Sorry for my bad English. I'm not a native speaker. I think having some automated resource income increment you can stop or restart by hand is a good idea. I think that is one type of interesting decision. Especially if you can decide between 2, 3, or 4 resources. So you not only decide if you want to increase the income, but you also have to decide which resource you want to increase automatically over time. Of course, you can maybe pimp that through upgrades so you can get 2 different resources and or 1 resource faster, etc. per base/ main structure. I think it will also be good to just decide to increase the number of production facilities for combat units and you don't have to find a place for the structure. So you click a button and the facility is automatically placed near the main structure or something like that. Of course, you will have several main structures and you can decide which main structure will get the extra production facility. That will also highlight the strategy part. (One thing that could be lost is the possibility of hiding production and tech structures etc. anywhere on the map like hidden Gateways or Dark Shrine or something like that. Not sure if this will easily be possible in that game. Is for me one of many important strategic options.) I think also just having a menu full of different upgrades sorted in the economy, new units, and existing unit improvements would be a cool idea. Unit improvements can be abilities like blink that give some existing units totally new options or something like a general power or defense upgrade for a group of units like armor. In this case, I would like to split armor and weapon upgrades into more different categories like laser, explosive, poison, or projectile weapons and armor types. That could increase the diversity in battles. So for example a unit with a projectile weapon can be changed to a unit with a laser weapon etc. It may be something that you don't just upgrade, but you can also change for the current production cycle of the unit. So after you have built the unit with the laser weapon upgrade you can change that back to the unit with the projectile weapon if needed. And it's good that they will probably remove that boring supply thing so you start with 4/200 for example and you don't have to increase the max supply. One thing that is actually missing in a lot of different rts like all C&C, StarCraft, and WarCraft titles is the strategic diversity auto-generated maps offer. That are several things. One thing is that scouting becomes more important because you don't know what the battlefield looks like. That gives you also more options to hide economy, production buildings, and tech more easily and will play a bigger part in the decision-making. I really like that in Age of Empires 2 and I miss it in Starcraft and Warcraft. In combination with more spread resources like stone, food, gold, and especially forest in Age of Empires 2 there are a lot more options for possible bases or places for economy and hidden economy. In Age of Mythology and also in Starcraft etc. the places for an economy are really limited. Especially when you don't have auto-generated maps. I think that could increase the strategic part of the game if you increase the options instead of limiting them. That would for me some really important parts of an RTS. StarCraft 1 is of course a great game, but it also has its parts for improving. People should more often combine the best things of Starcraft:BW and Age of Empires 2. One last thing. I would also overthink the start position thing. In Age of Empires 2, there is something called "nomad maps" so you start with 3 workers who are randomly distributed across the map. Those are really funny maps because each game has its own individual story. For example, one time you start really near to an opponent and you will have from the beginning a really action-based match. Another time you start far away from every opponent and you can hide and build up your great economy. Furthermore, sometimes the match develops into a defensive style of play depending on the many things that can happen during a match. This map type also benefits greatly from randomly generated maps. In addition which resource you have enough in range or not is totally different in each match. So there is so much variety so the basic principles are different from ... for example Starcraft, where you know most of the things. You know where your opponent starts, how the map looks like, where the opponent can expand, where you can expand, and where are the roads to the opponent's bases or to your bases, you probably also know the few build orders your opponent can play and you can play and of course, you will probably know your build order you will play in one match, etc. In Age of Empires 2 the 4 different resources also make it possible to decide if you want to build high-quality units (gold units) or trash units (food/wood units) or to build more defensive structures (stone things like castles, turrets, walls). The last thing can help you to get different and more resources and go over to a more aggressive playstyle with a lot of harassment with a small group of units etc. All of these things do not contribute to greater diversity, quite the opposite. They make the game more predictable and therefore more boring.
Talking about a game that has no gameplay footage out seems premature - it's hard to have an emotional investment in a game when you could be building the next halo wars
I don't think that is an unfair take! I don't think it's for everyone to express interest at the "design philosophy" stage. And I don't think anyone should jump to conclusions that "this game WILL be great" or "this game WILL be terrible". But I also think it's reasonable for some people to be interested in hearing more about the intentions behind a new game being developed by someone heavily involved in the direction of StarCraft 2. But I respect your take on that. Hope you can see gameplay footage to gauge your interest sooner rather than later! But agree it's good to reserve strong judgement until something concrete is seen.
David Kim putting out ideas about RTS that were known to be false in 2006. Claiming he thought about them for 10 or 30 decades. But he has literally nothing to say about what these new gameplay concepts has that his game will have. Making the same claims and statements that everyone and their dog has made ever since SC BW became popular, but claiming he is the first and only one making them. Fans are asked to have 'an open mind' while the devs have huge promises while making the same mistakes over and over again. Come back to us when you made a game that is actually a ton of fun and you can actually show us this. Because this is just stupid talk.
This is a terrible interview. Guy gives boomer takes on RTS. He says 'like' an absurd amount of times. The interviewer never pushes back, or asks clarifying questions. All he does is just blow hot air up the other guy's ass. "That's so true." "that makes a lot of sense, actually" "that is such a great insight" NO! Maybe this game is actually good. But what David Kim is saying all this video is almost all bullshit. And we learn literally nothing about the game.
The "guy" is a former SC1 pro player and one of the leading minds behind SC2. You can certainly disagree with him, but at least try to do it in a way that doesn't make you look like a complete clown.
Sorry for my bad English. I'm not a native speaker.
I think having some automated resource income increment you can stop or restart by hand is a good idea. I think that is one type of interesting decision. Especially if you can decide between 2, 3, or 4 resources. So you not only decide if you want to increase the income, but you also have to decide which resource you want to increase automatically over time. Of course, you can maybe pimp that through upgrades so you can get 2 different resources and or 1 resource faster, etc. per base/ main structure.
I think it will also be good to just decide to increase the number of production facilities for combat units and you don't have to find a place for the structure. So you click a button and the facility is automatically placed near the main structure or something like that. Of course, you will have several main structures and you can decide which main structure will get the extra production facility. That will also highlight the strategy part.
(One thing that could be lost is the possibility of hiding production and tech structures etc. anywhere on the map like hidden Gateways or Dark Shrine or something like that. Not sure if this will easily be possible in that game. Is for me one of many important strategic options.)
I think also just having a menu full of different upgrades sorted in the economy, new units, and existing unit improvements would be a cool idea. Unit improvements can be abilities like blink that give some existing units totally new options or something like a general power or defense upgrade for a group of units like armor. In this case, I would like to split armor and weapon upgrades into more different categories like laser, explosive, poison, or projectile weapons and armor types. That could increase the diversity in battles. So for example a unit with a projectile weapon can be changed to a unit with a laser weapon etc. It may be something that you don't just upgrade, but you can also change for the current production cycle of the unit. So after you have built the unit with the laser weapon upgrade you can change that back to the unit with the projectile weapon if needed.
And it's good that they will probably remove that boring supply thing so you start with 4/200 for example and you don't have to increase the max supply.
One thing that is actually missing in a lot of different rts like all C&C, StarCraft, and WarCraft titles is the strategic diversity auto-generated maps offer. That are several things.
One thing is that scouting becomes more important because you don't know what the battlefield looks like. That gives you also more options to hide economy, production buildings, and tech more easily and will play a bigger part in the decision-making. I really like that in Age of Empires 2 and I miss it in Starcraft and Warcraft. In combination with more spread resources like stone, food, gold, and especially forest in Age of Empires 2 there are a lot more options for possible bases or places for economy and hidden economy. In Age of Mythology and also in Starcraft etc. the places for an economy are really limited. Especially when you don't have auto-generated maps. I think that could increase the strategic part of the game if you increase the options instead of limiting them. That would for me some really important parts of an RTS. StarCraft 1 is of course a great game, but it also has its parts for improving. People should more often combine the best things of Starcraft:BW and Age of Empires 2.
One last thing. I would also overthink the start position thing. In Age of Empires 2, there is something called "nomad maps" so you start with 3 workers who are randomly distributed across the map.
Those are really funny maps because each game has its own individual story. For example, one time you start really near to an opponent and you will have from the beginning a really action-based match. Another time you start far away from every opponent and you can hide and build up your great economy. Furthermore, sometimes the match develops into a defensive style of play depending on the many things that can happen during a match. This map type also benefits greatly from randomly generated maps. In addition which resource you have enough in range or not is totally different in each match. So there is so much variety so the basic principles are different from ... for example Starcraft, where you know most of the things. You know where your opponent starts, how the map looks like, where the opponent can expand, where you can expand, and where are the roads to the opponent's bases or to your bases, you probably also know the few build orders your opponent can play and you can play and of course, you will probably know your build order you will play in one match, etc. In Age of Empires 2 the 4 different resources also make it possible to decide if you want to build high-quality units (gold units) or trash units (food/wood units) or to build more defensive structures (stone things like castles, turrets, walls). The last thing can help you to get different and more resources and go over to a more aggressive playstyle with a lot of harassment with a small group of units etc. All of these things do not contribute to greater diversity, quite the opposite. They make the game more predictable and therefore more boring.
I think his analysis is spot on. Very excited to see what they’re cooking up.
Great interview, thx FearDragon
Awesome! Thanks for the interview!
Rumor has it David Kim is still a top Random GM SC2 player
Dam he been playing StarCraft for 30 decades
That sounds really interesting to me. Now I am really hoping for some high fantasy non-futuristic setting.
Nah they’re are definitely robots in this one. Has an anime vibe
this guy gets it
Important question: has feardragon figured out how to cannon rush in this game yet?
ya
Why he wear steve jobs gimp costume?
Talking about a game that has no gameplay footage out seems premature - it's hard to have an emotional investment in a game when you could be building the next halo wars
I don't think that is an unfair take! I don't think it's for everyone to express interest at the "design philosophy" stage. And I don't think anyone should jump to conclusions that "this game WILL be great" or "this game WILL be terrible". But I also think it's reasonable for some people to be interested in hearing more about the intentions behind a new game being developed by someone heavily involved in the direction of StarCraft 2.
But I respect your take on that. Hope you can see gameplay footage to gauge your interest sooner rather than later! But agree it's good to reserve strong judgement until something concrete is seen.
What a moronic statement.
Wow, copy paste?
I'll never forgive, never forget him for the swarm host era.
stop shit talking sc2 david kim!
Starcraft no other game come close to it
So far, sure. But I'll keep an open mind and give Kimcraft a try once it's out.
KimCraft will rule them all. People will bow to it.
Frist
Legend
David Kim putting out ideas about RTS that were known to be false in 2006. Claiming he thought about them for 10 or 30 decades. But he has literally nothing to say about what these new gameplay concepts has that his game will have. Making the same claims and statements that everyone and their dog has made ever since SC BW became popular, but claiming he is the first and only one making them. Fans are asked to have 'an open mind' while the devs have huge promises while making the same mistakes over and over again. Come back to us when you made a game that is actually a ton of fun and you can actually show us this. Because this is just stupid talk.
This is a terrible interview. Guy gives boomer takes on RTS. He says 'like' an absurd amount of times. The interviewer never pushes back, or asks clarifying questions. All he does is just blow hot air up the other guy's ass. "That's so true." "that makes a lot of sense, actually" "that is such a great insight" NO! Maybe this game is actually good. But what David Kim is saying all this video is almost all bullshit. And we learn literally nothing about the game.
Greetings. What planet are you from?
The "guy" is a former SC1 pro player and one of the leading minds behind SC2. You can certainly disagree with him, but at least try to do it in a way that doesn't make you look like a complete clown.