SEN v4 (as on Feb 10, 2007)

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Buletbutter on 2005-09-24 at 16:32:37

QUOTE(Forsaken @ Sep 21 2005, 10:45 AM)

StarCraft is just one hell of a game. I think that SC2 will not be as good because to surpass SC will be one HELL of a task...
[right][snapback]318811[/snapback][/right]

And this is why there will be no sequal.

Naming Starcraft the best game ever......I won't touch that because it's just your opinion, not a fact. As far as UMS go.....the editor is very limited in what it can do, to many times I have scraped a map because it simply can't do what I want it to do. If something isn't done about this then I fear SC may not be around for much longer.

More mindless rantings about UMS:
Don't get me wrong, I have been playing SC since Sharewares and absolutely love the game. It was not untill about 2 years into owning the retail version that I got into map making. Ever since I have been hooked in making my own maps. Through testing and a lot of playing around with the editor I realised that the editor is VERY shallow. Either some things are just down right impossible to do or it takes [sarcasm] 998787685 triggers to get it done.[/sarcasm] The editor, IMO, forces map makers to sacrifice a large amount of quality in order to get a small amount of playability. So I have resolved the SC editor down to do what, I think, it does best. Which is make defense type UMS. RPG's just require to much confusing and really bizzare ways to do things. A spell system in SC is far to ugly for me to actually 'get into' an RPG and frankly, all spells systems for SC makes me want to vomit. The 'problems' of making an RPG for SC stretch far and beyond spell systems but I just choose to single them out. I just simply don't understand why anyone would make an RPG, let a lone play one. But like I siad, the only types of UMS that really make the editor shine, are Defense, Bounds and other really unique games (like Relfector).
Before some of you go on a rant about how easy those types of UMS are to make or about the fact that there are millions of each type out there I just want to say that I am speaking as a gamer, not a mapper. If I am gonna spend the time to figure out an RPG I at least need a better way to cast a spell (in SC) by loading/unloading a unit into a dropship

......To me thats like putting Sea World in the middle of a desert, it just doesn't make sense and it doesn't look right which throws the whole thing off for me. I enjoy playing Defense maps the most and yes it does become repetative at some times so I switch to the occational game of Risk or Domination and on rare occations I do play a few RPG's. As a mapper, I will never make an RPG in the SC editor because I would much rather spend my time making more quality RPG's by using a different game all together.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Shadow-Killa_04 on 2005-09-29 at 01:39:07

SC was superior because of 3 reasons.

1: It just had the best the best game play, no question.

2: It had the best internet Capabilites

3: Its editor was the first where you could actualy program the map urself and all.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Revelade on 2005-09-29 at 21:56:35

QUOTE(Buletbutter @ Sep 24 2005, 03:32 PM)

And this is why there will be no sequal.

Naming Starcraft the best game ever......I won't touch that because it's just your opinion, not a fact. As far as UMS go.....the editor is very limited in what it can do, to many times I have scraped a map because it simply can't do what I want it to do. If something isn't done about this then I fear SC may not be around for much longer.

More mindless rantings about UMS:
Don't get me wrong, I have been playing SC since Sharewares and absolutely love the game. It was not untill about 2 years into owning the retail version that I got into map making. Ever since I have been hooked in making my own maps. Through testing and a lot of playing around with the editor I realised that the editor is VERY shallow. Either some things are just down right impossible to do or it takes [sarcasm] 998787685 triggers to get it done.[/sarcasm] The editor, IMO, forces map makers to sacrifice a large amount of quality in order to get a small amount of playability. So I have resolved the SC editor down to do what, I think, it does best. Which is make defense type UMS. RPG's just require to much confusing and really bizzare ways to do things. A spell system in SC is far to ugly for me to actually 'get into' an RPG and frankly, all spells systems for SC makes me want to vomit. The 'problems' of making an RPG for SC stretch far and beyond spell systems but I just choose to single them out. I just simply don't understand why anyone would make an RPG, let a lone play one. But like I siad, the only types of UMS that really make the editor shine, are Defense, Bounds and other really unique games (like Relfector).
Before some of you go on a rant about how easy those types of UMS are to make or about the fact that there are millions of each type out there I just want to say that I am speaking as a gamer, not a mapper. If I am gonna spend the time to figure out an RPG I at least need a better way to cast a spell (in SC) by loading/unloading a unit into a dropship

......To me thats like putting Sea World in the middle of a desert, it just doesn't make sense and it doesn't look right which throws the whole thing off for me. I enjoy playing Defense maps the most and yes it does become repetative at some times so I switch to the occational game of Risk or Domination and on rare occations I do play a few RPG's. As a mapper, I will never make an RPG in the SC editor because I would much rather spend my time making more quality RPG's by using a different game all together.
[right][snapback]321349[/snapback][/right]

I agree that the title is just an opinion. Some people however, regard best/worst lists as facts. You can't say SC is a good/bad game, but rather what it factually does. While the editor seems weak in your point of view, I will praise it since I think it's very user-friendly, unlike WC3. I do agree that doing a simple task takes dozens of triggers sometimes. A lot of pain could have been saved if there was a create a unit trigger or my favorite: if maps could use the mp3 or midi format. I do admire how you attempt to find the truth beyond hype and intial opinions.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Buletbutter on 2005-10-04 at 21:06:16

QUOTE(Revelade @ Sep 29 2005, 08:56 PM)

I agree that the title is just an opinion. Some people however, regard best/worst lists as facts. You can't say SC is a good/bad game, but rather what it factually does. While the editor seems weak in your point of view, I will praise it since I think it's very user-friendly, unlike WC3. I do agree that doing a simple task takes dozens of triggers sometimes. A lot of pain could have been saved if there was a create a unit trigger or my favorite: if maps could use the mp3 or midi format. I do admire how you attempt to find the truth beyond hype and intial opinions.
[right][snapback]324424[/snapback][/right]

The editor is only weak compared to others out there, for its time it is halfway decent. I really enjoy using the SC map editor, mainly because its simple. But with this simplicity comes extreme limitations. I guess I am just spoiled by using more advanced editors...because SC is pretty old I understand why its editor is limited. For now I can overlook why Blizzard has abandoned the 'mappers' of SC. Especailly with Blizzard wraped up in the MMO monster they created, WoW (awesome game btw!!).

I honestly do not think that the WC3 editor is 'unfriendly'. When you have a lot of features it just gets cramped. More flexability = more complexity, and to begginer 'mappers' complexity can be be a major pitfall. I think that the amount of complexity is worth overcoming for the amount of flexability you have. I still am having trouble understanding why WC3 didn't do what, I think, it was supposed to do. Which was move people away from SC while Blizzard quietly left it in the basement to rot.

Report, edit, etc...Posted by yeow on 2005-10-06 at 13:45:23

Ya, I like the music in Starcraft too, and I'm a big fan of pure Instrumental Music, which thats what it is.. and I have part of the Terran Music on Winamp

Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2005-10-09 at 17:55:49

What the real question should be is:
Why is it still on the computer game best seller list as opposed to C&C Generals: ZH

C&C features the same basics: Tech trees, three different yet balanced countries, same UI.

The only differences were:
Planes had to return to an ariport to restock / refuel.
Workers and resource gatherers are different units, except with the GLA.
You cannot mass one unit without being countered. (Think this may be it)
General's Powers: Call in off-map artillery strikes, ranger drops, carpet bombings, etc.
Only one resource: Money
And anything else I'm forgetting.

In my experience:
Zerg = GLA
Terran = China
Protoss = USA

Would you still enjoy Starcraft if the above differences were implemented into it?

Staredit Network