Yeah, I can't agree with your positions. I've written a fair amount about giving and receiving feedback for my job, which I really think is worth reading:
I saw Moana this weekend. It certainly has issues with representation, but it's incredibly gorgeous. For this week, I'd like you to make some terrain that mimics the palette and style of the movie. I've attached several images to use as reference. I can't wait to see what everyone comes up with!
Agreed. Given the how fast a response I got, I'm sorely tempted to log a ticket for every single issue we know of with the Mac editor. Or maybe just open up a chat ticket and run them all past the rep there tomorrow.
I logged a support ticket last night about this and already heard back. They do know about the issue and are working on it internally, but have no timeline for resolution.
You do great work, for sure. I'm sure I'd do some things differently, but I don't have any criticisms on your technique. I do have a few thoughts in terms of your approach. It might sound crazy, but I think in general that you're doing too much work.
You're spreading your detail out really widely, which while nice doesn't have actually have the effect you might expect. In game, your players aren't going to be focusing enough to appreciate a baseline level like that, except I suspect it will make it harder for things to stand out. I'd recommend you tone down the overall level of detail (or at least, don't do as much going forward) and focus your efforts on specific places you know your players are going to be spending time (mob spawn points, cinematic areas, enemy bases, I think you get the idea). Even in commando missions, the players will mostly be moving from point to point, so save your juice for where it matters.
If you can put up with the frustration, you could download a Windows virtual machine from Microsoft to work in, though those shut themselves down every hour, which is...not optimal.
Honestly, I don't remember where the chair is from. I use our in-house Thoughts in Chaos mod to do WTEs and the chair is in there, as is the ornate table by the wall. As for the fireplace, it isn't a single doodad—I combined a bunch of stuff:
This sides are Compound Mansion Interior Decor
The top is Compound Mansion Furniture rotated and resized to make a wall
The inside of the fireplace is actually just a different cliff type
The fire itself is Void Generic Fire Medium
The logs are tinted Underbrush - Bel'shir
I'm attaching some screenshots so you can see how it's all set up. I'm also attaching a version of the map that doesn't use our mod. It loses the nice chair and table, but you can still take a look for yourself at how it all works.
Here's my submission for the week! It's not really where I want it to be, but I'm still learning how to use the editor on a PC, since the Mac editor now crashes willy-nilly. Sadly, the PC I have is not a great machine, so I have to build the map on PC and then hand it over to my Mac to take a decent screenshot. Hopefully Blizzard fixes this soon, but realistically...that's not happening.
Anyway, mini-rant over. Happy Thanksgiving to anyone who celebrates it.
I thought the Xanthos was an in-development dominion super weapon. Why would Davis be involved in RD?
Please forgive me if this sounds patronizing, but it's important to remember that everything that occurs in a story is the result of an active choice on the part of the author. Why would Davis, a high-ranking member of the military, be involved with the development of a super weapon? It's not exactly a stretch, is it? The writers chose to give her an ambiguous reason for wreaking so much havoc, but they could have chosen to make her involved with the project, and put both her and the Xanthos in play earlier. As it is, I think that they didn't actually have the plot outlined when they started, which led to the situation we ended up in.
The problem with the "contentious scene" is, it just spoils the DoM boss all too early and too clearly.
It doesn't have to. If I had been writing it, I would have introduced Davis like I mentioned, had her be helpful (though maybe a bit reproachful about how Arcturus would have handled it), presented a false lead for the traitor (Reigel?), and only then have Davis betray Valerian. Given the brevity of the mission packs, they didn't have time to waste before they introduced the villain. Because they put it off so long, she didn't have nearly the impact they wanted.
I don't understand why you're calling it a metal gear. From the info you've given us, isn't a metal gear a "bipedal nuclear weapon" (from the wiki page)? Let's compare it to the Xanthos, which has... no nukes and .... floats. But it's a weapon. Soooo... 1/3?
It's a giant robot at the end of a stealth game that's contained numerous homages to Metal Gear Solid games, as referenced above. The actual nuke-launching nature of the metal gears is rarely relevant. What's more relevant is the collection of various weapons they point at the protagonist. If you don't see the reference, then I'm not sure what to say. It doesn't really matter, I suppose, since my complains about the design stand independent of whether or not it's a reference—I still think it's boring and nonthreatening.
I think it's interesting to talk about the role that homage/tribute plays in narrative and game design. I hope you can forgive me for exploring this idea about being a Metal Gear Solid tribute to talk about the challenges and my specific criticism of Blizzard's approach. First, I should have made more clear that I was aware of the aware of the Metal Gear Solid tributes. However, just being a tribute to another property doesn't for me automatically make it good, it just makes it a tribute. The challenge is to make it a tribute that fits in the environment that Blizzard has already created, and makes use of the mechanics in the game. There were two specific points that came up here, so I'll talk about them separately.
Fighting Stone
I see the reference to the Cyborg Ninja, insofar as there's a person who can turn invisible. But the fight isn't really that much an homage to the ninja. For reference, . That's a one-on-one fight, hand to hand, against an opponent with cool tricks. It's actually a lot closer to the or the . You've got a bonus with a telegraphing attack that you have to wear down, and then some adds that spawn from time to time.
So...why don't I like it? First, the fight itself is pretty bland. There's not a lot of variety as you fight through it, which I suspect is because Blizzard needed to accommodate the various loadouts the player has. Second, because it's very busy and fast-paced. That's the opposite of Metal Gear Solid's approach, if this were to be a tribute. It also doesn't match the feeling of the infiltrations we've been doing with Nova, which reward a measured, planned approach. I think the frantic approach works well in the boss fights in Night Terrors, which is a larger-scale macro map against the Zerg, which are much more animalistic.
In this mission, however, we've controlled only Nova, and her opponent is himself a ghost. What's the defining quality of the ghosts? Being invisible assassins. That's why I didn't like this boss fight approach, and why I said I'd prefer the fight to resemble . As I think about it more, though, I think that is a better fit—she's got the turning invisible thing going for her. If Blizzard could have captured that feeling, I would have liked this boss fight, and it still would have been a reference to Metal Gear Solid.
Metal Gear Xanthos
In-fiction, a giant battle robot is unprecedented (I'm treating the Terratron as non-canon since it seemed like a joke). That's not necessarily bad, but to me, big narrative twists like that require context to make sense—I'm looking for an "aha!" moment where I put the pieces together, or an "oh shit" moment where the fight I've been dreading finally shows up. Think about how the Metal Gear appears in each MGS game—we get at least one shot early on that contrasts the scale of Snake with the giant robot and tells us we should be scared of it (frequently with an explicit narration about its dangers)
This mission didn't do the job for me; I ended up just feeling like they threw a giant robot in for the hell of it. If we had heard about the Xanthos before, or even just about General Davis's superweapon development program, this would have paid off for me. I'm thinking about a contentious scene between Valerian and Davis in, say, the first mission pack. That would have done two things for me: given us more context for Davis's issues with Valerian and set us up to fight the Xanthos. Essentially, we would have gotten the gun on the mantelpiece.
As for the design itself, being a reference to various metal gears, I just don't think it captured the essence of what makes metal gears special. Take a look at the robots it references (my favorites are ZEKE and Sahelanthropous). What makes the metal gears effective visually is not just their giant robotness, but the way Kojima combines that with an organic shape and movement.
Now contrast that with Xanthus. It's very blocky, and while it is large, it's too inanimate to really threaten. I really, really wish it walked, or at least had a hovering effect that conveyed some menace. Some asymmetry in its design would also really help, making for an unsettling effect in its appearance. As it stands, I'm just not compelled.
Like I said, for once we agree! I didn't hate the giant robot fight. It had fine mechanics, but we both agree that they were lazy in its implementation. I'm really disappointed that this is how the whole thing ended, but if they're going to be this lazy, then maybe it's good they're not making any more single-player content.
I generally disagree with both your approach and your opinions, but not this time. There are nice assets for sure, but none of the gameplay really stood out to me, and I really disliked the story for a variety of reasons. Some of my comments/complaints (mostly complaints):
Unearned Villain: General Davis comes out of nowhere to suddenly be the villain, and they don't bother giving us any reason until the end of the last mission, where she's suddenly preaching about avenging Mengsk's betrayal.
Incompetent Villain: As you mentioned, General Davis's plan sucks. She's got evidence of Valerian's malfeasance, so use that. Or maybe just wait to have her giant fucking robot online? Speaking of which:
Giant Robot!?: Ok, I'm a sucker for giant robots as much as anyone. I don't even mind it being the climax of the campaign (I do question with the execution). That said, I have a similar complaint as I did for General Davis: where the hell did this robot come from? If they had seeded the campaign with references to it, that would be one thing, but instead we get like, an inverse Chekov's Gun—the gun goes off without ever being on the mantlepiece.
Giant Robot Part 2: The mission briefing and gameplay are...incongruent. The introduction made me think we were going to have a scenario where the bases hold off the Xanthos while Nova sneaks in to destroy it. And maybe I just wasn't paying enough attention, but I was pretty surprised when the Hyperion started showing up. My impression is that Horner's assistance was a late add for balance reasons when it became clear that fighting off the Xanthos each time was doing too much damage to the army.
Giant Robot Part 3: The multiple turret thing is cool. The design of the robot on the other hand is really lackluster. It's just not...intimidating. If they're going this route, think they should have gone full-on gonzo and used something like the Terratron.
Having to Kill Davis: I didn't want to kill Davis. I wanted her to stand trial, but I couldn't find any way to do that. If the only option is to kill her, then just do it in a cut scene, rather than frustrating me.
Fighting Stone: The briefing talked about a holding pen for ghosts, so it was pretty clear we were going to be seeing a ghost, and since Stone has been AWOL, it was pretty clear to me that it would be him. This is good writing! Put the piece in play, tease it for people who are paying attention, bring it all together. The fight itself was lackluster—kind of a derivative of the Deadshot/Arkham Knight fights, but less dynamic because the 3/4 overhead view isn't really a good fit. I'm aware that it wouldn't fit in their budget, but I would have loved if they'd instead turned this into a Sniper Wolf-style fight in first person. I'm honestly not sure, but do you always knock him out, or can you kill him instead?
Alarak Showing Up: Just...why? It really feels to me like they had no idea what to do narratively here. Blizzard has this weird habit of counteracting their big plot moments, especially cliffhangers like Valerian resigning. Since that was a ruse and we captured Davis, now they have to immediately undo the big cool thing we just pulled off, or there's nothing left for the plot they outlined (except, I dunno, maybe rooting out the Defenders of Man?). Having Alarak show up and lay waste to everything gets the job done, but it paints Alarak really cartoonishly. He's not an idiot, he should be able to understand that Valerian is saying at that moment that they captured the leader of the Defenders of Man! Instead he starts inflicting massive civilian casualties and gets mad at Nova when she fights back.
Ji'nara: One-dimensional anger machine is one dimensional.
The Ending: Nova goes rogue! Now she'll be troubleshooting for the Dominion and we can look forward to more escapes from her. Except that we know we won't, because Blizzard's not making any more single player content. We follow that up with a message from the developers making it fairly clear that they're done with the game. That's really sad to me, since they had said not long ago we would be looking forward to DLC for quite a while (releasing a year of work every year). I get that co-op has been really popular, but...it really bums me out that they're done with us.
0
@DuckyTheDuck: Go
Yeah, I can't agree with your positions. I've written a fair amount about giving and receiving feedback for my job, which I really think is worth reading:
On [Giving] Feedback
Getting Feedback
Not being an asshole is, in fact, a very important part of giving feedback, assuming you actually want to be helpful.
0
Weekly Terraining Exercise #262
I saw Moana this weekend. It certainly has issues with representation, but it's incredibly gorgeous. For this week, I'd like you to make some terrain that mimics the palette and style of the movie. I've attached several images to use as reference. I can't wait to see what everyone comes up with!
The Global Information/Idea thread for Terraining Exercises can be found here: http://www.sc2mapster.com/forums/development/terrain/14658-terraining-exercises-global-information-idea-thread/
0
Agreed. Given the how fast a response I got, I'm sorely tempted to log a ticket for every single issue we know of with the Mac editor. Or maybe just open up a chat ticket and run them all past the rep there tomorrow.
0
I logged a support ticket last night about this and already heard back. They do know about the issue and are working on it internally, but have no timeline for resolution.
0
You do great work, for sure. I'm sure I'd do some things differently, but I don't have any criticisms on your technique. I do have a few thoughts in terms of your approach. It might sound crazy, but I think in general that you're doing too much work.
You're spreading your detail out really widely, which while nice doesn't have actually have the effect you might expect. In game, your players aren't going to be focusing enough to appreciate a baseline level like that, except I suspect it will make it harder for things to stand out. I'd recommend you tone down the overall level of detail (or at least, don't do as much going forward) and focus your efforts on specific places you know your players are going to be spending time (mob spawn points, cinematic areas, enemy bases, I think you get the idea). Even in commando missions, the players will mostly be moving from point to point, so save your juice for where it matters.
0
@wargirlwargirl: Go
Holy fucking shit. Wargirl delivers! Look at that bed! And the stacked bookcases! Amazing.
0
Thanks for posting this here. We've also got a thread about it in General: https://www.sc2mapster.com/forums/general/general-chat/131263-mac-editor-galaxy-memory-access-crash-from-update/ .
If you can put up with the frustration, you could download a Windows virtual machine from Microsoft to work in, though those shut themselves down every hour, which is...not optimal.
0
@Pr0nogo: Go
Honestly, I don't remember where the chair is from. I use our in-house Thoughts in Chaos mod to do WTEs and the chair is in there, as is the ornate table by the wall. As for the fireplace, it isn't a single doodad—I combined a bunch of stuff:
I'm attaching some screenshots so you can see how it's all set up. I'm also attaching a version of the map that doesn't use our mod. It loses the nice chair and table, but you can still take a look for yourself at how it all works.
0
Here's my submission for the week! It's not really where I want it to be, but I'm still learning how to use the editor on a PC, since the Mac editor now crashes willy-nilly. Sadly, the PC I have is not a great machine, so I have to build the map on PC and then hand it over to my Mac to take a decent screenshot. Hopefully Blizzard fixes this soon, but realistically...that's not happening.
Anyway, mini-rant over. Happy Thanksgiving to anyone who celebrates it.
0
Please forgive me if this sounds patronizing, but it's important to remember that everything that occurs in a story is the result of an active choice on the part of the author. Why would Davis, a high-ranking member of the military, be involved with the development of a super weapon? It's not exactly a stretch, is it? The writers chose to give her an ambiguous reason for wreaking so much havoc, but they could have chosen to make her involved with the project, and put both her and the Xanthos in play earlier. As it is, I think that they didn't actually have the plot outlined when they started, which led to the situation we ended up in.
It doesn't have to. If I had been writing it, I would have introduced Davis like I mentioned, had her be helpful (though maybe a bit reproachful about how Arcturus would have handled it), presented a false lead for the traitor (Reigel?), and only then have Davis betray Valerian. Given the brevity of the mission packs, they didn't have time to waste before they introduced the villain. Because they put it off so long, she didn't have nearly the impact they wanted.
It's a giant robot at the end of a stealth game that's contained numerous homages to Metal Gear Solid games, as referenced above. The actual nuke-launching nature of the metal gears is rarely relevant. What's more relevant is the collection of various weapons they point at the protagonist. If you don't see the reference, then I'm not sure what to say. It doesn't really matter, I suppose, since my complains about the design stand independent of whether or not it's a reference—I still think it's boring and nonthreatening.
0
@DrSuperEvil: Go
I think it's interesting to talk about the role that homage/tribute plays in narrative and game design. I hope you can forgive me for exploring this idea about being a Metal Gear Solid tribute to talk about the challenges and my specific criticism of Blizzard's approach. First, I should have made more clear that I was aware of the aware of the Metal Gear Solid tributes. However, just being a tribute to another property doesn't for me automatically make it good, it just makes it a tribute. The challenge is to make it a tribute that fits in the environment that Blizzard has already created, and makes use of the mechanics in the game. There were two specific points that came up here, so I'll talk about them separately.
Fighting Stone
I see the reference to the Cyborg Ninja, insofar as there's a person who can turn invisible. But the fight isn't really that much an homage to the ninja. For reference, . That's a one-on-one fight, hand to hand, against an opponent with cool tricks. It's actually a lot closer to the or the . You've got a bonus with a telegraphing attack that you have to wear down, and then some adds that spawn from time to time.
So...why don't I like it? First, the fight itself is pretty bland. There's not a lot of variety as you fight through it, which I suspect is because Blizzard needed to accommodate the various loadouts the player has. Second, because it's very busy and fast-paced. That's the opposite of Metal Gear Solid's approach, if this were to be a tribute. It also doesn't match the feeling of the infiltrations we've been doing with Nova, which reward a measured, planned approach. I think the frantic approach works well in the boss fights in Night Terrors, which is a larger-scale macro map against the Zerg, which are much more animalistic.
In this mission, however, we've controlled only Nova, and her opponent is himself a ghost. What's the defining quality of the ghosts? Being invisible assassins. That's why I didn't like this boss fight approach, and why I said I'd prefer the fight to resemble . As I think about it more, though, I think that is a better fit—she's got the turning invisible thing going for her. If Blizzard could have captured that feeling, I would have liked this boss fight, and it still would have been a reference to Metal Gear Solid.
Metal Gear Xanthos
In-fiction, a giant battle robot is unprecedented (I'm treating the Terratron as non-canon since it seemed like a joke). That's not necessarily bad, but to me, big narrative twists like that require context to make sense—I'm looking for an "aha!" moment where I put the pieces together, or an "oh shit" moment where the fight I've been dreading finally shows up. Think about how the Metal Gear appears in each MGS game—we get at least one shot early on that contrasts the scale of Snake with the giant robot and tells us we should be scared of it (frequently with an explicit narration about its dangers)
This mission didn't do the job for me; I ended up just feeling like they threw a giant robot in for the hell of it. If we had heard about the Xanthos before, or even just about General Davis's superweapon development program, this would have paid off for me. I'm thinking about a contentious scene between Valerian and Davis in, say, the first mission pack. That would have done two things for me: given us more context for Davis's issues with Valerian and set us up to fight the Xanthos. Essentially, we would have gotten the gun on the mantelpiece.
As for the design itself, being a reference to various metal gears, I just don't think it captured the essence of what makes metal gears special. Take a look at the robots it references (my favorites are ZEKE and Sahelanthropous). What makes the metal gears effective visually is not just their giant robotness, but the way Kojima combines that with an organic shape and movement.
Now contrast that with Xanthus. It's very blocky, and while it is large, it's too inanimate to really threaten. I really, really wish it walked, or at least had a hovering effect that conveyed some menace. Some asymmetry in its design would also really help, making for an unsettling effect in its appearance. As it stands, I'm just not compelled.
0
@ThePhail: Go
At Blizzcon. All efforts to go co-op now.
0
Mac editor here, too. Same crash as described.
Edit: I posted a report on the Blizzard forum: http://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/20752316511#1 .
For now, I guess it's time to see if I have a decent Windows machine somewhere in the office.
0
@DeltaCadimus:
Like I said, for once we agree! I didn't hate the giant robot fight. It had fine mechanics, but we both agree that they were lazy in its implementation. I'm really disappointed that this is how the whole thing ended, but if they're going to be this lazy, then maybe it's good they're not making any more single-player content.
0
Here Be Spoilers
I generally disagree with both your approach and your opinions, but not this time. There are nice assets for sure, but none of the gameplay really stood out to me, and I really disliked the story for a variety of reasons. Some of my comments/complaints (mostly complaints):