EPTGeneral Discussion - Page 63
| Forum Index > General Games |
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. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
| ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10924 Posts
Players that really like to play a game will probably allways kinda like too watch it. But many People that rarely Played Dota/Lol/SC2/WC3 still follow(ed) it and thats were "specatability" comes into play. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On November 03 2015 23:35 Dangermousecatdog wrote: I disagree. As long as a game is fun to play, and can attract a large enough playerbase, then there will always be the playerbase who will want to watch it. Agreed. The game might not be top ten on twitch all the time, but people will watch even if it’s a total disco party and hard to follow. The player base is more important to Blizzard than some form of ethereal “esports viability”. On November 03 2015 23:46 Velr wrote: Thats "half" true. Players that really like to play a game will probably allways kinda like too watch it. But many People that rarely Played Dota/Lol/SC2/WC3 still follow(ed) it and thats were "specatability" comes into play. More people tune in for the big events for sure. But I would be the people watching player streams are mostly active players. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
On November 03 2015 23:35 Dangermousecatdog wrote: I disagree. As long as a game is fun to play, and can attract a large enough playerbase, then there will always be the playerbase who will want to watch it. Which doesn't contradict what I say. The game will be at least modestly succesful as an esport no matter how bad the watching experience will be due to the game being incredibly fun (which will attracht a large playerbase).. But the point is that the viewer/player-rating is dependant on how watchable the game is. Watchability is basically the two following elements: 1. How easy it is to follow a "story" 2. How easy it is to identify skill Watching a round of CS:GO where 1 guy is trying to be the hero while the rest of his teammates are dead is awesome. It's esay to follow the story and whenever he kills his opponents you can be impressed by his skill. If on the other hand, the "story" is too hard too follow and you cannot really identifiy skill, the viewer/player-ratio will be lower. | ||
|
Daray
6006 Posts
A 6v6 DM game with tons of different classes and no pauses in the action will be a bad viewer experience for sure. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
The player base is more important to Blizzard than some form of ethereal “esports viability”. Yes and no. Yes becasue playerbase is what ultimately brings in money, and the focus of the game should be on making a great experience (note, 2GD also says this in the podcast). No because they both impact each other. If you have a succesful esport-scene with a lot of interesting stories, it has the following two effects on the playerbase: 1. Players become more motivated to get better at the game because they can be inspired by these superstars. Hence the esport functions as some type of part of the marketing-strategy (imagine if there was no professeional scene for most real sports). 2. The playerbase will share more moments together, which might sounds a bit like a cliche, but it actually does matter. If you watch LOL esport regularly, you will start to identify your self as a LOL-fan. This increases the player retention-ratio. Otherwise players are more likely to jump from game to game. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Edit: Hider, that is only one of many many ways game can be successful. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
On November 04 2015 00:18 Plansix wrote: As long as the player experience is good, it won't matter much. Plenty of games are wildly successful without being hits on twitch.tv. Really, the vast majority successful games are not hits on twitch. Edit: Hider, that is only one of many many ways game can be successful. What is much here? I think the difference between a medicore and a great esport experience could impact the playerbase by 5-10% (at least). Giving the sheer potential of Overwatch (could easily generate revenue for a billion dollars over the coming years), I think it is definitely worth the time to spend ressources trying to figure out how to optimize the viewing-expereince as long as it doesn't make the playing experience worse. Hence what if 6v6 (premade) competitive mode was implemented and it had a 30 second break after each objective (and that was the default esport-mode). For everyone else it would just be constant fast-paced action. This makes sense because when you play together with five other dudes, it is fun to coordinate strategies and a bit of a pause could improve the experience. Whereas that just doesn't work out when you play with strangers (at least rarely), hence I think its better to just make it about constant action. Plenty of games are wildly successful without being hits on twitch.tv. Really, the vast majority successful games are not hits on twitch. We need to compare apples to apples though. PC "competitive" oriented PVP games should be compared together. | ||
|
Daray
6006 Posts
On November 04 2015 00:18 Plansix wrote: As long as the player experience is good, it won't matter much. Plenty of games are wildly successful without being hits on twitch.tv. Really, the vast majority successful games are not hits on twitch. Edit: Hider, that is only one of many many ways game can be successful. Are there any successful games not on twitch that are PvP only? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On November 04 2015 00:23 Hider wrote: What is much here? I think the difference between a medicore and a great esport epxerience could impact playerbase by 5-10% (at least). Giving sheer potential of Overwatch (could easily generate revenue for a billion dollars over the coming years), I think it is definitely worth the time to spend ressources trying to figure out how to optimize the viewing-expereince as long as it doesn't make the playing experience worse. Chicken before the egg. First the game needs to be viable, played and have a large base for viewers. Then the Blizzard builds in tools to make it more viewable if the audience wants that. But right now they would be designing about what they believe the potential audience would want and there is every chance they would just waste their time on features. Good, playable game that people want to play and leave system open to build observer tools is the way to go. Wasting development money on a potential audience that might never show up is just inefficient. On November 04 2015 00:23 Daray wrote: Are there any successful games not on twitch that are PvP only? Battlefield to some degree. TF2 is still pretty popular and never really had a huge viewer base on stream. Call of Duty also. Edit: Hider, why don't we just narrow the field down to games with great observe options that are also Esports so you can just win the argument by default? That seems the quickest route to the end of this discussion. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
On November 04 2015 00:28 Plansix wrote: Chicken before the egg. First the game needs to be viable, played and have a large base for viewers. Then the Blizzard builds in tools to make it more viewable if the audience wants that. But right now they would be designing about what they believe the potential audience would want and there is every chance they would just waste their time on features. Good, playable game that people want to play and leave system open to build observer tools is the way to go. Wasting development money on a potential audience that might never show up is just inefficient. Well, but 2GDs suggestion would not be very costly (a break with a few highlights in 6v6 premade competitive mode). Noone is suggesting to rework the entire game to make it a better esport, and it seems to me that you are arguing out of principle right now rather than looking at this at a case by case basis. It's one thing to argue that playing experience should first priority; it's another thing to argue that developers shouldn't invest small amounts into improving the esport-experience significnatly. The major issue with relying with fanbase solutions is that the default esport-experience needs to be similar to the matchmaking experience. Players need to be able quickly find games, and that game-mode should be comparable to what the pro's are playing so they can be inspired and learn. Therefore the esport-solution must be implemented into matchmaking as well. If (every) matchmaking mode is bad for viewers, it's not an ideal solution either way. Does it have to be implemented ASAP? Well.. no, but the game would perform better if it was implemented at some point during the beta, so the game could be released with a "pro"-tournament to advertise it. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On November 04 2015 00:35 Hider wrote: Well, but 2GDs suggestion would not very costly (a break with a few highlights in 6v6 premade competitive mode). I feel like you are arguing out of principle right now rather than looking at this at a case by case basis. It's one thing to argue that playing experience should first priority; it's another thing to argue that developers shouldn't invest small amounts into improving the esport-experience significnatly. The major issue with relying with fanbase solutions is that the default esport-experience needs to be similar to the matchmaking experience. Players need to be able them selves to find and play a game relatively quickly, and that game-mode should be comparable to what the pro's are playing so they can be inspired and learn. Well if 2GD, well known game designer and expert coder said it is easy, it must be true. /s Seriously, I agree with your points right up until you say "its so easy, why doesn't Blizzard just do it." The largest fallacy fanbases believe about games is that changes and features are easy to make. If you listen to any game developers when they take candidly about making games, it is so clear that it isn't in any way. Nothing is easy when it comes to making games. | ||
|
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
Does KDA really matter when the matches are only like ~5-10 minutes long at the most? It really really doesn't to me. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
Seriously, I agree with your points right up until you say "its so easy, why doesn't Blizzard just do it." The largest fallacy fanbases believe about games is that changes and features are easy to make. If you listen to any game developers when they take candidly about making games, it is so clear that it isn't in any way. Nothing is easy when it comes to making games. Well I obviously don't know how "easy" something is since I am not a programmer. However, I am speaking relatively here: Relatively to the grand potential of Overwatch. Anything that costs below a few millions dollars is not that much money here (the investment can easily pay off). For Starcraft it's ofc another discussion, and my opinion here is that Blizzard simply should milk it as much as possible. Well if 2GD, well known game designer and expert coder said it is easy, it must be true. /s Well he actually is a developer and I am quite certain he can also code a bit on the game he is working on. That said, I was one the who said it was "easy" so I can't rely on his authority here. (EDIT: I actually said "not that costly"). | ||
|
ragz_gt
9172 Posts
I've redesigned structure of whole display just because I couldn't make a button go away when I needed it to. | ||
|
udgnim
United States8024 Posts
for example, if both teams have their ultimates built up, then it implies that a big team fight might occur and spectating needs to be treated more like a MOBA with a top overview to see the positioning of the players and how the ultimates get used by both teams if it doesn't look like a big team fight is going to occur, then the focus needs to be on the small skirmishes going on like spectating a Tracer or seeing how a Widow Maker or McCree might be controlling space | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9447 Posts
Holy crap Destiny is so annoying. "I'm mad because it doesn't show KDA so how can other people know how good I am?" I'm 20 minutes into this thing and that's basically the only thing he's said so far. Does KDA really matter when the matches are only like ~5-10 minutes long at the most? It really really doesn't to me. I think the best compromise here is to show other peoples stats after the game (after you have voted for MVP). Then you can compare yourself to your team and start to blame others to make yourself feel better. As long as you cannot chat to other people who aren't on your friendlist, this solution wouldn't induce "toxicity" while still giving people the sense of "superiority". | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
And Destiny never really adds must to any discussion. PS: Thanks ragz_gt, I don't code at all but I have listened to enough people that do to never say that something would be "easy and cheap". | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
It's really just way too early to speculate on anything aside from Blizzard's ability to produce playable characters. In that regard, they have knocked it out of the park. The wide range of playstyles and ability interactions is top notch. All that is left for Blizzard is to find a way to properly frame these abilities and playstyles in a way that tells a cool story and gives spectators a way to follow the action in an easily digested way. If they manage to do that, it's a done deal. Overwatch is gonna be huge. | ||
| ||
