 degrees if you leave a 360 turrent off them or forget to set weapon arc to 360. Red Circle TD suffered from this problem when doing something as straight foward as a simple tower defense. SC2 work needs serious testing as bugs or oversights are likly to occur due to the flexibility. However once you have done, product can feel very refined.

I agree on you that it isn't just so simple in learning a new editor but look at the data editor. All the values are not orginized. Its not just him arguing with this, many people have problems with the data editor UI. The Sc2Edit or whatever it was called had everything arranged nicely into tabs making it MUCH more easier to use. His point isn't that the editor sucks in this case, its more like its poorly organized.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Its organized like it should be, as a list of data, not some good to look at tab stuff where to copy changes you must.... oh wait you can not copy changes with tabs.

The only improvemement the data editor needs is a graphical relationship diagram showing where the relation ships go in a form of mind map showing both users of the selected data and what it uses as well as what they require and such (improved relation ship view as currently it is not very powerful and misses up important information like actors that an effect uses that you unit has etc). Also you should be able to edit every field with raw edit via shift opening like WC3 had (would allow some stuff to be more easilly copied). Additionally it would be nice if you could copy whole blocks of fields at once. A linkage manager would also be good so you could link stuff by drag and drop instead of by having to open the data type and the rechoose your target data all the time.

 

[KaboomMaster]

I find it hilarious that he goes on about how Browder likes big numbers (Immortals are a bit ridiculous but otherwise the stats are fine) and then shows screenshots/videos of his 1000 crappy maps where he took a unit, gave it 999999 health, made it 10.0 scale, and then said LOL IT'S A BOSS.

Celebrated modder? How about no.

If you actually paid attention to what he was saying then you would've seen that he was using the unit to demonstrate his uses of external scripts to give complex attack patterns to a FINAL BOSS UNIT at the end of a game. If you think its uncommon to have a boss with 99999 hp at the end of a game then you've never played many really old RPGs.

I like the part where the guy is wondering why games don't feature the same level of complexity as DF2.

Because most games right off the bat don't, and I can't actually think of a single one that does.

Because he has no idea how to design a successful game. DF is unpopular because it is cryptic (I play it, but I understand why most don't).

Actually I like how you bring this up because I've never seen a game made by anyone on this forum that completely revolutionized WC3. Also if you actually knew anything about why DF isn't popular you would know that it's a combination of it being a freeware ascii game, and the fact that it has an immense learning curve for anyone unfamiliar with the game.

... As soon as he is given tools targeting adults or more serious developers he will whine as he actually needs to learn stuff and the flexible engine means making stuff that works is difficult.

Modding games is not like changing from 1 car to another car of the same model. You will have a learning curve and the tools will all be different. Blizzards current editor might not be the best, but it probably will end up better maintained than WC3's cause it seems it is build more flexibly.

...

He never said that the tools weren't powerful he said they were a ******* mess. Also if you ever listened to Blizzard's constant raving about how good SC2 was going to be you may notice how they constantly talk about how easy to use the editor would be for people to use. No where in Blizzard's speeches did I hear "We are making tools for the minority of @@@@@@@@ *** hat 'computer scientists' who want to feel superior using backwards and down right disorganized tools." Honestly the features presented in the beta's editor were staggering in how disorganized and halfhearted they felt.

But then again I'm sure none of you even read half of what IskatuMesk wrote and somehow think that his opinions hurt the validity of your internet ego so you justify it with your horrid uninformed logic or pissy opinions on why he's worse than you without even seeing his work.

 

[Just_Spectating]

okay, so you agree with iskatumesk,

and other people don't

so what is your problem with our opinions?

 

[mrzwach]

Actually I like how you bring this up because I've never seen a game made by anyone on this forum that completely revolutionized WC3.

Does a game need to be revolutionary to be successful? Also, DF is unpopular because it is ASCII, which makes it cryptic and hard to understand.

Also, the reason people dislike him is probably due to the fact that the entire post is lined with arrogance.

EDIT: Also, I do agree with the guy on some parts, especially with the disorganization of the editor and removal of units like the Reaver and Vultures. I really don't care though, 3rd party tools will be available before long and I won't be spending most of my time meleeing.

 

[Fussiler1]

But then again I'm sure none of you even read half of what IskatuMesk wrote and somehow think that his opinions hurt the validity of your internet ego so you justify it with your horrid uninformed logic or pissy opinions on why he's worse than you without even seeing his work.

There are quite some SC I players on these forums, I believe.

 

[KaboomMaster]

okay, so you agree with iskatumesk,

and other people don't

so what is your problem with our opinions?

My problem isn't with other people disagreeing with me it has to do with Dr. Super Good and Purplepoot trashing on IskatuMesk without any reason other than "lol we're better than him". Honestly I would have a problem if PP and DSG had just said, "Hey we don't agree with his opinion because..." rather than "Hey guys hey disagrees with me so he's an little kid who doesn't know anything and shouldn't be allowed to map, mod, or discuss his opinion because he's subhuman."

Does a game need to be revolutionary to be successful? Also, DF is unpopular because it is ASCII, which makes it cryptic and hard to understand.

Ok I'll admit that I made a mistake as I am only human. Also how can you weigh the success of something without knowing the objective of the creator. Maybe IskatuMesk's goals are not the same as what Purplepoot thinks they should be? As for DF, it's freeware. The majority of people think freeware is filled with viruses and even for those who know a lot about freeware you may not have heard of DF if your not around people who already play it. But even for the people who have seen it there is a large possibility to be driven off by the sheer immenseness of its learning curve.

Also, the reason people dislike him is probably due to the fact that the entire post is lined with arrogance.

Oh and Dr Super Good and Purplepoot weren't arrogant when they said "I am a computer scientist, not some 12 year old. I do not want to see friendly interfaces that make understanding stuff easier for people who should not be modding." and "Because he has no idea how to design a successful game." respectively?

There are quite some SC I players on these forums, I believe.

Not really sure what you're saying but I have played SC for probably as long as they have, if not longer.

 

[PurplePoot]

If you actually paid attention to what he was saying then you would've seen that he was using the unit to demonstrate his uses of external scripts to give complex attack patterns to a FINAL BOSS UNIT at the end of a game. If you think its uncommon to have a boss with 99999 hp at the end of a game then you've never played many really old RPGs.

Yeah, a map full of final boss units. Uh-huh.

Also, even if old RPGs did it doesn't mean it's good. Also, the effect spam was just obscene.

Skill is not making something that spams a million effects. Skill is making something which is interesting and yet actually good for gameplay etc.

Actually I like how you bring this up because I've never seen a game made by anyone on this forum that completely revolutionized WC3. Also if you actually knew anything about why DF isn't popular you would know that it's a combination of it being a freeware ascii game, and the fact that it has an immense learning curve for anyone unfamiliar with the game.

Uuh, I think you could use the help of a dictionary to look up the word "cryptic". Also, who cares if we haven't revolutionized wc3? We aren't telling Blizzard that their entire approach to gameplay is wrong with no credentials to back ourselves up.

But then again I'm sure none of you even read half of what IskatuMesk wrote and somehow think that his opinions hurt the validity of your internet ego so you justify it with your horrid uninformed logic or pissy opinions on why he's worse than you without even seeing his work.

Read every letter of it. I also don't think you understand what the word "ego" is.

My problem isn't with other people disagreeing with me it has to do with Dr. Super Good and Purplepoot trashing on IskatuMesk without any reason other than "lol we're better than him". Honestly I would have a problem if PP and DSG had just said, "Hey we don't agree with his opinion because..." rather than "Hey guys hey disagrees with me so he's an little kid who doesn't know anything and shouldn't be allowed to map, mod, or discuss his opinion because he's subhuman."

Straw man fallacy. You seem to be Elenai's replacement.

Ok I'll admit that I made a mistake as I am only human. Also how can you weigh the success of something without knowing the objective of the creator. Maybe IskatuMesk's goals are not the same as what Purplepoot thinks they should be? As for DF, it's freeware. The majority of people think freeware is filled with viruses and even for those who know a lot about freeware you may not have heard of DF if your not around people who already play it. But even for the people who have seen it there is a large possibility to be driven off by the sheer immenseness of its learning curve.

A game which requires an immense time investment to understand is not marketable, and thus not something any company cares about. By comparing SC2 to DF this guy completely fails to understand that games are targeted at more than people who spend all day playing them.

[...] and Purplepoot weren't arrogant when they said [...] "Because he has no idea how to design a successful game." respectively?

Once again, I think you could use a dictionary, this time to look up what arrogant means.

Not really sure what you're saying but I have played SC for probably as long as they have, if not longer.

Played it since the day it came out, but that doesn't matter because I realize that SC2 is not SC 3D.

--

I don't disagree with all of what that guy said, but even an idiot is right some of the time.

 

[KaboomMaster]

Yeah, a map full of final boss units. Uh-huh.

Also, even if old RPGs did it doesn't mean it's good. Also, the effect spam was just obscene.

Skill is not making something that spams a million effects. Skill is making something which is interesting and yet actually good for gameplay etc.

How do you know that it isn't interesting yet good for gameplay, have you played it? Also he never said that the video was of an actual map from the game, in fact it actually looks like a dev test map based on all the scripted units and lack of terrain. Also obscenity is relative and while I agree the effects could have been toned down it doesn't mean everyone shares your opinion.

Uuh, I think you could use the help of a dictionary to look up the word "cryptic". Also, who cares if we haven't revolutionized wc3? We aren't telling Blizzard that their entire approach to gameplay is wrong with no credentials to back ourselves up.

Oh and by the way I know what "cryptic" means and even looked it up to make sure before posting (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cryptic) maybe you should in fact learn to read, since I mentioned that part of it being unpopular is the inherent difficulty curve which would drive off many people even if they knew about the game.

Read every letter of it. I also don't think you understand what the word "ego" is.

(Ego/noun/the self especially as contrasted with another self or the world) Basically I used it in reference to how you define yourself online which seems to be butt hurt over someone disagreeing with you so you feel the need to trample their opinion in a vainglorious attempt to make your internet friends like you more.

Straw man fallacy. You seem to be Elenai's replacement.

How is anything I've done so far a straw man fallacy? I don't have a problem with you, Dr Super Good, or anyone else for that matter having a different opinion than me. In fact if you actually read the users posts you would see how nice the discussion was going until DSG had his little bitch fit. All my arguments have been about how offensive and immature it is that a moderator and a retired moderator feel the need to trash someone else's opinion because they think that their own opinion is better. Honestly its a tad bit sad that either of you are resulting to internet bullying when you're supposed to exemplify good site conduct.

A game which requires an immense time investment to understand is not marketable, and thus not something any company cares about. By comparing SC2 to DF this guy completely fails to understand that games are targeted at more than people who spend all day playing them.

What was that about a straw man fallacy? If you look at my post you will see how I never actually talked about him relating DF to SC because I agree that they are bad comparisons since DF is a simulator while SC is an RTS. My issue was your statement the none of IskatuMesk's endeavors were successful. IM himself said that his maps were not successful but never gave a reason why and yet you accuse him of not knowing how to make a successful game. Success is relative and therefore defined by everyones perspective so maybe IM says he wasn't successful but his definition of success could be personal rather than public. And IM never said "SC should be like DF" he simply asked why DF's complexity isn't featured in more games.

Once again, I think you could use a dictionary, this time to look up what arrogant means.

(Arrogant/adjective/exaggerating or disposed to exaggerate one's own worth or importance often by an overbearing manner) So you're saying that DSG flat out saying that less skilled modders shouldn't be allowed to mod and yet he should isn't arrogant? Likewise you saying that IM doesn't know how to make a successful game sure made it sound like you know everything about successful games especially how success is once again relative.

Played it since the day it came out, but that doesn't matter because I realize that SC2 is not SC 3D.

I too have played SC since it came out and I agree that SC2 should not be SC 3D, but I implore you to please find where IM specifically states that SC2 should be SC 3D because all I saw were comparisons to how SC units had more strategic ability than their spiritual successors in SC2.

I don't disagree with all of what that guy said, but even an idiot is right some of the time.

So he's an idiot because he doesn't agree with you? I'm tempted to mention arrogance again but I'm sure you'll reply with some post trying to paint you as a helpless victim being browbeaten by my inquiries.

 

[syltman]

He has some valid points. And I'll have to agree that I don't like the water squares, that you must publish your maps and blizzard's ridiculous censorship (suck is censored, I mean wtf) and mainly how ugly and eye hurting the sc2 data editor is. It's a real mess. I heard some people said that they wanted to make the editor more newbie friendly, they failed there by a big giant step with this data editor.

What I think he should've commented more on is the fact that there's no custom coding. Biggest bullshit ever. I wonder what reason they could have because the only one I can think off is that they want to make it more newbie friendly (I mean you can still import scripts in a certain way). But I mean why should we who likes custom coding suffer from that? All they had to do is add a small fucking button that converted the gui shit to custom code. And the best maps in wc3 was made by those who were more or less developers or script monkeys who both used vJass

A user friendly tool is one where you can quickly edit something to your liking but alternatively go more in-depth like say the WE IMHO.

Also he mentioned Datedit but not vJass.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

Yeah, please don't pull out the huge walls of text dissecting every point of the other persons argument Poot and Kaboommaster - they really just take up space and few people really feel like reading them except the people arguing.

What I think he should've commented more on is the fact that there's no custom coding. Biggest bullshit ever. I wonder what reason they could have because the only one I can think off is that they want to make it more newbie friendly (I mean you can still import scripts in a certain way). But I mean why should we who likes custom coding suffer from that? All they had to do is add a small fucking button that converted the gui shit to custom code. And the best maps in wc3 was made by those who were more or less developers or script monkeys who both used vJass

-Well I wouldn't say all the best maps were made with extensive vJass for every little detail - its not always the best coded map which is the most successful or fun.
-I'm sure once again the mod community will go through and fix their editor with a 3rd party editor because there's no way that the incredibly active modders are going to take the removal of text based editing.

 

[KaboomMaster]

He has some valid points. And I'll have to agree that I don't like the water squares, that you must publish your maps and blizzard's ridiculous censorship (suck is censored, I mean wtf) and mainly how ugly and eye hurting the sc2 data editor is. It's a real mess. I heard some people said that they wanted to make the editor more newbie friendly, they failed there by a big giant step with this data editor.

What I think he should've commented more on is the fact that there's no custom coding. Biggest bullshit ever. I wonder what reason they could have because the only one I can think off is that they want to make it more newbie friendly (I mean you can still import scripts in a certain way). But I mean why should we who likes custom coding suffer from that? All they had to do is add a small fucking button that converted the gui shit to custom code. And the best maps in wc3 was made by those who were more or less developers or script monkeys who both used vJass

A user friendly tool is one where you can quickly edit something to your liking but alternatively go more in-depth like say the WE IMHO.

I guess at this point we can only hope that either Blizzard has help back a better version of the editor for release with the game or that they'll patch it as time goes on.

Yeah, please don't pull out the huge walls of text dissecting every point of the other persons argument Poot and Kaboommaster - they really just take up space and few people really feel like reading them except the people arguing.

My apologies. I'll try to either be more brief or ignore their responses next time.

 

[PurplePoot]

The problem with his unit argument is that many units in SC2 have plenty of strategic potential; for example, the Reaper is a decent successor to the Vulture (although obviously less useful late game, mostly due to its build time). He's just complaining because their strategic potential is different than that of Starcraft, and is trying to back this up by making direct comparisons between units when they are not meant to fill the same role (for example, the Marauder is not meant to fill the role of the Firebat, and the Hellion is not meant to fill the role of the Vulture, although he seems to think that they are because their buttons are in the same place in their respective buildings' command cards).

--

Also, no, I'm not claiming that I have the skills to make a widely successful game. I'm just claiming that he doesn't indicate that he does. As the saying goes, you don't need to be a chef to know that the food tastes like shit.

--

I agree and disagree with DSG's "less skilled modders" point. I would like more people to get into modding, but I also don't want to see five million poorly made clone maps on BNet similar to what happened with Warcraft 3.

 

[AKAIMAX]

Its organized like it should be, as a list of data, not some good to look at tab stuff where to copy changes you must.... oh wait you can not copy changes with tabs.

The only improvemement the data editor needs is a graphical relationship diagram showing where the relation ships go in a form of mind map showing both users of the selected data and what it uses as well as what they require and such (improved relation ship view as currently it is not very powerful and misses up important information like actors that an effect uses that you unit has etc). Also you should be able to edit every field with raw edit via shift opening like WC3 had (would allow some stuff to be more easilly copied). Additionally it would be nice if you could copy whole blocks of fields at once. A linkage manager would also be good so you could link stuff by drag and drop instead of by having to open the data type and the rechoose your target data all the time.

Im sure you can make copying still possible. Even if not, there isn't much to copy and paste that would take so long for users to write out. Besides, if you have a tab for abilities, all the data for abilities would be in that tab. I dobut you would need to copy a abilities effect and paste it for a unit or buff which are located in other tabs? And also, even the strings aren't put into one place. Like he showed, you have some strings at the top and another at the bottom. If Blizzard would actually organize the data editor, there wouldn't be a need to copy and paste things because it would be soo muchf aster and easier to learn.

The problem with his unit argument is that many units in SC2 have plenty of strategic potential; for example, the Reaper is a decent successor to the Vulture (although obviously less useful late game, mostly due to its build time). He's just complaining because their strategic potential is different than that of Starcraft, and is trying to back this up by making direct comparisons between units when they are not meant to fill the same role (for example, the Marauder is not meant to fill the role of the Firebat, and the Hellion is not meant to fill the role of the Vulture, although he seems to think that they are because their buttons are in the same place in their respective buildings' command cards).

--

Also, no, I'm not claiming that I have the skills to make a widely successful game. I'm just claiming that he doesn't indicate that he does. As the saying goes, you don't need to be a chef to know that the food tastes like shit.

--

I agree and disagree with DSG's "less skilled modders" point. I would like more people to get into modding, but I also don't want to see five million poorly made clone maps on BNet similar to what happened with Warcraft 3.

The units may not be meant to replace each other but the units that were added have absolutely no strategy except hit and run or simply attack (colossus). The strategy that can be used with these units is so limited that you may as well say there is no strategy absolutely. His argument isn't saying that the replacements must be as good as before or better, he just wants some sort of strategy in them.

--

He may not indicate that he has the skills to make a amazing map but he can make maps well. He did make many great games, he made the best Sc AI without C enhancements (or helped) and his only problem was the hard coded bugs in wc3. His music is amazing, its not the best but its great in quality. Maybe he doesn't have the best skills, but he does have more than your usual map maker.

--

Too late, probably half the maps that will be made will be 3rd Person Shooters. Already looking at what most people have made, the shooter games are the most populated out of all other games.

--

 

[KaboomMaster]

The problem with his unit argument is that many units in SC2 have plenty of strategic potential; for example, the Reaper is a decent successor to the Vulture (although obviously less useful late game, mostly due to its build time). He's just complaining because their strategic potential is different than that of Starcraft, and is trying to back this up by making direct comparisons between units when they are not meant to fill the same role (for example, the Marauder is not meant to fill the role of the Firebat, and the Hellion is not meant to fill the role of the Vulture, although he seems to think that they are because their buttons are in the same place in their respective buildings' command cards).

And I agree with you that not everything in SC2 is a direct replacement for SC units, however the same classed units in SC2 are less flexible than SC's version. A good example that IM gave was vultures/hellions they are both fast-attack harassment units however the vulture had spider mines which allowed them to be played defensively (setting defensive mine fields) as well strategically (drawing the enemy to a false expo by creating the appearance of defenses) while the hellions only upgrade lets them attack faster which only really helps against swarming zerglings. Reapers are also fast-attack harassment which are great rush units early game but I've never seen them used late game. However Vikings on the other hand are an example of new strategic options. It just depends on how you look at everything as a whole.

I agree and disagree with DSG's "less skilled modders" point. I would like more people to get into modding, but I also don't want to see five million poorly made clone maps on BNet similar to what happened with Warcraft 3.

I understand it sucks to see crap tons of bad and unoriginal map ideas but that is also how newbie modders learn. I agree with you and DSG that it is unfortunate that there are so many people never looking to improve and just keep making crappy maps but in the end their only wasting their time with something no one may ever play. I disagree though with the opinion that the modding/indie scene should only be for skilled people because its entire point of existing is to give the less skilled freelancers a chance to improve, show off their ideas, and enjoy working on a project without investors breathing down your neck.

Lets end this heated discussion now if its okay with you Purplepoot. Feel free however to respond to what I just said if you want.

----
Back on topic
----

I'm curious to see if the editor provided with the full game is different from the beta one? Has anyone heard and dev ramble about editor changes in the large update after June 7th?

 

[mrzwach]

They have said in the Q&A sessions that they don't plan on adding in more support for scripting or a more userfriendly editor.

However, everything in the data editor is basically just XML files; you can modify it via triggers so I don't think it would be extremely diffciult for someone to create a 3rd party tool that is more user friendly. Also, pretty sure that people are already in the process of making tools to increase scripting support, ie Andromeda/phynGal. I haven't bothered to look into either yet so I'm unsure on the specifics, but it can't be that hard to let you script within the editor.

 

[Cardinian]

Also, the reason people dislike him is probably due to the fact that the entire post is lined with arrogance.
.

He has earned the god-damn right to be as arrogant as he wants. IskatuMesk and a few others single handedly made Starcraft I modding feasible. StarEdit was a piece of shit. DatEdit came at the end of a very progressive line of editor improvements.

I agree wholeheartedly with everything that he say's in his post, and the reasons for why he says it.

Is it just me, or does anyone else feel that since World of Warcraft - Blizzard have sort of lost sight of the true goal of what it is to make brilliant computer games. Instead, they now just focus on the money?

Shit, I've been playing Blizzard games since the Lost Vikings in 1992-5.

The pinnacle of their success, absolutely has to be Starcraft I. It was so successful because of the sheer amount of time they spent fine-tuning, crafting and balancing each of the three completely distinct races. Something which had never been seen before in an RTS game. The fore-runners to Starcraft I was Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness and Warcraft I: Orcs & Humans... And these both involved Humans and Orcs, who's units were mere copies of each other. Every unit had his representative counterpart on the other side with minor differences: Knight/Ogre - Paladin/Ogre Magi - Troll Headhunter(berserker)/Elven Archer(Ranger) -Grunt/Footman - Peons/Peasants...

So, yes. Blizzard have tasted success in the past with series such as Warcraft, Diablo and Starcraft (you can tell a game is successful if it spawns a series). Games which all went on to spawn expansion packs and online communities/gameplay. All which in turn generates a lot of revenue. . .

But - to me, this success went to their heads. They drop something like World of Warcraft, which sure, is immense and first of it's kind, and offers real potential and of course is very successful... But... they have lost sight of their original goals. WoW is repetitive and boring (in my opinion).

And now, what do we get? Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty... With TWO future ad-ons expected to be released?? I am prepared to be flamed for anything I have said here, but you do so at the risk of the Hive Moderators so meh ...

Blizzard, to me, have milked World of Warcraft dry, and in looking for a next step they try to revive the most successful and brilliant computer games in the world (my opinion again), with a sequel. But, it seems they have lost the sight of how to make this brilliant computer game, and they just cling to the name of 'Starcraft' as a banner of false hope for the TRUE fans of what they were all about in the mid to late 90's...



Having gotten all of that off my chest. I am eager to get hold of Starcraft II and have pre-ordered it. Simply for a similar reason as mentioned by IskatuMesk - for me, Starcraft II will be a playground. I won't necessarily become any good at melee battles. I doubt I'll extract much fun from completing the campaings (but I am interested to see what they do with the storyline). I am looking forward to modding in this new engine. But, it will be a while before the Galaxy Editor is revamped and adjusted to the requirements of casual modders and players.

My two cents. If Blizzard don't seriously pull the finger out and revamp Starcraft II - it will be a flop. And, with release dates already announced, and Beta rapidly advancing with little serious change. I doubt that finger will be pulled out.

 

[Dr Super Good]

SC2 is pretty good the way it currently is. As there are 2 expansions planned I would not rule out the possibility of some medium level engine adjustments like WC3 RoC to TFT. For example one expansion might enhance galexy with new features while another might improve the data editor.

What you lot fail to realise is they are working on a pretty tight schedual now. They can not prolong the release of the game anymore and the programmers are working their best at building stable CD / download builds with the yet untested out side of local builds single player support. The programmers probably do not have the time anymore to change or add stuff to the engine, as they have run out of testing time to do so.

However after the game is released, next to for maintenence, the programmers are technically known as free as the expansion is mostly additional artwork + data. However this means that they probably will be reasigned onto improving the engine slightly as otherwise they would be idle. Thus I do expect some additions to the custom game support with each expansion.

What some people fail to understand is how much game development has changed. The whole SC1 with expansion was under 1 GB. SC2 is probably going to be 4-6 GB with an additional 2-4 GB per expansion. That is a hell of a lot more data to make and check.

 

[PurplePoot]

The units may not be meant to replace each other but the units that were added have absolutely no strategy except hit and run or simply attack (colossus). The strategy that can be used with these units is so limited that you may as well say there is no strategy absolutely. His argument isn't saying that the replacements must be as good as before or better, he just wants some sort of strategy in them.

You're making the same mistake as he is.

Imagine the Reaper (or maybe Banshee or Viking) as a replacement for the Vulture and the Hellion as a replacement for the Firebat. Now both seem pretty decent. Given, I miss mines, but there was more to the game than that, and some of the new stuff (Baneling traps anyone?) is pretty awesome.

He may not indicate that he has the skills to make a amazing map but he can make maps well. He did make many great games, he made the best Sc AI without C enhancements (or helped) and his only problem was the hard coded bugs in wc3. His music is amazing, its not the best but its great in quality. Maybe he doesn't have the best skills, but he does have more than your usual map maker.

Being able to make high quality resources does not make you a game designer. Also, in my experience everyone who complains about engine limitations when they are trying to do something isn't trying hard enough (unless it's something like detecting mouse clicks dynamically which just is plain unsupported, not something like "orbs can't stack!" which is what people seem to think are limitations).

He has earned the god-damn right to be as arrogant as he wants. IskatuMesk and a few others single handedly made Starcraft I modding feasible. StarEdit was a piece of shit. DatEdit came at the end of a very progressive line of editor improvements.

Then he has a right to be as arrogant as he wants with regards to Starcraft modding, not with regards to game design which he gives no evidence he knows anything about.

My two cents. If Blizzard don't seriously pull the finger out and revamp Starcraft II - it will be a flop. And, with release dates already announced, and Beta rapidly advancing with little serious change. I doubt that finger will be pulled out.

I'm pretty sure that Starcraft 2 is already not a flop judging by how many people have bought or will buy it.

 

[AKAIMAX]

You're making the same mistake as he is.

Imagine the Reaper (or maybe Banshee or Viking) as a replacement for the Vulture and the Hellion as a replacement for the Firebat. Now both seem pretty decent. Given, I miss mines, but there was more to the game than that, and some of the new stuff (Baneling traps anyone?) is pretty awesome.

You don't seem to understand. Were not expecting replacement units, were expecting units that have strategy in them. The colossus has no strategy cause he can either simply attack or hit and run. Were not saying, yes give us a replacement unit that is air, has a similar ability to mines and whatnot. Were just asking for units that can be used in a decent strategy that ISN'T hit and run.

Being able to make high quality resources does not make you a game designer. Also, in my experience everyone who complains about engine limitations when they are trying to do something isn't trying hard enough (unless it's something like detecting mouse clicks dynamically which just is plain unsupported, not something like "orbs can't stack!" which is what people seem to think are limitations).

Well lets say we wanted to make a medieval custom map with castles, old buildings, etc. With sc2 the way it is now, that is simply impossible. You cannot import enough resources to do that and make it look good. People want to import high quality models and units to make the game look the way it did when they planned it. To give it the theme of the game, not have a medieval custom mao with half sc2 buildings and half medieval buildings simply because we couldn't import more models. And why wouldn't we want high quality textures and units? If we don't you might as well use models that have the same standard as wc3 models do and we all don't want that.

Dr.SuperGood:

SC2 is pretty good the way it currently is. As there are 2 expansions planned I would not rule out the possibility of some medium level engine adjustments like WC3 RoC to TFT. For example one expansion might enhance galexy with new features while another might improve the data editor.

What you lot fail to realise is they are working on a pretty tight schedual now. They can not prolong the release of the game anymore and the programmers are working their best at building stable CD / download builds with the yet untested out side of local builds single player support. The programmers probably do not have the time anymore to change or add stuff to the engine, as they have run out of testing time to do so.

However after the game is released, next to for maintenence, the programmers are technically known as free as the expansion is mostly additional artwork + data. However this means that they probably will be reasigned onto improving the engine slightly as otherwise they would be idle. Thus I do expect some additions to the custom game support with each expansion.

What some people fail to understand is how much game development has changed. The whole SC1 with expansion was under 1 GB. SC2 is probably going to be 4-6 GB with an additional 2-4 GB per expansion. That is a hell of a lot more data to make and check.

So you want us to buy 3 expansions which is 100 dollars atleast, just to get a well organized editor? REALLY? If your already going to update the editor, why not do it for everyone with sc2? Do people who don't buy expansions haev to suffer with this unorganized editor? Im pretty sure you wouldn't. Blizzard has become way more greedy to make people buy all the expansions simply so that they could mod maps easier.

You expect custom game support and a more organized editor with every expansion. You may as well kiss goodbye to more organized. Blizzard stated they won't change the UI of the editor and use the excuse that making maps isn't a easy thing. It can be easy, if the editor isn't presented well enough. Its all a bunch of bull crap that there launching at us with these excuses. Yes they are far in production. They cannot change things again and won't delay the game again. But they stated they won't change it even in latter patches. And in TFT, not much of the game engine has been changed. I expect the same with these expansions. They may add some more crap onto the editor that will be unorignized, and give us units and maps. Thats probably it.

 

[Cardinian]

What you lot fail to realise is they are working on a pretty tight schedual now. They can not prolong the release of the game anymore and the programmers are working their best at building stable CD / download builds with the yet untested out side of local builds single player support. The programmers probably do not have the time anymore to change or add stuff to the engine, as they have run out of testing time to do so.

This seems vastly different to blizzard approach in producing Starcraft and Brood War Expansion.. Their whole take on things back then (mid 90s) was that "The game will be finished, when it's finished". As in, when they are completely happy with what they have produced, when they have taken into consideration feedback from future players and when they are happy with the level of gameplay the game has to offer...

Now, with
Diablo 3 in production,
Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty in production,
Starcraft 2: Heart of the Swarm in production,
Starcraft 2: Legacy of the Void in production,
Starcraft: Ghost being announced in 2002 and then undergoing 'indefinite suspension'...
World of Warcraft: Cataclysm in production...

To me it seems, as a game-development company, are more focussed on quantity (sales, revenue, profit) than quality (customer satisfaction, truly amazing games)...

Blizzard Entertainment used to be a small company. Believe it or not. When Starcraft I was in development, it was their only project. Having just wrapped up Diablo I, they set their entire workforce on this one game and it's future expansion... But, we look at what they are up to now, with 6 massive projects all in production - I definitely am under the impression that they have lost sight of what made Starcraft I truly great...

Anyways, enough about me flaming Blizzard. The game will be fun, sure, the game will be good, sure... But the game will not be as triumphant as Starcraft I.


As far as modding goes. Their stance on allowing 'casual players' to extensively modify and create their own maps is shocking. The battle.net 2.0 publishing system is pathetic. Read IskatuMesk's post for more information about this... When they were asked: 'are any refinements/changes going to be made to the Galaxy editor prior to release of Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty?'

The blunt answer provided by Browder was "No. Map-making is difficult." This annoys me the most. Anyways, enough of my perspective

ps...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3f/Alpha_build_(StarCraft).png

That is what Starcraft I looked like in Alpha. Compare that to what Starcraft I at release looked like. It is plain to see that they are not devoting the time and effort into refining, balancing and making SC:2 perfect...

 

[Deathcom3s]

The units present in SC2 are excellent in their conception, it's the implementation that has failed them. Most of the units are great, albeit some units need some further tweaking and stat editing. However, there are downfalls such as the lack of proper Terran GtA (yes, they have the Thor, but the sheer resource cost of them, as well as their position in the Tech Tree make them a rather pitiful choice for general GtA use). In one interview, Browder even said that they never approached SC2 with even the slightest idea of what they wanted their units to do, or even what units they needed. They simply came up with cool ideas, and crammed them into roles that the unit didn't fill properly. This has led to some immense unit changes between the SC2 we saw several years ago compared to the SC2 beta we have now. Such unit changes include the Roach.

Blizzard made those refinements to SC1 after they were utterly shut down at some game development conference. It was basically WC2 in space. They realized that they could do better, and did. Now that they're this mega game development company with cash cows such as WoW, they really don't care about quality so much as quantity.