Discussion: Effectiveness of Blizzard's modular approach to objects

Discussion in 'Starcraft 2 (SC2) Editor Help' started by krainert, May 3, 2010.

  1. krainert

    krainert Member

    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0
    Greetings,

    I've played around with the Data Editor a bit and followed a few tutorials, and although I love the improved depth and more logical structuring, the separation of units and weapons as well as projectiles and actual effects caused by attacks seems a bit excessive to me. I'm still learning, and it's still a beta, obviously, but what's your take on it - when mastered, is it more or less efficient (not powerful!) than the all-in-one approach of W3? In what ways? Why?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Advice D.

    Advice D. New Member

    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0
    I think that WC3's system just can't compare to the flexibility of SC2's system. As for efficiency and simplicity, consider an ability in the style of war stomp that halves the mana/energy of all surrounding enemies, and applies a slow and negative armour debuff(s) that can stack with itself three times.

    In WC3, you'd probably make a dummy ability cloned from Thunderclap/Fan of Knives/Channel, then trigger the rest, including the use of dummy units to cast the debuffs, checking in the trigger for any instances of the buffs already on the unit and using higher level ones to simulate stacking.

    In SC2, you make an Instant Ability, a button to go with it, a Buff type behaviour, a Search Area effect, a Set effect, a Modify Unit effect and an Apply Behaviour effect. You link the Ability to the Search Area, set the target types etc. in the Search, link the Set to the Search, link the Apply Behaviour and Modify Unit to the set and finally link the Buff to the Apply Behaviour.
    From there you put in a movespeed multiplier and a negative lifearmour bonus in the Buff, and set the Maximum Stack Counts to three, then set add a -0.5 Change Fraction to the Energy in the Vitals section of the Modify Unit effect.
    Sounds somewhat more lengthy and complicated than WC3, but bear in mind I didn't go to the extent of listing the full triggering involved there. Now, I think it's a fairly safe assumption that no dummy units are created in this system (I have my doubts about Create Persistent, but that isn't in the example), so it would appear that SC2's system is more lightweight in this instance.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. krainert

    krainert Member

    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0
    I was aware that Blizz intended to minimize the need for trigger powered abilities but not to this extent. Thanks for the input.

    However, what do you think of the weapons system (which puzzles me far more than the greater depth of ability adjustment)?
     
  4. Advice D.

    Advice D. New Member

    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0
    I think it's needlessly complex for the most part, but in situations where you want special attacks it's a godsend. My main gripe with it is that weapons don't properly link to their actors which leads to very confusing failed duplicates and frustration for inexperienced users (I spent a long weekend raging first over invisible missiles, then silent missiles shooting from the ground).
     
  5. Doomhammer

    Doomhammer Bob Kotick - Gamers' corporate spoilsport No. 1

    Ratings:
    +67 / 0 / -0
    A small tutorial least a short and structured report on your first experiences would be very helpful. As I'm very sure that you won't be the first and only one ending up with severe headaches after spending lots of time on this kind of data editor.
    With a good chance, Blizz won't bother changing too much of this stuff anyway. So there's always the chance of succeeding with a more modular work-in progress tut, that keeps improving along the way just as GE does.
     
  6. Advice D.

    Advice D. New Member

    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0
    I've thought about that, but I'm a bit scatterbrained at the moment with school and the galaxy editor depriving me of sleep, and I'm struggling to form coherent sentences. I'll most likely give it a go this weekend, unless someone beats me to the punch.
     
  7. BANANAMAN

    BANANAMAN Resident Star Battle Expert.

    Ratings:
    +153 / 0 / -0
    My head exploded from it's awesomeness and or possibly it's complexity.

    Seriously even something simple as adding a yamato cannon that functions to a carrier is hard.
     
  8. krainert

    krainert Member

    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0
    Thanks for the replies.

    That's another thing that bothers me... The complexity of data editing compared to that of W3 may scare off maplings which is usually not a good thing in a broad community. I'm still more concerned with effectiveness, though.
     
  9. punwisp

    punwisp New Member

    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -0
    What I think is odd is for the most part people very familiar with wc3s data editor will be in a totally different field when coming into this one. Some people like my assumed it would be similar, thus it wouldn't take long to adjust.

    Though it takes a lot longer to get used to it. Nearly everything is renamed, re-organized, style is different, its just more complex. Lot more flexible but more complex.

    Shit just making a new unit is complex... and isn't a simple copy & paste, then edit its stats & models (Including name). But now? Meh, I decided to work with other things first before I delve too much in the data editor. Everything is separated. It took me a while to find where you edit there life total, still not sure how to edit there pricing.
     
  10. phyrex1an

    phyrex1an Staff Member and irregular helper Staff Member

    Ratings:
    +446 / 0 / -0
    My greatest concern so far is the [lack of] programmability of the object editor. In wc3 everything but the most simple stuff was triggered, which meant that if you wanted to make it even more complex it was just a matter of making changes to the trigger code. In sc2 you might end up with a beautiful complex spell made only through the object editor but when you want to make it slightly more complex you'll notice that you can't so you'll have to redo lots of stuff in trigger code.

    For example, taking Advice D's example and extending it with a condition: The spell should be able to target both air units and ground units but only one kind at once. The spell will effect the kind of units that is most common around the caster. In wc3 this was just a matter of adding a simple count units check before picking the actual targets. I'm not yet fluid in the sc2 object editor but I suspect that it isn't possible to do there.

    My opinion is that blizzard is yet again making the mistake of separating the object editor and the trigger editor. The object editor should like the trigger editor generate galaxy code.
     
  11. Clockwork

    Clockwork New Member

    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    I find this editor very intimidating and unintuitive. Every time I look at a tutorial or think I figured out how to do something I want I find Im wrong and things do not work the way I thought it would.
     
  12. punwisp

    punwisp New Member

    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -0
    Yea I wouldn't call the trigger or data editor use friendly anymore..


    Terraining is, and I'm betting the model editor won't be user friendly either.
     
  13. Ancanus

    Ancanus [ancanus@TheHelper.net]# _

    Ratings:
    +54 / 0 / -0
    Deliberate.

    With the map editor in this state, there will only be masterpieces and rotundant failures. No middle ground. That makes it much easier for Blizzard to filter maps through the publication process I guess.

    Guess this is the map protection they were talking about. ;)
     
  14. EpicFlux

    EpicFlux Active Member

    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0
    I would say that's a very acceptable guess considering the way they described the Galaxy Editor is like 90% inaccurate. They say it's so easy to make an Uberlisk yet where is it? Only seen it made via XML and that sure as hell isn't easy considering all the functionality is lost.

    So considering their new editor is actualy more of a flop then a success, then ide guess that that was blizzard's intent from the start. Make it user friendly for those who actually know what their doing, and make it damn near impossible if you don't know what you're doing.
     
  15. Dangime

    Dangime New Member

    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0
    I agree that it looks like the editor is setup to encourage more Pros and less Joes being involved. Knowing how to trigger in WC3 will help you, but not knowledge of the object editor. It’s completely different in terms of its organization, and its really easy to completely mess up something very simple. Even now, I can’t say I know how to make a new unit or ability that isn’t very similar to one that already exists, without the possibility of messing up existing ones. It’s possible to learn, or relearn, but I’d say its setup will discourage more than encourage new users.

    But who is to say that the golden age of user made maps won’t be a year or two or three after its release? By then the collective knowledge of the community may have produced a wealth of walkthroughs and knowledge about the editor. Instead of hours of head banging like us first adopters will have to experience, new users can stand on our shoulders and maybe learn new things entirely. I know I came late to the WC3 game, and if I didn’t know how to do something, the standard procedure was to look for a tutorial online.
     
  16. Jesus4Lyf

    Jesus4Lyf Good Idea™

    Ratings:
    +394 / 0 / -0
    In WC3, using BuffStruct, SpellStruct and Status, I'd be surprised if this took someone more than 2 minutes. :thup:
    That is truly horrible. :(

    >My greatest concern so far is the [lack of] programmability of the object editor.
    This. :thup:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. PurgeandFire

    PurgeandFire zxcvmkgdfg

    Ratings:
    +513 / 0 / -0
    You still can use the trigger editor though, to fit your needs. It just means that the spells are going to be more oriented around the data editor. =P (Things that would normally require periodic timers will most likely be doable in the data editor, or at least for spells)
     
  18. Advice D.

    Advice D. New Member

    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0
    The apparent complexity of the SC2 approach?
     
  19. Jesus4Lyf

    Jesus4Lyf Good Idea™

    Ratings:
    +394 / 0 / -0
    Yes. In WC3, you could script this stuff. :thup:
    And you didn't need to learn some complicated interface to do it.

    ... Or maybe it's just that the learning was more fun. :)
     
  20. 13lade619

    13lade619 is now a game developer :)

    Ratings:
    +399 / 0 / -0
    there is a weakness to this.. data editor is still uses static values.



    I mean, i tried to do dash to point spell (on the way to a jump spell) using Create Persistent and Apply Force.
    The unit is stuck until the Create Persistent's periods end. (it wont stop if the target point is too close)
     

Share This Page