|
Northern Ireland25119 Posts
I am currently thinking of a way to collate the various parts of the community's perspectives on core game design and display the often underlooked similarities that exist there.
I believe this is entirely beneficial as a process. In this instance, I have certain preconceptions about the underlying root causes of casual players, both in terms of why they play SC2 in the first place and also what annoys or frustrates them about the game.
I do not want to be proven wrong, or proven right, I want to actually know how you think!
The idea of my thread, is to try and show that a lot of the core problems we have with the game as a community, or the things we like about it are actually a lot more universal and linked across different sections of the playerbase than we consider.
The only way to attempt to 'prove' that is to actually get feedback and information from those groups themselves.
The only resource as such that I don't have access to, or know how to find are people who consider themselves casual players. I can find mapmakers, pro players, theorycraft/design people and all those other people because I know where to find them.
Casuals, if you're out there help me with feedback. Either post here, or PM me or post in my original thread idea which is at:
Preliminary Discussion Thread
|
I think this is a great idea and would be more than happy to help. I like this approach because it doesn't force the casual into being a game designer, just giving input on what does and does not work for them personally and on their level of play.
|
Northern Ireland25119 Posts
Thanks for the input in terms of it seems you at least appreciate the general hypothesis, we can PM back-and-forth later if you so desire!
|
As a design person in training I'm not really sure if I qualify for your demographic, unless you're speaking specifically for SC2 custom games, which I don't have much patience for... I'd be happy to help you Wombat. It is a bit of a concern, however, that many casual players (not all) don't actually play (or watch - if they ever did) the game anymore. This would of course cheapen their contribution, or mislead you unintentionally.
EDIT: I prefer to think of myself as a terrible (skill-wise) fanatic with wrist injury from a lifetime of extensive gaming.
|
Northern Ireland25119 Posts
See Roach, (I couldn't be bothered with the capitalising  ) I'm convinced Blizzard consider casuals from the wrong perspective. I.e they do things 'for' the casual, but without really actually asking them what they want, or what frustrates them. I can show this in action, logically if you so desire further explanation.
It's the last group I feel are neglected in that sense. All these groups should be considered, perhaps in different terms though.
Us design guys, know design or at least have good ideas about DESIGN
Casuals, know how casuals think.
Mapmakers know how to make and balance maps
Pro players know how the game functions close to optimal play
I think that makes sense if I explain it like that
|
On December 06 2012 03:16 dUTtrOACh wrote:
As a design person in training I'm not really sure if I qualify for your demographic, unless you're speaking specifically for SC2 custom games, which I don't have much patience for... I'd be happy to help you Wombat. It is a bit of a concern, however, that many casual players (not all) don't actually play (or watch - if they ever did) the game anymore. This would of course cheapen their contribution, or mislead you unintentionally.
EDIT: I prefer to think of myself as a terrible (skill-wise) fanatic with wrist injury from a lifetime of extensive gaming.
I think (I could be wrong) as long as they're reading TL and willing to volunteer to help with the project, they probably either watch or play frequently still. When I went on SC2 hiatus my browsing of TL was extremely minimal and I would have hardly considered helping with a research project. Slightly side-stepping the main topic, but I hadn't considered that either. Definitely something to keep an eye on.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
The vast majority of casual players dont read discussion threads, your data is invalid.
|
How do you define causel player? Someone who doesn't try hard to win and improve?
|
Northern Ireland25119 Posts
Consider it like this.
1. People always talk about casual players, even Blizzard reference them as being in their thoughts with game design.
2. Somebody has raised the problem of 'how do you define casual players'
3. Who better to define their actual concerns, than people who self-identify as casuals?
If there are no casuals, then they don't exist. If they don't exist why would anybody try to design their game around them?
|
On December 06 2012 03:30 Wombat_NI wrote:
Consider it like this.
1. People always talk about casual players, even Blizzard reference them as being in their thoughts with game design.
2. Somebody has raised the problem of 'how do you define casual players'
3. Who better to define their actual concerns, than people who self-identify as casuals?
If there are no casuals, then they don't exist. If they don't exist why would anybody try to design their game around them? Since people who defines themselves as casual are still too hardcore. To me at least, casual players are the ones who plays only campaign and customs and comp stomps, never visited TL, never watch tournaments, etc. Yes even the guys stuck in Bronze are still too hardcore. These people definitely exist, and you won't ever hear from them.
|
You know what casual gamers want? CUSTOM GAMES. That is the only way my friends will get back into starcraft.. Only reason why we played Starcraft:Brood War was because of the UMS. We didnt play SC:BW because of ladder we could care less, it was about playing games that we can continuing playing like choose your D
edit : even i dont even play starcraft anymore, i only just watch it mostly.. its pretty lonely if you are playing alone to be honest.
|
Northern Ireland25119 Posts
On December 06 2012 03:33 achan1058 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 03:30 Wombat_NI wrote:
Consider it like this.
1. People always talk about casual players, even Blizzard reference them as being in their thoughts with game design.
2. Somebody has raised the problem of 'how do you define casual players'
3. Who better to define their actual concerns, than people who self-identify as casuals?
If there are no casuals, then they don't exist. If they don't exist why would anybody try to design their game around them? Since people who defines themselves as casual are still too hardcore. To me at least, casual players are the ones who plays only campaign and customs and comp stomps, never visited TL, never watch tournaments, etc. Yes even the guys stuck in Bronze are still too hardcore. These people definitely exist, and you won't ever hear from them.
Well, I suppose you can't factor that very lowest of casual in. Not because they don't exist, but because we lack the ways of interfacing with them (I mean in this case, they aren't on TL). Short of enlisting the glorious Gheed to delve once more again into the horrors of the furthest depths of Bronze league and chat to players there, I'm not sure how we could do that.
Gheed's Glorious Quest
I link that because it's hilarious but also to illustrate an upcoming point.
Also, with reference to your listed 'archetypal casuals'. If they are THAT casual, surely stuff like game balance, or design issues, or 'patchzergs' wouldn't really bother them? With regards to the casuals that Gheed encountered on his journey, people who weren't necessarily stupid but who did things that were unfathomably stupid. There are ways of addressing them I guess, logically but in most cases their lack of skill isn't due to game design or anything like that.
There are ways of lateral thinking to help people who don't understand the game, understand the game.
|
If that's the level of "casual" you are looking for, pretty much you have to go to the B.net forums, in my opinion. I would want to define myself as casual, as in I only watch tournaments but not play, but I really can't knowing that there are many more casual people out there.
|
Northern Ireland25119 Posts
Those people are on Blizzard's own forums so at least Blizz can find them easily.
I'm trying to find people between the extremes of some of the retards on there, and the pro players that Blizz talk to. Those are guys who I feel fall through the cracks, at least in terms of how Blizzard interacts with them
|
I'm getting the feeling that some people just refuse to believe that people can get bored of playing a video game; that they can lose interest in it after a while and move on to another game. They always want to default to "oh well blizzard is doing this wrong" or "oh people are afraid of losing" or "omg look at the viewer count compared to these other games" or some combination of 15 other assumptions, most if not all of which are irrelevant, stupid, or uneducated guesses based on hype or drama.
Casual gamers. Just think about what that means. To me, it means someone who picks up a game, finds something in it they enjoy, plays it for 2 weeks, and then moves on to the next new release. That is what "casual" means. Competitive players tend to stick with the game for a longer period of time because they want to improve for the purpose of competing. Why would a casual player stick to playing sc2 for 2 years if all they are looking for is something to burn their relaxation time on? People want new games, shit they havent seen before, and unfortunately that kind of innovation is becoming more stagant recently.
As for sc2: the game has a competitive nature. Whether you are playing ladder on the bottom of bronze league, or you are playing a non-ranked game vs a friend. The very actions of playing the game itself lean towards a sense of competing; im trying to get the fastest mothership possible or, im going to expand 6 times and hope he doesnt notice, it's still competitive in at least one way, and that can burn people out. Everyone is different, some people just cant handle playing more than 2 games in an hour, others have no problem playing all day. That doesnt mean there is something "wrong" with the game, or the design, or blizzard as a company.
If you are someone who is getting bored with sc2, then just find a new game that you havent played, that you have some kind of interest in. You dont have to feel bad about leaving a game just because someone else wants to make you feel bad because you arent a competitive person. Also, if you are a competitive person, and you get depressed because you lose a lot of games, then just move on to something else; something better suited towards your skills, something you are more comfortable with, or just plain enjoy more than sc2.
To the OP: I'm not saying what you want people to do here is dumb, but it's been discussed to death already. People have expressed their opinions on what should and shouldnt be in this game, people have argued over balance, and it will continue until the game dies. You cant make everyone happy, and neither can Blizzard or any other game company.
Someone here said that Blizzard wants to design for casual players, but doesnt give them what they want. How can you make such an ignorant comment with a straight face when there is an expansion coming out in 4(?) months. I think that you, and almost everyone else lol, needs to understand that any and all negativity being expressed about sc2 or blizzard is just over exaggerated because this is the internet. Problems seem a whole lot bigger than they really are, and how people choose to express their opinions is uncontrollable.
Give blizzard your opinions on the game, and then wait until HoTS. If you still dont like the game, then either keep protesting and trolling them, or find a new game.
|
Northern Ireland25119 Posts
Nope, you're wrong. 
If they were just getting bored of the game, that's an unfixable problem and not at all one I would want to fix or ever advocate trying to.
If they were say, put off by the lack of social features that's fixable. For example the often, OFTEN described problems with Bnet 2.0 and how it feels 'lonely' put off many people.
The latter example, is the kind of misconception I wish to address. I've already got responses to that effect from a variety of sources. I had a central idea about certain problems, and the feedback I am getting directly validates my overarching hypothesis.
|
I think the races should "feel" more balanced, as in the fights between basic units should be more even. I have casual friends who get very frustrated because their losses amount to not force fielding well / in time, or get very confused because the expensive stalkers lose so badly to cheap roaches in a head on fight.
Things like that aren't intuitive at all, and I believe Blizzard wants things to be intuitive.
|
Northern Ireland25119 Posts
On December 06 2012 04:10 ultratorr wrote:
I think the races should "feel" more balanced, as in the fights between basic units should be more even. I have casual friends who get very frustrated because their losses amount to not force fielding well / in time, or get very confused because the expensive stalkers lose so badly to cheap roaches in a head on fight.
Things like that aren't intuitive at all, and I believe Blizzard wants things to be intuitive.
That kind of feedback is pretty useful.
Are you yourself a 'casual' or is it just your friends? If the latter, I like the way you're discussing actual things that concern them. If at all possible would you be at the very least able to relay my questions to them, and collect the answers and get them back to me?
Post here again or PM me regardless of whether you want to or not
|
On December 06 2012 04:09 Wombat_NI wrote:Nope, you're wrong. If they were just getting bored of the game, that's an unfixable problem and not at all one I would want to fix or ever advocate trying to. If they were say, put off by the lack of social features that's fixable. For example the often, OFTEN described problems with Bnet 2.0 and how it feels 'lonely' put off many people. The latter example, is the kind of misconception I wish to address. I've already got responses to that effect from a variety of sources. I had a central idea about certain problems, and the feedback I am getting directly validates my overarching hypothesis.
Most of these things you want though, will have nothing to do with actual game balance. People will always claim their own race is UP, even if it is terrans of the 2010 era.
I guess I would add what I want as a tournament watcher, if that's any value to you. Aggression. Watching turtling players are not fun, balanced or not. Seeing as I don't play, I hardly care if one race has better win rates than another unless it's something like 70-30. On the other hand, NR 15 is not the reason why I watch SC2.
|
Social features will keep casual players in the game but wont necessarily be a reason why they should come back after they've dropped the game. New campaign missions or really innovative custom games might draw them back to bnet and then upon seeing the new social features they may stick around.
Blizzard needs to wise up. SCII has one of the best communities among all video games despite it's recent performances. There are literally free things blizzard can do to improve the play ability of their game!
Balance designers don't really need to know much about the game. They can just listen to professional feedback! Feedback for casuals should only be used to determine the interface, not the balance of the game. This includes Bnet 2.0, custom map searching etc... maybe even hotkeys and in game mechanics.
The number 1 most underutilized tool blizzard has is the mapmaking community. They churn out quality maps for free even though most of them aren't even considered by blizzard or tournaments. If blizzard used community made maps (top votes win) and changed up the map pool every ladder season, the game would be a lot more refreshing for all of us. Also because mapmakers are rewarded for their work *in the form of their pieces actually influencing the game* they will be more willing to make better maps / there will be more people interested in mapmaking, which can translate to more custom maps down the road.
This can even be done at the professional level. Pro players get paid not because they are really fucking good at 3 base vs 3 base, but because they're good at STARCRAFT II. That includes all facets of the game including new maps that come out. As long as we don't have close spawn metalopolis or steppes of war again, new maps that have a different structure will force players to try new things to win and ERASE THIS BORING CURRENT METAGAME. I mean just look at the last time we changed the map paradigm. When it was first changed, things were cool because we were seeing 3 base plays and long macro games that were much rarer before. Now, I don't even feel a need to watch certain matchups until it's 3 base to 3 base because nothing happens in the first 10 minutes. The current map strategies have been played and figured out. It also doesn't help that the same strategy works on basically all the maps we have now +/- ohana, which I believe to be the best map in the pool currently.
Basically: New Maps = New Metagame = Renewed interest in watching/ playing SCII
|
Northern Ireland25119 Posts
On December 06 2012 04:15 achan1058 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 04:09 Wombat_NI wrote:Nope, you're wrong. If they were just getting bored of the game, that's an unfixable problem and not at all one I would want to fix or ever advocate trying to. If they were say, put off by the lack of social features that's fixable. For example the often, OFTEN described problems with Bnet 2.0 and how it feels 'lonely' put off many people. The latter example, is the kind of misconception I wish to address. I've already got responses to that effect from a variety of sources. I had a central idea about certain problems, and the feedback I am getting directly validates my overarching hypothesis. Most of these things you want though, will have nothing to do with actual game balance. People will always claim their own race is UP, even if it is terrans of the 2010 era.
It's got literally nothing to do with addressing people like that directly.
They exist, but you CANNOT balance around people who are not inherently logical (as in the case of the worst balance whiners) but you can do so with people who have the same concerns ('Terran UP'), but express it logically with reference to why they feel this is so.
Regardless of whether you think they are wrong or right, you can/should address concerns based in some kind of rationale over and above assertions, even ones that are right.
|
You should clarify what your target group is specifically.
"Casual players" is a popular, catchall term that can mean anything and everything. I can't determine whether I'm supposed to include myself in the group, as I was never truly committed to Starcraft as a video game, or exclude myself from it as I still follow the game and have an in-depth knowledge of it relative to an average player.
|
Northern Ireland25119 Posts
On December 06 2012 04:21 Talin wrote:
You should clarify what your target group is specifically.
"Casual players" is a popular, catchall term that can mean anything and everything. I can't determine whether I'm supposed to include myself in the group, as I was never truly committed to Starcraft as a video game, or exclude myself from it as I still follow the game and have an in-depth knowledge of it relative to an average player.
You address the actual point of the thread Talin.
It's a catchall term that is thrown about, but never really defined. Thus, how do you address 'the casual', if this group is ill-defined?
I'd welcome your overall ideas though, I can PM you the additional detail of my overall plan, or address whether you count as casual there? You're a good poster who I'd love to deal with, albeit most of that is based on the posts of yours I've read in non-SC sections
|
The people that constantly complain about "social problems" with this game dont know what they want either. They just say "omg the game is lonely" or "omg why am i not put into 600 chat rooms upon logging in, and if they do this I will somehow not be lonely anymore".
This isnt facebook. If you want 90% talking to people, and 10% playing a game, then go play a facebook game lol.
"If they were say, put off by the lack of social features that's fixable"
"The idea of my thread, is to try and show that a lot of the core problems we have with the game as a community, or the things we like about it are actually a lot more universal and linked across different sections of the playerbase than we consider"
"why they play SC2 in the first place and also what annoys or frustrates them about the game."
A lot of what you are saying is just general and provoking, sorry, nonsense. You want all of the extremists and [probably] trolls to come back out of their caves and replicate everything they have already said on various other threads over the last 2 years.
ultratorr says:
I think the races should "feel" more balanced, as in the fights between basic units should be more even. I have casual friends who get very frustrated because their losses amount to not force fielding well / in time, or get very confused because the expensive stalkers lose so badly to cheap roaches in a head on fight.
Things like that aren't intuitive at all, and I believe Blizzard wants things to be intuitive.
You can have an opinion, but in reality you have no clue what you are talking about at all. Your friend(s) are frustrated because they dont know how to execute a build efficiently, and then get mad when they die to a rush because:
1. all of their buildings are late
2. they didnt make workers
3. they didnt scout
4. they didnt watch the replay to find out a general timing of when they should scout
5. they got caught in a bad spot on the map witht he wrong units
6. they have bad mechanics
7. they have bad micro
8. they want to attack-move and feel like they can let go of the keyboard and expect to win the game
and so on...
There isnt a problem with the game here, they just need to learn how to fucking play lol. If they want stalkers to have the same hp, the same damage, the same movement speed, the same resource cost, etc...then what the fuck is the point in having 3 different races?
|
On December 06 2012 04:29 ishyishy wrote:The people that constantly complain about "social problems" with this game dont know what they want either. They just say "omg the game is lonely" or "omg why am i not put into 600 chat rooms upon logging in, and if they do this I will somehow not be lonely anymore". This isnt facebook. If you want 90% talking to people, and 10% playing a game, then go play a facebook game lol. "If they were say, put off by the lack of social features that's fixable" "The idea of my thread, is to try and show that a lot of the core problems we have with the game as a community, or the things we like about it are actually a lot more universal and linked across different sections of the playerbase than we consider" "why they play SC2 in the first place and also what annoys or frustrates them about the game." A lot of what you are saying is just general and provoking, sorry, nonsense. You want all of the extremists and [probably] trolls to come back out of their caves and replicate everything they have already said on various other threads over the last 2 years. ultratorr says: Show nested quote +I think the races should "feel" more balanced, as in the fights between basic units should be more even. I have casual friends who get very frustrated because their losses amount to not force fielding well / in time, or get very confused because the expensive stalkers lose so badly to cheap roaches in a head on fight.
Things like that aren't intuitive at all, and I believe Blizzard wants things to be intuitive. You can have an opinion, but in reality you have no clue what you are talking about at all. Your friend(s) are frustrated because they dont know how to execute a build efficiently, and then get mad when they die to a rush because: 1. all of their buildings are late 2. they didnt make workers 3. they didnt scout 4. they didnt watch the replay to find out a general timing of when they should scout 5. they got caught in a bad spot on the map witht he wrong units 6. they have bad mechanics 7. they have bad micro 8. they want to attack-move and feel like they can let go of the keyboard and expect to win the game and so on... There isnt a problem with the game here, they just need to learn how to fucking play lol. If they want stalkers to have the same hp, the same damage, the same movement speed, the same resource cost, etc...then what the fuck is the point in having 3 different races?
That's a good point, in a twisted kind of way. In Brood War there were so many NR 15 and fastest games that it wasn't even funny.
|
|
|
I have a friend who constantly gets really put off by the game whenever he loses his entire army to a-move banelings because he can't split or his entire army dies in 2 fungals. I don't think there is a single other RTS where you can just lose your entire army in the blink of an eye because you looked away for one second.
Basically we just play customs or 4v4 now.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On December 06 2012 04:16 fighter2_40 wrote:
Social features will keep casual players in the game but wont necessarily be a reason why they should come back after they've dropped the game. New campaign missions or really innovative custom games might draw them back to bnet and then upon seeing the new social features they may stick around.
Blizzard needs to wise up. SCII has one of the best communities among all video games despite it's recent performances. There are literally free things blizzard can do to improve the play ability of their game!
Balance designers don't really need to know much about the game. They can just listen to professional feedback! Feedback for casuals should only be used to determine the interface, not the balance of the game. This includes Bnet 2.0, custom map searching etc... maybe even hotkeys and in game mechanics.
The number 1 most underutilized tool blizzard has is the mapmaking community. They churn out quality maps for free even though most of them aren't even considered by blizzard or tournaments. If blizzard used community made maps (top votes win) and changed up the map pool every ladder season, the game would be a lot more refreshing for all of us. Also because mapmakers are rewarded for their work *in the form of their pieces actually influencing the game* they will be more willing to make better maps / there will be more people interested in mapmaking, which can translate to more custom maps down the road.
This can even be done at the professional level. Pro players get paid not because they are really fucking good at 3 base vs 3 base, but because they're good at STARCRAFT II. That includes all facets of the game including new maps that come out. As long as we don't have close spawn metalopolis or steppes of war again, new maps that have a different structure will force players to try new things to win and ERASE THIS BORING CURRENT METAGAME. I mean just look at the last time we changed the map paradigm. When it was first changed, things were cool because we were seeing 3 base plays and long macro games that were much rarer before. Now, I don't even feel a need to watch certain matchups until it's 3 base to 3 base because nothing happens in the first 10 minutes. The current map strategies have been played and figured out. It also doesn't help that the same strategy works on basically all the maps we have now +/- ohana, which I believe to be the best map in the pool currently.
Basically: New Maps = New Metagame = Renewed interest in watching/ playing SCII
I agree with what you are saying about maps and I think new maps would be awesome for SC2, however why do people think that writing in full caps is a good thing, it detracts from the point. Use bold like this if you want to illustrate an important point.
|
Like, I play protoss. I can beat roaches. I'm not making "better" stalkers than you because i have a rank 60 masters icon by my name and you have a gold league icon. My stalkers are just made more efficiently, higher in quantity, further ahead in upgrades, engaging in a better possition on the map im playing on, and microing them with blink....while you just take your hand full of unupgraded stalkers, attack-move with no micro, and gets smashed.
|
On December 06 2012 03:33 achan1058 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 03:30 Wombat_NI wrote:
Consider it like this.
1. People always talk about casual players, even Blizzard reference them as being in their thoughts with game design.
2. Somebody has raised the problem of 'how do you define casual players'
3. Who better to define their actual concerns, than people who self-identify as casuals?
If there are no casuals, then they don't exist. If they don't exist why would anybody try to design their game around them? Since people who defines themselves as casual are still too hardcore. To me at least, casual players are the ones who plays only campaign and customs and comp stomps, never visited TL, never watch tournaments, etc. Yes even the guys stuck in Bronze are still too hardcore. These people definitely exist, and you won't ever hear from them.
This. I would go one farther in that the people you expect to grow the scene are not the people even playing the game right now, they are the ones who have never even played Starcraft before. To say there is the possibility of there being no casual players is ludicrous. The question is how much you want to pander to them.
Want to grow the scene and get multi-million dollar prize pools and 50k people attended live events? You need people who have never even thought of playing the game before get into it. You need to talk to them, not the current players.
If you don't care about that, then you really don't care much about "casuals" as you say.
|
On December 06 2012 04:29 ishyishy wrote:
You can have an opinion, but in reality you have no clue what you are talking about at all. Your friend(s) are frustrated because they dont know how to execute a build efficiently, and then get mad when they die to a rush because:
1. all of their buildings are late
2. they didnt make workers
3. they didnt scout
4. they didnt watch the replay to find out a general timing of when they should scout
5. they got caught in a bad spot on the map witht he wrong units
6. they have bad mechanics
7. they have bad micro
8. they want to attack-move and feel like they can let go of the keyboard and expect to win the game
and so on...
There isnt a problem with the game here, they just need to learn how to fucking play lol.
If this is the go-to response, then you can't complain when people (including pro's) abandon the game for games like LoL. People can beat their chests and say "LOL L2P NUB", but all it means is that in a couple years you'll be saying it in a vacuum.
|
I would define casual as anyone who doesn't play 1v1 ladder.
1v1 ladder is where all your flaws are exposed and your ego will get thoroughly trashed. If you can't handle that, you are a casual player. Not that there is anything wrong with that :p
|
Northern Ireland25119 Posts
On December 06 2012 04:50 vesicular wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 03:33 achan1058 wrote:On December 06 2012 03:30 Wombat_NI wrote:
Consider it like this.
1. People always talk about casual players, even Blizzard reference them as being in their thoughts with game design.
2. Somebody has raised the problem of 'how do you define casual players'
3. Who better to define their actual concerns, than people who self-identify as casuals?
If there are no casuals, then they don't exist. If they don't exist why would anybody try to design their game around them? Since people who defines themselves as casual are still too hardcore. To me at least, casual players are the ones who plays only campaign and customs and comp stomps, never visited TL, never watch tournaments, etc. Yes even the guys stuck in Bronze are still too hardcore. These people definitely exist, and you won't ever hear from them. This. I would go one farther in that the people you expect to grow the scene are not the people even playing the game right now, they are the ones who have never even played Starcraft before. To say there is the possibility of there being no casual players is ludicrous. The question is how much you want to pander to them. Want to grow the scene and get multi-million dollar prize pools and 50k people attended live events? You need people who have never even thought of playing the game before get into it. You need to talk to them, not the current players. If you don't care about that, then you really don't care much about "casuals" as you say.
I've written threads about how to get non-Starcraft people into the game through indirect means too!
Such as this
That thread deals with making Starcraft seem something physically visceral, cool and worth pursuing, albeit subtly.
I don't believe casuals don't exist, I was extended logic to a fallacious conclusion to illustrate my other points.
|
On December 06 2012 04:54 vesicular wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 04:29 ishyishy wrote:
You can have an opinion, but in reality you have no clue what you are talking about at all. Your friend(s) are frustrated because they dont know how to execute a build efficiently, and then get mad when they die to a rush because:
1. all of their buildings are late
2. they didnt make workers
3. they didnt scout
4. they didnt watch the replay to find out a general timing of when they should scout
5. they got caught in a bad spot on the map witht he wrong units
6. they have bad mechanics
7. they have bad micro
8. they want to attack-move and feel like they can let go of the keyboard and expect to win the game
and so on...
There isnt a problem with the game here, they just need to learn how to fucking play lol. If this is the go-to response, then you can't complain when people (including pro's) abandon the game for games like LoL. People can beat their chests and say "LOL L2P NUB", but all it means is that in a couple years you'll be saying it in a vacuum.
I didnt complain about people switching to LoL, ever. Dont know where that came from.
But, do you know why they switched? Well, with Alicia and Inori, they switched to LoL because they realized that they didnt have what it takes to go any further, or reach their goal, with sc2. They said "i gave it my best shot, i had a good time with good people, but maybe this game just isnt for me. Maybe ill try this other game and see if I can be more successful at it".
Some, most, (all?) pros treat these games like careers, jobs, not fluffy bunnies and pink flowers and Mr Rogers holding your hand while you a-move your stalkers and lose lol. If they see another game that is showing an explosion of growth not only online, but in their country. They know team players, managers, coaches, they have in's with the people reaping the rewards of the other game. They make a business decision to move. Sometimes it has nothing to do with the gameplay itself.
However, what I see a significant amount less of, is complaining and whining from the pros.
|
I agree with Ishyishy.
The casual gamers I know buy new releases every month and play for the visceral enjoyment of games, the spontaneous 'oohs' and 'ahhs' of seeing new stuff. SC2 feels like banging your face in the wall until you ascend to a higher plateau of skill.
Games that require time investment without tangible gains are not popular with casuals. LoL is a popular casual game because you earn points for playing and every two weeks, bam! shiny new heroes. What are us casuals chasing in SC2? Icons and the elusive ladder promotion.
Somehow, Battle.net needs to be a funner place to hang out. Right now it's like living on an island. There is a lot of potential for good things with map making tools, but it just hasn't been what the WC3 scene is. I don't know why that is, except maybe the RPG/hero elements of WC3 made for funner maps. But who knows, maybe the next DotA is already on its way.
DotA 2, on the other hand, is heading in the right direction, I think. You can earn aesthetic armor for your heroes, can buy banners to support your favorite teams, can spectate tourneys in-game. It's like battle.net but there's a definite e-sports spin to it. There is nothing in SC2 that promotes viewership.
|
United States22154 Posts
Don't make threads with no new content to promote old threads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
