|
Please be advised:
We will be closing this General thread in 24 hours. It will remain searchable.
After that we will require new threads to discuss topics.
Questions should go in the stickied Q&A thread, screenshots and PotG will go in the PotG sticky, QQ/Rage/Complaints should go in the QQ/Rage thread. If you want to talk about maps or strategies open a new thread.
Any comments or concerns will be logged please forward them to ZeromuS. This new forum is still fluid so we will try this out. General TL rules will still apply to new threads. |
On November 18 2014 05:42 Wuster wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2014 22:36 Yacobs wrote:On November 17 2014 11:13 Yoav wrote:On November 17 2014 06:16 Yacobs wrote:On November 17 2014 05:38 [SXG]Phantom wrote:
Well, you could say what you want about D3, sc2, wow and whatever, but the fact is that those 3 are the most succesful games of their genre. Depends on how you define successful. WoW is obviously the most successful MMORPG but I'd argue D2 and SC1 were far, far more successful than their sequels. Best selling PC games of all time. Number at left is rank. Number at right is millions of copies sold. 1. Minecraft.....................17 2. World of Warcraft.....14
3. Diablo 3.....................124. Half Life 2...................12 5. Starcraft....................11... 10-14. Starcraft 2...........6... 16-20. Diablo 2...............4... 24-31. Warcraft 3...........3Starcraft is the only Blizzard game where the most recent iteration is not the most successful, commercially. These figures are completely meaningless. You have to look at other quantitative things like how much money did Blizzard spend to develop those games versus the older games, is Blizzard growing as a company, as well as qualitative things like the impact of SC1/D2 on the industry versus the impact that SC2/D3 had (quantitative evidence for the qualitative: SC2/D3 had no impact -- do you see any SC2/D3 clones in the pipeline?) and changes in Blizzard's reputation. You can read Blizzard quarterly report if you like and they are growing every quarter as far as I recall. So ya, they're definitely succeeding financially. Do you have numbers where they're hemorrhaging money to show otherwise? As for the rest, I don't think you really mean 'qualitative'. I don't think I would trust anyone giving me a 'qualitative' reputation or impact score. Besides, RTS was a dead genre before SC2 how much are you gonna rip on Blizzard for RTS staying a dead genre? Age of Empire Online shut down after a year and C&C's latest RTS was so successful they followed up by turning C&C a Clash of Clans clone. There was Company of Heroes though, not sure how that ended up doing. Show nested quote +On November 17 2014 23:14 FeyFey wrote:On November 17 2014 20:02 ahswtini wrote:
Yeah, will be interesting to see the figures for Diablo 4 probably way higher since people often judge the game after its expansion. Like BW is the most epic multiplayer game of all time, while Sc1 was well not that fun in multiplayer. Especially console people love D3 as it was already patched up quite nicely when released there. But some people were surprised by the minecraft approach D3 took I guess. As in improve the game with community feedback. Definitely true, D2 wasn't really that perfect of a game, the expansion really cleaned it up and gave it longevity (plus some very serious patching to put in Ubers, respeccing, ect). Same thing RoS did with D3 sorta. Also, knowing Blizzard by the time D4 is ready the nostalgia factor will have kicked in and people will be praising D3 as amazing. Further offtopic + Show Spoiler +Having played Blizzard games since the beginning, it amazed me that people love WC3 so much when it was so reviled on release as not being an RTS and gender swapping Kerrigan and Raynor's story. I'm also amazed that people say LK was the best WoW expansion. When it came out, all people bitched about was how the casuals were taking over and class homogenization, ect, ect (DK's were broken though =p).
For the record I liked WC3 and LK a lot. I'm just remember reading so much hate when they came out and now all I hear is people praising them as the greatest things ever. Actually, when D3 came out I saw some clever posters copy-pasting D2 release hate threads for fun, and there were a lot. Maybe haters just give up and leave the rest of us alone to enjoy things and make good memories.
The nostalgia factor definitely matters. Many people do think Blizzard's game have generally gone down in quality, which quite frankly isn't surprising considering the absolute beasts they released before. They set the bar real high with BW and WC3. I feel like many people don't realise this, but WC3 revolutionized the gaming scene as we know it.
Though Aeons of Strife began in BW, it really evolved in WC3 and became Dota, which sprouted the whole MOBA genre. WC3 was also the precursor to the story of WoW, so there's that. In terms of gameplay, it also changed RTS quite drastically, and for the better. I'm very biased, because WC3 is the game of my heart, but still, these things are at least partially true xD.
I played D3 for two hours, and was incredibly bored. It's not my type of game though. I played D1 and D2 when I was younger, but never more than 10 hours or so. I tried SC2, and I genuinely think it's a good game, I just don't find it fun for me.
HotS is a pretty good game however. It's lots of fun, and I quite enjoy it. It gives me the "old Blizzard" vibe from WC3. Lately, it seems they're going back to a more "casual" trend with Hearthstone and HotS, where they focus more on "fun" gameplay rather than precise mechanics and deep strategy.
In any case, and while I am not as big a fanboy I used to be, I still dig Blizzard's game a lot. I don't care for SC2, but I will likely buy LotV just for the campaign. Overwatch doesn't interest me too much though.
|
On November 18 2014 05:42 Wuster wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2014 22:36 Yacobs wrote:On November 17 2014 11:13 Yoav wrote:On November 17 2014 06:16 Yacobs wrote:On November 17 2014 05:38 [SXG]Phantom wrote:
Well, you could say what you want about D3, sc2, wow and whatever, but the fact is that those 3 are the most succesful games of their genre. Depends on how you define successful. WoW is obviously the most successful MMORPG but I'd argue D2 and SC1 were far, far more successful than their sequels. Best selling PC games of all time. Number at left is rank. Number at right is millions of copies sold. 1. Minecraft.....................17 2. World of Warcraft.....14
3. Diablo 3.....................124. Half Life 2...................12 5. Starcraft....................11... 10-14. Starcraft 2...........6... 16-20. Diablo 2...............4... 24-31. Warcraft 3...........3Starcraft is the only Blizzard game where the most recent iteration is not the most successful, commercially. These figures are completely meaningless. You have to look at other quantitative things like how much money did Blizzard spend to develop those games versus the older games, is Blizzard growing as a company, as well as qualitative things like the impact of SC1/D2 on the industry versus the impact that SC2/D3 had (quantitative evidence for the qualitative: SC2/D3 had no impact -- do you see any SC2/D3 clones in the pipeline?) and changes in Blizzard's reputation. You can read Blizzard quarterly report if you like and they are growing every quarter as far as I recall. So ya, they're definitely succeeding financially. Do you have numbers where they're hemorrhaging money to show otherwise? As for the rest, I don't think you really mean 'qualitative'. I don't think I would trust anyone giving me a 'qualitative' reputation or impact score. Besides, RTS was a dead genre before SC2 how much are you gonna rip on Blizzard for RTS staying a dead genre? Age of Empire Online shut down after a year and C&C's latest RTS was so successful they followed up by turning C&C a Clash of Clans clone. There was Company of Heroes though, not sure how that ended up doing. Show nested quote +On November 17 2014 23:14 FeyFey wrote:On November 17 2014 20:02 ahswtini wrote:
Yeah, will be interesting to see the figures for Diablo 4 probably way higher since people often judge the game after its expansion. Like BW is the most epic multiplayer game of all time, while Sc1 was well not that fun in multiplayer. Especially console people love D3 as it was already patched up quite nicely when released there. But some people were surprised by the minecraft approach D3 took I guess. As in improve the game with community feedback. Definitely true, D2 wasn't really that perfect of a game, the expansion really cleaned it up and gave it longevity (plus some very serious patching to put in Ubers, respeccing, ect). Same thing RoS did with D3 sorta. Also, knowing Blizzard by the time D4 is ready the nostalgia factor will have kicked in and people will be praising D3 as amazing. Further offtopic + Show Spoiler +Having played Blizzard games since the beginning, it amazed me that people love WC3 so much when it was so reviled on release as not being an RTS and gender swapping Kerrigan and Raynor's story. I'm also amazed that people say LK was the best WoW expansion. When it came out, all people bitched about was how the casuals were taking over and class homogenization, ect, ect (DK's were broken though =p).
For the record I liked WC3 and LK a lot. I'm just remember reading so much hate when they came out and now all I hear is people praising them as the greatest things ever. Actually, when D3 came out I saw some clever posters copy-pasting D2 release hate threads for fun, and there were a lot. Maybe haters just give up and leave the rest of us alone to enjoy things and make good memories.
Respeccing destroyed a lot of D2 though. I remember raging about it when they announced it. It was shortly after they announced D3 to have full respec at all time. People were mad and said D2 didn't have it and it was part of the fun. Then they suddenly brought a patch after like 2 years of no patches that introduced respec to D2. Blizzard so troll.
|
It's the nature of things: if you want a hardcore experience, play something made by an indy or one-off studio or something similarly esoteric. If you want a game with broad appeal, look at an established game company. Back when Blizz was young and adventurous, they didn't give a shit that D2 is nigh on inaccessible without reading online guides.
Nowadays, they make things like SC2, D3 and Hearthstone. And you know what? I love D2 and BW, but it'a hell of a lot easier to get a bunch of friends together to play one of the newer games. We old-schoolers are just looking in the wrong place if we expect Blizz to cater to old-school gamers. If you want that, there are plenty of hardcore games out there. I'm gonna keep on playing the old Blizzard games from time to time, and I'll definitely buy new hardcore games, but I'm also perfectly happy that the new generation of Blizzard is making it easier to set up gaming parties...assuming you have rock-solid internet :-).
|
On November 18 2014 06:16 Miragee wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2014 05:42 Wuster wrote:On November 17 2014 22:36 Yacobs wrote:On November 17 2014 11:13 Yoav wrote:On November 17 2014 06:16 Yacobs wrote:On November 17 2014 05:38 [SXG]Phantom wrote:
Well, you could say what you want about D3, sc2, wow and whatever, but the fact is that those 3 are the most succesful games of their genre. Depends on how you define successful. WoW is obviously the most successful MMORPG but I'd argue D2 and SC1 were far, far more successful than their sequels. Best selling PC games of all time. Number at left is rank. Number at right is millions of copies sold. 1. Minecraft.....................17 2. World of Warcraft.....14
3. Diablo 3.....................124. Half Life 2...................12 5. Starcraft....................11... 10-14. Starcraft 2...........6... 16-20. Diablo 2...............4... 24-31. Warcraft 3...........3Starcraft is the only Blizzard game where the most recent iteration is not the most successful, commercially. These figures are completely meaningless. You have to look at other quantitative things like how much money did Blizzard spend to develop those games versus the older games, is Blizzard growing as a company, as well as qualitative things like the impact of SC1/D2 on the industry versus the impact that SC2/D3 had (quantitative evidence for the qualitative: SC2/D3 had no impact -- do you see any SC2/D3 clones in the pipeline?) and changes in Blizzard's reputation. You can read Blizzard quarterly report if you like and they are growing every quarter as far as I recall. So ya, they're definitely succeeding financially. Do you have numbers where they're hemorrhaging money to show otherwise? As for the rest, I don't think you really mean 'qualitative'. I don't think I would trust anyone giving me a 'qualitative' reputation or impact score. Besides, RTS was a dead genre before SC2 how much are you gonna rip on Blizzard for RTS staying a dead genre? Age of Empire Online shut down after a year and C&C's latest RTS was so successful they followed up by turning C&C a Clash of Clans clone. There was Company of Heroes though, not sure how that ended up doing. On November 17 2014 23:14 FeyFey wrote:On November 17 2014 20:02 ahswtini wrote:
Yeah, will be interesting to see the figures for Diablo 4 probably way higher since people often judge the game after its expansion. Like BW is the most epic multiplayer game of all time, while Sc1 was well not that fun in multiplayer. Especially console people love D3 as it was already patched up quite nicely when released there. But some people were surprised by the minecraft approach D3 took I guess. As in improve the game with community feedback. Definitely true, D2 wasn't really that perfect of a game, the expansion really cleaned it up and gave it longevity (plus some very serious patching to put in Ubers, respeccing, ect). Same thing RoS did with D3 sorta. Also, knowing Blizzard by the time D4 is ready the nostalgia factor will have kicked in and people will be praising D3 as amazing. Further offtopic + Show Spoiler +Having played Blizzard games since the beginning, it amazed me that people love WC3 so much when it was so reviled on release as not being an RTS and gender swapping Kerrigan and Raynor's story. I'm also amazed that people say LK was the best WoW expansion. When it came out, all people bitched about was how the casuals were taking over and class homogenization, ect, ect (DK's were broken though =p).
For the record I liked WC3 and LK a lot. I'm just remember reading so much hate when they came out and now all I hear is people praising them as the greatest things ever. Actually, when D3 came out I saw some clever posters copy-pasting D2 release hate threads for fun, and there were a lot. Maybe haters just give up and leave the rest of us alone to enjoy things and make good memories. Respeccing destroyed a lot of D2 though. I remember raging about it when they announced it. It was shortly after they announced D3 to have full respec at all time. People were mad and said D2 didn't have it and it was part of the fun. Then they suddenly brought a patch after like 2 years of no patches that introduced respec to D2. Blizzard so troll.
Oh, not being able to respec was a huge frustration for me actually. And I'll admit I was long done with the game by the time it came out (it was what? over 10 years old by then?) so I was trying to infer what people enjoyed about D2 in addition to what I liked when playing.
|
Bunch of pages bashing on Blizzard completely divorced from the actual topic. Why not go take it elsewhere and make a "Hate on Blizzard here" thread, guys? Rather than crapping up this thread?
Back on topic:
@zeross: Thanks for posting that. Personally I'm not sure that particular spectator setup is the best way to do it. Although its fairly "typical" for an FPS Overwatch's setup makes it like a DOTA-like and FPS hybrid. So a freemoving camera with an observer might give better angles to understand what's going on.
Game looks really fun to play though.
|
I hope they've finally ironed out the kinks on that elusive "LAN" technology.
|
This looks fucking awesome
|
On November 18 2014 23:01 Sbrubbles wrote:
I hope they've finally ironed out the kinks on that elusive "LAN" technology.
Why would there be LAN? this game will be all about microtransactions.
|
There *would* be lan, but you are going to have to pay to play different characters so they can't actually allow you to have lan or 3rd party servers etc.
If theres anything blizz has taught us, its that their greed triumphs over their customer's experience every time.
|
The biggest issues will be
LAN
Custom servers/server management
Modding
This is the big problem when dealing with the FPS genre that blizzard may not be use to or know how to handle. FPSs revolve around owning your own servers and heavy modding to make it in the long run. I don't know if new blizzard has what it takes to let people do what they want to the game. Especially after dota, blizzard will own anything that you make for their game which i think will turn alot of people off to making great mods, like team fortress, weapons factory, rocket arena, team deathmatch and counter strike. People forget most great games came from mods of other ones.
|
On November 19 2014 01:58 Chro wrote:
The biggest issues will be
LAN
Custom servers/server management
Modding
This is the big problem when dealing with the FPS genre that blizzard may not be use to or know how to handle. FPSs revolve around owning your own servers and heavy modding to make it in the long run. I don't know if new blizzard has what it takes to let people do what they want to the game. Especially after dota, blizzard will own anything that you make for their game which i think will turn alot of people off to making great mods, like team fortress, weapons factory, rocket arena, team deathmatch and counter strike. People forget most great games came from mods of other ones.
I would be extremely surprised if there was LAN or modding for this game. Just forget about it.
|
On November 19 2014 02:03 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2014 01:58 Chro wrote:
The biggest issues will be
LAN
Custom servers/server management
Modding
This is the big problem when dealing with the FPS genre that blizzard may not be use to or know how to handle. FPSs revolve around owning your own servers and heavy modding to make it in the long run. I don't know if new blizzard has what it takes to let people do what they want to the game. Especially after dota, blizzard will own anything that you make for their game which i think will turn alot of people off to making great mods, like team fortress, weapons factory, rocket arena, team deathmatch and counter strike. People forget most great games came from mods of other ones. I would be extremely surprised if there was LAN or modding for this game. Just forget about it.
I mean, they could go the Dota 2 route with lan and have it be totally "meh". No replays, no hats, no custom anything, no dota TV. But the game totally works. I think thats the best route for games like that when it comes to lan. Just make sure the online features are worth connecting for.
But yeah, moding and lan are cool, but they are literally the last features I care about in a game at this point in my life.
|
On November 19 2014 02:06 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2014 02:03 Redox wrote:On November 19 2014 01:58 Chro wrote:
The biggest issues will be
LAN
Custom servers/server management
Modding
This is the big problem when dealing with the FPS genre that blizzard may not be use to or know how to handle. FPSs revolve around owning your own servers and heavy modding to make it in the long run. I don't know if new blizzard has what it takes to let people do what they want to the game. Especially after dota, blizzard will own anything that you make for their game which i think will turn alot of people off to making great mods, like team fortress, weapons factory, rocket arena, team deathmatch and counter strike. People forget most great games came from mods of other ones. I would be extremely surprised if there was LAN or modding for this game. Just forget about it. I mean, they could go the Dota 2 route with lan and have it be totally "meh". No replays, no hats, no custom anything, no dota TV. But the game totally works. I think thats the best route for games like that when it comes to lan. Just make sure the online features are worth connecting for. But yeah, moding and lan are cool, but they are literally the last features I care about in a game at this point in my life.
they can only do that if the characters are free to play
this game is 10000000000% using the Heroes of the Storm (aka LoL) monetization system where you can't play a char without buying it. so it wont work.
|
On November 19 2014 02:12 Sn0_Man wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2014 02:06 Plansix wrote:On November 19 2014 02:03 Redox wrote:On November 19 2014 01:58 Chro wrote:
The biggest issues will be
LAN
Custom servers/server management
Modding
This is the big problem when dealing with the FPS genre that blizzard may not be use to or know how to handle. FPSs revolve around owning your own servers and heavy modding to make it in the long run. I don't know if new blizzard has what it takes to let people do what they want to the game. Especially after dota, blizzard will own anything that you make for their game which i think will turn alot of people off to making great mods, like team fortress, weapons factory, rocket arena, team deathmatch and counter strike. People forget most great games came from mods of other ones. I would be extremely surprised if there was LAN or modding for this game. Just forget about it. I mean, they could go the Dota 2 route with lan and have it be totally "meh". No replays, no hats, no custom anything, no dota TV. But the game totally works. I think thats the best route for games like that when it comes to lan. Just make sure the online features are worth connecting for. But yeah, moding and lan are cool, but they are literally the last features I care about in a game at this point in my life. they can only do that if the characters are free to play this game is 10000000000% using the Heroes of the Storm (aka LoL) monetization system where you can't play a char without buying it. so it wont work.
Obviously, if the business model prohibited LAN from making business sense, it won't be a feature. Its like expecting LAN for WoW or some other game where they make money off of small purchases or a monthly fee.
And again, in the era of high speed internet, LAN is pretty low on my priority list of features. Right up their with "play by email".
|
On November 19 2014 02:12 Sn0_Man wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2014 02:06 Plansix wrote:On November 19 2014 02:03 Redox wrote:On November 19 2014 01:58 Chro wrote:
The biggest issues will be
LAN
Custom servers/server management
Modding
This is the big problem when dealing with the FPS genre that blizzard may not be use to or know how to handle. FPSs revolve around owning your own servers and heavy modding to make it in the long run. I don't know if new blizzard has what it takes to let people do what they want to the game. Especially after dota, blizzard will own anything that you make for their game which i think will turn alot of people off to making great mods, like team fortress, weapons factory, rocket arena, team deathmatch and counter strike. People forget most great games came from mods of other ones. I would be extremely surprised if there was LAN or modding for this game. Just forget about it. I mean, they could go the Dota 2 route with lan and have it be totally "meh". No replays, no hats, no custom anything, no dota TV. But the game totally works. I think thats the best route for games like that when it comes to lan. Just make sure the online features are worth connecting for. But yeah, moding and lan are cool, but they are literally the last features I care about in a game at this point in my life. they can only do that if the characters are free to play this game is 10000000000% using the Heroes of the Storm (aka LoL) monetization system where you can't play a char without buying it. so it wont work.
What? How in the world would this work? A MOBA's pricing system doesn't work at all for this kind of game, purely because there's no room for growth. The only exception I've seen that's been successfully implemented recently is Killer Instinct, but even that has a cap on pricing, so it prices out to be the full value of a game. There's only 12(14?) characters in the game, if you monetize based on something this limited, you're guaranteed to lose. It makes way more sense that they follow the TF2 approach and sell increased amounts of cosmetics for their small pool of heroes.
|
On November 19 2014 02:27 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2014 02:12 Sn0_Man wrote:On November 19 2014 02:06 Plansix wrote:On November 19 2014 02:03 Redox wrote:On November 19 2014 01:58 Chro wrote:
The biggest issues will be
LAN
Custom servers/server management
Modding
This is the big problem when dealing with the FPS genre that blizzard may not be use to or know how to handle. FPSs revolve around owning your own servers and heavy modding to make it in the long run. I don't know if new blizzard has what it takes to let people do what they want to the game. Especially after dota, blizzard will own anything that you make for their game which i think will turn alot of people off to making great mods, like team fortress, weapons factory, rocket arena, team deathmatch and counter strike. People forget most great games came from mods of other ones. I would be extremely surprised if there was LAN or modding for this game. Just forget about it. I mean, they could go the Dota 2 route with lan and have it be totally "meh". No replays, no hats, no custom anything, no dota TV. But the game totally works. I think thats the best route for games like that when it comes to lan. Just make sure the online features are worth connecting for. But yeah, moding and lan are cool, but they are literally the last features I care about in a game at this point in my life. they can only do that if the characters are free to play this game is 10000000000% using the Heroes of the Storm (aka LoL) monetization system where you can't play a char without buying it. so it wont work. Obviously, if the business model prohibited LAN from making business sense, it won't be a feature. Its like expecting LAN for WoW or some other game where they make money off of small purchases or a monthly fee. And again, in the era of high speed internet, LAN is pretty low on my priority list of features. Right up their with "play by email".
Well since no servers ever crash or get packet loss or ping spikes ever, I guess ur right LAN is overrated especially for an FPS where ping is crucial for good gameplay. Play by email would be just as good we can all agree
On November 19 2014 02:27 Tribute wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2014 02:12 Sn0_Man wrote:On November 19 2014 02:06 Plansix wrote:On November 19 2014 02:03 Redox wrote:On November 19 2014 01:58 Chro wrote:
The biggest issues will be
LAN
Custom servers/server management
Modding
This is the big problem when dealing with the FPS genre that blizzard may not be use to or know how to handle. FPSs revolve around owning your own servers and heavy modding to make it in the long run. I don't know if new blizzard has what it takes to let people do what they want to the game. Especially after dota, blizzard will own anything that you make for their game which i think will turn alot of people off to making great mods, like team fortress, weapons factory, rocket arena, team deathmatch and counter strike. People forget most great games came from mods of other ones. I would be extremely surprised if there was LAN or modding for this game. Just forget about it. I mean, they could go the Dota 2 route with lan and have it be totally "meh". No replays, no hats, no custom anything, no dota TV. But the game totally works. I think thats the best route for games like that when it comes to lan. Just make sure the online features are worth connecting for. But yeah, moding and lan are cool, but they are literally the last features I care about in a game at this point in my life. they can only do that if the characters are free to play this game is 10000000000% using the Heroes of the Storm (aka LoL) monetization system where you can't play a char without buying it. so it wont work. What? How in the world would this work? A MOBA's pricing system doesn't work at all for this kind of game, purely because there's no room for growth. The only exception I've seen that's been successfully implemented recently is Killer Instinct, but even that has a cap on pricing, so it prices out to be the full value of a game. There's only 12(14?) characters in the game, if you monetize based on something this limited, you're guaranteed to lose. It makes way more sense that they follow the TF2 approach and sell increased amounts of cosmetics for their small pool of heroes.
? they have 12 characters NOW. There will eventually be 50+. There's literally no other reasonable way for them to monetize the game.
|
There is only 12 characters in the game so far. The could release more. I could easily see it having a similar model to Tribes Ascend where you have to unlock both classes and weapons
LAN is obviously far more important for an FPS. In other games you can get away with playing with latency even in LAN tournaments, you should not do that in a fast paced FPS.
|
4713 Posts
On November 19 2014 02:12 Sn0_Man wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2014 02:06 Plansix wrote:On November 19 2014 02:03 Redox wrote:On November 19 2014 01:58 Chro wrote:
The biggest issues will be
LAN
Custom servers/server management
Modding
This is the big problem when dealing with the FPS genre that blizzard may not be use to or know how to handle. FPSs revolve around owning your own servers and heavy modding to make it in the long run. I don't know if new blizzard has what it takes to let people do what they want to the game. Especially after dota, blizzard will own anything that you make for their game which i think will turn alot of people off to making great mods, like team fortress, weapons factory, rocket arena, team deathmatch and counter strike. People forget most great games came from mods of other ones. I would be extremely surprised if there was LAN or modding for this game. Just forget about it. I mean, they could go the Dota 2 route with lan and have it be totally "meh". No replays, no hats, no custom anything, no dota TV. But the game totally works. I think thats the best route for games like that when it comes to lan. Just make sure the online features are worth connecting for. But yeah, moding and lan are cool, but they are literally the last features I care about in a game at this point in my life. they can only do that if the characters are free to play this game is 10000000000% using the Heroes of the Storm (aka LoL) monetization system where you can't play a char without buying it. so it wont work.
I'm not sure where you've drawn this conclusion from. There doesn't seem to be a big enough number of chars to sell them like Heroes or LoL does. It seems much more likely that this game will go the DoTA 2 and Team Fortress model where all the playable chars are unlocked for everyone and instead you have to buy customization for them, which includes anything from skins and new gun models to new sounds, animations and special effects.
|
On November 19 2014 02:33 Destructicon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2014 02:12 Sn0_Man wrote:On November 19 2014 02:06 Plansix wrote:On November 19 2014 02:03 Redox wrote:On November 19 2014 01:58 Chro wrote:
The biggest issues will be
LAN
Custom servers/server management
Modding
This is the big problem when dealing with the FPS genre that blizzard may not be use to or know how to handle. FPSs revolve around owning your own servers and heavy modding to make it in the long run. I don't know if new blizzard has what it takes to let people do what they want to the game. Especially after dota, blizzard will own anything that you make for their game which i think will turn alot of people off to making great mods, like team fortress, weapons factory, rocket arena, team deathmatch and counter strike. People forget most great games came from mods of other ones. I would be extremely surprised if there was LAN or modding for this game. Just forget about it. I mean, they could go the Dota 2 route with lan and have it be totally "meh". No replays, no hats, no custom anything, no dota TV. But the game totally works. I think thats the best route for games like that when it comes to lan. Just make sure the online features are worth connecting for. But yeah, moding and lan are cool, but they are literally the last features I care about in a game at this point in my life. they can only do that if the characters are free to play this game is 10000000000% using the Heroes of the Storm (aka LoL) monetization system where you can't play a char without buying it. so it wont work. I'm not sure where you've drawn this conclusion from. There doesn't seem to be a big enough number of chars to sell them like Heroes or LoL does. It seems much more likely that this game will go the DoTA 2 and Team Fortress model where all the playable chars are unlocked for everyone and instead you have to buy customization for them, which includes anything from skins and new gun models to new sounds, animations and special effects.
There's 12 playable characters now, and at least another 12 in the from the concept art and splash screens. They're going to add plenty more.
|
United States12240 Posts
I don't see a payment model that ISN'T a Heroes/LoL model as viable for this game. Paying for new heroes as they're released, having an ongoing cycle of free heroes, that makes the most sense to me. People seem to think the 12 characters they have now are it, but this game is a Dotalike-FPS fusion and there will absolutely be new playable characters introduced over time (they've explicitly said this) which they can monetize. I'm sure they can go down the Dota road of having everything free and include payable cosmetics, but there are extenuating circumstances that make that more well suited specifically to Dota/TF2 (in that Steam is a closed market which also contains a community marketplace). In order to do this, they would have to reintroduce the concept of a RMAH, and the Blizzard community may feel too burned by negative D3 experiences to be open to that, even if the items sold therein are solely cosmetic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
