|
On June 17 2010 05:12 owenowens33 wrote:Show nested quote +Game companies need to make a game that is fun to play, not hard to play. They need to make a game that is easy for players to pick up and they need gamers to feel good about themselves. So how does one do that? In short its making a game eaiser to play, and making sure there is a skill ceiling that is very attainable. Think of Super Smash Brothers Brawl compared to Super Smash Brothers Melee. Think of HALO compared to HALO3. Think of SCBW to SC2. Think of the Modern Warfare Series... WOW ext... all of these games have something in common- and that is a false sense of competition. As the new generation of games debut- they slowly and slowly lower the skill ceiling. Yet even when the skill ceiling is lowered, competitive gaming circuits still pick up games that are vastly inferior to others.
I actually agree 100% on this, especially with regards to Melee's de-evolution into Brawl. Those of you who may believe that Brawl is some sort of competitive fighter did not witness or experience the incredibly competitive Melee scene. And Misrah is right, Melee was never meant to be a truly competitive fighter (it was made by nintendo, I mean, come on), but it became one because the players in the community found various advanced techniques that completely obliterated the envisioned skill ceiling. Becoming a competitive Melee player was one of the most difficult things to achieve in my gaming career, and its up there with getting to C- on Iccup for BW. Then came the advent of Brawl. The sequel was highly anticipated by both the casual and the hardcore alike, until the hardcore realized that the game was being developing SOLELY for the casual market. The speed of the games was horribly nerfed. The advanced techniques that served as pillars for competitive Melee were instantly taken out and replaced with something no fighting game has even SEEN before: tripping, which randomly tripped players stunned them while running. It is hard to describe the transition from Brawl to Melee as anything but a complete abandonment of the hardcore gamer in favor of the massive, casual audience. And guess who won? Nintendo did. The game sold incredibly well; hell, IGN gave it a 9.5. But the release of Brawl introduced a gaping dichotomy in the Smash community, and most of the hardcore smash players continue to play Melee even now. The only losers in this equation are the hardcore gamers that did not receive a fully functioning sequel. Both the gaming companies and the casual gamers got exactly what they wanted. The pull is undeniable, even for a hardcore gamer. My roommate used to play Counter Strike with me; in fact, he was the one who got me into it. I used to be amazed at his skills, and I just get practicing because I wanted to be good at the game. And trust me, if you have ever played Counter Strike before, you know that the first couple of weeks you play that game you are going to get owned. Over and over again. But I persisted because the competitiveness of the game and its steep learning curve drove me to keep playing, rather than pushing me away because it was too hard. I am now much better than my roommate at CS and continue to play in CEVO CSS leagues. But the real point of the story is why my roommate stopped playing CS. He started to pick up other shooters like TF2, and eventually Modern Warfare. He started playing Modern Warfare and never looked back to CS because (he even said this to me) "I'm really good Modern Warfare, I love owning these kids". And so I started playing it, and within an hour I was getting the same KDR's as he was. It wasnt because I was some god like FPS gamer. It was simply because the guns have no recoil, the entire KDR is based upon Kill Streak rewards, and most of the community was 10-16 year old kids. It simply wasn't that compelling for me. But my roommate loved it. It was entertaining. However, MW2 came out and the community slowly got better and better. Soon my roommate hated the regular team deathmatch because he simply wasnt getting the KDR he wanted. So what did he do? Try and get better at the game so he could be more competitive? No. He now exclusively plays the Ground War playlist because "Its easier cause people who play Ground War are noobs". This is a classic example of someone who just wants to succeed, even if succeeding requires no effort. However, I have to disagree with the OP on one thing: I still believe in SC2. I know that there have been some mechanics that make the game easier for the casual (MBS, smart cast, automine), but there exists a large discrepancy between the good players and the great players of the game. The skill ceiling, as it stands right now, is undoubtedly lower than the SCBW, but I still believe that Blizzard knows that SC2 must appeal to the hardcore gaming base that has built the SC community. Have faith in Blizzard, they really do deliver quality games. Show nested quote +Thank you for proving my point.
Starcraft is competitive. The pros play on a competitive level. A 6 year old (or a copper player) will be playing the game for entertainment. But they are playing the same game.
Starcraft BW was fine, SC2 will be fine. I think you are missing the point. It is obvious that there can be a game that is easy to pick up but hard to master. SSBM was a game like that, tailored for the casual, but the hardcore drove the metagame until it was highly competitive. What Misrah is saying is that gaming developers now are consciously trying to limit the competitiveness of a game in order to attract a larger casual audience and generate more profit. For example, imagine a company that comes up with the game of Soccer. Then the company comes up with Soccer 2.0, and builds into the game rules that are specifically designed to make the game non-competitive, such as no running, the goals are bigger, etc etc. Also, no pro goes out and challenges a 6 year to a soccer match, beats him badly, and then scars the kid for life. However, on an online platform, advanced gamers are matched up with noobs constantly; game companies are afraid of the noobs becoming wary of a game because he or she cannot play the game without being beaten badly by an experienced player online.
wait someone actually agrees with me on the sc2 forum! hell ya!
|
On June 17 2010 05:12 Misrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 05:06 Half wrote:I don't think you've addressed this point. Youe core conclusion is an illogical piece of steaming crap. If you argue that games cannot simultaneously exist as competition and media (what you erroneously refer to as entertainment), that requires Starcraft 1 not to be a game. If Starcraft 1 was a complete experience unto itself, then going onto Starcraft 2 why do I want more content? Not just me, but a lot of other plays. Content is something that necessitates an experience as media. I want more content. How can this fact coexist with your thesis that "entertainment is not gaiming"? On June 17 2010 05:04 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 04:59 Half wrote:On June 17 2010 04:58 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 04:56 OpRaider wrote:On June 17 2010 04:30 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 04:28 Backpack wrote:
You fail to realize that a game can be easy and remain competitive at the same time.
Look at any non e-sport. Kids start playing soccer or baseball or hockey when they're 6 years old. Does that mean the sport is made for little kids? Try telling that to the professional athletes and die-hard fans.
Just because it's available to more than just the top elite players doesn't mean it can't be competitive. Nope that's called entertainment. Stop kidding yourself- understand what everything has becoem in the pursuit of money... WRONG, you are COMPLETELY wrong, you had not a single good point in your article. ill throw out Quake as an example, which you seemed to completely missed in your article. Which is hard, since its about E-sports and competition. You used halo as a point? rofl, anwyays back on point. Quake is easy as balls to get started. You can run around like a chicken with no head and get kills in a FFA server, or Clan Arena. But it, like SC, and CS is one of the most high skill demanding to get GOOD at and be competitive at. But do you need to be godly good to have fun? hell no, you can just run around in Clan Arena and do some wicked shit. You (and a lot of others for that fact) are completely missing that game designers aren't making a game just for money. They are making something that they are truly proud of.. For example...an artist can just throw paint at a piece of paper and sell taht shit (some do) , but most sit down and make a painting from their heart, make it look the best. Where does this fit in to gaming? Quite simple...game designers and programmers play the game that they make, they want to make it a game they like to play. Its their game, they put their heart into it. Its not just a money grab, contrary to popular belief. one of their main goals is to feed their family, yes. but its not the only goal. You don't understand business if you honestly think that a game company would make a game that does not sell well- but they felt good about it. I never said that a game that is easy to get into is bad- just one that has a very attainable ceiling. That is called entertainment. The Witcher made 2450$ in profit as of May 2010 and was considered a success by both producer and the studio. Why? Because it established them as a producer of quality products and a dedicated support for their fanbase. ya blizz started that way too. But then they realized they could make lots of money. small companies start out small, and they grow bigger and bigger. that is how blizz started, bungie started and everything else in this world. I am not sure i understand where you are coming from  Because you just said
You don't understand business if you honestly think that a game company would make a game that does not sell well- but they felt good about it.
Which is wrong. There are tons of game companies making products and making limited/no profits, not out of failure, but just out of the limited size of the target audience. . that little game company did make a profit. They are a small business, and small business make small profits... What do you expect? When you have a big business you are constantly looking for bigger and bigger profits- and you will get them anyway you can. Besides blizz has been sucked up by activision- more corporate yay!
Did you know to run a succesful business you need to grow. Every business is made to make money. Most new game developers need to make their first title great and the cost must either be close to breaking even or a small margin of profit. Walmart used to be a small business, but then people decided they were doing a good job and forced it to grow.
Next time you think Blizzard was the good guys back in the day just remember what they did to Condor(They bought them to increase their profits! Of course Condor did not mind that they became a peice of a bigger puzzle).
|
On June 17 2010 05:15 Misrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 05:10 Talic_Zealot wrote:
APM mattered so much in BW because of no worker / fight rally, no automine, no mbs, no unlimited selection.
Nony your a way better player than me- don't you think that if that was in SC1 that you and many other pro gamers would have hit the ceiling many many years ago?
You are proving yourself wrong. No worker / fight rally, no automine, no mbs, no unlimited selection are not at all the reasons starcraft is such a competitive game. Actually the fact that these exist in SC2 and still it is a very mechanically demanding game means that there will be even more things that you can do if you are good enough. SC2 is not mechanically demanding. You must be kidding me right? Many people share the sentiment that sc2 doesn't not require as much mechanical skill as sc1. But at least you have APM technology now... so i could be wrong.
stop acting morally superior to everyone...by using this "APM technology" thing as your cover
|
oO there's no way the average gamer is 35 years old, unless they count card games or something haha
|
On June 17 2010 05:10 Puosu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 05:01 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 04:56 Liquid`NonY wrote:On June 17 2010 04:50 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 04:48 Liquid`NonY wrote:
Easy to learn, difficult to master. It's possible and it's out there. If the skill ceiling is too low, why are there still players and teams that stand out from the rest? Until there are tournaments with 20+ people who have about an equal chance of winning, skill ceilings aren't a problem. nony- come on, with the apm machines that are korean pro gamers, you don't think that they will hit the ceiling quickly? They didn't with BW -- why would they with SC2? Are you saying your whole OP relies on theorycraft? =/ I know Halo 3 is, in a sense, less competitive than Halo 1. I was there for that. I was a very competitive Halo 1 player and I was totally disappointed with the direction the sequels went. But Halo 3 is still perfectly fine as a competitive game. The skill ceiling is high enough. The skill ceiling for WoW Arena is also high enough. I'm not sure what failure games you can point out... APM mattered so much in BW because of no worker / fight rally, no automine, no mbs, no unlimited selection. Nony your a way better player than me- don't you think that if that was in SC1 that you and many other pro gamers would have hit the ceiling many many years ago? You're really really underestimating the importance of strategy, decision making and things not completely related to mechanics. The current SC1 progamers at even the B-level hardly ever miss their workers or buildings being inactive yet they're nowhere close to being as good as Flash. WC3 had those things there and the game was far from SC in mechanics, however the game has never been played at even close to perfect level. I doubt SC2 will ever reach a stage where anyone can play it completely "optimally". Not in less than multiple decades.
Completely agree with this post. If you compare sc to chess, just knowing how to move the pieces does not win you the game. Moving your workers to mineral patch is a complete waste of time and does nothing to prove one's strategic thinking, I don't understand why people think this makes the game easy...
|
An RTS can evolve where a FPS " genre games cannot.
lol.
Stop making statements out of your ass.
On June 17 2010 05:18 Skeyser wrote:
oO there's no way the average gamer is 35 years old, unless they count card games or something haha
Yes, the liberal left wing controlled media is lieing to us.
|
On June 17 2010 05:18 OpRaider wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 05:15 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:10 Talic_Zealot wrote:
APM mattered so much in BW because of no worker / fight rally, no automine, no mbs, no unlimited selection.
Nony your a way better player than me- don't you think that if that was in SC1 that you and many other pro gamers would have hit the ceiling many many years ago?
You are proving yourself wrong. No worker / fight rally, no automine, no mbs, no unlimited selection are not at all the reasons starcraft is such a competitive game. Actually the fact that these exist in SC2 and still it is a very mechanically demanding game means that there will be even more things that you can do if you are good enough. SC2 is not mechanically demanding. You must be kidding me right? Many people share the sentiment that sc2 doesn't not require as much mechanical skill as sc1. But at least you have APM technology now... so i could be wrong. stop acting morally superior to everyone...by using this "APM technology" thing as your cover
Morally superior- yep thats me.
Keep bringing on the hate SC2 forum i have been waiting for this.
Entertainment is the new wave of the future.
|
On June 17 2010 05:16 Jovian wrote:
The biggest Problem that I see here is that you are comparing FPS to RTS. The difference in the genres make your point (while well thought out) a pile of rubbish. Yes games are made simpler and easier to learn but thats to get people playing them. The game takes on a mind of its own once it gets into the players hands.
Look back at BW - the Reaver is a classic example because when it came out people thought it was a worthless unit by and large. Then some guy decided to put it in a Shuttle and now it is a mainstream strategy. Once the game is released it is developed by the players, and Blizzard then has to react to how we play the game and patch what the true imba's are - case in point the spawning pool's cost on Starcrafts release.
FPS games dont have that element because (and don't take offence to this) but like with Halo you have a gun and grenades, there is a strict limit on the level of creativity that can come out of there. Whereas with an RTS and the units and compositions and spells etc... We wont know those limits for several years.
An RTS can evolve where a FPS or "Sports" genre games cannot.
This is entirely incorrect.
I'm not a huge fan of Halo but you are seriously underestimating the complexity that goes on in a team vs team game. It's not just the guns and the grenades, it's how to use them, where to put yourself with available cover but still meeting the objective, conserving ammo properly, proper defense. This is what made the original Halo and CS 1.6 so ridiculously competitive.
It's simply much harder to see this from a spectator view point but it is most definitely there.
However I am definitely seeing the trend Misrah is talking about. Without a doubt games are leaning toward easier to master and reward for little effort. This is undeniable. Hell even when Brawl was being developed a dev came right out and said , "It made sense to take x ability out because it allows players that haven't played as long to keep up with players that have played for a long time."
This statement spoke volumes about the direction a franchise as popular as SSB would go toward...and it's happening with ALL games.
|
So because people do not agree with you POV we are brinning the "hate" ? Really ?
|
On June 17 2010 05:21 Misrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 05:18 OpRaider wrote:On June 17 2010 05:15 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:10 Talic_Zealot wrote:
APM mattered so much in BW because of no worker / fight rally, no automine, no mbs, no unlimited selection.
Nony your a way better player than me- don't you think that if that was in SC1 that you and many other pro gamers would have hit the ceiling many many years ago?
You are proving yourself wrong. No worker / fight rally, no automine, no mbs, no unlimited selection are not at all the reasons starcraft is such a competitive game. Actually the fact that these exist in SC2 and still it is a very mechanically demanding game means that there will be even more things that you can do if you are good enough. SC2 is not mechanically demanding. You must be kidding me right? Many people share the sentiment that sc2 doesn't not require as much mechanical skill as sc1. But at least you have APM technology now... so i could be wrong. stop acting morally superior to everyone...by using this "APM technology" thing as your cover Morally superior- yep thats me. Keep bringing on the hate SC2 forum i have been waiting for this. Entertainment is the new wave of the future.
You seem to enjoy the attention.
kinda pathetic.
Read this guys post
On June 17 2010 05:09 Silver~Guy wrote:
Hello,
I think you are being cynical about the state of gaming. In fact I think nostalgia is the main emotion of your post.
I think perhaps you need to take a break from gaming, enjoy some other parts of life and look at it again with a fresh perspective and you will find it the same as ever; easy to play and hard to compete.
OP:
I seriously suggest you reevaluate your life.
|
As an engineer I can tell you right now that money is not the only thing that people are interested in. Sure there are some people who are interested only in money but to say that is the only driving force is just false.
Right now I'm working on a few projects but we've just started getting in the parts for one project that I designed a few months back. I cannot express to you how excited and proud I am of these parts. They're dumb pieces of steel that most people would look at and pass right over but to me they're more. I spent weeks doing calculations to perfectly optimize these parts and have spent lots of time in boring meetings since then listening as the mechanical engineers figure out how to fit it all into a good package. I'm not the only one, my boss and other coworkers come by and smile when they see the parts, they're all excited to see it come together too.
I'm sure that this is what its like at Blizzard. When the programmers all come together and see the great game they've made they feel pride for what they accomplished. Yes the product will make them money, but the sheer joy of seeing it come together is equal in their minds to any money they receive for it.
I find it hard to believe that this is exclusive to engineers or scientists, people like doing things well. People feel pride for the work which they accomplished. When the business people see the work that we do, they are proud of it too. To dismiss this is being far too cynical.
|
Woow.. this is starting to get really entertaining. I've played aggressive poker but damn.. this is just a whole new level. GG I guess the APM tech trully got me lmao..
|
remember pong? easy enough to learn, but loads of fun when played with friends. It's the people like us that makes the game enjoyable. The games or sports are just the platform.
True, Money is certainly a major part of the motivation for these companies. But don't forget that the game developers want to be successful too. I work on IT projects in a corporate environment and sure money is certainly a factor in everything that we do, but having satisfaction from our accomplishments matters too.
|
Nope just enjoying that people are up in arms about the truth.
Entertainment is big bucks, and all of you are buying into it. That is what my OP was- that is my opinion and i am sticking with it.
|
On June 17 2010 05:23 Misrah wrote:
Nope just enjoying that people are up in arms about the truth.
Entertainment is big bucks, and all of you are buying into it. That is what my OP was- that is my opinion and i am sticking with it.
Nope. Considering almost every single thing you've posted in this thread is demonstrably false.
|
On June 17 2010 05:23 revy wrote:
As an engineer I can tell you right now that money is not the only thing that people are interested in. Sure there are some people who are interested only in money but to say that is the only driving force is just false.
Right now I'm working on a few projects but we've just started getting in the parts for one project that I designed a few months back. I cannot express to you how excited and proud I am of these parts. They're dumb pieces of steel that most people would look at and pass right over but to me they're more. I spent weeks doing calculations to perfectly optimize these parts and have spent lots of time in boring meetings since then listening as the mechanical engineers figure out how to fit it all into a good package. I'm not the only one, my boss and other coworkers come by and smile when they see the parts, they're all excited to see it come together too.
I'm sure that this is what its like at Blizzard. When the programmers all come together and see the great game they've made they feel pride for what they accomplished. Yes the product will make them money, but the sheer joy of seeing it come together is equal in their minds to any money they receive for it.
I find it hard to believe that this is exclusive to engineers or scientists, people like doing things well. People feel pride for the work which they accomplished. When the business people see the work that we do, they are proud of it too. To dismiss this is being far too cynical.
Thank you for bringing up this point. While you yourself are not interested in monetary gains- the company you will be working for is. and in the case of activision blizzard- the board of directors is very very concerned with making money. 
|
So Misrah, just to clarify, is your problem with SC2 that it is "entertaining" or the fact the Blizz will make money on it ?
Both of which are highly dependent on one another.
|
How about an additional hypothetical about "skill-ceilings":
What if SC1 is nowhere even close to the "ceiling" of skill of what you could accomplish. It takes so much APM and dexterity to work around the engine that what you do is incredibly impressive but nowhere near what the maximum capacity of the game is.
So, what if SC2 doesn't rail you against the ceiling but shifts the abilities along the continnum closer to the ceiling. So, yes, the average noob looks more skilled than they would in SC1, but the pro can still soar higher than them. In fact, the pro can use the additional APM that he's not using working around the SC1 interface to get an even more impressive command on his units.
Isn't the ultimate goal of gaming to have a true control over every unit individually? I mean, if you could do that, that would be the "ceiling" as I see it. The closer you get to that, the more you can control raiding parties, drops, expanding, harassing, attacking, flanking, etc all at the same time. In this way, it could be that removing some of the APM sinks of SC1 actually opens up an even more entertaining result. Or an equally entertaining result, or just an entertaining result.
In this way, sure SC2 is easier than SC1 in the ways that we used to regard as amazing the ways that pros managed the limitations of SC1, but SC2 could be amazing in entirely new ways and provide depth in entirely different ways.
Again, this is all hypothetical. I'm just throwing out a thought experiment moreso than passing judgement on the legacy of all of BW and the incredibly young SC2.
|
On June 17 2010 05:23 Misrah wrote:
Nope just enjoying that people are up in arms about the truth.
Entertainment is big bucks, and all of you are buying into it. That is what my OP was- that is my opinion and i am sticking with it.
Ok this is what bothers me. You are making a stand for your opinion, and that is great. But I feel you have been majorly influenced by other people on the forum, which is bad. Take a step back and try to make your own opinion about the situation. Take all the articles aside and look at the game itself.
|
On June 17 2010 05:25 Half wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 05:23 Misrah wrote:
Nope just enjoying that people are up in arms about the truth.
Entertainment is big bucks, and all of you are buying into it. That is what my OP was- that is my opinion and i am sticking with it. Nope. Considering almost every single thing you've posted in this thread is demonstrably false.
care to show me where everything i have said is false? why don't you start at the op- and then actually make an argument, or you can just keep posting your defamatory trash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
