SC2 Campaigns?

[johnnythewolf]

Just stumbled upon this:

http://www.moddb.com/mods/project-warfare

[Church]

Yeah, I ran into that a week or so ago. I must admit, it looks pretty sleek. Would be interesting to try out.

[johnnythewolf]

http://www.moddb.com/mods/project-warfa ... e/#2014021

Development continues at a pretty good pace. Our singleplayer campaign is about 50% playable right now. What does that mean, exactly? Well - 4 of the 8 planned levels are fully playable. They aren't perfect, but they work. The other four are still in more of a concept/planning stage. Singleplayer is a huge focus of this project and we really want to get it right. Everything from the way we tell a story to how we immerse you in our fiction has to work right. On top of that, we are constantly checking for gameplay balance and most importantly, is the game fun to play? Ultimately the answer to that question is up to you guys - but we'll do our best.

And here's the answer I got when I asked one dev about the campaign mechanics:

In terms of gameplay, it's RTS gameplay you would be familiar with, but with a couple twists added on. Things like the ability to call in air strikes, paratroopers, artillery barrages, etc. are all possible. Second is the customizable mechs - they function a little bit like Hero units in that they are very powerful and important to keep alive. These things can be individually upgraded with a whole range of different weapons. We're working on 'em right now, once we have something ready to show off, I certainly will!

If you meant between-missions, we have something Hyperion-like planned. In-between missions you can go and upgrade any aspect of your army, from your vehicles, infantry, aircraft, etc. We have a pretty cool system where basically you can explore your "home base" after a mission, from a top-down RTS perspective. Going to your Barracks, for example, brings up a list of infantry-related upgrades.

Going to your Command Centre gives you as brief of the next upcoming mission, which allows you to plan accordingly. Maybe this upcoming mission, you will need a powerful airforce, so you go and upgrade your fighter jets.

That's the general gameplay we have so far, once we get things nailed down and really finalised we'll start explaining in a lot more detail how it will all work!

Holy shit mackarel soup!

And to think that, some time ago, people were saying that nothing good would ever come from the Galaxy Editor.

[Lavarinth]

It's pretty advanced as is, there's just some features missing that a lot of people would like, and some aspects are pretty damn confusing or disorganized but doesn't mean they're not in the editor.

[johnnythewolf]

Yeah, I remember the previous argument all too well. Still, they've managed to come this far without sounding bitter or discouraged. That's what I like to see.

[Thalraxal]

Dang. That's looking pretty spiffy. Seems a bit ambitious though, so I wish them the best of luck.

Still, it is nice seeing people doing stuff with the game. Hope to see more of them.

[UntamedLoli]

And to think that, some time ago, people were saying that nothing good would ever come from the Galaxy Editor.

No, everyone was saying it would be a royal pain in the ass and would take an extremely inefficient amount of time due to the editors layout and general lack of UI for some things.

[Archangel]

Also, now that all the excitement of the debate should be gone by now, if you go back and read over it, you will see time and again where everyone's arguments were based on the idea of making campaigns, and this was always "countered" with examples and arguments about making maps.

Johnny, I really do appreciate your enthusiasm - don't get me wrong. I actually like doodling with the editor from time to time, myself. But You're just not talking the same subject as what you think you are. Not even this MOD establishes anything to the contrary to what's been said here. A mod is not the same as a campaign. A map is not the same as a campaign.

One might argue that an entire campaign could take place on one map, and I've toyed with that idea, however the fact that size limitations will always be an issue have deterred my serious advancements in that arena.

So here's the deal, you came here asking about campaigns. We told you. Everything you've mentioned has nothing to do with campaigns. I think some people have been a little harsh with you. I don't think you're an idiot troll. However I do know that you're wrong.

I will agree, however, that those who truly desire to tell a StarCraft story should probably go ahead and do the map designs and worry about publication later. But that's not really relevant to the discussion over GE.

[johnnythewolf]

Johnny, I really do appreciate your enthusiasm - don't get me wrong. I actually like doodling with the editor from time to time, myself. But You're just not talking the same subject as what you think you are. Not even this MOD establishes anything to the contrary to what's been said here. A mod is not the same as a campaign. A map is not the same as a campaign.

Project: Warfare is 1) a MOD 2) a campaign 3) a succession of maps linked together

Explain me how it's not the same thing.

One might argue that an entire campaign could take place on one map, and I've toyed with that idea, however the fact that size limitations will always be an issue have deterred my serious advancements in that arena.

Then try making something simpler first. No need to get super ambitious right off the bat.

So here's the deal, you came here asking about campaigns. We told you. Everything you've mentioned has nothing to do with campaigns. I think some people have been a little harsh with you. I don't think you're an idiot troll. However I do know that you're wrong.

While I do appreciate the attempt at a more civil approach, I know you're wrong, because:

- I wasn't the one who originally asked for campaigns.

- What I've been basically told, between two insults and condescending assertions, was that 1) Blizzard = Evil 2) Battle.Net 2.0 = Shit and 3) StarEdit was so much better

- What I said was that lack of official support and bad modding tools never prevented the creation of great custom content. And GE is far, far from being the mess that was STALKER SDK (at least, until very recently).

- Just "a little harsh" with me, you said? Don't be so euphemistic; you guys were complete dicks.

- People on SC2mapster have been coming up with some pretty good stuff lately (most of them still unavailable to the NA server, unfortunately). Meanwhile, here in CC, there has been Ricky's W&M and.... what else?

Of course, Purity of Form and SC1 Remake may be too humble and amateur to warrant the so-called "veterans"' attention here on CC, but the fact remains we did make something decent, and with relative ease.

Now, if you guys don't like GE, that's fine, nobody will force you to. Just don't try discouraging others like you've doing with me.

[IskatuMesk]

Someone is wrong on the internet. Aw balls.

[Archangel]

Seriously.

It's quite clear there's no reasoning with this guy. Guess I was wrong too.

[UntamedLoli]

Now, if you guys don't like GE, that's fine, nobody will force you to. Just don't try discouraging others like you've doing with me.

The problem I and many others probably have with your type of posts is that we know GE is a pile of steaming shit and aren't trying to compare it to Editor's/SDK's from other companies. If you actually looked around you would notice how much backpedaling they did from WE in WC3, or the fact they discarded any sort of efficient layout from community made tools.

You sorely misunderstand what we mean when we say the editor is slow and its interface is a mess. It takes an excruciating amount of time to change simple things and have them not fuck up like duplicating a Zergling when I could change anything I want editing raw XML files in less than a minute with all the other changes I want done as well.

The model work in Project Warfare should be the part taking longer to do, not the editor beyond balance tweaking.

[GnaReffotsirk]

What bothers me most is that WC3 has campaign support right off the bat. I was honestly shocked and hurt when SC2 came out without this feature.

All that came to my mind upon seeing this fact was, "Shit, money got to them."

I could remember them showcasing the cinematic feature, and promising the release of their art tools even. And when the time came to deliver, suddenly someone changed their mind in the corporate structure.

Is blizzard scared of Community made campaigns? Do they want to make money out of everything? Only time will tell.

The truth of the matter is, I'm eagerly awaiting and looking for other games that has a good and stable modding community that has complete and faithful support from the developers. Blizzard's time will come, I can feel it. "Too arrogant too soon" -- so to speak.

edit:

IIRC, SCALLIN tool has not been frowned upon by blizzard. If this is the case still, making campaign loaders would not be illegal unless it hacks on the game files. Running a map through a loader without modifying the data but rather to skip the drag and dropping Imo should not be ground for bans or what not.

How do I make a loader for a specific map?

[johnnythewolf]

What bothers me most is that WC3 has campaign support right off the bat. I was honestly shocked and hurt when SC2 came out without this feature.

Yeah, but the most curious thing is that, even if it had campaign support, WC3 didn't have that many custom campaigns either. AFAIK, the only official campaign here on CC is the JRPG-inspired Wanderers of Sorceria.

I also remember Heart of Storms, but last time I checked, it was still unreleased.

[IskatuMesk]

Wc3 didn't have that many custom campaigns not because of the editor but because of the community. Let's picture for example that SC2 had a perfect release. Everything's great. Editor's wonderful. Layout is decent, mod and campaign support are there.

We still wouldn't see many mods or campaigns.

Why, grasshopper?

Because the workload of even a semi-new game, specifically one that uses a 3d engine over a sprite-based one, is monumentally different. Not necessarily more - I assure you the work that went into 2042 and AO's graphics was considerably more time consuming than that most wc3 campaigns put in overall - but different. The skillsets themselves are more demanding and can't be half-assed as much. Things got more complicated. Complication doesn't equate to difficulty, but it does have an impact on young people's ability to remain motivated.

The #1 problem there is that most people were not motivated to make projects, and could not focus on them to get ones they had started finished.

I know this well, because I had this problem a lot as well.

Sc2 is more demanding than wc3 by three fold, even if the editor was superior. Let's take models. For a model in wc3 you can half-ass your way through a diffuse texture to call it a day. Now you need diffuse, specular, normal, and emissive. Sc2 makes this harder by not using normal information properly in the first place. Now you struggle with a third-party exporter made by a guy who barely started that kind of work when he began on it. Oh, did I mention he announced he's not working on it anymore (too busy elsewhere)? Yeah.

Even in a perfect world the developer himself can and will still crumble beneath the pressure.