Comments on: The revolutionary breakthrough of strategic zoom http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/ Forging new Alliances daily Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:58:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: MeDDish http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-18296 MeDDish Mon, 25 Feb 2008 01:57:23 +0000 http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-18296 i admit ill buy/borrow/download SC2 just to see the story line (or more likely 1/2 of it then type in the cheats to watch the rest... but realisticly blizzard games SHOULD be dated by the time they hit the shelfs! they often look old, and play old, but the one thing they allways have is the shiny polish, no release day patches! Also game wise never that good but a GREAT story line everytime... lets face it Warcraft 3 was a flop multiplayer the ONLY reason its still played is pplz got into the map editor and made DOTA & TD & HD maps! with out these the game would of suck..... and we would of never had the WOW factor! i admit ill buy/borrow/download SC2 just to see the story line (or more likely 1/2 of it then type in the cheats to watch the rest… but realisticly blizzard games SHOULD be dated by the time they hit the shelfs! they often look old, and play old, but the one thing they allways have is the shiny polish, no release day patches!
Also game wise never that good but a GREAT story line everytime… lets face it Warcraft 3 was a flop multiplayer the ONLY reason its still played is pplz got into the map editor and made DOTA & TD & HD maps! with out these the game would of suck….. and we would of never had the WOW factor!

]]> By: Cameron aka BodyBag26 http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-18273 Cameron aka BodyBag26 Sun, 24 Feb 2008 15:45:21 +0000 http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-18273 WoW maybe an exception to the rule, i wouldn't know i've never played it but i never equate popularity with quality. From what i've seen of Starcraft 2 there's nothing that looks particularly spectacular or innovative, i'll probably buy it just so i can see where the story has gone, i must admit buying a video game just for that is rather sad in my view. Starcraft 2 on the Moho engine.... yeah now that would impress me. :D WoW maybe an exception to the rule, i wouldn’t know i’ve never played it but i never equate popularity with quality.
From what i’ve seen of Starcraft 2 there’s nothing that looks particularly spectacular or innovative, i’ll probably buy it just so i can see where the story has gone, i must admit buying a video game just for that is rather sad in my view.

Starcraft 2 on the Moho engine…. yeah now that would impress me. :D

]]> By: Engineer http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-18228 Engineer Sat, 23 Feb 2008 21:14:13 +0000 http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-18228 Blizzard doesn't release games very often because, quite simply, they don't have to. Their enormous financial success means they have freedom in their release schedule and they aren't forced to push games through as aggressively as many other game companies are. WoW alone grosses over $800 milllion a year and World of Warcraft, in its different boxes, was #2, #4, and #5 in sales just last month. All this for a game that came out 4 years ago now. Blizzard games do have numerous patches, but they are primarily minor technical issues and balance patches; balance gets to be a pretty big deal when you have millions of players trying to find exploits and when you have games with races as diverse as the ones in Starcraft and Warcraft. I also think you can't underestimate the importance of Blizzard's storytelling and intellectual property. Sadly, most game developers don't have this much leeway, and this was visible in Supreme Commander. The game shipped with some pretty serious gameplay and balance issues that turned a lot of people off to the game, and it wasn't until the first expansion that these were really fixed. Unfortunately by that point a lot of players had stopped playing the game and never came back. Blizzard doesn’t release games very often because, quite simply, they don’t have to. Their enormous financial success means they have freedom in their release schedule and they aren’t forced to push games through as aggressively as many other game companies are. WoW alone grosses over $800 milllion a year and World of Warcraft, in its different boxes, was #2, #4, and #5 in sales just last month. All this for a game that came out 4 years ago now. Blizzard games do have numerous patches, but they are primarily minor technical issues and balance patches; balance gets to be a pretty big deal when you have millions of players trying to find exploits and when you have games with races as diverse as the ones in Starcraft and Warcraft. I also think you can’t underestimate the importance of Blizzard’s storytelling and intellectual property.

Sadly, most game developers don’t have this much leeway, and this was visible in Supreme Commander. The game shipped with some pretty serious gameplay and balance issues that turned a lot of people off to the game, and it wasn’t until the first expansion that these were really fixed. Unfortunately by that point a lot of players had stopped playing the game and never came back.

]]> By: Cameron aka BodyBag26 http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17890 Cameron aka BodyBag26 Tue, 19 Feb 2008 05:33:18 +0000 http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17890 That mustn't be the case for me Woden, i haven't played a Blizzard produced game in years (not that they've released a whole lot lately), if i wanted to waste money i'd throw it off a bridge like 'Yahtzee' instead of playing WoW, or buy something i actually want like a new bench, ezy curl bar or punching bag, something that enriches my life. As for 'flawlessly bug-free' (thanks for the laugh) you should go browse the innumerable patches for blizzard games. That mustn’t be the case for me Woden, i haven’t played a Blizzard produced game in years (not that they’ve released a whole lot lately), if i wanted to waste money i’d throw it off a bridge like ‘Yahtzee’ instead of playing WoW, or buy something i actually want like a new bench, ezy curl bar or punching bag, something that enriches my life.
As for ‘flawlessly bug-free’ (thanks for the laugh) you should go browse the innumerable patches for blizzard games.

]]> By: Woden http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17880 Woden Tue, 19 Feb 2008 02:13:57 +0000 http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17880 Cameron: You're forgetting that they are also incredibly addictive, they have professionally written, innovative story lines, they have excellent map editors, and they are flawlessly bug-free. I don't think I've ever known a Blizzard game to crash. Sup Com is an entirely different story. So maybe Blizzard games are sapphires to Sup Com's diamonds, but they are superbly faceted and polished in comparison. As for strategic zoom, I'm tending to agree with Molloy - though I play sup com with the minimap enabled anyway, so there's no real disadvantage. Cameron: You’re forgetting that they are also incredibly addictive, they have professionally written, innovative story lines, they have excellent map editors, and they are flawlessly bug-free. I don’t think I’ve ever known a Blizzard game to crash. Sup Com is an entirely different story. So maybe Blizzard games are sapphires to Sup Com’s diamonds, but they are superbly faceted and polished in comparison.

As for strategic zoom, I’m tending to agree with Molloy - though I play sup com with the minimap enabled anyway, so there’s no real disadvantage.

]]> By: Molloy http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17720 Molloy Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:28:00 +0000 http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17720 Engineer: You know, I think I'm actually onto something here. The whole clicking on the minimap system of getting around is really a thousand times faster. I largely work in Autocad for a living so when SupCom first came out I though "Finally someones got the right idea. This is so much more efficient." But now when I think about it I'd probably be able to draw in Autocad alot more quickly if there was a minimap style preview pane that cut down on the huge amount of zooming in and out that I do on a minute by minute basis. You're generally only ever operating at two levels of zoom, the detail level and the expanded level that lets you see the bigger picture. All the other levels of zoom inbetween are largely redundant. It's purely a speed issue. I think I can play TA much more quickly than I can Supreme Commander because of the lack of strategic zoom. It was something I was clamoring about for years but now I actually have it I've realised it's a bit of a flawed system. Engineer: You know, I think I’m actually onto something here. The whole clicking on the minimap system of getting around is really a thousand times faster. I largely work in Autocad for a living so when SupCom first came out I though “Finally someones got the right idea. This is so much more efficient.” But now when I think about it I’d probably be able to draw in Autocad alot more quickly if there was a minimap style preview pane that cut down on the huge amount of zooming in and out that I do on a minute by minute basis. You’re generally only ever operating at two levels of zoom, the detail level and the expanded level that lets you see the bigger picture. All the other levels of zoom inbetween are largely redundant.

It’s purely a speed issue. I think I can play TA much more quickly than I can Supreme Commander because of the lack of strategic zoom. It was something I was clamoring about for years but now I actually have it I’ve realised it’s a bit of a flawed system.

]]> By: Cameron http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17666 Cameron Sun, 17 Feb 2008 08:03:02 +0000 http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17666 Well technically you can't really call Starcraft or SC2 RTS games, they are real time tactical games. Starcraft and most other 'RTS' games before it lack true strategic elements like TA/Supcoms super artillery and TRUE strategic nukes, let's face it in Starcraft you have to sneak ghosts in literally 1 screen away from the target to 'paint' it, a laughable premise. I do agree that while useful the minimap simply doesnt cut it. No doubt SC2 will sell like crack to baseheads, because it's a better game? No definately not. It will sell extremely well because it will likely run perfectly on any system made in the last 6 to 8 years, like all Blizzards 'childishly' colourful games, Diablo2, WoW, Starcraft etc. Blizzards graphics have never been up to scratch, most of the time not even up to standard but their games sell because they are simplistic and their system requirements are below average. Well technically you can’t really call Starcraft or SC2 RTS games, they are real time tactical games.
Starcraft and most other ‘RTS’ games before it lack true strategic elements like TA/Supcoms super artillery and TRUE strategic nukes, let’s face it in Starcraft you have to sneak ghosts in literally 1 screen away from the target to ‘paint’ it, a laughable premise.
I do agree that while useful the minimap simply doesnt cut it.

No doubt SC2 will sell like crack to baseheads, because it’s a better game? No definately not.
It will sell extremely well because it will likely run perfectly on any system made in the last 6 to 8 years, like all Blizzards ‘childishly’ colourful games, Diablo2, WoW, Starcraft etc.
Blizzards graphics have never been up to scratch, most of the time not even up to standard but their games sell because they are simplistic and their system requirements are below average.

]]> By: Engineer http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17524 Engineer Sat, 16 Feb 2008 03:06:57 +0000 http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17524 Molloy for shame! Really now, how can you say you don't miss the strategic zoom. I have such a hard time playing any top-down view game without it now. That's one of thing things I really like about Stardock's Galactic Civilizations is the huge zoom range. Regarding playing zoomed out and missing out on the pretty graphics: Well now, we can't have everything. If you want a game with great strategic depth and enormous scale, you have to be able to take in a huge amount of information at once. This is, after all, what most hardcore wargames look like; NATO symbols on a bland map. On the other hand, if you want to enjoy the pretty graphics up close that means you are sacrificing the high level view. SupCom lets you have both with the strategic zoom; you can go from pretty explosions to NATO symbols in a fraction of a second. The mini-map just doesn't cut it for me in this regard, now I don't have to divide my attention between two distincly separate images. Molloy for shame! Really now, how can you say you don’t miss the strategic zoom. I have such a hard time playing any top-down view game without it now. That’s one of thing things I really like about Stardock’s Galactic Civilizations is the huge zoom range.

Regarding playing zoomed out and missing out on the pretty graphics: Well now, we can’t have everything. If you want a game with great strategic depth and enormous scale, you have to be able to take in a huge amount of information at once. This is, after all, what most hardcore wargames look like; NATO symbols on a bland map. On the other hand, if you want to enjoy the pretty graphics up close that means you are sacrificing the high level view. SupCom lets you have both with the strategic zoom; you can go from pretty explosions to NATO symbols in a fraction of a second. The mini-map just doesn’t cut it for me in this regard, now I don’t have to divide my attention between two distincly separate images.

]]> By: Molloy http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17472 Molloy Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:39:59 +0000 http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17472 You know, I've begun playing Total Annihilation multiplayer again recently and I don't miss the zooming at all. In fact, It's made me realise how redundant it is. The minimap tells you pretty much what's going on, and you can just right click on it to quickly get to the part of the map that needs your attention. If anything the whole zoom out, move to what needs your attention, zoom in mechanic is actually slower. Not to mention the fact it wastes alot of the effort that's gone into making SupCom a pretty game with interesting looking units because there's always the temptation to play it pretty zoomed out most of the time. You know, I’ve begun playing Total Annihilation multiplayer again recently and I don’t miss the zooming at all. In fact, It’s made me realise how redundant it is. The minimap tells you pretty much what’s going on, and you can just right click on it to quickly get to the part of the map that needs your attention. If anything the whole zoom out, move to what needs your attention, zoom in mechanic is actually slower. Not to mention the fact it wastes alot of the effort that’s gone into making SupCom a pretty game with interesting looking units because there’s always the temptation to play it pretty zoomed out most of the time.

]]> By: Gimpb http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17432 Gimpb Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:05:26 +0000 http://www.supcomtalk.com/2008/02/10/the-revolutionary-breakthrough-of-strategic-zoom/#comment-17432 While certainly a great large-scale management tool, it has its downsides I think. For example, when I play supcom I generally spend most of my time looking at little dots on the screen, clicking the ui, and hitting hot keys. While that might be the easiest way to get things done, it doesn't make for a terribly immersing video game imo. Technically it's not that tough based on the messing around I've done, only use every Nth pip from the height map, replace models with icons as you zoom out, and the linear algebra of doing the actual zoom is trivial. For those reasons I think it will continue as it has with some games choosing to do it and some not. Those developers that want to concentrate making the game immersing and engaging (typical blizzard philosophy, for example) probably won't do it and those that want to concentrate on the unit management tools (home-style game studios like relic or GPG, for example) will likely continue to provide it. While certainly a great large-scale management tool, it has its downsides I think. For example, when I play supcom I generally spend most of my time looking at little dots on the screen, clicking the ui, and hitting hot keys. While that might be the easiest way to get things done, it doesn’t make for a terribly immersing video game imo.

Technically it’s not that tough based on the messing around I’ve done, only use every Nth pip from the height map, replace models with icons as you zoom out, and the linear algebra of doing the actual zoom is trivial.

For those reasons I think it will continue as it has with some games choosing to do it and some not. Those developers that want to concentrate making the game immersing and engaging (typical blizzard philosophy, for example) probably won’t do it and those that want to concentrate on the unit management tools (home-style game studios like relic or GPG, for example) will likely continue to provide it.

]]>