EPTMany of you here seem to think that the market for sc2 and a potential warcraft 4 would heavily overlap, but that might not be completely true. To each their own. Both games could coexist next to each other, provided starcraft 2 would last that long.
Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne - Page 57
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Latham
9562 Posts
Many of you here seem to think that the market for sc2 and a potential warcraft 4 would heavily overlap, but that might not be completely true. To each their own. Both games could coexist next to each other, provided starcraft 2 would last that long. | ||
|
Spaylz
Japan1743 Posts
On March 23 2015 15:29 lestye wrote: Whatever your opinion of WCS is, that's not the big reason why SC2 has problems. Other games outgrew SC2 because RTS is hard and not casual friendly, and usually have team aspects. There's a reason why Dota 1 overshadowed and lasted way longer than Warcraft III. Hearthstone is very easy to get into, and very entertaining to watch. RTS is a lot more subtle. So that's why it's successful esports-wise even though Blizzard hasn't done anything with it. . I don't think WCS is necessarily bad, what you're describing what happened in 2013, it did suck but at the same time you gotta realize the giant bubble that 2012 was with MLG IPL and NASL trying to top eachother and spending way too much money. They have loosened up a lot since 2013. I remember like 2013 WCS was on 5 days a week so it was impossible to schedule anything with that. That being said, they seem to be absolutely going HAM on HOTS esports, well kinda, sorta, the fact that HOTS isnt yet released or like competitively sound, the large push to get it broadcast ed on ESPN, tells me they want to push that hard as hell. Either way, WCS isn't the biggest hurdle, it's the genre and how fun it is to play/watch. Warcraft III was known to have more micro intensive than BW/SC2 is, if WC4 carries over those same design principles, that's going to turn off a lot of casuals. That is pretty much my case. I bought SC2 and played maybe half a thousand games, but I didn't stick around because the game was not entertaining me as much as WC3 did. I think it was largely due to the much more heavy focus on macro, expanding, position-based micro and deathballs. I agree that fundamentally, that will always attract less people than hero-based games à la Dota or WC3. The case of Dota is pretty special though. It arguably began on BW with Aeons of Strife, and it only started to gain real popularity some time in 2006 or something. The game was a fluke. The Dota mod literally spawned a whole genre. Without it, there would be no LoL, no HoN, no HotS, and of course no Dota 2. Or at least, these would have come out much later. It always blows my mind to think about the fact that Blizzard, the uncontested master of RTS games, is indirectly responsible for creating the genre which largely contributed to the death of RTS (or at least it sped it up). Some pretty sick irony right there. I'll take your word on everything else you said about WCS. I believe the situation I was describing was indeed 2013 or so. I haven't really followed the scene since. The viewer experience of WC3 wasn't so bad in comparison to SC2 though, so I'm not sure I agree about how WC4 would fare with the same core principles. At the time, the whole concept of heroes was rather new to a lot of people. I remember encountering so many players who would be turned off by WC3 because there were a lot of heroes, and therefore a lot of spells to keep in mind, and it confused them. Now though? Dota 2 and LoL both have hundreds of heroes, and they're hugely popular. People have gotten used to heroes and to what they do, and for that reason I personally think that if WC3 were to somehow come out today, among all the MOBAs, it would have a rather huge success. I think WC3 may have been too early for its time. Twitch and streaming weren't around, gaming as a whole wasn't as popular, and the same applied to esports. WC3's learning curve is at least as steep as Dota 2's, though likely steeper, but I feel like it has a spot. I could be completely biased though, since I still think WC3 is the greatest game ever. I see what you're saying about HotS. They are promoting it quite a bit. They do it as well on Hearthstone but they rely more on social medias in the process, and less on big announcements (à la Heroes of the Dorm). But eh, HotS happens to be a good game. I do believe it'll do just fine in esports, it's already quite big. Nearly 60k subscribers on reddit, close to 1 million likes on Facebook, and 186k followers on Twitter... it's looking pretty great on that front for Blizzard. | ||
|
AssyrianKing
Australia2111 Posts
On March 22 2015 14:04 AssyrianKing wrote: Just played the custom campaign, "Lord of the Clans" and it was pretty good nice :D Here is a like for some recommended ones http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/589475-/55648085 I think there is more on the hiveworkshop website  Ill just re-quote this incase nobody noticed it because of all the arguing going on LOL :D | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
| ||
|
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
On March 23 2015 18:23 Spaylz wrote: That is pretty much my case. I bought SC2 and played maybe half a thousand games, but I didn't stick around because the game was not entertaining me as much as WC3 did. I think it was largely due to the much more heavy focus on macro, expanding, position-based micro and deathballs. I agree that fundamentally, that will always attract less people than hero-based games à la Dota or WC3. The case of Dota is pretty special though. It arguably began on BW with Aeons of Strife, and it only started to gain real popularity some time in 2006 or something. The game was a fluke. The Dota mod literally spawned a whole genre. Without it, there would be no LoL, no HoN, no HotS, and of course no Dota 2. Or at least, these would have come out much later. It always blows my mind to think about the fact that Blizzard, the uncontested master of RTS games, is indirectly responsible for creating the genre which largely contributed to the death of RTS (or at least it sped it up). Some pretty sick irony right there. I'll take your word on everything else you said about WCS. I believe the situation I was describing was indeed 2013 or so. I haven't really followed the scene since. The viewer experience of WC3 wasn't so bad in comparison to SC2 though, so I'm not sure I agree about how WC4 would fare with the same core principles. At the time, the whole concept of heroes was rather new to a lot of people. I remember encountering so many players who would be turned off by WC3 because there were a lot of heroes, and therefore a lot of spells to keep in mind, and it confused them. Now though? Dota 2 and LoL both have hundreds of heroes, and they're hugely popular. People have gotten used to heroes and to what they do, and for that reason I personally think that if WC3 were to somehow come out today, among all the MOBAs, it would have a rather huge success. I think WC3 may have been too early for its time. Twitch and streaming weren't around, gaming as a whole wasn't as popular, and the same applied to esports. WC3's learning curve is at least as steep as Dota 2's, though likely steeper, but I feel like it has a spot. I could be completely biased though, since I still think WC3 is the greatest game ever. I see what you're saying about HotS. They are promoting it quite a bit. They do it as well on Hearthstone but they rely more on social medias in the process, and less on big announcements (à la Heroes of the Dorm). But eh, HotS happens to be a good game. I do believe it'll do just fine in esports, it's already quite big. Nearly 60k subscribers on reddit, close to 1 million likes on Facebook, and 186k followers on Twitter... it's looking pretty great on that front for Blizzard. I think you're over complicating things (for some of your points). SC2 was just badly made and had a lot of money dumped into it to kill off WC3 and BW. They got so many things wrong, from the game itself to other parts like custom games and channels. I recall how most people didn't actually play WC3 melee back when it was popular but spent more time on mini games. (After all it was designed by a CnC guy, a game which didn't have comparable popularity at all, and you can see what would be coming from the way their attitude in interviews.) I've played WC3 and BW for years, and would enjoy playing and watching them from time to time but stopped SC2 after 6 months and didn't enjoy the 6 months I played, and I actually like the RTS genre. Just imagine what people who don't like the genre would think. A good measure is that watching highlights of WC3/BW/CS/Dota/Quake would blow my mind. Even hearthstone is quite entertaining. Watching SC2 highlights make me wonder where the highlight was, like a watching a really bad comedian telling jokes. To me the current situation is not surprising. The RTS genre isn't inherently unfriendly or too hard (you think CS/Dota is easy?). It's just that SC2 is bad. This means that if there were a well designed RTS, be it WC4 or day9's atlas or whatever, it has a chance to do well. We need not be so pessimistic about our favourite genre. | ||
|
3point14
Germany890 Posts
On March 23 2015 17:25 Latham wrote: Also guys, please consider that a lot of people would be interested in Warcraft 4 that are not interested in Starcraft 2 solely because they don't like the sci-fi setting of SC2. Likewise there are people that play Company of Heroes 2 but don't touch starcraft or warcraft because they like the world war 2 setting and don't like either sci-fi or fantasy. Many of you here seem to think that the market for sc2 and a potential warcraft 4 would heavily overlap, but that might not be completely true. To each their own. Both games could coexist next to each other, provided starcraft 2 would last that long. I agree Sc2 will cool down in some years. Wc4 might even help it, cause it shows Blizzards RTSquality to the players of tomorrow.I love the discussion in this thread. many well written comments! Something Mobas dont have is the huge battles, basically the equivalent of giant explosions in movies. in Wc3 there are very many casual players, who will pick a fun hero in a 3on3 or 4on4 RT and just hope for some epic Heros and Battles. they want to use starfall and cause 2000 damage with it, or do a huge flamestrike into a standing army. they want to feel their patriotism when they cast tranquillity or heal a friendly hero with their Paladin . they want to have a badass hero (like in Dota) but also have it as a legitimate leader of a huge army. many Dota2 players will have this yearning too. long huge battles, Hero spells, focus fire, Hero focus, using Items, unit counter, team work, fat T3 units these are the gamemechanics they are looking for. and in Wc3 they get it rather often, because bad positioning is solved by TP. personally for example I love playing the dreadlord simply because of his ultimate. Blizzard have to decide whether they still want to be known for superheavyweight games, that control a whole genre and its community for years. it may not be fast and easy money, but it would have many other assets for them. I personally believe Wc4 would be substantially more popular than Sc2 (and I regard Sc2 as a huge success). @404AlphaSquad: added you! my name is "karpador". usually play after 11pm (cet) greetings! | ||
|
lestye
United States4163 Posts
The RTS genre isn't inherently unfriendly or too hard (you think CS/Dota is easy?). It's just that SC2 is bad. RTS is hard for a lot of people. You have no idea how many abandons/shit games in Dota 1 + 2 I've experienced because people were not confident in their micro to play visage/chen/meepo and you only need to micro a few units. Mechanically WC3 is way harder than Dota and CS. That's probably why custom maps in warcraft 3 was more popular than the actual game itself. Most people sucked at it. | ||
|
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
On March 24 2015 09:56 lestye wrote: RTS is hard for a lot of people. You have no idea how many abandons/shit games in Dota 1 + 2 I've experienced because people were not confident in their micro to play visage/chen/meepo and you only need to micro a few units. Mechanically WC3 is way harder than Dota and CS. That's probably why custom maps in warcraft 3 was more popular than the actual game itself. Most people sucked at it. I understand where you're coming from. Most people suck at everything, but maybe RTS feels harder because it is more apparent when we are bad at it (especially when we see how fast the pros play). But it's a fact that none of us "great RTS people" can win a dota or CS tournament just like that. I'm only agreeing with you based on my experience with my friends when I was younger, who mainly played custom games and dota. When I was under 10 I didn't feel any difference between playing BW, Diablo, SF2 or Quake. They were all fun games to me and I cannot relate to that problem as a casual gamer. Now that I understand more and take competitive games more seriously they are all challenging in their own way. | ||
|
Probemicro
3708 Posts
| ||
|
lestye
United States4163 Posts
On March 24 2015 19:50 JieXian wrote: I understand where you're coming from. Most people suck at everything, but maybe RTS feels harder because it is more apparent when we are bad at it (especially when we see how fast the pros play). But it's a fact that none of us "great RTS people" can win a dota or CS tournament just like that. I'm only agreeing with you based on my experience with my friends when I was younger, who mainly played custom games and dota. When I was under 10 I didn't feel any difference between playing BW, Diablo, SF2 or Quake. They were all fun games to me and I cannot relate to that problem as a casual gamer. Now that I understand more and take competitive games more seriously they are all challenging in their own way. It was really strange, because when grey goo came out, as well as like, in RTS discussion reddit, AND EVEN and EVEn the "future of rts" thread on TL there are people who say games like Brood War and SC2 aren't real strategy games because it requires so much speed and in their mind, not much strategy. Of course you and I know thats bullshit, but people actually believe that, and in games like RTS and Quake/UT based games, because like you said, the skill gap is VERY apparent. Casuals don't like that and casuals are super important nowadays when it comes to the healthiness of the professional scenes in games. ON A LIGHTER NOTE, The WC3 Models are now available to use in SC2 after the patch that rolls out today. =D | ||
|
404AlphaSquad
839 Posts
On March 24 2015 03:31 3point14 wrote: @404AlphaSquad: added you! my name is "karpador". usually play after 11pm (cet) greetings! Yeay! But I already lost my PW so I have another account  "Kalevi" | ||
|
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
On March 24 2015 23:41 lestye wrote: It was really strange, because when grey goo came out, as well as like, in RTS discussion reddit, AND EVEN and EVEn the "future of rts" thread on TL there are people who say games like Brood War and SC2 aren't real strategy games because it requires so much speed and in their mind, not much strategy. Of course you and I know thats bullshit, but people actually believe that, and in games like RTS and Quake/UT based games, because like you said, the skill gap is VERY apparent. Casuals don't like that and casuals are super important nowadays when it comes to the healthiness of the professional scenes in games. ON A LIGHTER NOTE, The WC3 Models are now available to use in SC2 after the patch that rolls out today. =D Oh well...... thing is, this noticeable skill gap problem is even more apparent in sports like football (NFL and FIFA), basketball, tennis etc., but that doesn't deter "casuals" from getting into the game. Maybe it's the multitasking element in an RTS? I don't know. You still have to keep track of a million things in DotA and CS. On March 24 2015 20:13 Probemicro wrote: we need justine chowder to take the helm for wc4 and we are golden :D hahaha | ||
|
lestye
United States4163 Posts
Oh well...... thing is, this noticeable skill gap problem is even more apparent in sports like football (NFL and FIFA), basketball, tennis etc., but that doesn't deter "casuals" from getting into the game. That's way different. Most people who are "into" those sports aren't playing it. With video games you're probably going to be playing it or watch the game you play the most. Maybe it's the multitasking element in an RTS? I don't know. You still have to keep track of a million things in DotA and CS. It's 100% the multitasking. When you play Broodwar, you're scouting, building army, fighting, keeping resources low, casting abiltiies, moving out of abilities, dealing with drops, and a bunch of other shit at the same time. If you forget to make your workers (or in Brood War's case forget to put your workers on the mineral line because you were busy), you're fucked. If a drop gets off that wrecks your workers, you're especially fucked. You need to pay attention a million times more. When you play dota, you're just sitting there csing casually, you can do it one handed, you might use a spell or two to harass, maybe you're a bit low and you're going to save the mana you have for an escape spell or save it for a burst kill. Glancing at the minimap once in a while to make sure no one is missing. In CS, I'm not super knoweldgeable, but form my understanding you have a handfull of things you need to worry about, you don't need to change your view and do something or other shit every handfull of seconds. You're just worrying about your positioning, and where your enemy might be, and where you're exposed. It's way slower/tactical, you just have to be ready to have fast reaction time to aim and kill, but even then that's going to be only for a few seconds in the match. (comparing how long warcraft 3 fights are vs cs fights, cs fights can be over in like 2 seconds where wc3 fights can be minutes long) There's not that many ways to "fall behind" in Dota like in Starcraft/Warcraft. Not to mention you have the team element in Dota/CS, even if you suck maybe someone on your team can carry you. | ||
|
Spaylz
Japan1743 Posts
On March 25 2015 00:58 lestye wrote: That's way different. Most people who are "into" those sports aren't playing it. With video games you're probably going to be playing it or watch the game you play the most. When you play dota, you're just sitting there csing casually, you can do it one handed, you might use a spell or two to harass, maybe you're a bit low and you're going to save the mana you have for an escape spell or save it for a burst kill. Glancing at the minimap once in a while to make sure no one is missing. There's not that many ways to "fall behind" in Dota like in Starcraft/Warcraft. Not to mention you have the team element in Dota/CS, even if you suck maybe someone on your team can carry you. I'm not sure I agree with your statement about Dota or MOBA games in general. I played a looooooot of Dota 1/2 and a loooot of HoN, and starting from mid-level to high, it gets more intense. I mean, if we're talking about low level stuff... then you're absolutely right. Laning is pretty much what you described. Go a bit higher and the nuances add up though. I also generally agree that WC3 requires more attention and multitasking than Dota and MOBAs. Playing Meepo at a high level is quite challenging though! But overall, it can be somewhat summarized as: you're handling one hero instead of one hero plus a whole army plus your economy. In reality it's a bit more complex, as some heroes have a very peculiar set of skills (Invoker/Meepo) and there's generally more awareness going on because you can die at the drop of a hat. Burst is far more present in MOBAs, especially in HoN. Most of all, the team aspect adds a whole other universe. It's not entirely a concept that is estranged to WC3, because 2v2 was actually awesome and very realistically part of the competition. Still though, Dota and MOBAs have evolved a great deal and they've become games with a real elite and with people who can showcase just how high skill can go in the game. I'll take a ToD vs. Moon over a Na`Vi vs. C9 any day though :D I miss those days... | ||
|
lestye
United States4163 Posts
On March 25 2015 01:27 Spaylz wrote: I'm not sure I agree with your statement about Dota or MOBA games in general. I played a looooooot of Dota 1/2 and a loooot of HoN, and starting from mid-level to high, it gets more intense. I mean, if we're talking about low level stuff... then you're absolutely right. Laning is pretty much what you described. Go a bit higher and the nuances add up though. I also generally agree that WC3 requires more attention and multitasking than Dota and MOBAs. Playing Meepo at a high level is quite challenging though! But overall, it can be somewhat summarized as: you're handling one hero instead of one hero plus a whole army plus your economy. In reality it's a bit more complex, as some heroes have a very peculiar set of skills (Invoker/Meepo) and there's generally more awareness going on because you can die at the drop of a hat. Burst is far more present in MOBAs, especially in HoN. Most of all, the team aspect adds a whole other universe. It's not entirely a concept that is estranged to WC3, because 2v2 was actually awesome and very realistically part of the competition. Still though, Dota and MOBAs have evolved a great deal and they've become games with a real elite and with people who can showcase just how high skill can go in the game. I'll take a ToD vs. Moon over a Na`Vi vs. C9 any day though :D I miss those days... There's a lot of nuances in Dota for sure. Like you need to concentrate to get some sick spills and strikes when you're playing Lanaya, and Meepo and stuff might get intense, there's like a variety of heroes you can play, and most require teamwork, but not super intense concentration/APM. Like, to play Warcraft III competently, you gotta do a lot of shit, do a lot of effort, just to play at a basic level. However, with Dota, you could pick an "easy" hero, when that's not really an option in WC3, there's not really an easy race where you dont have to do basic RTS shit. When I play support, I ward, right click the off laner a few times, maybe do a pull, maybe we can go for a bursty kill because the offlaner gets out of position. I can play Leoric, where I'm just csing, doing my own thing, maybe throw out a casual hellfire blast. Not much effort. | ||
c3rberUs
Japan11286 Posts
This like asking why some people like football, basketball as opposed to say, golf or tennis. ^_^ | ||
|
3point14
Germany890 Posts
Especially important: players will be allowed to veto 2 heroes and 1 unit (except workers, but more detailled rules are not yet firmly decided) there will also be many new items and some unitchanges. http://www.twitch.tv/imaginelimits/b/640626144 go to minute 35 for the acutal ingame presentation http://www.wcreplays.com/forums/showthread.php?t=146973&p=3104176 you can read about it here (+discuss) I like the changes, as it will force players to think a lot more strategically and it gives every unit a chance to be played. balance will obviusly not be perfect from start, but some things, like UD having no DK due to veto will be handled by better healing chances for UD and so on.. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16071 Posts
On March 22 2015 22:04 Nesto wrote: well, I totally liked the decision to create a Panda continent, that really fit in the WC3 universe quite nicely ;> Actually if you bothered to read the lore or do the quest content in Pandaria, it had the best Lore that's been in WoW since Wrath of the Lich King. WoD on the other hand is a mess and the time travel portion of it is only the beginning of how screwed up the story is. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On March 25 2015 03:59 3point14 wrote: Ferfe, a top10 w3arena player has suggested some big changes to make Wc3 more interesting again (he will create custom maps that consist of a usual melee map with .the changes included) Especially important: players will be allowed to veto 2 heroes and 1 unit (except workers, but more detailled rules are not yet firmly decided) there will also be many new items and some unitchanges. http://www.twitch.tv/imaginelimits/b/640626144 go to minute 35 for the acutal ingame presentation http://www.wcreplays.com/forums/showthread.php?t=146973&p=3104176 you can read about it here (+discuss) I like the changes, as it will force players to think a lot more strategically and it gives every unit a chance to be played. balance will obviusly not be perfect from start, but some things, like UD having no DK due to veto will be handled by better healing chances for UD and so on.. I saw that, unit veto still seems really, really stupid to me. | ||
|
3point14
Germany890 Posts
On March 25 2015 05:15 TheYango wrote: I saw that, unit veto still seems really, really stupid to me. I think it is cool and I want to try it out, but I dont see an Orc without BM and Grunts defending a 2rax footy(with defend) rush. i have never lost against that as human in Bnet | ||
| ||
