|
I have never said there was no micro in SupCom. I have said that micro is less rewarding than it is in StarCraft, because of the artificial latency in unit responses, which is true.
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:20 |
|
|
I used to like RTS games, until this thread. e: wait that's probably not an unpopular opinion at all
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
Like just fundamentally more precise control is a hallmark of mechanically deep games, because the less precise your control is, the less potential difference there is between the perfect move and failure. Making greater numbers of less precise (and therefore less challenging) decisions or actions is a trade-off of one kind of depth for another, but it's not one I'd want to make because games that trade away precision feel like rear end to play.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:i'm beginning to wonder if you've even played starcraft or if this is some kind of very elaborate troll You're an idiot who thinks there's no micro in supcom so I dunno dude, I've been assuming you're baiting this whole time because there's no way someone can be that stupid unless they just never played the game.  You don't run more units because you can ignore micro. You run more units because even microing 3 heavy assault bots won't protect you from a horde of T1 light assault bots. You seem to think that because there is more to do, you can't do everything that you do in Starcraft, but that's simply false. Supcom is Starcraft turned up to 11 because there's so much more going on and if you're anything better than mediocre you're giving everything attention down to the casualty. Starcraft's macro is so severely lacking that it's practically a joke. The big picture in starcraft is bare bones basic, while Supcom took the Dune 2 formula and fleshed out the big picture so that large scale and future thinking are necessary to be an effective player. There's not only an emphasis on tactics, but on strategy. You have to be able to switch from breaking apart a 400 strong assault force into squads of 10 to deal with an array of point defenses to zooming out and setting your nearby FOB to start pumping out reinforcements for the casualties that you should have pre-estimated. You should be constantly switching back and forth between the kind of longterm thinking you do with war games and short term thinking on how you can properly neutralize a heavily defended position without crippling your standing army. That's where Supreme Commander is superior to starcraft as an RTS, it has every kind of strategy and it's all equally important at high levels of play. Tuxedo Catfish posted:Like just fundamentally more precise control is a hallmark of mechanically deep games, because the less precise your control is, the less potential difference there is between the perfect move and failure. Making greater numbers of less precise (and therefore less challenging) decisions or actions is a trade-off of one kind of depth for another, but it's not one I'd want to make because games that trade away precision feel like rear end to play. Units not instantly responding doesn't decrease control granularity, it means you have to be far more deliberate in your actions and plan ahead instead of playing the game like its a twitch shooter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
SpaceClown posted:You're an idiot who thinks there's no micro in supcom so I dunno dude Tuxedo Catfish posted:I have never said there was no micro in SupCom. please learn to read
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
stop talking about bad games
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
SpaceClown posted:Units not instantly responding doesn't decrease control granularity, it means you have to be far more deliberate in your actions and plan ahead instead of playing the game like its a twitch shooter. Actually it does, because there's a period from when you notice a change you need to respond to, till when you're able to respond to that change. With a delay, that period of time is lost to you. "Playing the game like it's a twitch shooter" is a good thing, because twitch skills are one of the best ways to distinguish good play from bad -- both in terms of "they're an effective way to enhance a skill gap" and "they're really fun and downplaying them makes your game feel like it's stuck in molasses."
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:please learn to read quote:micro is more limited and you continue to say that because units don't instantly respond that micro thus isn't important and satisfying or whatever but that's a complete non-sequitur. anticipation is a cornerstone of strategy and if you were even slightly good at it you would have adjusted to the latency immediately instead of whining that you can't kite or whatever retarded strategy you think is good micro.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:First off, "it's harder to do" is a legitimate reason in itself. quote:We have worldwide competitions that don't involve a lot of decision-making but do involve doing difficult, repetitive tasks under pressure and being the best in the world at it, because it's interesting to see how far people can go. There are limits to this in practice -- a game that pushes too far in this direction will have no playerbase, and that's not good either -- but it's not inherently bad any more than it's inherently good. quote:Second, it's not just difficulty. A double half-circle motion in a fighting game cannot be buffered into certain other moves that a single quarter-circle can quote:Third, the experience of finding something incredibly challenging and alien and watching it become natural and intuitive just feels really good. Tuxedo Catfish posted:Like just fundamentally more precise control is a hallmark of mechanically deep games, because the less precise your control is, the less potential difference there is between the perfect move and failure. Making greater numbers of less precise (and therefore less challenging) decisions or actions is a trade-off of one kind of depth for another, but it's not one I'd want to make because games that trade away precision feel like rear end to play.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
SpaceClown posted:and you continue to say that because units don't instantly respond that micro thus isn't important and satisfying or whatever but that's a complete non-sequitur. anticipation is a cornerstone of strategy and if you were even slightly good at it you would have adjusted to the latency immediately instead of whining that you can't kite or whatever retarded strategy you think is good micro. The fact that you can, for instance, move Mutalisks out of a Psi Storm to minimize the damage does not negate the fact that you also need to plan ahead for Psi Storm along the lines of, say, using smaller groups of Mutalisks or not investing as heavily in them as the first place. Fast reactions can go hand in hand with anticipation, and usually do in most twitch-based games. On the other hand, artificial latency just cuts half of that equation out. Latency is bad for any real time game for precisely this reason, and most developers are smart enough to at least try to minimize it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
jfc some of you guys need to try drugs or sex or something god drat
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Bodyholes posted:nope no u Bodyholes posted:Different moves already have different buffer windows. That same aspect of choice can be designed without the technical requirements. They serve different functions. You did a good job of picking out the weakest example in the list I gave there, but to replace it with a better one: a charge character functions fundamentally differently than a circle-motion character. It creates a small series of drawbacks (you have to prep moves in advance, your opponent can "see" when you lose charge and won't have certain moves available to you, etc.) which allows devs to give those moves slightly better properties to compensate. Really, the specifics aren't that important, the point is just that physical difficulty interacts with game mechanics in much more complex ways than "it's harder to do." Bodyholes posted:There are physical limits to what humans can do. Making inputs harder than those physical limits makes the game less deterministic and worse. So there is a diminishing point of returns. Absolutely true! But that limit isn't anywhere near "do two half-circles in a row."
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
there is a whole forum for autistic blizzard game fans, please go there and never return
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Actually it does, because there's a period from when you notice a change you need to respond to, till when you're able to respond to that change. With a delay, that period of time is lost to you. have you considered, I don't know, utilizing this thing called scouting to prevent those situations? Also no, that doesn't decrease granularity, that just makes your life more difficult if you're an idiot and you rush in like a complete idiot without a second thought. A properly executed offensive will alert you of new threats before they even begin to be a hazard to your units. If you were even slightly good at strategy and planning, your reflexes would never be tested in the first place aside from when an FOB is destroyed by an assaulting force. And no, twitch skills aren't a way to distinguish good RTSes from bad RTSes. Freedom and depth of strategy distiguish good RTSes and bad RTSes. The mainstay and focus of the genre is strategy, not being able to think on your actions forever is the second most important part of it. RTSes that rely on twitch skills generally do so artificially and tend to disallow deeper strategic freedom. Such as Starcraft.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
SC2 WoL was a golden era of e-sports, and despite lower viewership and the AIDS of the GOMTV client, it was really good and I miss it forever. Tasteless and Artosis are the best casters of all time Merlini is the best DOTA analyst KOTLGuy is the best play-by-play. DOTA is the best DOTA-like Call heroes by their lore name or you're noob. Ultima Online can never happen again, but was the greatest game of all time for a huge number of sociological and gameplay reasons. Richard Garriott is a genius. The AWP is Good David Sirlin is also Good, haha
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
Also, it can be good for a game to exceed the ability of human beings in some cases -- we've been talking about RTS games, which only work because they demand more attention to more tasks than a human being can actually perform at once. This both creates depth (because there are correct and incorrect choices of what to focus on) and room for individual expression (because sometimes there are multiple valid answers, so you can be "that player with amazing macro who puts constant pressure on every enemy base" or "the guy who killed a bajillion units with one guy and a dropship.") (Admittedly this is more a case of "too many things for a person to do" rather than "one thing that no human being can do" but it can still apply to skill checks that are more binary -- for example there's an infinite combo in Vampire Savior that's so hard there's only been one tournament player who can do it consistently under pressure.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
Smythe posted:David Sirlin is also Good, haha This is true and I make a point of posting it in Traditional Games about once a year, it makes them sooooo angry lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
SpaceClown posted:have you considered, I don't know, utilizing this thing called scouting to prevent those situations? Yes, because it's not incompatible with the things I'm advocating, they both contribute to the depth of the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
Smythe please lock or gas this thread before the RTS guys start infecting other threads.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:The fact that you can, for instance, move Mutalisks out of a Psi Storm to minimize the damage does not negate the fact that you also need to plan ahead for Psi Storm along the lines of, say, using smaller groups of Mutalisks or not investing as heavily in them as the first place. Fast reactions can go hand in hand with anticipation, and usually do in most twitch-based games. So play a MOBA, not an RTS. Tuxedo Catfish posted:Yes, because it's not incompatible with the things I'm advocating, they both contribute to the depth of the game. Except it is completely incompatible in a game with actual ranges on the weapons because you can simply kill things before they can hit you. SpaceClown fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Feb 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
It's a thread about video game opinions, you can't expect people not to share opinions about one of the more popular genres of video games in the bitching about video games thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
SpaceClown posted:So play a MOBA, not an RTS. Why would I want to do that? MOBAs are like the classic example of a genre that mistakenly thinks that knowledge checks are a satisfying or adequate replacement for mechanical skill.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:56
|
|
|
Tuxedo catfish has been making good thoughtful in depth posts in games about a variety of topics for a long time so he gets some latitude imo
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
TF2 is fun and the people that play it are hilarious. I just wouldn't want to meet them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
Smythe posted:Tuxedo catfish has been making good thoughtful in depth posts in games about a variety of topics for a long time so he gets some latitude imo I mean I don't need special treatment, if your estimate as a mod is that I'm making GBS threads up the thread I'll leave it alone. I mostly came here to make low-effort zingers about stuff I didn't want to effortpost about and we can see how effective that has been lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
Robokomodo posted:TF2 is fun and the people that play it are hilarious. I just wouldn't want to meet them. I liked it a lot until they started adding hats and the enhanced weapons and stuff.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:I mean I don't need special treatment, if your estimate as a mod is that I'm making GBS threads up the thread I'll leave it alone. I mostly came here to make low-effort zingers about stuff I didn't want to effortpost about and we can see how effective that has been lol its ok to argue with noobs and own them repeatedly. its gaming 101. good job.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
Like being able to properly project force with artillery to diminish threats is a basic building block of warfare and starcraft doesn't really have any effective ways to do this, while long-range fire support as well as CAS plays a huge role in supreme commander.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
heres a controversial opinion: ryu is the only correct and most pure character to play in street fighter terran is the only correct and most pure race in starcraft Shadow Fiend is the ryu of DOTA
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
SpaceClown posted:Like being able to properly project force with artillery to diminish threats is a basic building block of warfare and starcraft doesn't really have any effective ways to do this, while long-range fire support as well as CAS plays a huge role in supreme commander. It's true that if you tried to make a game like StarCraft but with arbitrarily large range a lot of other things would have to change to accomodate it. I'm okay with that, though, there's still strategically significant differences in range in StarCraft and I don't really feel the need for artillery beyond siege cannons and guardians.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
Polt is the greatest gamer in history
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
Team deathmatch should be the only gamemode played in competitive FPS tournaments.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
It is no surprise at all that Nintendo doesn't make more new franchises when stuff like Codename S.T.E.A.M. is already sitting in bargain bins all over and Splatoon, the company's best-selling new IP of the last decade, sold less than half as many copies as lovely entries of other series like Assassin's Creed Unity.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
It's a shame I can't get out of wood league in Starcraft because it has build orders (having a gameplan) and micro (controlling your units) instead of True Strategy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:It's true that if you tried to make a game like StarCraft but with arbitrarily large range a lot of other things would have to change to accomodate it. I'm okay with that, though, there's still strategically significant differences in range in StarCraft and I don't really feel the need for artillery beyond siege cannons and guardians. How is it arbitrarily long range though? What's the quantifier for that? Being able to offer direct fire support from behind the front lines to clear a path for ground forces opens up a whole new world of strategic possibilities. The fact that everything in Starcraft is so short range and that the game is so small is its biggest drawback, imo. Especially when the micro in the game is actually kind of bad compared to a modern game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
Blizzard has never made a good game. Daggerfall is the best elder scrolls. System Shock 1 is a fuckton better than System shock 2 The new XCOM games are bad. Crusader still has yet to be surpassed as the best tactical isometric shooter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
A few years ago a goon got into Masters by building nothing other than marines, raxes, scvs, and command centers. Like SF, SC2 is a game where fundamentals go a long way. I own a lot of ppl at the Local Arcade in Super Turbo by doing nothing other than fireball/srk space control, as seen in DAVID SIRLINS PLAY TO WIN sf2 tutorial videos lol. Thats at the craft beer white ppl arcade tho, at the Real poo poo gritty arcade I get brutally owned by hard-looking men with neck tattoos who train hard and game harder
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Absolutely true! But that limit isn't anywhere near "do two half-circles in a row." Single-frame inputs go beyond that limit though, unless you're a 16 year old kid with fresh fingers and weapons grade autism. I can't really find that kind of system interesting or beautiful. If you choose to, that's your prerogative, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:20 |
|
|
Bodyholes posted:Single-frame inputs go beyond that limit though, unless you're a 16 year old kid with fresh fingers and weapons grade autism. I can't really find that kind of system interesting or beautiful. If you choose to, that's your prerogative, I guess. I'm halfway with you, actually. I don't like games where one-frame links are a vital part of every character's BnB combos. However, I would happily play a game where -- for example -- there's one character who gets advantages off of single-frame links, another character who has low damage potential but crazy mixup, another character who can do incredibly long and damaging combos, and so on. I don't mind being tested against a skill I can't or don't want to master, as long as some skill I enjoy developing can be more or less fairly weighted against it. The ability to create these situations is one of the beautiful things about video games (and games generally) and one of the things that distinguish them from raw tests of strength or of one very narrow and particular skill.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 21:24
|
|