agreed. Unlike EVERY SINGLE game released today, theres truly nothing to hate about BW, imo. Except losing lol. Still the most competitive game ive ever played as well
SC2 is a good game, but everything that makes Brood War interesting isn't as prevalent. In retrospect it makes sense that with all the QOL changes that SC2 added that it would make the game more automated and less mechanical, but you couldn't have made a successor to Brood War without modernization that fundamentally changed the game.
You can make more QOL features but not make the game all about damage. The issue w/ bw vs sc2 is blizzard literally had the mindset of that and D3 to make it all big damage, big numbers must mean its more interesting. Rather than small skirmishes that do more mechanically because the damage is different. It became who can mass the most things. Not who can counter the other best. It wasn't rock paper scissors it was who can gain the better army like what risk devolves to.
@@bomnitoperro9422 the economy ,the unit control ,the grup control max 12 units in 1 grup ,spel control ,in sc1 if you have 5 templar in a grup and you storm all of them will storm ,and the maps that give you more to the game that sc 2 ,maps are realy important in to the game ,sc1 has an early game you will not get a 3 base in 6 -7 min in to the game ,just play some sc1 is free the not the resmaster but you will see in first 5 min of the game how hard it is
I can help explain it. SC2 was designed based on optimal ways to play. SC1 was designed based on units that play their role optimally. In SC1 you can play your game because there's only units, the lack of balance in between them promotes creativity. In SC2 you can play the game they designed for you to play because everything is balanced, there's an answer to everything coded in the game, no need for creativity. I'm attempting to create something mechanically deep in the 4 humanly possible ways. I'm currently in production after 2 years of pre-production. I'm all by myself so it won't be ready for a couple years more. I promise you will all hate it, but love it; it will demand execution you might have never developed before.
@@puppetmaskerrthey did a remaster of it, supposedly theres still a community of avid players today, but it really is an ancient game nonetheless, so there’s less players today online compared to the days where a lot of people had to use dial up
The limitation is the input cap. In chess, your limitation is strategy, theory, and the clock. In FPS, your limitation is accuracy, map awareness, and game sense. In SC2, your limitation is knowledge of the matchup, and current unit balance/counters But in Broodwar you have to have map awareness, input accuracy, strategy, theory the clock, unit balance and counters, matchup, but all of that comes after you hit the human input cap. Anyone can have a unique strategy, but even the most basic strategy, when executed well with a high input bandwidth, aka APM, can still beat the smartest player with worse mechanics.
I think Brood War's mechanics are cleaner and more interlinked with each other than SC2. The macro in Starcraft 2 especially just feels tacked on. You have to keep managing this new resource called energy which doesn't have anything to do with the core mechanics of the game. Whereas macro in Brood War is explicitly tied to the order you build units and make buildings, which is explicitly tied to your rate of resource gathering and spending. Macro is a natural outcome of the core mechanisms of the game.
Artosis is still financially tied to SC2 as a GSL caster and must therefore be careful in what he says about the game. The differences between BW and SC2 are more than mechanical: BW is just the better game strategically. Positioning is so much more important in BW since the units do not clump up into a ball like they do in SC2, which in turn makes map control more important. Fighting low-ground vs high-ground is also a lot more punishing, which when combined with the positioning aspect, makes the defender's advantage much more real. As a spectator sport, I think it's also more interesting to watch. There is more opportunity for comebacks, and more tension-filled moments (e.g. scarabs and spider mines).
Yeah I completely agree. I've always thought Artosis and Tasteless have held back on their critique of SC2 vs. BW. Just on a spectator level BW is way more interesting and fun to watch and you know they both agree, even though they'll never say it.
As a game, one could argue the benefits of either. As an esport, it's no contest, BW >>>>> SC2. I played SC2 for a couple years as Z and T in master league and when I watch pro games it's just like they do what I did but more refined. I played thousands of games of BW and there's no comparison between my play and pro play, it's like a different game.
Well said. There's no way sc2 would be his second favorite game if he was not financially tied to it. We know Artosis lies a lot for money so that's to be expected, but I don't necessarily blame him for it either.
just like IdrA who played sc2 because there was an enormous amount of money pumped into it, not beause it was more interesting or better than BW. Probably a lot more ppl like this around.
1. Sounds and music. Much cooler than other games. 2. Game design, race design. So much cooler than other games. 3. Graphics are so simple it triggers imagination. 4. Its so difficult and mechanical that only pro players can make the game come alive. Its almost like watching art. 5. Perfect balance and unit composition. 6. Everything was better in the 90s.
The BW balance could be better by having each unit balanced with each unit in mind individually with penalties and bonuses per unit type, but at least there were no unit clumps.
Broodwar was mechanically by far superior and will always be that. Back in summer 97, friend got me broodwar because I always played at his house, and I managed to get 10 wins on the 1v1 ladder playing all 3 races.
What terrifies me the most about bw is that I'm sure the creators didnt have a effin clue about Korean guys discovering allied mines and stuff like that it just grew like a monster. Btw this is the Artosis I respect a lot
I think what he meant was "every game has a counter to anything but in broodwar you have to execute it perfectly". In chess you can choose a better variation against any opening and you don't have do it accurately, you just have to know the principle have a good positional evaluation and just be good at tactics.
Every game has a counter to anything but in Broodwar you have; - rushes at 10 minutes of gametime - foreigners - Buccaneers - you can become disgusted by people who play Starcraft - 1001 excuses of why you have lost - 2 bases only - cockroaches with nicer souls than Buccaneers - talentless players who beat you day in day out - 20 years of experience on how to build up your rage - foreigners - protos scum - zerg scum - Dark Artosis - Mario & Luigi - all-ins every time - every attack thrown at you is a all-in rush - foreigners - etc.
Yes and no, that’s certainly true for most openings. Although some openings in chess are very sharp and you need to know specific moves (or calculate tough variations) to survive
There are some non-mechanical reasons why Brood War is superior to SC2. Here's a couple of big systemic reasons: - High Ground Advantage. Real high ground advantage gives you more tactical agency to hold off a stronger army, which ties into tech builds and so on. - Unit Counter Calculations. The way unit counters work means that when the enemy has units that counter yours you have a lot more time to escape from the fight (in BW, a unit that counters another unit does 100% damage instead of ~25-50%, in SC2 a unit that counters another unit does much more than 100% damage).
I do agree on the first point 100%. Imperfect pathing also works in favor of this design since controlling bridges, ramps and chokes are really big important strategic decisions that goes much deeper than just having a good concave. However, Its hard to meassure unit counter calcs by just looking at dmg. Marauder hard counter roaches, sure, but similarly, vultures hard counter zealots. The difference between having the vulture deal 5 (+5 vs medium, +15 vs small) and 20 (10 vs medium and 5 vs small) is only seen when you uppgrade the units, and its not that significant most of the time. Nevertheless, in sc2 units do more damage since they clump more and they are easier to control (specially ranged units), but since they clump, splash also affects more units. Moreover, there exist many units that are made to specifically counter some units. Like ravagers, vipers, vikings, collosus, etc. And the game revolves around keeping your units safe and getting complex army comps at 200 supply while harassing and taking your side of the map, until one side commits to a big battle. In broodwar there exist hardcounters, but they usually apply to either fast units (mutas, lings, vultures, zealots), which can outmaneuver, or they just make a unit obsolete in a matchup (like marines, carriers or ultras being obsolete versus protoss). So, essentially, you are not thinking about making the ideal army comp, but rather, using your current units to slowly build an advantage over your opponent while you gradually tech up and make your army progressively better without needing mayor tech switches. The only moment when i feel that sc1 in similar to sc2 in how armies are made is when protoss makes carriers against terran, as terran has to balance the goliaths and the other ground units or make a wraith switch. But even then, goliath carrier micro is pretty interesting too see from time to time, specially with the terrain features of those maps where carriers are more viable.
@@hiei49 Vultures don't hard counter Zealots all of the time, if you manage to land zealots in the right place zealots can pin the vultures against the wall and win, they can also sometimes drag mines into the vultures.
Aren't a fair amount of the extra complexities of Brood War born entirely out of general jank due to it being a fairly early RTS? I feel like in some ways you couldn't make a successor with as much depth as Brood War purely because you'd have to somehow recreate on purpose was the developers could only have done on accident at the time.
I think that only applies to the pathing and lack of clumping, which might be a lot easier to intentionally program than you'd think. Additionally I think SOME of it was intentional (for example the way units naturally tend to form a line when they are moving over a significant distance). Other than that you have: 12 unit limit selection, no auto-mining, no multiple building selection. Those are some of the most impactful differences between SC1 and SC2 and those things weren't accidents. The developers chose to make the game that way. They would never intentionally design games like that now because too many players would see it as unnecessarily time wasting. "I have to click on EVERY building to queue units? I have to go back and tell each worker that's made to start mining? I can ONLY select 12 units at a time?" Honestly players thought this was annoying even back when the game came out. It's only in retrospect we've realized how crucial these limitations were to create the game we love.
@@abstractdaddy1384 I don't really think the developers intentionally designed it that way, it was probably an engine limitation sort of things. It just looks so counterintuitive that I don't believe if given a better choice they'd choice this jankiness
@@yamao4938 I don't know which part of what I said you disagree with. The three things I mentioned in my second paragraph were definitely intentional. There were hacks back in the day you could get that would give you unlimited unit control and multiple building select. They weren't limitations because of technology.
Suboptimal unit pathing is part of what makes the game mechanical, yes. Because it requires more inputs to control units well, which is actually better for the combat encounters both from the players persepective and the viewers, because engagements aren't just death balls, but take up 2-3 entire screenfulls, and the units themselves naturally disperse creating much larger surface areas, meaning every single input from the user magnifies the potential of the units many fold Whereas in SC2 the units do most of their own micromanagement, then tend to clump up making AOE's far too powerful, and user input might increase the unit potential effectiveness by 1.5x at most. TLDR, "bad" (aka suboptimal) pathing is better for the game
Imagine a unit is 1x effective, but 1x isn't very effective because the pathing isn't very good, and the targeting of the unit is wonky. More player "MICROMANAGEMENT" can increase the potential damage output of the unit by 10x or 15x. That means encounters will play out over longer periods of time, and better players will eek out more potential from the units. But now imagine that a unit is 1x effective, and it's mostly perfect in its pathing and targetting. 1. the unit by itself will by nearly optimal 2. when the unit is MICROMANAGED, you might get a 1.2 maybe 1.5x potential out of the unit because it is already generally effective 3. The unit when not micromanaged will be far more effective at killing its target 4. massively increasing the difficulty curve for the defender because they can't really "outdo" the minimum potential of the unit without micro Suboptimal pathing continues to be better for the game
You could make Dragoons go down ramps quickly, but it requires you to spend time constantly clicking down the ramp to stop the pathing algorithm to visit the next post code for 10 seconds. If you have better things to be doing, you can let them eventually figure it out after like a minute, but it is an optimization choice. If you don't need to fight stuff at that moment, you don't need to babysit Dragoons.
@@nanthilrodriguez On that note, I believe the mod Starbow displays an elegant way to keep smarter AI while still naturally spreading units out. If the game detects units are too close to each other, they make a loop in place, and the blobs become spread out clouds or lines.
I don't think being mechanical has anything to do with why this game still the best because every RTS is mechanical. BW is more fun because scale > speed every single time. Armies are bigger at 100 supply in BW than they are at 200 in Sc2. The pathfinding in BW also spread units making those fights look even bigger. Sc2 wasn't all bad back in WoL because people could build a bank then sacrifice the economy for more army supply leading to some really cool and intense back and forth but with everything they did to reduce length of matches you're lucky to see 50 units on screen and even luckier if you see late game units. As a spectator i simply prefer Brood War because it's worth it to be patient. The way they went about to reduce the length of the boring part in Sc2 ironically made it so that it's the only thing you have now. Players do their opening, small skirmish happen, someone taps out then you rince and repeat. They keeps edging you and you never get to the good part. 🤣
Because if every race is easier you must still play better than your opponent, because he will have an "easy" race as well. Arguably having to fight against the game more than agianst your opponent is not a good type of difficulty but that's besides the point
"Running without legs is so mechanically difficult, it will never be replaced. Because no one wants to make something so difficult these days. So thats why leg-less running is my favorite sport. All those guys simply using legs to run just dont want to put in the effort!"
How about making it more about actual skill and less about meta. Controlling huge armies is insanely tough on top of pathing. This makes starcraft, the original vastly superior.
While yes it would make it more mechanical, this doesn't solve the problem that the unit AI is already generally combat effective on its own, and thus micromanagement doesn't increase the unit effectiveness by nearly as much as is possible in brood war. This is why the "bad" (suboptimal) pathing and targetting of units in BW is better for the game. Suboptimal targetting and pathing means that there is an optimal that can be achieved. And that optimal damage output must be MICROMANAGED to be achieved. A unit in BW can have its minimum effectiveness amplified by 10-15x damage output by micro A unit in SC2 is already optimal enough that only a 1.2 or 1.5x increase is possible by the best players. Suboptimal unit AI is better for the game. Not just smaller control group size.
@@nanthilrodriguez Uhh CS is the SC2 of Quake but other than that I agree. Quake for FPS and BW for RTS. That's it. That's where competitive gaming peaked.
I was a baby back then but my journey and love for videogames has made me feel but upmost appreciation and respect for those games and consider those times as the golden era of PC gaming. But I gotta ask, do you guys really think the birth of competitive gaming was its peak? Im gonna have to disagree but would like to hear your arguments. Games are easier now because thats how you get them to become trendy and reach a broad audience which makes the most money for video game publishing companies. Same thing that happened to novels, music and movies.
AOE4 is still new and hasn't been figured out just yet. Still needs balancing too. I'm more surprised that he thinks either Starcraft is better than AOE2. I think this is mostly due to the fact that he spent much more time in SC1 and SC2 that he sticks with what he's spent time getting good at. Anyone will have bias for the game they put the most effort towards, even if they think it sucks and Artosis is a prime example of that lol
@@Hunterchuck why is it surprising that sc2 or sc would be preferred over aoe2? I played aoe2 a ton, but it really doesn't have the impact or player base that either starcraft has and it's really not even close.
@@2639theboss It has a larger player base sure. AOE just has almost perfect balance and more mechanics and strategy. More resources to manage, different ages to advance through for pacing and units that fit specific roles that lines up very well with the rock, paper, scissors mechanic that RTS try to shoot for with unit compositions. AOE2 has all games beat in all these categories.
@@Hunterchuck Not only is everything you're describing incredibly subjective and opinion-based, none of that actually matters. If I had to guess a random person's favorite game, and I guessed Call of Duty, I'd be much more likely to be right than if I picked command and conquer regardless of which one I prefer personally. It's the same thing here.
@@2639theboss I have personally found it to be surprising bercause I view SC2 as a godawful abvomination and the first sign that there's something rotting in blizzard. As for AoE2, he said he never played it.
It's weird hearing people like Artosis talk about how there's so much more to do in BW compared to SC2 when Korean BW pros say that SC2 was too fast for them and that they enjoy BW's slower pace.
With the slower pace, many more decisions can be made and executed per in-game clock cycle. If the game itself is too fast, too many in game events happen per human input, so human input can't mitigate "gameplay mechanics". When he says "mechanics" he's talking about the human input dimension of the game, not the design of the game or its internal systems. Since BW is slower, combat and large encounters are beautiful to watch because in a single combat encounter, hundreds of decisions are being made, battles take up 2-3 whole screens, and decisive engagements take minutes to unfold. In SC2, the decisive engagement has tens of decisions being made, encounters are over in tens of seconds, and usually whittles down to the unit comp and not the players decisions anyway.
@@nanthilrodriguez I remember seeing the clash of Flash goliaths with the Korean protoss and it as a beautiful show of about 2 minutes. No more than 30 or 50 vs 12 carriers and zealots. I saw a battle of 2 terrans in sc2. Hundreds of units among Vikings and Marines and tanks. It lasted 20 seconds.
BW is harder mechanically, but SC2 is harder to react to things due to one mistake setting you back a lot. When you fuck up in BW, lower DPS in general means you have more time to react, retreat, buy time. It is ok to be imperfect when everyone is imperfect. SC2 in contrast is more like being balanced on a knife's edge.
They are different skill sets. Broodwar requires much higher APM as a whole throughout the entire game. Starcraft 2 requires much faster reaction speed and burst APM during critical moments. In Brood War you will lose because your opponent can type 10% faster than you can for 20 minutes straight. In Starcraft 2 you will lose because your opponent was 10% faster than you in the critical moment of the game, or you weren't watching your map for half a second when he decided to move in.
The truth is that a game like Brood War with theoretically unlimited skill ceilings in macro/micro/knowledge only exists because of outdated mechanics and limited game design from 20 years ago. A new game like that could be made but it wouldn't sell.
The design of broodwar is super good. You could argue that they made the game a wide spread success despite the artificial obstacles of working around crappy pathing by moving units in dozens or having to spend a lot of time macroing. For anyone who is not a pro gamer I doubt having to manually tell workers to start mining after being produced make the game better.
I believe a decent amount of the game feel could be replicated with more modern controls, you just need to work very hard in mapping out what exactly each outdated mechanic has on gameplay, and how well that could be replicated. For example, the SC2 mod Starbow had units make loops if they were too close to each other while moving, making larger armies less efficient at fighting without a bit of attention. Most of the primary spells were DOT, or area effect, so while you could still cast faster, you don't really have as big of a damage spike. See, Irradiate vs Snipe. EMP just like the og spell was slow and could be dodged, but made into a fixed shield/energy removal to compensate for being able to fire off more easily.
@@pawelmurias Hmm they need to figure out other ways of making macro more challenging. I was thinking that certain units can long-distance mine taking 100 minerals per distance, or there are neutral units/buildings that when destroyed give you a certain amount of resources.
i cant play sc1, 12 or 15 unit group max is just too much finger and arm muscles destroying. it has no scatter hot key x, and has no bookmarks. i can only watch others play if it has one terran player
They should have just made the QOL additions to SC2 and added them to BW I honestly would have preferred changes and updates to BW versus a whole other game which TBQH looked good at first , but now seeinf footage everything just looks all ugly and boxy. Am i the only one who feels this way? Also, they should remove concussive damage penalties to terran and let them be normal damage.
Broodwar could have been the greatest game ever but they made scouts too expensive, disruption web cost too much energy and workers lack auto mine. So close.
workers not having auto mine is critical to what makes broodwar good also the biggest balance concern is that carriers are super op when in large numbers
At the pace it is being solved, we, and probably our kids, will not live to see that day. The interesting questions are: will BW and SC2 still be played by then? If so, will there exist an "advanced AI" solving it and how much progress will it have made?
I would love aoe2 more if luring boar wasnt a thing. Really killed the enjoyment out of it for me, put 200 hours in and honestly just hated how tedious openers are
@@asesinonabo I think you misread my comment lol Arty would never be rated in the 2000's because people are crazy good mechanically. And obviously as I mentioned it's the most balanced RTS
@@Appletank8 I’ll check it out thanks. I’m not crazy about the look of sc2 it kind of lost the essence of SC which to me was the difference in the species. But maybe this starbow is different 🧐
When the basic parts of the game are operating inefficiently, there's more you can squeeze with attention and APM. When everything is operating near perfectly, there's less to optimize.
@@pablosanhueza1454 I don't know, I don't play SC2 anymore, so I can't talk on the balance. But SC1's balance is perfect, so are you saying SC2's balance is also perfect?
@@pablosanhueza1454 SC2 isn't balanced whatsoever. You can see that by any professional match. Nor can you go outside the meta if you do you outright lose. That's not balance that's playing the only cookie cutter builds that work.
"Anyways, hum, here is what I hate"
God I lost it
It's so beautiful and mechanical, you can grow in all directions... but if you rush me, you're a talentless hack.
Anyways, here’s what I hate
protoss?
@@Imboz *laughs in defiler*
Here's what I hate... everything about it
@@Imboz and zerg and terran
@@ImbozReavers?
That ending was _chef's kiss_
agreed. Unlike EVERY SINGLE game released today, theres truly nothing to hate about BW, imo. Except losing lol. Still the most competitive game ive ever played as well
You never know. Mechanically focused games come around every once in a while.
"its strategically infinite"
*proceeds to cry because the ennemy didnt do the exact thing you expected him to do*
If Artosis is at loss of words when trying to explain the beauty of Broodwar - that's pretty much all there is to say to it..
i need the continue of what he said
SC2 is a good game, but everything that makes Brood War interesting isn't as prevalent. In retrospect it makes sense that with all the QOL changes that SC2 added that it would make the game more automated and less mechanical, but you couldn't have made a successor to Brood War without modernization that fundamentally changed the game.
You can make more QOL features but not make the game all about damage. The issue w/ bw vs sc2 is blizzard literally had the mindset of that and D3 to make it all big damage, big numbers must mean its more interesting. Rather than small skirmishes that do more mechanically because the damage is different. It became who can mass the most things. Not who can counter the other best. It wasn't rock paper scissors it was who can gain the better army like what risk devolves to.
@@Zeratultheking If youre looking for a rock, paper, scissors game, try Company of Heroes. SC (1 or 2) is NOT a rock, paper, scissors game.
@@LiezAllLiez SC2 will be remembered as the easier, more kid-friendly version. Looks pretty but looks don't last when graphics take another leap.
@@bz6606 can you teach me why strcraft 2 is easier ?
@@bomnitoperro9422 the economy ,the unit control ,the grup control max 12 units in 1 grup ,spel control ,in sc1 if you have 5 templar in a grup and you storm all of them will storm ,and the maps that give you more to the game that sc 2 ,maps are realy important in to the game ,sc1 has an early game you will not get a 3 base in 6 -7 min in to the game ,just play some sc1 is free the not the resmaster but you will see in first 5 min of the game how hard it is
I can help explain it.
SC2 was designed based on optimal ways to play. SC1 was designed based on units that play their role optimally.
In SC1 you can play your game because there's only units, the lack of balance in between them promotes creativity.
In SC2 you can play the game they designed for you to play because everything is balanced, there's an answer to everything coded in the game, no need for creativity.
I'm attempting to create something mechanically deep in the 4 humanly possible ways. I'm currently in production after 2 years of pre-production. I'm all by myself so it won't be ready for a couple years more. I promise you will all hate it, but love it; it will demand execution you might have never developed before.
Is sc1 still alive? Is it worth getting into?
Whats the name of your game
Can you elaborate on what you mean by "designed based on units that play their role optimally"?
@@puppetmaskerrthey did a remaster of it, supposedly theres still a community of avid players today, but it really is an ancient game nonetheless, so there’s less players today online compared to the days where a lot of people had to use dial up
sounds intriguing, may we know the name of the game? also, whats the 4 mechanical ways you're talking about?
The limitation is the input cap.
In chess, your limitation is strategy, theory, and the clock.
In FPS, your limitation is accuracy, map awareness, and game sense.
In SC2, your limitation is knowledge of the matchup, and current unit balance/counters
But in Broodwar you have to have map awareness, input accuracy, strategy, theory the clock, unit balance and counters, matchup, but all of that comes after you hit the human input cap. Anyone can have a unique strategy, but even the most basic strategy, when executed well with a high input bandwidth, aka APM, can still beat the smartest player with worse mechanics.
And then 4 DTs walk past Arty's bunker and destroy his only mistle turret.
And even the counters arent as hard, you can still win against a superior army with good micro.
I think Brood War's mechanics are cleaner and more interlinked with each other than SC2. The macro in Starcraft 2 especially just feels tacked on. You have to keep managing this new resource called energy which doesn't have anything to do with the core mechanics of the game. Whereas macro in Brood War is explicitly tied to the order you build units and make buildings, which is explicitly tied to your rate of resource gathering and spending. Macro is a natural outcome of the core mechanisms of the game.
Larva, mules, and chrono aren’t very emergent. Sc2 has similar issues with maps and combat too.
Artosis is still financially tied to SC2 as a GSL caster and must therefore be careful in what he says about the game. The differences between BW and SC2 are more than mechanical: BW is just the better game strategically. Positioning is so much more important in BW since the units do not clump up into a ball like they do in SC2, which in turn makes map control more important. Fighting low-ground vs high-ground is also a lot more punishing, which when combined with the positioning aspect, makes the defender's advantage much more real. As a spectator sport, I think it's also more interesting to watch. There is more opportunity for comebacks, and more tension-filled moments (e.g. scarabs and spider mines).
Yeah I completely agree. I've always thought Artosis and Tasteless have held back on their critique of SC2 vs. BW.
Just on a spectator level BW is way more interesting and fun to watch and you know they both agree, even though they'll never say it.
As a game, one could argue the benefits of either. As an esport, it's no contest, BW >>>>> SC2. I played SC2 for a couple years as Z and T in master league and when I watch pro games it's just like they do what I did but more refined. I played thousands of games of BW and there's no comparison between my play and pro play, it's like a different game.
Well said. There's no way sc2 would be his second favorite game if he was not financially tied to it. We know Artosis lies a lot for money so that's to be expected, but I don't necessarily blame him for it either.
just like IdrA who played sc2 because there was an enormous amount of money pumped into it, not beause it was more interesting or better than BW. Probably a lot more ppl like this around.
@@whitneysmiltank What else would be his second favorite game then?
1. Sounds and music. Much cooler than other games.
2. Game design, race design. So much cooler than other games.
3. Graphics are so simple it triggers imagination.
4. Its so difficult and mechanical that only pro players can make the game come alive. Its almost like watching art.
5. Perfect balance and unit composition.
6. Everything was better in the 90s.
The BW balance could be better by having each unit balanced with each unit in mind individually with penalties and bonuses per unit type, but at least there were no unit clumps.
that's what ruined sc2, balance@@AlexRodriguez-gb9ez
Brood War is by far the best RTS of all time and i dont think it will ever be surpassed
In broodwar you play against the game firts , then against the player.
exactly.
Getting supply lock became of "I can't build there" or your worker dancing in the mineral is such a beauty.
@@dennisrodriguez3689simpleton
Broodwar was mechanically by far superior and will always be that. Back in summer 97, friend got me broodwar because I always played at his house, and I managed to get 10 wins on the 1v1 ladder playing all 3 races.
Starcraft 2 is a good, fun strategy game. Brood War is unprecedented. It is amazing to watch to this day.
scouts still suck, nukes aren't viable and marines + medics is only really worth against zerg
is it fun to watch - yes
is it still flawed - yes
Sc2 is BullShyte really...people went there becuase they imagined there are going to be all the money in the world but yeah , no..
What terrifies me the most about bw is that I'm sure the creators didnt have a effin clue about Korean guys discovering allied mines and stuff like that it just grew like a monster. Btw this is the Artosis I respect a lot
Lmao that ending :D
I think what he meant was "every game has a counter to anything but in broodwar you have to execute it perfectly".
In chess you can choose a better variation against any opening and you don't have do it accurately, you just have to know the principle have a good positional evaluation and just be good at tactics.
Every game has a counter to anything but in Broodwar you have;
- rushes at 10 minutes of gametime
- foreigners
- Buccaneers
- you can become disgusted by people who play Starcraft
- 1001 excuses of why you have lost
- 2 bases only
- cockroaches with nicer souls than Buccaneers
- talentless players who beat you day in day out
- 20 years of experience on how to build up your rage
- foreigners
- protos scum
- zerg scum
- Dark Artosis
- Mario & Luigi
- all-ins every time
- every attack thrown at you is a all-in rush
- foreigners
- etc.
Yes and no, that’s certainly true for most openings. Although some openings in chess are very sharp and you need to know specific moves (or calculate tough variations) to survive
God I miss the Brood War days so much.
It’s like … jazz!
Hold my coffee, I’m gonna make my story’s version of StarCraft. Come back to this comment in 10ish years hahahah!!
There are some non-mechanical reasons why Brood War is superior to SC2. Here's a couple of big systemic reasons:
- High Ground Advantage. Real high ground advantage gives you more tactical agency to hold off a stronger army, which ties into tech builds and so on.
- Unit Counter Calculations. The way unit counters work means that when the enemy has units that counter yours you have a lot more time to escape from the fight (in BW, a unit that counters another unit does 100% damage instead of ~25-50%, in SC2 a unit that counters another unit does much more than 100% damage).
I do agree on the first point 100%. Imperfect pathing also works in favor of this design since controlling bridges, ramps and chokes are really big important strategic decisions that goes much deeper than just having a good concave.
However, Its hard to meassure unit counter calcs by just looking at dmg. Marauder hard counter roaches, sure, but similarly, vultures hard counter zealots. The difference between having the vulture deal 5 (+5 vs medium, +15 vs small) and 20 (10 vs medium and 5 vs small) is only seen when you uppgrade the units, and its not that significant most of the time.
Nevertheless, in sc2 units do more damage since they clump more and they are easier to control (specially ranged units), but since they clump, splash also affects more units. Moreover, there exist many units that are made to specifically counter some units. Like ravagers, vipers, vikings, collosus, etc. And the game revolves around keeping your units safe and getting complex army comps at 200 supply while harassing and taking your side of the map, until one side commits to a big battle.
In broodwar there exist hardcounters, but they usually apply to either fast units (mutas, lings, vultures, zealots), which can outmaneuver, or they just make a unit obsolete in a matchup (like marines, carriers or ultras being obsolete versus protoss). So, essentially, you are not thinking about making the ideal army comp, but rather, using your current units to slowly build an advantage over your opponent while you gradually tech up and make your army progressively better without needing mayor tech switches.
The only moment when i feel that sc1 in similar to sc2 in how armies are made is when protoss makes carriers against terran, as terran has to balance the goliaths and the other ground units or make a wraith switch. But even then, goliath carrier micro is pretty interesting too see from time to time, specially with the terrain features of those maps where carriers are more viable.
@@hiei49 Vultures don't hard counter Zealots all of the time, if you manage to land zealots in the right place zealots can pin the vultures against the wall and win, they can also sometimes drag mines into the vultures.
brood war will always be top G.
If you think that then you are too old to use 'top G' 😅
The best Game Ever made.
100%
Aren't a fair amount of the extra complexities of Brood War born entirely out of general jank due to it being a fairly early RTS? I feel like in some ways you couldn't make a successor with as much depth as Brood War purely because you'd have to somehow recreate on purpose was the developers could only have done on accident at the time.
I think that only applies to the pathing and lack of clumping, which might be a lot easier to intentionally program than you'd think. Additionally I think SOME of it was intentional (for example the way units naturally tend to form a line when they are moving over a significant distance).
Other than that you have: 12 unit limit selection, no auto-mining, no multiple building selection. Those are some of the most impactful differences between SC1 and SC2 and those things weren't accidents. The developers chose to make the game that way. They would never intentionally design games like that now because too many players would see it as unnecessarily time wasting. "I have to click on EVERY building to queue units? I have to go back and tell each worker that's made to start mining? I can ONLY select 12 units at a time?"
Honestly players thought this was annoying even back when the game came out. It's only in retrospect we've realized how crucial these limitations were to create the game we love.
@@abstractdaddy1384 I don't really think the developers intentionally designed it that way, it was probably an engine limitation sort of things. It just looks so counterintuitive that I don't believe if given a better choice they'd choice this jankiness
@@yamao4938
I don't know which part of what I said you disagree with. The three things I mentioned in my second paragraph were definitely intentional. There were hacks back in the day you could get that would give you unlimited unit control and multiple building select. They weren't limitations because of technology.
Please make a video thats him saying "sc1 is just more mechanical" then clip to a highlight reel of scvs and goliaths bugging out / terrible pathing.
That's exactly why it's more mechanical compared to these auto-x cop outs.
Suboptimal unit pathing is part of what makes the game mechanical, yes. Because it requires more inputs to control units well, which is actually better for the combat encounters both from the players persepective and the viewers, because engagements aren't just death balls, but take up 2-3 entire screenfulls, and the units themselves naturally disperse creating much larger surface areas, meaning every single input from the user magnifies the potential of the units many fold
Whereas in SC2 the units do most of their own micromanagement, then tend to clump up making AOE's far too powerful, and user input might increase the unit potential effectiveness by 1.5x at most.
TLDR, "bad" (aka suboptimal) pathing is better for the game
Imagine a unit is 1x effective, but 1x isn't very effective because the pathing isn't very good, and the targeting of the unit is wonky. More player "MICROMANAGEMENT" can increase the potential damage output of the unit by 10x or 15x. That means encounters will play out over longer periods of time, and better players will eek out more potential from the units.
But now imagine that a unit is 1x effective, and it's mostly perfect in its pathing and targetting.
1. the unit by itself will by nearly optimal
2. when the unit is MICROMANAGED, you might get a 1.2 maybe 1.5x potential out of the unit because it is already generally effective
3. The unit when not micromanaged will be far more effective at killing its target
4. massively increasing the difficulty curve for the defender because they can't really "outdo" the minimum potential of the unit without micro
Suboptimal pathing continues to be better for the game
You could make Dragoons go down ramps quickly, but it requires you to spend time constantly clicking down the ramp to stop the pathing algorithm to visit the next post code for 10 seconds. If you have better things to be doing, you can let them eventually figure it out after like a minute, but it is an optimization choice. If you don't need to fight stuff at that moment, you don't need to babysit Dragoons.
@@nanthilrodriguez On that note, I believe the mod Starbow displays an elegant way to keep smarter AI while still naturally spreading units out. If the game detects units are too close to each other, they make a loop in place, and the blobs become spread out clouds or lines.
Sc2 don’t have flash, end of debate
@Đăng Đức Trương who?
@@whitneysmiltank epic gamer
@Đăng Đức Trương literally who ? Please don’t put son of boxer and sc2 scrub in same sentence
@@kdavid123186 you sound mad bro
@@jjwh I am cool, but…are you mad bro ?
I don't think being mechanical has anything to do with why this game still the best because every RTS is mechanical.
BW is more fun because scale > speed every single time. Armies are bigger at 100 supply in BW than they are at 200 in Sc2. The pathfinding in BW also spread units making those fights look even bigger. Sc2 wasn't all bad back in WoL because people could build a bank then sacrifice the economy for more army supply leading to some really cool and intense back and forth but with everything they did to reduce length of matches you're lucky to see 50 units on screen and even luckier if you see late game units.
As a spectator i simply prefer Brood War because it's worth it to be patient. The way they went about to reduce the length of the boring part in Sc2 ironically made it so that it's the only thing you have now. Players do their opening, small skirmish happen, someone taps out then you rince and repeat. They keeps edging you and you never get to the good part. 🤣
Artosis is the guru of bw
Brood War is PERFect
Here's what I don't get: how can Arty have any love for SC2 when every race in SC2 is easier than BW Protoss?
Easy, because he does not have to suffer playing against BW protoss as BW terran
Does this guy looks like an easy path seeker? =D
Because if every race is easier you must still play better than your opponent, because he will have an "easy" race as well.
Arguably having to fight against the game more than agianst your opponent is not a good type of difficulty but that's besides the point
Protoss in BW is infinitely tougher to play than any child-friendly race in SC2
because he plays protoss in sc2? idk
"Running without legs is so mechanically difficult, it will never be replaced. Because no one wants to make something so difficult these days. So thats why leg-less running is my favorite sport. All those guys simply using legs to run just dont want to put in the effort!"
heh git gud m8
0:26 fartosis
How you adjust it to High Screen mine is too Close...?..😎🌌💻🍦.
Can anyone send me a link to the rest of his talk. About what he hates
Broodwar lo mejor EVER
How about forcing players to select only 12 units at a time in SC2? Would that make SC2 more mechanical?
Yes it would
Also getting rid of the smartmine so you still gotta spread or clone your workers off rip
How about making it more about actual skill and less about meta. Controlling huge armies is insanely tough on top of pathing. This makes starcraft, the original vastly superior.
Sc2 pros would get a reality check real quick.
While yes it would make it more mechanical, this doesn't solve the problem that the unit AI is already generally combat effective on its own, and thus micromanagement doesn't increase the unit effectiveness by nearly as much as is possible in brood war. This is why the "bad" (suboptimal) pathing and targetting of units in BW is better for the game.
Suboptimal targetting and pathing means that there is an optimal that can be achieved. And that optimal damage output must be MICROMANAGED to be achieved. A unit in BW can have its minimum effectiveness amplified by 10-15x damage output by micro
A unit in SC2 is already optimal enough that only a 1.2 or 1.5x increase is possible by the best players.
Suboptimal unit AI is better for the game.
Not just smaller control group size.
AYAYA
ty artua
Broodwars is chest in the 20century
sad that nobody will try to make a modern game with a high skill ceiling high & high mechanical requirements
I miss the days when everyone played Quake, 1.6, and Brood War.
Modern games are trash.
@@nanthilrodriguez Uhh CS is the SC2 of Quake but other than that I agree. Quake for FPS and BW for RTS. That's it. That's where competitive gaming peaked.
I was a baby back then but my journey and love for videogames has made me feel but upmost appreciation and respect for those games and consider those times as the golden era of PC gaming. But I gotta ask, do you guys really think the birth of competitive gaming was its peak? Im gonna have to disagree but would like to hear your arguments. Games are easier now because thats how you get them to become trendy and reach a broad audience which makes the most money for video game publishing companies. Same thing that happened to novels, music and movies.
I got you, I just need more time.
bw is an amazing game but its not perfect
sc2 is a deeply flawed game but its still really good
True
StarCraft brood war is the best video game of all time
Ehh, so he like AoE4 less than he does SC2 :(
AOE4 is still new and hasn't been figured out just yet. Still needs balancing too.
I'm more surprised that he thinks either Starcraft is better than AOE2. I think this is mostly due to the fact that he spent much more time in SC1 and SC2 that he sticks with what he's spent time getting good at. Anyone will have bias for the game they put the most effort towards, even if they think it sucks and Artosis is a prime example of that lol
@@Hunterchuck why is it surprising that sc2 or sc would be preferred over aoe2? I played aoe2 a ton, but it really doesn't have the impact or player base that either starcraft has and it's really not even close.
@@2639theboss It has a larger player base sure. AOE just has almost perfect balance and more mechanics and strategy. More resources to manage, different ages to advance through for pacing and units that fit specific roles that lines up very well with the rock, paper, scissors mechanic that RTS try to shoot for with unit compositions. AOE2 has all games beat in all these categories.
@@Hunterchuck Not only is everything you're describing incredibly subjective and opinion-based, none of that actually matters. If I had to guess a random person's favorite game, and I guessed Call of Duty, I'd be much more likely to be right than if I picked command and conquer regardless of which one I prefer personally. It's the same thing here.
@@2639theboss I have personally found it to be surprising bercause I view SC2 as a godawful abvomination and the first sign that there's something rotting in blizzard.
As for AoE2, he said he never played it.
It's weird hearing people like Artosis talk about how there's so much more to do in BW compared to SC2 when Korean BW pros say that SC2 was too fast for them and that they enjoy BW's slower pace.
With the slower pace, many more decisions can be made and executed per in-game clock cycle. If the game itself is too fast, too many in game events happen per human input, so human input can't mitigate "gameplay mechanics".
When he says "mechanics" he's talking about the human input dimension of the game, not the design of the game or its internal systems. Since BW is slower, combat and large encounters are beautiful to watch because in a single combat encounter, hundreds of decisions are being made, battles take up 2-3 whole screens, and decisive engagements take minutes to unfold.
In SC2, the decisive engagement has tens of decisions being made, encounters are over in tens of seconds, and usually whittles down to the unit comp and not the players decisions anyway.
@@nanthilrodriguez I remember seeing the clash of Flash goliaths with the Korean protoss and it as a beautiful show of about 2 minutes. No more than 30 or 50 vs 12 carriers and zealots.
I saw a battle of 2 terrans in sc2. Hundreds of units among Vikings and Marines and tanks. It lasted 20 seconds.
BW is harder mechanically, but SC2 is harder to react to things due to one mistake setting you back a lot. When you fuck up in BW, lower DPS in general means you have more time to react, retreat, buy time. It is ok to be imperfect when everyone is imperfect. SC2 in contrast is more like being balanced on a knife's edge.
They are different skill sets. Broodwar requires much higher APM as a whole throughout the entire game.
Starcraft 2 requires much faster reaction speed and burst APM during critical moments.
In Brood War you will lose because your opponent can type 10% faster than you can for 20 minutes straight. In Starcraft 2 you will lose because your opponent was 10% faster than you in the critical moment of the game, or you weren't watching your map for half a second when he decided to move in.
Nah pro's usually say sc2 is more like fps. Reaction time is more important than your macro or mind game
I think AoE2 and BW are close together as the best RTS made.
The truth is that a game like Brood War with theoretically unlimited skill ceilings in macro/micro/knowledge only exists because of outdated mechanics and limited game design from 20 years ago. A new game like that could be made but it wouldn't sell.
when can we patch Broodwar to remove Camera location and Control groups, as well as automatic mining, so it is even more skillful?
The design of broodwar is super good. You could argue that they made the game a wide spread success despite the artificial obstacles of working around crappy pathing by moving units in dozens or having to spend a lot of time macroing. For anyone who is not a pro gamer I doubt having to manually tell workers to start mining after being produced make the game better.
I believe a decent amount of the game feel could be replicated with more modern controls, you just need to work very hard in mapping out what exactly each outdated mechanic has on gameplay, and how well that could be replicated. For example, the SC2 mod Starbow had units make loops if they were too close to each other while moving, making larger armies less efficient at fighting without a bit of attention. Most of the primary spells were DOT, or area effect, so while you could still cast faster, you don't really have as big of a damage spike. See, Irradiate vs Snipe. EMP just like the og spell was slow and could be dodged, but made into a fixed shield/energy removal to compensate for being able to fire off more easily.
@@pawelmurias Hmm they need to figure out other ways of making macro more challenging. I was thinking that certain units can long-distance mine taking 100 minerals per distance, or there are neutral units/buildings that when destroyed give you a certain amount of resources.
i cant play sc1, 12 or 15 unit group max is just too much finger and arm muscles destroying. it has no scatter hot key x, and has no bookmarks. i can only watch others play if it has one terran player
They should have just made the QOL additions to SC2 and added them to BW
I honestly would have preferred changes and updates to BW versus a whole other game which TBQH looked good at first , but now seeinf footage everything just looks all ugly and boxy. Am i the only one who feels this way?
Also, they should remove concussive damage penalties to terran and let them be normal damage.
Broodwar could have been the greatest game ever but they made scouts too expensive, disruption web cost too much energy and workers lack auto mine. So close.
workers not having auto mine is critical to what makes broodwar good
also the biggest balance concern is that carriers are super op when in large numbers
yes, compare it to chess, a game that will sooner than later, become a solved game.
that's why they are changing maps all the time. new maps need new ways to solve them.
At the pace it is being solved, we, and probably our kids, will not live to see that day. The interesting questions are: will BW and SC2 still be played by then? If so, will there exist an "advanced AI" solving it and how much progress will it have made?
@@Crateron1 oops, i thought it was within reach. My bad
@@Atmapalazzo No problem bro :)
@@Atmapalazzo It would take quantum computing.
Here i thought AOE2 was the most mechanical game ever made...
Not to mention the most balanced RTS ever made.
I would love aoe2 more if luring boar wasnt a thing. Really killed the enjoyment out of it for me, put 200 hours in and honestly just hated how tedious openers are
Nah AOE is good to play only before going to sleep. Game's boring as fuck
@@bz6606 Boring doesn't have anything to do with balance and mechanics lol
Boring is a personal opinion.
nah cant compare, 3 total different races against bunch of totally equal races, slightly changes between them
@@asesinonabo I think you misread my comment lol
Arty would never be rated in the 2000's because people are crazy good mechanically. And obviously as I mentioned it's the most balanced RTS
I wish they could come out with a remake of broodwar same mechanics same everything better graphics and easier to control units.
"easier to control units" is changing the mechanics. Unit control and "tricks" are the mechanics.
@@nanthilrodriguez maybe just be able to highlight more than 12 at a time. Just gets old especially using lings lol but I see what u mean
Have you heard of Starbow? the mod makers there made a decent attempt to make SC2 feel more like BW without throwing all the QOL changes out.
@@Appletank8 I’ll check it out thanks. I’m not crazy about the look of sc2 it kind of lost the essence of SC which to me was the difference in the species. But maybe this starbow is different 🧐
this doesn't make a lot of sense does it?
Your 70 iq might not have caught it but there's a lot of sense to be found here.
@@whitneysmiltank highly unlikely
When the basic parts of the game are operating inefficiently, there's more you can squeeze with attention and APM. When everything is operating near perfectly, there's less to optimize.
SC2 is pure trash but yeah, he's right otherwise.
I agree that sc2 is more easy, but at least we have a better balance that sc1?
@@pablosanhueza1454 I don't know, I don't play SC2 anymore, so I can't talk on the balance. But SC1's balance is perfect, so are you saying SC2's balance is also perfect?
@@pablosanhueza1454 SC2 isn't balanced whatsoever. You can see that by any professional match. Nor can you go outside the meta if you do you outright lose. That's not balance that's playing the only cookie cutter builds that work.
its not "trash" but compared to BW excitement levels.. yeah, not even close. way too streamlined and automated
@@isaacsteele7986 BW isn't imbalanced.
BW is worse, but he is addicted.
lol enjoy sc2 bum