EPT[H] WWI SC2 Questions
| Forum Index > Closed |
Manifesto7
Osaka27140 Posts
| ||
|
BlackStar
Netherlands3029 Posts
| ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5540 Posts
1. Seeing as StarCraft 2 is meant to be a competitive multiplayer RTS game, are you planning not to include any gameplay an/or balance changing features in the eventual expansion pack, and focus on expanding the singleplayer content and various non-competitive online modes, such as, for example, co-op campaign, team melee, etc.? 2. The ladder mappool in WarCraft 3 has been rather stagnant over the years, as opposed to the StarCraft progaming scene in South Korea, where maps change roughly three times a year. Will this be the case as far as the official StarCraft 2 ladder is concerned? 3. StarCraft 2 is most probably going to unite RTS players not only from StarCraft and WarCraft 3, but also from many other titles. Will Blizzard ensure that their transition is as smooth as possible by allowing them to rearrange the UI somewhat? E.g. by being able to reposition the minimap or move the resources/popcap display elsewhere, or even by moving the whole UI to the side of the screen (a la C&C games). 4. Do you consider removing certain units you cannot find a suitable role for, such as, for example, the Mothership or Thor? | ||
|
UmmTheHobo
United States650 Posts
EDIT: other than jumping up and down cliffs of course. Marines can do this with a dropship though. | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
Example: ![[image loading]](http://www.commandconquer3.com/images/scrin_corrupter.jpg) | ||
|
Cauldr0n
Belgium12 Posts
Are they planning on adding a auto-save on disconnect feature that will allow players to resume lan/tourney games? | ||
|
Nitrogen
United States5345 Posts
On June 26 2008 09:41 UmmTheHobo wrote: Reapers and marines are extremely similar. What sets them apart so the reaper isn't just a faster marine??? I lol'd. Anyways, Blizzard is probably aware of the whole chaoslauncher and latency changing thing. Will they include different set latencies in sc2, such as lan, single player, and bnet? | ||
|
Manifesto7
Osaka27140 Posts
On June 26 2008 10:03 Cauldr0n wrote: The biggest issue for lan or other tournament organizers in any game have always been disconnects. Are they planning on adding a auto-save on disconnect feature that will allow players to resume lan/tourney games? Nice idea. | ||
|
Megrim
Australia60 Posts
On June 26 2008 08:52 maybenexttime wrote: Those are the question I gave to GameReplays admin going to BWI, but in case he doesn't manage to ask those questions... ^______^V 1. Seeing as StarCraft 2 is meant to be a competitive multiplayer RTS game, are you planning not to include any gameplay an/or balance changing features in the eventual expansion pack, and focus on expanding the singleplayer content and various non-competitive online modes, such as, for example, co-op campaign, team melee, etc.? 2. The ladder mappool in WarCraft 3 has been rather stagnant over the years, as opposed to the StarCraft progaming scene in South Korea, where maps change roughly three times a year. Will this be the case as far as the official StarCraft 2 ladder is concerned? 3. StarCraft 2 is most probably going to unite RTS players not only from StarCraft and WarCraft 3, but also from many other titles. Will Blizzard ensure that their transition is as smooth as possible by allowing them to rearrange the UI somewhat? E.g. by being able to reposition the minimap or move the resources/popcap display elsewhere, or even by moving the whole UI to the side of the screen (a la C&C games). 4. Do you consider removing certain units you cannot find a suitable role for, such as, for example, the Mothership or Thor? I'd like to second question #3. I think it would be a very good idea if one could customize one's GUI in Star2. | ||
|
Elric
United Kingdom1327 Posts
While extremely unoriginal and repetitive, for me this is the single most important question for SC2. | ||
|
Showtime!
Canada2938 Posts
 We have seen units like the thor, mothership and medivac go through several changes in order to make the game. Many of the avivd communities have scorned upon these units based on their appeal in design and balance. I, for one, am one of them. Can you specify your personal thoughts on scraping some of these units and replacing them with more intriguing ones? With that said, what is your favourite unit so far in development and why? Which one is your least favourite and why? Has the company consulted anyone outside of the company in the professional gaming world, like Rose of Dream (or something like that -.-), the professional map maker, to help with the design of ladder maps? What constructive criticism have they given you with regards to balance? Do you stay in contact with past employees on a regular basis? Are there any reunions you guys plan other than BWWIs? Do you give them any personal invitations to such events? Is there any intention on consulting past employees like Bill Roper for his thoughts during the development phase? What do Blizzard Employees do to relieve themselves of stressful days? Dustin Browder questions(if you manage to get him): Did you expect to see this much criticism when you moved to Blizzard? Did you talk to anyone prior to taking the job? If so, what advice did they give you? What are your personal objectives and goals with Starcraft 2? | ||
|
anotak
United States1537 Posts
The Korean pros already have such a tremendous advantage in Starcraft 1, and they're already getting playtime on the early builds of SC2. Have you given much chances to the highest level nonkorean teams like Excello, RoX, ToT, and MYM to try the game? A lot of unit control (and also lead to things like muta and other air unit stacking) is based on the "magic box" formation system of Starcraft 1, where units within a box of certain size stay in the formation they were in while stationary while moving, and arrive in the same formation, whereas a group of units larger than this all bunch together and come closer together. In WC3, units followed a pattern where no matter what formation they were in, they try to group into squares and ignore any player's intended formation. Many SC players complained that Warcraft 3 is actually harder to control your units as intended because this square formation is actually quite often suboptimal and annoying. How is this handled in SC2? Have you paid attention to how mapmaking evolved from original blizzard cliffable-main, no-natural, etc type imbalanced maps to modern maps like Othello, Python, Blue Storm, etc? Have you done any talking with OGN and MBC mapmaking teams and mapmakers like Rose.Of.Dream on map balance and map fun? Or will we be forced to completely ignore blizzard maps again and create our own maps as a community? (edit: oh i got ninja'd... well i still said it first in the other thread  )------------------------ Have you given any thought to bringing back defensive matrix? Now that Nomads no longer detect, what will Terran use for mobile detection? | ||
|
wswordsmen
United States987 Posts
What do terrans have to counter dark swarm when it intially is teched to? | ||
|
Showtime!
Canada2938 Posts
We've heard plenty of celebrities getting involved in the lore of Blizzard games, like Dave Chappelle and the World of Warcraft. Have any artists/celebrities approached you about doing some personal artwork for them? | ||
|
Centric
United States1989 Posts
| ||
|
Ideas
United States8088 Posts
| ||
|
Showtime!
Canada2938 Posts
I'd like to hear Dustin's thought on that one. | ||
IntoTheWow
is awesome32274 Posts
| ||
|
HolyToss1911
354 Posts
| ||
|
Showtime!
Canada2938 Posts
| ||
LosingID8
CA10827 Posts
ie it's pretty well-known in BW that on a very balanced map, stats are roughly Z=P=T. however certain maps are extremely unbalanced, although to the casual player they might not realize why something makes a map Z>>>>P or whatever. i think it's really important to try out things on a huge range of maps, and as said before with non-blizzard mapmakers... because we all know how many great maps came out of the original blizzard maps... | ||
|
Showtime!
Canada2938 Posts
I guess I should write it as a question: Does Blizzard have any intention on hiring well-known map makers to help resolve balance issues and help conceptualize the ladder maps for release? | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
2) Nowadays it's very common to watch recorded games on youtube videos instead of starcraft replays. Which, among other advantages, is much more practical and easier for the viewer to watch (no need to install/run starcraft). Can we expect some tool to allow starcraft 2 spectators to watch games without installing/running the whole big and heavy game? Maybe a small replay-only application or even a browser plug-in? 3) It is already standard for zerg players to completely replace lurkers with ultralisks once they get the tech. In sc2 you put lurker to tier 3 and gave splash damage to ultralisks. How will you avoid role overlaps? 4) Is the battle.net gonna provide in-game support for custom leagues and tournaments such as Iccup, TSL or Wgtour. So we don't need to rely on private servers to play on non-official leagues? 5) Blizzard has a investing a lot of money and personnel organizing World of Warcraft tournaments to increase it's e-sports popularity. Can we expect the same energy to be invested in a not subscribed game such as Starcraft 2? | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
| ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
3. StarCraft 2 is most probably going to unite RTS players not only from StarCraft and WarCraft 3, but also from many other titles. Will Blizzard ensure that their transition is as smooth as possible by allowing them to rearrange the UI somewhat? E.g. by being able to reposition the minimap or move the resources/popcap display elsewhere, or even by moving the whole UI to the side of the screen (a la C&C games). I think blizzard has already said that they won't be allowing this, with the reasoning being that the UI should be the same for everyone. Not sure but I seem to remember this being said.. You need to ask them about the medivac! And by ask I mean kidnap them and hold them hostage until they bring back the medic... Don't know if it's feasible to ask them about the Gunboat but since so many people have been very positive towards the idea it would be interesting to see what they think about it/if they have considered something similiar on their own. In WC3 they have automated tournaments, have they ever considered having these types of tournaments but with a buy-in fee and prize money, a la Sit'n'Gos/tournaments in poker? Don't know how the legality of it would work out but it's not gambling at least. | ||
|
shimmy
Poland997 Posts
| ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5540 Posts
My point is that if the UI should be the same - or rather equally conveniet - for everybody, then people from different games should maybe have a chance to alter the UI somewhat to suit their previous experiences more. It's no different from custom hotkeys, really. | ||
|
prOxi.swAMi
Australia3091 Posts
| ||
|
LordofToast
United Kingdom250 Posts
| ||
|
BlackStar
Netherlands3029 Posts
If there is prize money, it should be from the sponsors. Not from the other players. I mean, what's the point of having prize money if the players themselves pay for it? Then money will be streaming from the good players to the very good players. That's bad. Don't rip off the good players. | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
What do you consider to be the core dynamic of each of the three races? And how does each of these dynamics work in testing? | ||
|
iCCup.Juppi
Austria187 Posts
On June 26 2008 10:03 Cauldr0n wrote: The biggest issue for lan or other tournament organizers in any game have always been disconnects. Are they planning on adding a auto-save on disconnect feature that will allow players to resume lan/tourney games? this is a fucking good question, imagine at iccup we could have such a feature as well. disc complaints are the BIGGEST amount of plaints. there would be by far less work and we could focus on other nice things. go mani, make some1 answer this question, id like to know if that can be implemented in future. | ||
Chosi
Germany1302 Posts
-- or -- do you design the game complete and then ripp out some units that will come back later in the expansion while trying to keep the game balanced w/o the units? In Sc and Wc3 things were different since balance was a goal but not "the" goal imho. So what can we expect for sc2 and sc2:exp? - And no excuses about the Expansin, we all know it will be comming (-: 2. In Wc3 AMM was a milestone, so while they promised the editor will make a huge step, can we expect such leaps for the game and battle.net aswell? Any hints? 3. Which poll does the "TL.net wins the Internet" division need to attack that the next Blizzard Event will be in corporation with TL.net instead of gg.net :-) 4. Is there any way we can prevent the german (insert your country) localisation of the game will to such horrible things as WoW did? 5. Can we expect more merchandise (shirts, figures, etc) for Sc2? | ||
|
GinNtoniC
Sweden2945 Posts
| ||
|
Scorch
Austria3371 Posts
| ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 26 2008 21:04 BlackStar wrote: SC isn't poker. You should never ever have to pay to play in a tournament. That's the big problem poker has. That's the reason why it's not a sport but gambling. If there is prize money, it should be from the sponsors. Not from the other players. I mean, what's the point of having prize money if the players themselves pay for it? Then money will be streaming from the good players to the very good players. That's bad. Don't rip off the good players. That's dumb. You had to pay to play in TLTour You have to pay to play in Courage You have to pay to play in many Go-tournaments You have to pay to participate in BJJ/submission wrestling tournaments (perhaps not all but wever) Having pay to play tournaments where the money goes to the prize pool (the majority of it, blizzard should take some % in rake) is the best and simplest way of sustaining worthwhile tournaments. Everything in life benefits those at the top, regardless of what field (well fine, taxes don't). On June 26 2008 21:17 iCCup.Juppi wrote: this is a fucking good question, imagine at iccup we could have such a feature as well. disc complaints are the BIGGEST amount of plaints. there would be by far less work and we could focus on other nice things. go mani, make some1 answer this question, id like to know if that can be implemented in future. Would be nice to get their opinion on it yes, we've already sent it in as part of one of our monthly reports a few months back, too. | ||
|
iCCup.Juppi
Austria187 Posts
| ||
|
Aerox
Malaysia1213 Posts
(ok, not gonna go too deep here. This is fine I guess.)2. Can you confirm/deny the December 3rd 2008(gamestop, gamespot) as the projected release date? Or is Blizzard willing to develop and refine SC2 to near perfection even if it takes until 2009? 3. Can't you guys do anything about the Thor? We understand that the lore may have been set in stone but can't you guys fiddle around with it some more? It just doesn't have the feel of awesomeness described on the SC2 website anymore. 4. Don't you guys look into other current day RTS titles for inspiration besides the C&C series? How about something from Supreme Commander for Terran? How about more robots for Terran? if (Diablo3 == true) { 1. Didn't Diablo die? What happened to the Worldstone? What happened to the world? 2. Is the game now in 3D? How many classes this time? What is the (planned) level limit? 3. Is the multiplayer model still the same as D2? Why not a Diablo MMO? (if not MMO) } 1. Are any of these new games coming to the consoles? Is Blizzard making or planning anything for the current generation of consoles? Note: omit as you please though I do hope everything gets interroga...err asked to dig out as much info as we can out of Blizz... | ||
|
MrRammstein
Poland339 Posts
 Those may seem not worth to ask but... 1) Are they going to add tutorial for every race (like in Dawn of War)? 2) Considering SC2 will be sold with DVD(s) inside the box: will it be needed to run the game at any given time? 3) Are they going to add something more than CD-key as precaution/security to play in multi? 4) Will number of cinematics in campaign be similar to one from SC1 (vanilla) or will we see "real" ones as intros and ends, with game engine used between missions like in W3? 5) Will some things (for example unit deaths) be possible to turn ON/OFF? | ||
|
Tiamat
United States498 Posts
General Game Engine Questions.. a) Starcraft had a set resolution of 640x480 which every player had to play as and provided the same view and screensize for every player. With today's Video Cards capable of displaying several different resolutions (both widescreen and fullscreen) what is the team's stance on dealing with different display resolutions? Are players with Widescreen monitors and beefer Video Cards going to have an advantage of "seeing more of the action" than those with fullscreens and lower resolutions? While LAN tournaments can govern which resolution settings are used, what about online tournaments? While we are discussing resolutions, what about multiple monitors? b) Do air units fly on the same axis as they do in normal Starcraft? I remember on one of the early Protoss videos, Air units would kinda "dip" into the space whenever they were traveling over islands or mountains. c) In Starcraft, LAN games had a faster mouseclick response time than BNET games (even with low lactency). Are the plans for Starcraft2 to use the same response time in both LAN games and BNET games? Balance / Race specific Questions.. a) Queen ; Alot of the Zerg design seems to focus on or around the Queen unit. By defining the term "hero or commander unit" as used in other games (Warcraft 3, Dawn of War) if the player did not build or factor in the "hero unit" into their gameplay, they were put at a serious disadvantage, thus meaning that every optimal build order or strategy had to include building the hero/commander unit. Is the Queen intended to be this type of unit meaning that if the zerg does not incorporate her then they are put at a disadvantage in the matchup? b) Defensive weapons used offensively ; Every game seems to have one or two defensively designs units/weapons that are switched and used offensively that can create a break in game balance. How does the team balance good defensive performance vs non-gamebreaking offensive performance? For example, you would want your bunker or cannon to generally kill its cost of Tier1 units when used defensively in your base, but you would also not want a single cannon to disable or kill a player if build in their base. c) Medivac ; The reasoning behind nixing the Medic was because the Medic cannot heal Reapers when they jump up a cliff. The solution was to give the dropship the healing ability so it can follow the reaper up the cliff to heal. While this provided the healing solution for the reaper created a situation where the player could just ferry his marines up the cliff since he now has a dropship to do so negating the reaper main ability of cliff jumping in the first place. What are your thoughts about giving the Medic another shot by giving them a "jumppack" ability to solve the healing issue for reapers and also placing them at the same tech location as Ghosts? | ||
|
yangstuh
United States120 Posts
On June 26 2008 17:19 FrozenArbiter wrote:... In WC3 they have automated tournaments, have they ever considered having these types of tournaments but with a buy-in fee and prize money, a la Sit'n'Gos/tournaments in poker? Don't know how the legality of it would work out but it's not gambling at least. Oh my god, awesome automated tournament suggestion! I don't know how revolutionary people realize this is, but it is! I don't think people really grasps the impact this would have on competitive RTS gaming.. or just any kind of gaming in general! Holy crap! Here's a good compromise.. have automated tournaments every other day like they do in WC3, for fun/prestigue/rankings or whatever... for free. Then once a month.. or every other month have a special grand buy-in event tournament like you said. I think this was a great way to do it. And.. not kidding this will SIGNIFICANTLY boost the pro/competitive scene like nothing before. My god this would be crazy good! Have the event advertized on the Battle.net/Blizzard website and whatever too. AND like you briefly mentioned, this would be a great way for Blizzard to make some money, the kind of continuous money flow they get from WoW. It'd be like a volunteer subscription! The only problem is there would be an overlap and perhaps a conflict of interest with pro leagues and whatnot..... | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
You could have the free ones running in their own tab, have - let's say - 10$ ones run continuously then maybe a weekend 50$ tournament or something like that. Then every month or so you could run a really big (perhaps with some sponsored prizes as well) tournament, perhaps a 50-100$ buyin or something like that BUT with several (free or small buyin) qualifying tournaments leading up to it throughout the month. And yeah, I think it would be completely awesome =] I'd like 1v1s for money too but that would be approaching gambling I guess (it's different when you pay for a tournament and when it's just 2 people putting up X$ to play). | ||
|
SlickR12345
Macedonia408 Posts
2: What is the Marauder role apart from the obvious of slowing down units, is it really cost-effective and useful and aren't you afraid it might turn out to be as the queen and ghost in starcraft, barely used. 3: How did you came to the idea of the Immortal, since everyone likes it and think it fits perfectly into starcraft 2, with no or very little exceptions. 4: What is the main idea behind the Overseer, there are some thoughts that it may turn out to be a huge disadvantage to the Zerg as its the only mobile detection for Zerg. 5: Can you tell us more specifics and details about the worm, for example can it move through uneven terrain and natural blocks like rocks and stuff or will it circle around them, how are units shown when inside the worm, for example is their some new graphical interface that will show up and so on... 6: What was the idea of moving the hydralisk into higher tier, since there is the fear of zerg not having early ground to air unit and thus being extremely vurnable to air to ground units. Also how will hydralisk's higher tier and more supply be compensated for considering the roach seems much more stronger unit yet lower tier? 7: Will you be looking to make Zerg single player campaign much different than the protoss and terran one, since Zerg is the most unique race in starcraft. Obviously they won't be flying in battle cruiser but would it be the same type just zerg flying in overlord or something instead of battle cruiser !? 8: Will battle.net support huge number of observers and live broadcasting from within battle.net? 9: There was a suggestion go give the lurker an upgrade that would improve its spikes so they can attack in 4 ways "+"; What do you think about this and has there been similar ideas in the development team and if so why hasn't such ones been utilized? 10: Can a unit be stuck between buildings when spawning or will there be some kind of better mechanic that will make the unit spawn from a side where there is place to move? 11: Will the damn ugly infestor model change? 12: Will they consider removing auto-mine if it helps macro a lot, and it should help macro a lot!? 13: Is smart-cast still in the game and if yes, why? | ||
|
BlackStar
Netherlands3029 Posts
On June 26 2008 22:33 FrozenArbiter wrote: Having pay to play tournaments where the money goes to the prize pool (the majority of it, blizzard should take some % in rake) is the best and simplest way of sustaining worthwhile tournaments. Then the money stream goes away from the players. You cannibalize your own player base. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
Blizzard has to make a living + you could argue that without the rake (I'm assuming that's what you're talking about) there wouldn't be any tournaments in the first place... I really don't get your argument at all. Yes blizzard would turn a profit, people pay for entertainment. And yes, some people will be good enough to finish in the money at a high enough rate to yield them a positive return on their investment (buyin). Honestly what the hell do you mean!?? | ||
|
Goosey
United States695 Posts
If No, hold their heads under water until they agree to it I really REALLY want to have some official central location where you have a TLPD-style database of all ladder games ever played, especially one that gives a lot of power to query stuff. IE: 'Give me 100 ZvT on X map by the top 50 people on ladder played in the last 2 weeks', 'Give me all the PvZ that player X has played on map Y in the last month'. Just imagine how this would revolutionize the strategy forum.. T_T "here go check out this replay" or "go check out Stork's games, here is a link"Gah. Want this feature so badly | ||
|
eugen1225
Yugoslavia134 Posts
| ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5540 Posts
| ||
|
sqwert
United States781 Posts
will the size of the screen resolution affect the area of vision for the player? are they going to use blu-ray or dvd? the colors in sc2 look a little too bright compared to sc1. will they or can they change it to have a darker theme? is there going to be a setting for it? will we be able to customize the bnet skin or the unit icons on the bottom right or the unit pics? | ||
|
dcttr66
United States555 Posts
On June 26 2008 22:05 Scorch wrote: Please explain the exact reasoning behind including the Medivac over the Medic concerning the roles of Reapers and Marines. Doesn't the Medivac defeat the Reaper's distinguishing advantage of being a mobile harasser? Why would you use Reapers with Medivac healing when you can ferry Marines behind the enemy lines and have them healed by the dropship just as well? Wouldn't a Medic with jetpacks be suited better to differentiate the Reaper from the Marine? you people who keep asking that question obviously don't seem to care if your dropship full of marines dies...with reapers and medivacs you can get most of your units away but if someone takes down the dropship with marines in it, you lose it all. | ||
|
MrRammstein
Poland339 Posts
On June 27 2008 03:49 FrozenArbiter wrote: Wat? Blizzard has to make a living + you could argue that without the rake (I'm assuming that's what you're talking about) there wouldn't be any tournaments in the first place... I really don't get your argument at all. Yes blizzard would turn a profit, people pay for entertainment. And yes, some people will be good enough to finish in the money at a high enough rate to yield them a positive return on their investment (buyin). Honestly what the hell do you mean!?? QFT it can be small enough, buying a game alone could give few free tickets to such tournaments, both ones for fun and prestige only and for money could be held and many tournaments matching skill of at least half of players on BN can be held... why not? Naming would be the only problem I can see | ||
|
prOxi.swAMi
Australia3091 Posts
On June 27 2008 07:52 sqwert wrote: ask them what new things they put in bnet and chat. suggest, if not already said, to put in "friend-follow", "clan/group chat", "friend invite", etc will the size of the screen resolution affect the area of vision for the player? are they going to use blu-ray or dvd? the colors in sc2 look a little too bright compared to sc1. will they or can they change it to have a darker theme? is there going to be a setting for it? will we be able to customize the bnet skin or the unit icons on the bottom right or the unit pics? why on earth would they use blu-ray? | ||
|
byron
Angola21 Posts
On June 26 2008 22:33 FrozenArbiter wrote: That's dumb. You had to pay to play in TLTour You have to pay to play in Courage You have to pay to play in many Go-tournaments You have to pay to participate in BJJ/submission wrestling tournaments (perhaps not all but wever) Having pay to play tournaments where the money goes to the prize pool (the majority of it, blizzard should take some % in rake) is the best and simplest way of sustaining worthwhile tournaments. Everything in life benefits those at the top, regardless of what field (well fine, taxes don't). Courage grants pro-gamers a license. Having to pay for a license so you can get into bigger tournament / leagues (which cost no money) is not the same as players seeding the money to a tournament. You calling someone dumb and not seeing the difference is hilarious. You mention BJJ/submission wrestling and TLTour like it somehow backs up your claims. You can find small tournaments ran in basements that have any structure / fee / payout you'd like, but they don't represent the sport. TLTour was a failure and a one time thing, using it to support your argument is ridiculous. You should be using the Korean leagues because they're what represent StarCraft, and they're what's successful. It's the same with submission wrestling. You know the ADCC World Championships charge no entrance fee right? Probably not. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 27 2008 21:51 byron wrote: Courage grants pro-gamers a license. Having to pay for a license so you can get into bigger tournament / leagues (which cost no money) is not the same as players seeding the money to a tournament. You calling someone dumb and not seeing the difference is hilarious. You mention BJJ/submission wrestling and TLTour like it somehow backs up your claims. You can find small tournaments ran in basements that have any structure / fee / payout you'd like, but they don't represent the sport. TLTour was a failure and a one time thing, using it to support your argument is ridiculous. You should be using the Korean leagues because they're what represent StarCraft, and they're what's successful. It's the same with submission wrestling. You know the ADCC World Championships charge no entrance fee right? Probably not. TLTour a failure? What the fuck? TLTour was a success, and there were 2 editions of it, just FYI. Then we had WGTour speed ladder - 1 week ladders with a small entrance fee, with the fee going towards prizes - another huge success. ADCC has no entrance fee and do you know why? BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO QUALIFY TO GET THERE. The qualifiers, however, DO have an entrance fee (at least the ones we have here in scandinavia do, last I checked)!! You don't pay for the courage license, you pay to play in the tournament - slightly different but not by much. Oh and I didn't call him dumb, I said his comment was dumb. I don't think he is, he's a quality poster as far as I can remember. And if you wanna talk korean leagues I'm pretty sure almost all the minor ones have an entrance fee. Online leagues/tournaments too. So please, find out the facts before you speak. And instead of saying "oh but we don't do it that way" can you actually make an argument for why we shouldn't? So far I've not seen a single reason against it other than it "cannibalizing the players" which I don't even know what he meant by it. What's the difference if the money comes from the players directly or is blizzard sponsored as a result of, say, a monthly WoW fee/sales? You pay for entertainment/a chance to win. And besides, can you think of any other way to have constantly running tournaments with prize money? What incentive would there be to sponsor non-stop automated tournaments where you get no exposure? None!! You can sponsor bigger ones, with coverage and hype etc but the only way to have regular, worthwile tournaments is with an entrance fee that goes towards the prize pool. I don't see the resistance to this, they could still run free tournaments just as often. | ||
|
BlackStar
Netherlands3029 Posts
You are going to try to play tournaments with weak opponents that are stupid enough to enter a pay tournament in which they are outclassed. People are going to be sandbagging. People are only going to play for money. The strongest people should play vs each other and they should win the money from a third party. There is going to be so much abuse. The top players are going to form a cartel. They enter one at a time into one of those tournaments so they have a free win and don't steal money from each other. Stuff like that. It's so obvious. Do you want Starcraft 2 to be a sport or not? It's not entertainment which you pay for. It's not supposed to be gambling either. Do you want it to be like Formula 1 where people have to buy a seat in a car? Otherwise, it's not just a zero sum game. You mention a rake. People are going to lose money overall from playing Starcraft 2. That's bad. There should be money to be won. Not money to be lost. Esports should copy chess, not poker. | ||
|
BlackStar
Netherlands3029 Posts
Money should flow from sponsors to the players. Also, in Korea they have teams so that changes stuff up quite a bit anyway. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
Your point is what? It's not a finite resource. Again, please present me with an alternative business model that allows for constant, around the clock, automated tournaments to be run? Fwiw I'd happily pay 10$ every now and then to play in a tournament like this, even if I knew I'd be playing against a lineup of jaedong, flash and Best. It would be for fun/competition, I don't mind being a dog in terms of my chances to win... Sandbagging can be stopped by not having a list of players available for the tournament (I dunno what size tournaments you'd want to run, but let's say 32 man tournaments with another one starting as soon as one fills up). In addition, for the more expensive tournaments you'll just have a ton of qualifiers where the winners are bought into the tournament by blizzard (adding to the prizepool). I don't think, say, 5$ tournaments are really gonna kill anyones budget =.= | ||
|
BlackStar
Netherlands3029 Posts
| ||
Heyoka
Katowice25012 Posts
Esports should copy chess, not poker. I've paid to enter every amateur chess event I've played in. Magic Online has been running tournaments for years that you pay to enter and then win prizes, and it increases the skill level of players at all levels quite a bit as well as makes games exciting even for people at an amateur level. It does wonders to increase the playerbase too. Obviously money flows from lesser players to stronger ones. Not really an issue. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
In addition, having within the bnet interface the option to create and host your own tournament (private or public) would be absolutely golden. | ||
|
homeless_guy
United States321 Posts
| ||
|
Constantinius
United States64 Posts
| ||
|
MrRammstein
Poland339 Posts
On June 27 2008 23:55 Constantinius wrote: Why couldn't you have these automated tournaments with lots of different variables you could modify, like an ELO rating? Just specify only "level 5-10" players on BNet or some other qualifier and you're done. I'm sure the dev team would give us that option if considering it. yeah if this would be for money ;P just don't let to enter guys without big enough amount of games played. If prizes would be small enough there wouldn't be much ppl wanting to create stats of 300-500? games to win 25-100$ and even after that they can be banned from such a weaker tournaments as being "too good" | ||
|
shimmy
Poland997 Posts
On June 27 2008 22:06 BlackStar wrote: There is going to be so much abuse. The top players are going to form a cartel. They enter one at a time into one of those tournaments so they have a free win and don't steal money from each other. Stuff like that. I loled. | ||
|
SlickR12345
Macedonia408 Posts
No one should pay for entering a tournament, that is proven to be downhill of every sport, game, league, whatever. Sponsors are what provide money for leagues and in return they get big coverage. In huge costly sports we see sponsors and tickets since they are such an expensive sports. We don't see players paying or clubs paying do we? Then we have governing bodies that act as the brain of any sport, say fifa, uefa and they get their money from TV licenses and sponsors. As far as things like WWI go its obvious the money taken from tickets go to tournament winners, so it can be sustainable, otherwise its written doom all over it. | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
| ||
|
Terranesque
119 Posts
On June 27 2008 22:06 BlackStar wrote: If you win other people's money because of pay in fee then what are you going to do? You are going to try to play tournaments with weak opponents that are stupid enough to enter a pay tournament in which they are outclassed. People are going to be sandbagging. People are only going to play for money. The strongest people should play vs each other and they should win the money from a third party. There is going to be so much abuse. The top players are going to form a cartel. They enter one at a time into one of those tournaments so they have a free win and don't steal money from each other. Stuff like that. It's so obvious. Do you want Starcraft 2 to be a sport or not? It's not entertainment which you pay for. It's not supposed to be gambling either. Do you want it to be like Formula 1 where people have to buy a seat in a car? Otherwise, it's not just a zero sum game. You mention a rake. People are going to lose money overall from playing Starcraft 2. That's bad. There should be money to be won. Not money to be lost. Esports should copy chess, not poker. Stop crying, if you don't think you can win: don't enter. Leave the money games to the big boys. | ||
|
tec27
United States3696 Posts
On June 28 2008 06:50 SlickR12345 wrote: whats this nonsense about fees and stuff? No one should pay for entering a tournament, that is proven to be downhill of every sport, game, league, whatever. Sponsors are what provide money for leagues and in return they get big coverage. In huge costly sports we see sponsors and tickets since they are such an expensive sports. We don't see players paying or clubs paying do we? Then we have governing bodies that act as the brain of any sport, say fifa, uefa and they get their money from TV licenses and sponsors. As far as things like WWI go its obvious the money taken from tickets go to tournament winners, so it can be sustainable, otherwise its written doom all over it. You make no sense. People paying to enter a tournament has pretty much never been the downfall of anything to my knowledge, so you should really back that up with some sources. Sports become huge and costly usually because of things like travel, needing large venues since they attract a large amount of interest, needing good equipment, etc. Anything you can play online doesn't have those associated costs, so they don't need sponsors. If all sports and games could have "sit'n'go" type tournaments like FA described, it would very likely trigger a major advancement in the skill of all of them, since it allows A) more people to play, B) more games to occur, C) easier access to large groups of players, and D) easier aquisition of incentives for winning. When you rely on sponsors to generate money for tournaments, you severely limit the amount of paying tournaments availible. Without the money incentive, player skill advancement tends to slow and there are very few venues for them to accurately test their skill against others with the added pressure you get from playing in tournaments. I'm sorry, but all of you complaining about FA's suggestions have yet to bring up any good reasons for not having it. If you don't want to spend money, or to have your money taken by better players, then stick to the free tourneys they could easily offer right alongside the paid ones. | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
| ||
|
Manifesto7
Osaka27140 Posts
THIS THREAD IS A FAILURE | ||
| ||
