1. No UI - huge failure. At a minimum I have to keep the health bar info. Removing it removes 'drama' and 'suspense' from the clip.
2. Too long. This I agreed with even before I put the movie up. It was a production issue from the start rather than a direct choice to make the movie so long. Fraps files take a huge amount of room and I was a bit short of HD space. So, I had to make the movie in segments. I'd get some clips, decide which ones were good enough and make a segment from those and delete the original fraps to clear room for more clips. Once a segment was complete it was basically unalterable.
Now, I like to keep a variety of classes. For example, that one feral druid I have in the movie is not the best druid... but he is the best one I found while filming. So he made it in.
But, I ended up with other cases where I had a fight that was similar to one I already, but was a better fight or opponent so I felt compelled to keep it, and since I couldn't get rid of the one in the segment already done.. I had to keep that one too. If I had the flexibility I would have REPLACED it.
I won't make the same mistake again. This time I'll make sure that I have more room to work with AND I'll be more patient in my choices before putting any segments together so there is less filler and less "similar" fights. I mean, you only need to see me CoS stunlock one nonSL warlock to know that the build can do that.
3. Music. You really can't make everyone happy here, but some people brought up an excellent point: Some techno, not all techno. I need to put more of a variety of music in the movies and perhaps even use clips instead of whole songs to make the movie feel like it's moving along quicker.
4. Content. I was generally satisfied with the content of the movie (aside from some filler and repition as mentioned above). People who's opinion I actually respect seem to agree that I had enough "tough" fights in here to make things interesting. They weren't necessarily the best of the best, but they were perhaps only a notch or two down. Personally, I'd like more 1v2s (and that will come with more HP, I believe)
I had this quite interesting exchange with Ming earlier today on worldofming.com:
The bitterness continues hereMe: [quote]Ming, go watch Oozo’s new video lol.[/quote]
You mean the one where I beat the crap out of several 1900-2100 3-to-5 gladiator-pieced opponents with my shitty gear?
lolz
Not the best of the best, but that is only because I didn’t run across anyone else with a higher rating or there is a pretty good chance they would have been in the movie too.
Actually, that is somewhat false I did run into a 2400+ player and had him isolated for a 1v1, but he ran away for help, heh.
100: does this oozo guy think hes good or some shit?
Me: No, it’s more the case that arena ratings don’t mean much when it comes to 1v1. Gear does though.
Ming: 1900-2100 is really low these days, very mediocre players if that is their “go-to” bracket. That and hemo is enough to beat every class except felguard warlock and BM hunter and ONLY at extreme gear ranges. And let me guess, most of these fights are in BGs or world PVP? Most of them didn’t have full CDs? Try dueling them, different story.
Playing the “I have bad gear” card is a joke in TBC. PVP gear is so incredibly easy to acquire, I won’t watch anyone’s video unless they have a 2100+ arena rating. I have no interest in minor league play.
Me: That’s right 1v1 in BGs. I did kill a 13K HP felguard warlock btw, with two adds on me. My point is that you can’t possibly balance the two. Balance world pvp and bgs (where rogues are still overpowered IMO) and you weaken rogues even more in the arena. Balance rogues for the arena and you make them ridiculously overpowered for BGs and world PvP. The problem is the gear and resilience.
Blizzard has made two seperate PvP systems basically, and IMO an unfixable problem.
Rogues have problems in 5v5s (always have really) and high resilience DUELs. BTW, if you had the same matchups you had in your duels but were in more of a BG situation (where the rogue had initiative) the rogues would have fared much better. You know that.
Oh yes, and if 1900+ sucks why would you be listing that as your requirement for joining your 5v5 team. *Note: I see you just recently raised that to a 2000+ requirement.
Once again, arena ratings are a good indicator of how a person might be 1v1, but they are not the “definitive standard” as you put it. Otherwise how could a person with 0 arena standing beat such people?
As usual, you move your standard around to fit whatever argument you are trying to win. 1900-2100 rating people suck, but these are exactly the requirements with which you are recruiting people to join your 5v5 team.
Continue to sit upon your high throne, and I will continue to beat gladiator-geared opponents when I’m able to single them out in the BGs.
6 comments:
First! Hey Loved the article and the vid. You've gotta get some exposure though...
Thanks. :)
This is more for fun and a learning experience more than anything for me ATM. Also, I'm not very good at selling myself.
But, I'll try to keep it going.
Everyone, including Ming, who thinks if you do not have a 2100+ arena rating team, your mediocore, needs to look deeper into the equation. Look at all the top teams of 2v2 (http://www.geekboys.org/arena/index/5/) and you will notice most consist of warlock and paladin. Does that mean those two classes are overpowered? Perhaps. Does that mean they work well/best together? Perhaps. Or does that mean absolutely nothing and just a coincidence?
Pre-TBC when many players had full raiding gear or Grand Marshal/High Warlord rank, the major factor that had an impact on the World of Warcraft community was gear (e-peen status). But there was still extremely skilled players in blues. Post-TBC the new "e-peen" status is a high arena rating. There are still extremely good players out there that do not do arena or not enough to pass with flying colors. Others just have a bad class combination, or at least compared to the rest. This is with gear aside.
Think about this: Team A plays 1000 games and lose about 500, they get a 2300 rating. Team B plays 100 games and lose about 50, they get a 2000 rating. This means the ratio to win/lose is the same, but considering the amount of experience Team A learned they should have won more. Also, this could mean Team A lost a lot more to much higher ranked teams and won versus low ranked teams - which in turn means they are not that great but those wins started to count up.
I Like it and "The Beast" as well, even if previous videos as "Cooldowns are for noobs", "PvP Made Easy" and "Original Control" remain to be my favorites from you.
The article "Oozo Lives (Content)" is a really good piece too because it share good informations about your video, you can enjoy a little more the fights we can see in the movie.
I'm really looking for the next videos. I'm sure you'll improved at them. I laugh really hard with the black box part :D
First of all, I really enjoyed your 'cooldown is for noobs' video-- it is one of my all-time favorite rogue videos.
In 'The Aftermath' tho, I really wish you had displayed the UI. Although the fights looked of good quality, the lack of UI doesn't allow me to see how close a 1v1 fight was when you got jumped by 3 adds or how badly you were able to beat an opponent.
Of course you have already commented on this issue-- I really hope you'll put out some more videos with this fixed.
Good to see some PvP action with less than perfect gear and a non-cookie-cutter build.
oozo, venick,
This is Cerias from RogueSpot.com. Could both of you shoot me a PM on our forums or hook me up with a way to contact you guys. My email is cerias at gmail dot com. Nice Blogs both of yas!
~CS
Post a Comment