|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IkYqp.jpg)
League of Legends has 32 million players.
StarCraft II is the best game in the world.
Agree with me or not on the second point, the first point is true. StarCraft II is an outstanding game and doesn't even have a fourth the amount of players. It has the foundation of Broodwar, arguably the greatest strategy game of generations and inarguably the most popular, it's made by one of the largest gaming companies in existence, and it's player base is still just a fraction of League of Legends -- though the actual number of players for LoL is probably lower due to duplicate accounts.
Still, something is wrong. StarCraft 2 is a success, and its eSports is booming. But something missing. The formula is off.
There is a void.
Let's take a look at the two games, and see what we can steal, and what we can't change.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/KEU3Z.jpg)
Yesterday I posted on my Facebook to my once-Mennonite cousins and family members: Watched the national championship for Major League Gaming this weekend. The Darkhorse fought through to win the tournament against insane opposition, held his trophy up high, sweapt up in it all as the crowd chanted his name and received a huge check. He's been working for most of his life. That's some Hollywood stuff right there.
I recieved no likes, but that's not a surprise. For the most part, they are world he sports was never meant for. But I want to get MLG's name out there. Even if my extended family is not meant for eSports, eSports is a thing. Kind of like the World Cup is a thing, or Black Friday is a thing. It should be on people's radars, even if they're not actively engaged in it.
iNcontroL's blog described driving into the city to attend a star craft championship held in the stadium at twilight amongst the glittering city lights, debating with you buds who's going to take the championship. It stirred me. I want it, I want it bad. I've always wanted to cheer for football at my mother and father did, and though I have a good time, I never really got into it. Whether it was because of my health keeping me from experiencing much physical competition when I was young, or just the way I think, I don't know. But with StarCraft II there is no such barrier. I want to cry when Marine King Prime twists his shirt in his hands after yet another second place, the pain on his face. I jumped off my seat and shouted and fist pumped with my little brother when NaNiWa took the MLG invitational to open up MLG Providence. Take that, Korea! We foreigners are still kicking. And then I cheered when Leenock took him down -- I couldn't help it! Leenock, you earned a fan that day.
There's no doubt about it, StarCraft II is packing magic. It tells the human story of struggle and victory, and lasers.
I love this game.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/SUyov.jpg)
But something is broken, something is incomplete, is it not? Something is wrong in the code. Shouldn't the player base be larger? It's unavoidable: the size of your playerbase limits your eSports potential.
Perhaps some hackles are rising, after all we're comparing to a mere casual game. "StarCraft II is not for the weak! If they need senseless shooters to come, then we don't need them." We almost feel the need to justify why are game isn't as big, to defend. But something needs to happen, StarCraft II needs to reach more people for the growth of eSports. So, do we dumb it down?
We cannot dumb down StarCraft II; That's part of the magic. So, what is there to do?
Steal the strenghts of competition. When I look at legends I find 3 steal-able appeals. (Obviously Free To Play is a huge boon to LoL, but the idea of translating that into paid content for Starcraft II... well, it's kind of horrifying. This is just for the stuff SCII can steal, and though there might be some ancient and mystic way to make Free-To-Play work for SCII, that's a whole other ball game. Instead, this section focuses on what's easier to play.)
1) Feeling heroic.
I am a fiction writer, and one of the greatest goals, more than half of everything we do, boils down to creating an emotion in our reader. You can see that in LoL as well; look at the new title screen, listen to the music. While the gameplay feels far from heroic, the paint they slap on the outside is compelling. I'm sure it's allure has brought many into the actual gameplay where they discover its gameplay and social merits, people who would have never made it that far otherwise. That emotion is the stepping stool that lets many climb over the barrier of entry.
And that is so crucial. Dozens of studies have been made on this mental "barrier of entry", and some of the smallest changes to reduce it create drastic changes in behavior.
2) Community
I logged into League of Legends one MLG to play between matches. The whole home screen, all the news, updates, everything but the navigation menu was removed. Instead, we got a link to the professional match streaming with some pretty art. Over 70,000 people showed up to watch that stream that day, the equivalent of a grand championship, and yet it was only day two.
The battle.net interface offered a small piece of art among several other scrolling headlines informing us of the tournament. It would be easy to miss, and very easy not to care about.
In fact, the whole battle.net 2.0 interface seems like a single player game with the multiplayer and community elements tucked away. It's the very tried and true basic interface design, with some updating. It gives a bare nod that there is a community behind it, but says little more. Why? Community is possibly StarCraft 2's greatest strength. Its heartbeat, no doubt. Why not have great banners for tournaments, watch-in-progress open pro customs, more destinations to meet new people inside the interface. One shouldn't have to go hunting the web to find the community. The newb should be sucked in, kicking and streaming, into the awesomeness.
3) Accessibility
Casual. LoL is. Call of Duty is. Halo is. Notice, all of these titles are outstandingly successful? Because of the casual gameplay, they're accessible. I honestly don't know if I would be in eSports if I didn't have as much time to dedicate to it. This is the biggest crux of the matter, is it not? A paradox: a game is either Deep and Small, or Large and Shallow. Right?
But we cannot be shallow, we cannot dumb. How could we? Create two different games, one for casual player and one for pro? And divide the ladder into two different parts? That's poison more than medicine.
It all goes back to you, Blizzard. What are you going to do with this paradox? How can we conquer it?
There are hundreds of tools out there, little psychology tricks and game design innovations, that can help us do just that. I don't have all the answers, but I think I have a bit one for accessibility. It's so simple it almost made me facepalm: split the tasks.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/LOVsT.jpg)
Multitasking stressful, and is one of the most demanding elements of StarCraft II. In Halo and Call of Duty there is no multitasking, and almost none in LoL. All you have is what's in front of you, and the reactions you training. Thus I propose splitting the tasks of macro and micro.
One player controls attacking units, the other controls production, gathering, and construction. It's based on the special team variant shared base from SC1, except only one can spend resources and only the other can command units, preventing those frustrating control conflicts. Call it something like "Fusion Ladder", where you use your skills with that of another. Allow the player to choose before searching to be the macro or micro player. See, I told you it was simple, but it does so much.
First, we get to feel more like a pro. Since we're not splitting our attention, we can perform our dedicated task at a higher level. We get to practice a skill set more dedicated, and feel that sense of progress in the reward that comes with it sooner and more often. These are all things that will draw a casual player in.
With divided tasks, there's more of a sense of teamwork. In standard 2v2 and 3v3, there's always an element of competition. You given the same tools in the same objectives, and teamwork often feels more like hoping to avoid failing teammates or screwing up than that sense of cooperation and accomplishment. With the Fusion Ladder you and your team are assigned different tasks, creating a psychological shift: he's doing what you can't and you're doing what he can't. The focus moves from competition to role fulfillment (like class-based shooters and LoL) and a is much more likely to create that sense of teamwork. I know my friend would play more if we could play this, instead of a 2v2 where he's failing and I'm trying to save the team.
This makes easier to get your friends involved. When handed the controls to StarCraft II, it's overwhelming. Micro and multipronged attacks are intricate enough to create an entire science out of, and that's forgetting macro, unit choice, and timings. By giving them a smaller, more accomplishable task -- with you there to help pull the slack without direct competition -- a noob will feel more involved and less overwhelmed. This will engage new players so much more.
I play LoL for working the lane with my friend, for coordinating. The Fusion Ladder harnesses that same social draw.
This post is a challange, a call, and a love letter to Blizzard. I challange them to create that heroic feel -- or stir some other universal emotion. I challange them to make their interface focus on the heart of StarCraft 2, the community. I challange them to create a convenient, inclusive interface that shares the wonder and gets casuals connected to scene, things like videos of player stories available right there in the interface. Yes, video in hte interface.
As pedestrian as this may seem, I want a video player in Starcraft II's interface. Because then it's just one click. Then they don't have to interrupt their game or change windows. It's so easy, so simple. Just one click to view something, no mental barrier fought.
There is a whole world of tools to bring in the casual player without corrupting the game. These are just a few, and I'm sure they're more. I encourage Blizzard to take these things to the next level, to grow eSports and StarCraft with that which is in their power. To put community in the fore front.
Then, perhaps, we can amass the audience SCII eSports deserves.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/qhtVr.jpg)
  
|
|
|
Nice blog, an interesting read.
But you failed to mention the key component to LoL's success. It is free to play. If starcraft was free, I'm sure it would have many more players. People are reluctant to "try out" a game if they have to pay for it. I'm not sure if there is an easy way for Blizzard to address this, unless at some point esports becomes so popular that they can make enough revenue from esports alone and would consequently not need the "game-purchase" revenue.
|
On November 24 2011 12:57 Steveling wrote:
35 what? Source plz?
http://na.leagueoflegends.com/news/community-grows-32-million-players
Well, not really 35, but 32 is close enough...
Yet again, a lot of these accounts are smurfs, etc... Because it's a free game, and there are freebies for people who "invite" more people to the game.(Only need to lvl an account to lvl 5, thats like 6-7games)
|
Yeah, I corrected the article and provided the link. Thanks for catching that, must have had the numbers switched in my head. In any case, give it a month and the old stat would be right. Also updated the Fusion Ladder art, the old one looked a little bland next to the rest.
As for the free to play, yes, that is a huge reason for LoL's success. This wasn't intended to be an exhaustive list detailing why LoL succeeds, just the parts we can steal. And I think most of us agree that the idea of a pay-for-content SCII is horrifying and probably completely broken. Maybe your theory would work, that would be quite the interesting day! Aside from that, there might be some ancient and obscure way to make it work, I won't discount that, but I just avoided that to focus on the more translatable strengths.
|
On November 24 2011 13:08 itkovian wrote:
Nice blog, an interesting read.
But you failed to mention the key component to LoL's success. It is free to play. If starcraft was free, I'm sure it would have many more players. People are reluctant to "try out" a game if they have to pay for it. I'm not sure if there is an easy way for Blizzard to address this, unless at some point esports becomes so popular that they can make enough revenue from esports alone and would consequently not need the "game-purchase" revenue.
Starter edition let's you play unlimited custom games as Terran, so Starcraft can be tried for free.
OP, you bring up some great points. IMO Blizzard just needs to do more for SC2: provide access to tournaments in the client and make the menu better/ more accessible my chief concerns. They may do this for HOTS, but it will be a long wait if they leave important items out of the game so they can say the expansion is better, even though we are all going to get it.
|
Thanks, Chocolate. If any of this gets implemented, I expect it to be in Legacy of the Void. They're locked down on finishing HotS and can't really set a bunch of new goals. I wanted to post this now, though, when they're just starting to think of the next expansion, to plant a seed, you know?
|
Nice work on the article.
I have to say tho I completely disagree with you on everything.
Only thing I agree on is that Blizzard should put a little more effort into promoting their game and tournaments.
|
Ha ha ha, fair enough. I'm curious why you think making a player feel heroic, or placing a video player inside the SCII interface is a bad idea?
|
On November 24 2011 13:16 FoxyMayhem wrote:
As for the free to play, yes, that is a huge reason for LoL's success. This wasn't intended to be an exhaustive list detailing why LoL succeeds, just the parts we can steal. And I think most of us agree that the idea of a pay-for-content SCII is horrifying and probably completely broken. Maybe your theory would work, that would be quite the interesting day! Aside from that, there might be some ancient and obscure way to make it work, I won't discount that, but I just avoided that to focus on the more translatable strengths.
I think it being free to play is the biggest part of LoL's success, but I do agree blizzard could do a better job promoting esports themselves, especially compared to riot. Maybe they don't see as much reason to do it themselves, because there are already a lot of other organizations (ie TL) that do a great job of promoting/covering it. But Blizz does need to do something to get the more casual players interested. It might be hard to implement, but some kind of stream in the SC2 program itself, like on the main menu page, would do wonders for the esports scene I think.
|
The part that gets me is that I have several friends who play starcraft who don't even know there's an esports community. They've seen a hint here and there, but it's just some distant thing. Where Riot is excited to share it all with you and holds it up in your face, and there is no question whether or not there's an esports community.
And yes, I have no doubt that Free To Play is its biggest success. They've done a brilliant job of monetizing the gameplay without being overly intrusive either. But there's a lot of other factors I think blizzard would do to emulate and take a step further.
|
I didn't really get what you were trying to say with LoL making you "feel heroic".
I play LoL and when I play or win it don't feel anymore heroic than when I win on the ladder.If anything I feel more satisfied when I win a long starcraft game than when I win one in LoL.
The video in interface is a good idea yea and that's what I meant when I said that I agree with you that Blizzard should put a little more effort into promoting their game and tournaments.
Aside from that here is my thought on sc2.I'm not thrilled by the way it is right now.It has potential,but idk.
And yea,making sc2 more casual than it already is,I don't see the point in that tbh.
There are some core things wrong with sc2 imo for it to become what you want,but I don't really feel like typing it here because it will just derail it into a bw vs sc2 thread.
|
I'm not suggesting we make SCII more casual, except for the introduction of a Fusion Ladder, where army control is assinged to one player and production/construction is assigned to another. The players will still feel like they're playing a part of starcraft, all the strategy descussions and pro matches will still be relevant to their experience, but it's less overwhelming and more socially rewarding than the current ladder systems. The point is to attract those who can't or won't dedicate so much time to the brutal experience of 1v1, but who will play with their friends, or will play a more "tunnel vision" task. That's most people. We want them, you know, to grow SCII eSports.
|
I really like the idea with the shared control!
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
The "shared control" thing you're talking about... I miss Team Melee.
|
On November 24 2011 13:37 FoxyMayhem wrote:
I'm not suggesting we make SCII more casual, except for the introduction of a Fusion Ladder, where army control is assinged to one player and production/construction is assigned to another. The players will still feel like they're playing a part of starcraft, all the strategy descussions and pro matches will still be relevant to their experience, but it's less overwhelming and more socially rewarding than the current ladder systems. The point is to attract those who can't or won't dedicate so much time to the brutal experience of 1v1, but who will play with their friends. You know, to grow SCII eSports.
But you don't get what I mean.
We shouldn't promote stuff like that because the game SHOULD feel hard.It should be frustrate people when they play it.
Because when they go and watch a MLG they will appreciate that much more what the pros are doing.
And the thing that you are suggestion,splitting army control and resource management.That's basically 2v2 for you right there.
When you log onto ICCUP and play a few games you become mind boggled of how it is possible that someone can play this game like Bisu plays.
When I play ladder and than go watch Huk's stream,there are some smart things here and there that he is doing and refined builds,but,there is no overwhelming feeling of superiority that I feel towards him.
When I watch Dirk Nowitzki land a fade away jumper after another,I feel like"HOLY SHIT".+ Show Spoiler +GOD DAMN YOU LOCKOUT;GOD DAMN YOU!!
When I see Naniwa do a blink stalker +2 build,Its cool but,not the awe inspiring feeling.
What sc2 really needs in order to grow and for people to take it as a serious Esport is beyond just simple cosmetics and just catching the eye of the mainstream public.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On November 24 2011 13:12 lurked wrote:http://na.leagueoflegends.com/news/community-grows-32-million-playersWell, not really 35, but 32 is close enough... Yet again, a lot of these accounts are smurfs, etc... Because it's a free game, and there are freebies for people who "invite" more people to the game.(Only need to lvl an account to lvl 5, thats like 6-7games)
Oh he meant accounts. Then the real amount must be something like 5m tops.
I never played lol and I have like 4 accounts.
|
On November 24 2011 13:47 TheKefka wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2011 13:37 FoxyMayhem wrote:
I'm not suggesting we make SCII more casual, except for the introduction of a Fusion Ladder, where army control is assinged to one player and production/construction is assigned to another. The players will still feel like they're playing a part of starcraft, all the strategy descussions and pro matches will still be relevant to their experience, but it's less overwhelming and more socially rewarding than the current ladder systems. The point is to attract those who can't or won't dedicate so much time to the brutal experience of 1v1, but who will play with their friends. You know, to grow SCII eSports. But you don't get what I mean. We shouldn't promote stuff like that because the game SHOULD feel hard.It should be frustrate people when they play it. Because when they go and watch a MLG they will appreciate that much more what the pros are doing. And the thing that you are suggestion,splitting army control and resource management.That's basically 2v2 for you right there. When you log onto ICCUP and play a few games you become mind boggled of how it is possible that someone can play this game like Bisu plays. When I play ladder and than go watch Huk's stream,there are some smart things here and there that he is doing and refined builds,but,there is no overwhelming feeling of superiority that I feel towards him. When I watch Dirk Nowitzki land a fade away jumper after another,I feel like"HOLY SHIT". + Show Spoiler +GOD DAMN YOU LOCKOUT;GOD DAMN YOU!! When I see Naniwa do a blink stalker +2 build,Its cool but,not the awe inspiring feeling. What sc2 really needs in order to grow and for people to take it as a serious Esport is beyond just simple cosmetics and just catching the eye of the mainstream public. + Show Spoiler +
I get the holy crap feeling when Naniwa lays the sickest forcefields and storms the army ^_^
|
On November 24 2011 13:49 Steveling wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2011 13:12 lurked wrote:On November 24 2011 12:57 Steveling wrote:
35 what? Source plz? http://na.leagueoflegends.com/news/community-grows-32-million-playersWell, not really 35, but 32 is close enough... Yet again, a lot of these accounts are smurfs, etc... Because it's a free game, and there are freebies for people who "invite" more people to the game.(Only need to lvl an account to lvl 5, thats like 6-7games) Oh he meant accounts. Then the real amount must be something like 5m tops. I never played lol and I have like 4 accounts.
That's still very impressive if you think about it. I don't know what SC2 numbers are like but I don't think they're that high....even WoW is hemorrhaging while LoL numbers only grow...
|
United States7639 Posts
If it makes you feel any better, the vast majority of that 32 million is situated in China. And China loves MOBAs. DotA is far more popular there than BW, and DotA2/LoL is far more popular than SC2 will ever be there. Direct comparison of numbers isn't completely fair when one game has inherent access to the worlds largest market that the other can never hope to breach.
But yes, you're right on some points. Before this summer's Dreamhack, I'd never watched games on streams before. What was this e-sports thing you speak of? But it was all the hype and support that Riot put behind the Season 1 Championships (that, and one of my friends was competing) that kind of sucked me in. You couldn't play a game without seeing the huge banner smack in the middle of the game client and main website. The website they made for the event was laid out well and made the streams easy to access, the results easy to see, and the schedule easy to find. It's no wonder that even in it's first time being featured in a major global e-sports tournament, LoL had 200,000 concurrent viewers on its stream. And Riot does this for every single IEM, MLG, Dreamhack, etc. It's actually gotten to the point where I don't even bother to click anymore, but I'm sure there are people who still do every time, as well as new players who get drawn in through curiosity.
However, I object to any measure to dumb SC down to make it more casual. That's simply not the nature of the game. I don't think Blizzard should compromise the essence of a 14 year old series so that it can lure in more casuals. I think what you're suggesting could be done in a custom map setting for practice, but not through a completely different ladder or game mode. I don't know why you'd actually want to promote tunnel vision or similarly bad play.
Edit:
On November 24 2011 13:49 Steveling wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2011 13:12 lurked wrote:On November 24 2011 12:57 Steveling wrote:
35 what? Source plz? http://na.leagueoflegends.com/news/community-grows-32-million-playersWell, not really 35, but 32 is close enough... Yet again, a lot of these accounts are smurfs, etc... Because it's a free game, and there are freebies for people who "invite" more people to the game.(Only need to lvl an account to lvl 5, thats like 6-7games) Oh he meant accounts. Then the real amount must be something like 5m tops. I never played lol and I have like 4 accounts.
If you actually bothered to see a little further down, LoL has 4.2 million active players daily, and 11.5 million players monthly. So unless you're saying that every person registered plays every single day without fail and some of them get on 2 or 3 of their accounts every month, then I'm pretty sure you're wrong. Most people I know have just 2 accounts, their main and 1 smurf, which I admittedly almost never touch.
|
On November 24 2011 13:53 Spicy_Curry wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2011 13:47 TheKefka wrote:On November 24 2011 13:37 FoxyMayhem wrote:
I'm not suggesting we make SCII more casual, except for the introduction of a Fusion Ladder, where army control is assinged to one player and production/construction is assigned to another. The players will still feel like they're playing a part of starcraft, all the strategy descussions and pro matches will still be relevant to their experience, but it's less overwhelming and more socially rewarding than the current ladder systems. The point is to attract those who can't or won't dedicate so much time to the brutal experience of 1v1, but who will play with their friends. You know, to grow SCII eSports. But you don't get what I mean. We shouldn't promote stuff like that because the game SHOULD feel hard.It should be frustrate people when they play it. Because when they go and watch a MLG they will appreciate that much more what the pros are doing. And the thing that you are suggestion,splitting army control and resource management.That's basically 2v2 for you right there. When you log onto ICCUP and play a few games you become mind boggled of how it is possible that someone can play this game like Bisu plays. When I play ladder and than go watch Huk's stream,there are some smart things here and there that he is doing and refined builds,but,there is no overwhelming feeling of superiority that I feel towards him. When I watch Dirk Nowitzki land a fade away jumper after another,I feel like"HOLY SHIT". + Show Spoiler +GOD DAMN YOU LOCKOUT;GOD DAMN YOU!! When I see Naniwa do a blink stalker +2 build,Its cool but,not the awe inspiring feeling. What sc2 really needs in order to grow and for people to take it as a serious Esport is beyond just simple cosmetics and just catching the eye of the mainstream public. + Show Spoiler + I get the holy crap feeling when Naniwa lays the sickest forcefields and storms the army ^_^
Meh,whatever.Forget about it.
|
The RTS genre is a niche market due to their complexity. Consequently, it's really hard for new players to embrace games like Starcraft. Nothing new.
LoL is a lot simpler than HoN and it's other predecessors. A lot of players can relate to the MMO feel it has, so it isn't completely foreign to them on a molecular level even though there is a lot more to the game than meets the eye.
Anyway I will address each individual point you brought up:
1) I'm going to turn the tables on this one: the heroes are the actual players/personalities themselves. What about the euphoria you get when your favorite team/player wins a title?
Your rebuttal,"If you don't know who any of the players are and their background then where is the invested interest?"
Why of course! Goes back to what I said earlier about the depth of the game and the fact it is a niche market. Just another barrier to entry.
2) Blizzard is about to implement these banners/major tournament streams in B.Net 2.0 sometime after HotS. There was a thread on it. That and we're starting to see companies like YouTube jump on the eSports bandwagon.
3) I believe I addressed this one already. Sorry it's a niche market. With that said, we have plenty of avenues to get the message out now compared to the past. Barcraft is growing steadily. Newspapers, magazines, etc. are providing us with more coverage. It will grow at it's own pace. We just have to keep on doing what we're doing by supporting eSports.
|
Blizzard needs to make Battle.net more social:
- Clan support/ Clan wars
- Live observing
- Replay with friends
- Embedded tournament streams
Also they need to make a way to play Starcraft without laddering. Ladder is way too intimating for most people, look at the IGN, Gametrailers reviews for example, they all mention how intimidating ladder is.
One thing they can do is make unranked auto-match making, there are probably much more ways to make SC2 fun without adding the ladder aspect.
|
|
|
You've got that right, Kefka, we need a Hero. That would do world of good for eSports. But I have some questions for you:
We shouldn't promote stuff like that because the game SHOULD feel hard.It should be frustrate people when they play it.
Because when they go and watch a MLG they will appreciate that much more what the pros are doing.
Let's say there is a Fusion Ladder implemented. When you go to watch a 1v1 pro match and see a single player doing the job of two people, and doing it better than them combined? Doesn't that sound more superhuman? It's a metric scrubs who don't understand how bad they are can appreciate ("he's better than two people combined!" versus "His macro is perfectly tight, allowing him to execute this ideal timing in the current PvZ metagame". See, newbs can't appreciate the second, but the can the first.)
That's basically 2v2 for you right there.
It's not, for a lot of reasons that I explained: 1) no direct competition, 2) dedicated roles, 3) teamwork psychology, 4) social reward. Feel free to give that part a closer look for the break down on why they mean so much.
When you log onto ICCUP and play a few games you become mind boggled of how it is possible that someone can play this game like Bisu plays.
I don't understand what you mean by this.
So yeah, I agree that a superstar would do worlds of good. But I think that's only one tool in the arsenal to grow eSports. Engaging the more casual or social audiences like the article mentioned is something Blizzard has control over, not something that can only be hoped for. It also represents huge growth potential. I have friends in this demographic that I want to see in eSports. I want to see them with us, a part of this community.
@Starstruck: It is a niche market, but it doesn't have to be so extremely niche. I object to dumbing down SC2 as well, but I don't think this type of team splitting is actually dumbing it down. It's a different flavor, and more welcoming. And those who play it will know that they don't even compare to the 1v1 guys. But it gets them inside the community and, again, eSports 1v1 is still relevant to them, since the Fusion Ladder is a simulation of that.
Is this type of task splitting really dumbing it down? If it is, is this type of "dumbing it down" actually a negative thing? What are its drawbacks?
|
SC2 is too expensive as it is right now. They need to have a full multiplayer version for $20, campaign not included.
|
That would be detrimental. It would become two different games and there's a reason why Blizzard uses data from every league as they say. RTS games aren't meant for casual gamers. Blizzard dumbed down SC2 enough. No argument there.
Heck, player records don't even show up anymore yet some people still cower in fear by the word Ladder. A system which tries to pair you up with players of similar skill. Besides that, Laddering isn't a players only option. Julia Childress is a great example, "Oh before I played SC2 I used to play BW UMS games all the time."
On that note, look at the solution you gave:
We have several UMS versions of that back in Brood War: one would be the builder, the other would control the units, which was very popular. To expand on that idea, Brood War also had a team melee setting.
In reality, SC2 incorporates all of these features you described already once a player familiarizes themselves with the U.I. (on a little aside: team games just aren't the same anymore, but that's a discussion for a different day).
The mode you described is unnecessary as it's already there.
The UMS mode is a total mess at the moment.
Players don't know where to turn and unfortunately Blizzard messed up big when they released it. If anything Blizzard has to make it more user friendly still.
|
There are plenty of fantastic custom games available that aren't played because they're not implemented. Whle the mode I described may be available, is it getting into the hands of the casual customer that it will benifit? It's all about distributing it. These are the people who don't know to go digging, and that's why I think it should be a ladder.
I agree that UMS need to continue to be improved, no doubt there.
At the top of the post you mention how it might split the game, where you replying to me? If so, can you explain how?
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37023 Posts
SC2, LoL, both my top games currently. I would say SC2 is just more exciting though. The battle scenes in SC are just too epic to overcome
|
Btw I don't think your point bout a more casual aspect of the game is valid.
Look at dota, its relation(difficulty wise) to lol is exactly like the one between bw and sc2 and yet it's the most popular game in the world.
|
LoL is not a fun game IMO, it's just free to play
|
What happened to the imbedded WC3 tournament system? Why don't we have that, it's 2011 already.
How hard is it to code in SC2 tournament brackets? It should be so simple to update with match history already on SC2. I may be a little unfair to the developers, but it's definitely possible, but there hasn't been an initiative.
I just wish Blizzard focuses on the present than looking to the future of SC2. Sometimes what their players need isn't provided in another expansion, but improving on the little things that can satisfy us for the meanwhile. The new battle.net hasn't really proved itself to be better than what I've been accustomed to for a good portion of my life on BW/WC3.
|
Thus I propose splitting the tasks of macro and micro.
One player controls attacking units, the other controls production, gathering, and construction.
Starcraft I already technically had this - It was called "Team Melee" I think. It was where you shared control with a player by default.
Technically both games are similar in that you can just play team games instead. You don't have to micro as much (or worry about scouting) in team gates.
On November 24 2011 17:53 Steveling wrote:
Btw I don't think your point bout a more casual aspect of the game is valid.
Look at dota, its relation(difficulty wise) to lol is exactly like the one between bw and sc2 and yet it's the most popular game in the world.
Agreed.
Casual. LoL is. Call of Duty is. Halo is. Notice, all of these titles are outstandingly successful? Because of the casual gameplay, they're accessible. I honestly don't know if I would be in eSports if I didn't have as much time to dedicate to it. This is the biggest crux of the matter, is it not? A paradox: a game is either Deep and Small, or Large and Shallow. Right?
Casual + accessibility isn't the correct term IMO.
It's the genre.
RTS games generally aren't as much fun as FPS or MOBA like DotA at least in my opinion (even as a somewhat regular RTS player).
Problems with the RTS genre:
1. RTS isn't focused on team play. Typically 1v1. DotA, Battlefield, LoL, etc all focus on team play rather than 1v1.
Sure you can play 4v4 in Starcraft II but the game isn't focused on that (balance isn't good either). Also again Starcraft II by itself is less fun (maybe even boring) especially in 4v4.
4v4 does not have that much variety (at least the times I tried it). There are workers rushes, a few cheeses, rush to Void Ray, etc which does not compare to the amount of variety DotA has (DotA has 80+ heroes + several items. Each game [even if you play the same hero and the same build] is usually very different).
2. Lack of variety in team play (and also sometimes in 1v1 too). What keeps DotA, LoL, etc fresh is the variety and plenty of player options. Each game will be different which means game will become less stale.
I know there are a lot of builds, different match ups, etc with SC2 but they do not compare to the variety of DotA (for example). I know in a lot of games I feel like I'm playing basically the same thing over and over sometimes.
(Hey we know how the same builds are done over and over especially if you play the leader.) I play Random in SC2 but even then the game sometimes feel a bit lacking in variety or options I can do.
Actually I guess in a way RTS genre doesn't "always" encourage *variety or player options. RTS (SC1 and SC2) can be "reactive" in some cases which means that a lot of times there may not be a lot of true options the player can pick.
*Generally people scout, see the build they do, and usually just pick 1-3 builds that work well against that player. Rinse and repeat for every game and every matchup. If you don't pick the right build (try going Carriers on Protoss for example against Terran >.>) then you'll probably lose badly.
In DotA or LoL (however), you can just pick any hero or chose any build you want. None of it has to be reactive (unless it's a competition with all heroes known before hand that is).
Even if it's reactive, there's dozens and dozens of options you can pick. Multiple heroes can counter another hero (for example).
In SC2 maybe one or two builds can counter one build. That makes it stales sometimes.
3. Lack of "addiction" element ("not" counting addiction to getting better skill-wise). DotA features leveling up or for CoD weapon unlocks. This reminds me of Natural Selection (an FPS/RTS hybrid). The game has two modes - "Classic" (RTS/FPS basically) and "Combat" (FPS/RPG).
More examples:+ Show Spoiler +
At NS's prime, Combat was played way more than Classic. Why? Well because it featured leveling elemnts.
This also reminds me of Counter-Strike. After a while several mods which introduced leveling aspects to Counter-Strike were introduced (WC3 mod, BF2 flags mod, Pokemon mod, etc).
The rate those mods are played rival that of regular Counter-Strike. Heck if you take out all the PC Cafe CS games, the mods win in popularity.
Basically Starcraft (or RTS in general) does not have these addiction elements. Warcraft III (and a few other RTS) do have but it's really slow paced (also you typically never got a hero past level 6+ or so in WC3. In DotA nearly every game that has no leavers will be played until level 20+ at least [out of level 25]).
4. Now this is a bit related to the accessibility but that by itself does not equal casual. While I do list this a fourth point, I consider the above three points way more major. If the game is fun, then players will find ways to improve. If they do not find a game fun in the first place, why bother trying to improve?
Now I will list this anyway - Starcraft II can't really be learned well by playing. DotA you can probably play really well even if you never look at guides on websites or so. You can figure things out well IMO in DotA. (I have played DotA on and off since 2005 and I've had no problem learning things or even playing all the heroes.)
Continuing on:
+ Show Spoiler +
The same can be said for FPS. It's easy to learn by playing.
The problem with RTS (and SC2) is the builds. What build do I use? What can I do? Not knowing the builds really hampers your gameplay unlike DotA or FPS games for example.
A person who plays Protoss (during the days when 4gate was the only strategy) will have trouble knowing how to deal with 4gate unless they actively go on websites or look and analyze their replays.
In DotA + FPS you don't really have to do this at all (also if you don't know you can simply ask a teammate).
This has nothing to do with "depth" mind you. Blizzard can make learning builds easy by presenting a build wiki or build guide in Starcraft II (maybe for lower leagues) but they don't. Presenting a build guide or build wiki on the SC2 client wouldn't make it casual or make Starcraft II less deep, it would just make things more accessible and easier to learn.
However again this isn't very important. It is a part of the problem why SC2 isn't as popular but the other three are much more important. If you have fun with the game, you will "want" to get better at it (at least for me and others I know).
Conclusion: Starcraft II (and RTS in general) lacks those three major elements: 1. Team play focus (lots of people like the social aspect + fun aspect of team games). 2. Variety (SC2 is a reactive games sometimes. The person picks Protoss, then you do these builds. The person does this build, you do this build. You don't have as much "true options" as DotA. In Dota you can pick dozens of heroes to counter 1 hero or 1 build for example). 3. And lack of addiction element (leveling up in DotA, obtaining unlocks in FPS games).
For me Starcraft is only fun for the stuff I can pull off. The game itself is okay but it does get boring fast compared to DotA or FPS IMO. FPS like BF or CoD are fun when you play with a lot of other players.
I know what it's like to want to improve my game but for some others that's not for them. Some just want to play a game that's simply fun. Sure maybe get better but just play for fun.
RTS genre in general isn't just as fun as other genres IMO. It's not because RTS is more deep or it's less accessible but because lacks those three major aspects (I listed above) that makes people want to play.
I'm not saying the RTS genre is bad. I'm just saying "unfortunately", RTS lacks those three elements from more popular online video game genres like CoD or DotA that make those games more popular. Depth or accessibility doesn't matter as much as those things.
However just because the RTS genre isn't as popular doesn't mean it's bad. Genre is still popular/alive which is good enough IMO. It's like certain TV shows or genres for example.
Edit - One more thing. RTS genre doesn't as much of the "wow realism!" factor that FPS (well "realistic FPS", not TF or Quake mind you) games have. I don't know but I know a lot of people who keep playing FPS like CoD or BF even if they do bad. Why they do keep playing? Because there are a lot of aspects of the game that impresses them and makes them want to keep playing.
I guess it's neat to feel like you're in a war or battle (without all the pains of wars that is). It's fun for the sake of the simulation sometimes (speaking of which, why the Sims is one of the most popular PC games[it's the top 5 last I checked in games sold]).
Overall I'm not sure exactly what they can do to make RTS more popular without changing it severely. Make the game have more variety? More addiction elements (not counting just getting promoted or anything. It has to do with in game stuff like unlocks or learning new abilities for your hero like DotA)? I'm not sure but at the same time I don't think it's a major problem since RTS (while not as popular as others) is still alive and doing well enough.
|
I would argue that "fun" and "teamwork" are accessibility. At least they are in my mind: anything that makes it easier to engage in the game qualifies as accessibility. But I like your points.
I kind of feel like eSports can provide a substitute for addiction/leveling elements. It's the player stories and epic action that keep you coming back. It's not perfect, and it doesn't keep you playing the game as much necessarily, but I think the football analogy is a good one: most the people who watch it don't play it, and that's okay. So, while it's not an addiction element, it can keep people coming back to eSports. Getting people into it in the first place is the biggest hurtle I see (we're not having difficulty retaining fans like WWE does, as far as I can tell).
I never struggle with feeling like SCII is bland or lacks variety. I might be the minority when sampling the general population, but there is so much you can do in SCII with just one race versus just one race -- banshee marine push in tvt, in base hellion production, quick 3 bases with tanks to secure, Hunter Seeker missile push, two-pronged attacks with medivac drops, two-base bunker siege push, 6 rax marine all-in, 5 rax tech all-in, and that's just openings, once you get to the late game there's a ton of different potential routes. If anything, games like Call of Duty seem to lack variety in comparison. Like I said, perhaps I'm a minority, but SCII feels like it can play different 100 ways in just one matchup let alone all nine -- okay, ZvZ doesn't play out 100 different ways, but hopefully HotS will help that.
As far as teamwork goes, does the Fusion Ladder address that in any way?
I hope they let LotV sit on the back burner for a while after HotS's release and develop the game a bit/lot more. That would be lovely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/1Fm4b.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/PpMzE.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Pjvsg.jpg)
