|
Hi everyone,
It's been a while since I had this idea but I never really posted it so here we go.
(At the beginning I'm talking about WoW but it's only to make a general point)
Like a lot of other Starcraft II players I'm coming from the World of Warcraft background and like most of you know there was a period (between the "Burning Crusade" extension and the "Wrath of the lich King" one) where World of Warcraft had an eSport scene.
It was much smaller than the Starcraft scene, but still it was growing.
From about the last patch of "Wrath of the Lich King" to now Blizzard totaly changed their philosophy. From that point in time, every patch they released was excessively simplifying the gameplay / mechanics and everything that made the game competitive. The patches before you could already tell that they where going in that direction but most high level players couldn't think that it would go to that extreme point I think.
The changes where so drastic that the game lost most of it's dept now.
(Some people say that the game itself wasn't realy designed for eSport which is true in my opinion, but there is a difference between a flaw in the design of a game and not trying to improve it especially if you have the support of the community.)
This post is not about QQing on WoW because otherwise I wouldn't post it here but my point is this :
"Blizzard is a company and simplifying a game to make it more enjoyable (this is debatable too, but I won argue on that in this post) is a justifiable (and probably good) business decision"
So now if we extrapolate (and deliberately exaggerate) this to Starcraft II for example and say: "well it takes to much skill to inject larvas / chronoboosts / mules every time you can. So from next patch on larvas / chronoboosts and mules will be automatically made."
Again it would be a justifiable business decision but it would also kill the macro skills at a high level.
This also means that if you have a big eSport scene like Starcraft changes like this would completely ruin it. It would really be a desaster for all this "outside Blizzard" companies that are directly impacted by these changes.
I don't wan't to make Blizzard look like some corrupted evil guys only thinking about money, but I'm just saying that if :
change the game to make it more newbie friendly > eSport then it's possible that they would do changes like this.
Now you will understand the title of this post. ^^
What I thought of some time ago was this :
---> Create an "eSport" status / label for games.
---> If a game claims to want an eSport scene they have to "subscribe" to this eSport label which constraints the company to change the game in agreement with the pro-gamer / caster community but also to make changes happen quicker.
Ok, I know it seems really harsh for the company that creates the game to have regulations like that and also really "unproductive" for eSport to do something like this and it is probably true too BUT I think that if you look in the business way this also means : stability.
If your a company wanting to sponsor a tournament you want some garanties, especially if you don't have a real inside in the game.
Ikea has nothing to do with eSports but if tommorow they decide to sponsor the biggest tournament that ever existed, they can, but they won't have that insight that gamers or computer related businesses.
Organising an event takes time so do you want to flip a coin ?
- Heads, everything works fine and your tournament will have a great success.
- Tails, there is some disastrous patch coming in the next 6 month / 1 year, the competitive scene totaly crashes and disapears; the viewer UI is broken and doesn't work either and the company doesn't even bother to work on it (like World of Warcraft). Sorry, you just lost...10 Million $ !
My opinion is that even if changing eSports like that would probably slow things down for some time it would also create a more stable investment evironement so that companys would not be afraid to invest in more regular events but also longer events (Day9 mentions this regularly in State of the Game).
Like I said before, this would also help "outside" companies to be more confident in the eSport scene because it wouldn't be a coin flip but a garantied safe and stable way to invest money.
That's it ^^
Sorry for the wall of text and for my bad english =)
Share your thoughts especially if you don't agree !
--LunaSea
|
SC2 is intended to be an e-sport, and like you said WoW never was. They didnt care about arena at ALL, the main focus was PvE. To compare that would be like them balancing Sc2 based on the campaign.
An e-sport label would first need an organisation that actually controls every single event for them to be able to "ban" a game from events. Then the developers have to actually undermine themselves to this organisation, something i doubt they cannot do and also will not do due to financial reasons. If a game is a ver good esport game but doesn´t sell, it will be a bad game in the eyes of a developer. We want good games, they want money. This wont always match up.
|
pretty goo idea imho, it profits both parties, the developer gets good feed back on his game, and their games stay populair for a longer time.
The gamers get better esport games.
|
No offence, but my gut reaction is that your idea would be really unproductive and possibly destructive for competative gaming. Lots of games that have a strong competative scene are already palyed in a slightly mod'd form usual game modes like COD is loads of stuff not available etc. These games are instantly dead to your esports label because the game you see played competativly is not the only version of the game and certainly not one specifically thought up by the developers. Granted, its nice of them to allow such variety in game and maybe THIS would be a good way to go for us, companies allowing some level of self governance with their games, but a silly little label is not
Also big companies that make good games dont give a flying fuck about our niche market when compared to the greater market of casual gamers who do still buy and play their games. They arnt going to want to limit what they are allowed to do with their own property to appease a few hardcore players and have the game "allowed" in tournaments. So they wont. And you wont be allowed to watch it as esports.
Also, it screws over the tournaments, because they cant even give you the games that you want to see, and they have to limit the games that they are able to broadcast because you want an "esport" label. They lose a chance of branching out and trying to capture a different market.
|
@unkkz : I totaly agree with what your saying, the only thing I think is that even if a game is designed for eSports, there should be a security for other companies that want to create something around that game.
(And also for the pro-gamers that invest a lot of time training in a game that could be "worthless" for competition in the next patch. Of course I'm still exagerating a bit there. ^^)
I think it's managable to improve the game for competition while still being great for amateurs playing for fun but not the other way around.
|
esports games are good for everyone, thus encouraged
|
@michielbrands : Thanks ! =)
@BigLighthouse : That's exactly what I was thinking writting this post. I knew that people would react like this and it's perfectly normal. It's also true to say that big companies "don't give a fuck" a bout that niche market but you have to think the other way around.
-> Bigger eSport scene = more popularity then the game would ever achieve with "conventional adds".
If you have a big eSport scene big medias will eventually be interested in it because it takes such a big place in the entertainement / gaming economy, it will look more professional.
I'm not mentioning that you would have a super-supportive community (even if it's already the case with Starcraft) but in a much bigger scale then.
For tournaments and eSport in general, if a game isn't broadcasted because of that restriction it would also let people see that these companies are not so serious about it as they maybe thought.
If companies are really dedicated to there game I don't see a reason for them to not do it because in the long run it would be profitable.
I'm maybe completely wrong about it ! =)
|
You're completely wrong about comparing SC2 to WoW. WoW was never about eSports, even when a small scene formed, Blizzard never had incentives to build WoW into an eSport, whereas with SC2 they have no incentive not to, as it's a great way to get revenue for them (in the long run, they will sell broadcasting licenses to companies).
|
On October 07 2011 18:15 LunaSea wrote:
"Blizzard is a company and simplifying a game to make it more enjoyable (this is debatable too, but I won argue on that in this post) is a justifiable (and probably good) business decision"
So now if we extrapolate (and deliberately exaggerate) this to Starcraft II for example and say: "well it takes to much skill to inject larvas / chronoboosts / mules every time you can. So from next patch on larvas / chronoboosts and mules will be automatically made."
Again it would be a justifiable business decision but it would also kill the macro skills at a high level.
This also means that if you have a big eSport scene like Starcraft changes like this would completely ruin it. It would really be a desaster for all this "outside Blizzard" companies that are directly impacted by these changes.
I don't wan't to make Blizzard look like some corrupted evil guys only thinking about money, but I'm just saying that if :
change the game to make it more newbie friendly > eSport then it's possible that they would do changes like this.
This already happened. Blizzard wanted to make a game that was easier than BW so that more people could enjoy it. They significantly reduced the mechanical skill needed and voila – SC2. But this doesn’t seem to be a big problem, the game is very popular anyways.
Also I don’t think Blizzard would ever agree on letting another organization control the game, which would be needed in order to make the eSport-label effective.
|
Making a game eSports friendly is not about making a game easy and fun to play, it's about making a game easy and fun to watch. I see no proof suggesting Blizzard is going to make SC2 easier to play.
|
@drsnuggles : Your 100% right !
I'm not comparing WoW to SC2, but i'm saying that "for some reason" at a point there was an eSport scene for WoW that was growing and that with very litle help of Blizzard it could've made something great that would've popularize WoW a lot more at that time and imrove the state of the game.
Like saying : Well there's definitetly something going on whith our game in the competitive gaming area, we should take advantage of that and develop it ! Even if it wasn't the main goal at first.
|
@gn0m : I didn't played BW but from what I heard and like you said it was harder than SC2 now.
I just think that for SC2 we are not at that stage (yet ? xD) where it simply hasn't any depth anymore and where there isn't a competitive scene.
It maybe took that direction with SC2 but in an other scale than WoW I think.
WoW is still popular so now the question is :
Are you happy with your X Million players or do you want it to grow more and make it grow in a more supportive environement ?
About Blizzard agreeing...I think it's also sadly true, i'm not the kind of "economist" type of guy so I don't really know how regulation systems are instored in the real world.
|
You want to dumb starcraft down even more =/
Sad BW fan is sad =[
|
|
|
@Novalisk : I never said that, you misunderdtood me.
What I tried to explain in my post was that there is the possibility for Blizzard to make SC2 easier so that more people like to play the game.
It already happended with WoW and probably a lot of other games (I think that CS 1.6 -> CSS could be a good example too), so why not SC2 ?
I didn't say that there are doing it now but it is certainly something that they eventualy could do and if they do it, it would ruin eSports in general not just SC2 because companies wouldn't trust games anymore.
Trust and professionalism are two things that games really struggled to obtain years after years, so we shouldn't lose what we already acquired.
|
@ShadeR : Why do you say that ?
|
makes it very hard for games that don't have developer support but have a community based competitive scene, and there are a LOT of these
|
@Pandemona : Thanks a lot ! =)
Just wanted to comment on what you said about Blizzard's post :
The post from blizzard on here the other day was mentioning that they get information off professionals for input on patches and changes.
Actually it's also what was happening with World of Warcraft where the pro players were also talking with the game developpers... :S
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51465 Posts
On October 07 2011 19:24 LunaSea wrote:@Pandemona : Thanks a lot ! =) Just wanted to comment on what you said about Blizzard's post : Show nested quote +The post from blizzard on here the other day was mentioning that they get information off professionals for input on patches and changes. Actually it's also what was happening with World of Warcraft where the pro players were also talking with the game developpers... :S
Ahh right -_-
I didn't know that. I didn't think the proffesional PvP aspect was nerfed as much as your saying. I know raiding kind of got easier in Cataclysm but still the last boss is always a challenging encounter pre the nerfs.
But with SC2 you are always worried what the patches might throw out. Very nice discussion though!
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
This also means that if you have a big eSport scene like Starcraft changes like this would completely ruin it. It would really be a desaster for all this "outside Blizzard" companies that are directly impacted by these changes.
I don't wan't to make Blizzard look like some corrupted evil guys only thinking about money, but I'm just saying that if :
change the game to make it more newbie friendly > eSport then it's possible that they would do changes like this.
Can you elaborate on this?I don't understand what you mean, do you mean like Blizzard should dumb the game down more in order to make it a better E-sport?
Also, wtf do you mean by outsied blizzard companies and what impact and what changes?
|
I understand where you're coming from, but Blizzard KNOWS that sc2 HAS to be NON-newbie friendly, to keep with our esports. no offence, but the wow esports was probably an offshoot of wow that obviously didn't have blizzard's support - wow is an mmorpg, not a rts.
however in sc2, blizzard supports all of these esports events. They even have blizzcon where there are TOURNAMENTS for sc2 and before that wc3, but no tournaments for wow - because wow is not meant for tournaments/esports, its meant to be like a mmorpg.
Also, sc2 has already been dumbed down from bw. I mean, smart attacking, rally points simplified, better user interface, a variety of things.
I think it mainly comes down to this: The major tournaments are luring in non-players to buy sc2 - making money for blizzard. The esports scene in wow probably didn't lure non-players to buy sc2 (excuse me if i am wrong on that part). The 'play with your friends mmo style' probably lured more people into wow.
All in all, blizzard would be hurting themselves by newbifying sc2, and they know that. I mean, sc2 has its own BALANCE department at that. Did wow have that? (again, correct me if i'm wrong, i have actually not played WoW).
Just my 2c
|
The difference is that due to WoW being a monthly subscription game they wanted to lower the skill level so even the most brain dead of noobies would continue to play and pay. In starcraft, lowering the skill cap for all these people would be far less profitable for Blizzard as there is no necessity to keep people playing after buying the game.
|
The big difference between WoW and SC2 is that WoW was NEVER intended to be an eSport, and because of that, it was always patched around PvE. In contrast, SC2 was created with eSports in mind, and is balanced around the 1v1 component.
|
On October 07 2011 18:55 gn0m wrote:
This already happened. Blizzard wanted to make a game that was easier than BW so that more people could enjoy it. They significantly reduced the mechanical skill needed and voila – SC2. But this doesn’t seem to be a big problem, the game is very popular anyways.
Also I don’t think Blizzard would ever agree on letting another organization control the game, which would be needed in order to make the eSport-label effective.
Yes, SC2 is easier to handle than BW is ofc. But i dont think it validates your point.
With easier handling you can complete more tasks in less time. It doesnt necessarily mean that people just do the same stuff with less effort. Doing more stuff with equal effort is probably more likely imo. And you have to remember SC2 is still in its beginning.
Although i agree on the whole thing: Games get more and more dumbed down. Its a shame really.
I dont even have any expectations in D3. Its not a good game at all. Too much anime too much restrictions. Too much overdone fighting animations. I want to play diablo not some japanese manga game ffs..
edit: Its not about good games anymore its all about good numbers..
I can remember the times when D1 or SC1 were released. Yes i am that old. Games and gaming were much different back than.
|
@Pandemona : well PvE / Raiding got easier but also the gear grind is much faster and easier then before.
@Kipsate: No absolutely not, I just meant that if Blizzard could win more money by dumbing the game versus losing the eSport scene of their game, it would be a possibility for theme to do changes like this because it's a "good" business decision.
This would cause other companies like GOM, Mlg, IEM, WCG, Steel Series, Razer, Roccat, and other tournaments and companies that are build around the game to stop their investments in Starcraft or simply to go bankrupt while not affecting Blizzard.
|
Blizzard is getting a silly amount of publicity from eSports, so I think your point about them screwing us over for business reasons is moot...
Blizzard wants to make the game more exciting for viewers and players and to recieve more money from companies for their IP. What you're talking about is as much the result of WoW arena forum gripes vs. Blizz's need to appeal to their predominantly PvE market; the game was balanced for the 95%, not the 1%.
In SC2 they regularly make posts about the winrate for all leagues, saying they monitor statistics for all players, and we are all playing the same part of the game. So it would be silly to take out various features.
|
@zeOllie:
However in sc2, blizzard supports all of these esports events. They even have blizzcon where there are TOURNAMENTS for sc2 and before that wc3, but no tournaments for wow - because wow is not meant for tournaments/esports, its meant to be like a mmorpg.
Well actually there are also tournaments for WoW eSport at BlizzCons and WWI.
(I'm going ot eat so I'm jsut answering this quickly.)
|
they're not really made with the same things in mind. WoW reminds me a lot of super smash bros in the sense that a competitive community came out simply because there are ALWAYS competitive people playing a game if there are enough people in general playing a game, but the developer doesn't care and has no interest whatsoever in cultivating it. frankly, they don't have to either.
that's obviously not the case with SC2, SC2 wouldn't even have been made if it weren't for the korean scene still playing BW so enthusiastically. blizzard is not retarded, they realize that esports is what makes starcraft, whether BW or SC2, as popular of a game as it is. they have catered to their target audience for both WoW and SC2 rather reasonably. the difference is the competitive community for WoW was never a high priority target audience if one at all
|
If anybody is interested in the Story about SC2 and the "how to make an e-sport game" I recommend watching this.
Its about an hour long, but very very interesting listening to how and why blizzard made things more "simple" in order to create the perfect e-sport game.
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014488/The-Game-Design-of-STARCRAFT
|
On October 07 2011 19:20 LunaSea wrote:
@Novalisk : I never said that, you misunderdtood me.
What I tried to explain in my post was that there is the possibility for Blizzard to make SC2 easier so that more people like to play the game.
It already happended with WoW and probably a lot of other games (I think that CS 1.6 -> CSS could be a good example too), so why not SC2 ?
Because WoW and SC2 are completely different games. One was created with casual playerbase in mind, and one was created with the spectator experience in mind. Mind you I don't play WoW, so the game could have gotten really hard raid content or something since WotLK, but I'll take your word for it.
I didn't say that there are doing it now but it is certainly something that they eventualy could do and if they do it, it would ruin eSports in general not just SC2 because companies wouldn't trust games anymore.
Trust and professionalism are two things that games really struggled to obtain years after years, so we shouldn't lose what we already acquired.
If Blizzard started making the game easy to play it would indeed be bad for eSports, but you failed to show any pattern suggesting this could happen in the future. What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier?
|
On October 07 2011 19:24 LunaSea wrote:
Actually it's also what was happening with World of Warcraft where the pro players were also talking with the game developpers... :S
Blizzard never took any form of advice from pro players, not pvp:ers atleast. Some PvE guilds got to test unreleased raid content and give feedback on classes raid performance and needs, thats it. It was suggested thousands of times that they should hire a bunch of arena "pro gamers" to help them with balancing the game and they gave the same reply every single time: PvP and arena is not a priority, balancing is done out of a PvE perspective.
In other words any comparision between WoW and an "e-sport" game cannot be done, because WoW is never going to be balanced that way and it never was, they never even tried. Why do you think class X and Y was godlike in the arena fr Z amount of time? Because it was weak/fine in PvE. WoW is a PvE cashcow that milks the pockets of PvE players and "casual" gamers.
And WoW was dumbed down for PvE, because they do not care about PvP, again you cannot compare WoW to any form of competitive multiplayer game, because WoW was never intended as one and they have never tried to make it one either.
|
@Lazorstrats : Well it's true, but if Blizzard plans on adding extensions (Zerg / Protoss / +++ ?) or paiable services you will have that type of "philosophy" coming back in one way or another.
@mordk : Yes I agree whith the fact that WoW never was designed for eSports, but if your game suddenly appears to have a competitive scene then you probably want to promote it and take advantage of it to develop it.
On October 07 2011 19:02 LunaSea wrote:
Like saying : Well there's definitetly something going on whith our game in the competitive gaming area, we should take advantage of that and develop it ! Even if it wasn't the main goal at first.
@Deezl : Well they did it with WoW and Valve did it with Counter Strike. CS 1.6 was great then wanted to surf on that enthusiasm and created CS: Source which was crap eSports wise.
Now they announced CS : GO and most of the eSport players already said that it wouldn't be a good game...
@TheRealartemis : Thanks for the link I will watch it later ! =)
@Novalisk : Besides the fact that SC2 seems easier then BW I don't think that there is a pattern suggesting that the game will evolve like this.
I simply think that it would be great to creat something like a "eSports Fifa" like Pandemona said BEFORE a disastre bursts out. Preventing SC2 eSport to colapse like WoW's did.
We don't wan't to waste a great game like Starcraft !
|
@unkzz : yes actualy thy did, I know that a lot of players were asked for their opinion.
About PvE, there was also drama in that part of the game (Ex : Ensidia #1 Lich King kill where the guild was banned for some time and the GM quits...etc).
But I don't agree with the fact that WoW never was an eSport. For some years there even was a WoW event at Mlg's !
|
On October 07 2011 18:15 LunaSea wrote:
---> Create an "eSport" status / label for games.
---> If a game claims to want an eSport scene they have to "subscribe" to this eSport label which constraints the company to change the game in agreement with the pro-gamer / caster community but also to make changes happen quicker.
Who gets to "create" the label, and who gets the developer to "have to" follow the rules you outlined, and why would any developer even care?
|
@Talin: Well like I said in my previous posts and like Pandemona said something like an "eSports Fifa" would be great and even outside sports there are regulations in other fields like economy (in some ways).
|
On October 07 2011 19:56 Novalisk wrote:
If Blizzard started making the game easy to play it would indeed be bad for eSports, but you failed to show any pattern suggesting this could happen in the future. What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier?
Blizzard already did "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics." It's called SC2, and it's been pretty damn successful.
Overall, I think yall are giving game companies way too much credit. Blizzard didn't do anything to make BW an "esport," the community did. From maps, to tournaments, to teams, to sponsors, to this very site were all community driven.
Whether a game is successful or not at a tournament competitive level has nothing to do with the developer and everything to do with the community.
This risk of companies suddenly pulling out of progaming is funny as well, because it's largely already happened. The companies that are sponsoring pro teams now are companies that have done the research and know what they're doing is a sound investment. When other companies see good investments in "esports," they'll follow with their sponsorship, and not a moment sooner. At the end of the day, Pepsi doesn't care if SC2's gameplay is so bad that it becomes rock paper scissors in the GSL as long as their sponsorship sells drinks.
TLDR: calm down, everything will be A-OK 
|
I'm sure Blizz will make more money from SC2 as an e-sport than it will do from individual sales.
Blizz will target the casual market with (goofy) custom maps in the Custom Maps Marketplace they are making.
Calm down, Blizzard are not killing e-sports.
|
On October 07 2011 18:54 drsnuggles wrote:
You're completely wrong about comparing SC2 to WoW. WoW was never about eSports, even when a small scene formed, Blizzard never had incentives to build WoW into an eSport, whereas with SC2 they have no incentive not to, as it's a great way to get revenue for them (in the long run, they will sell broadcasting licenses to companies). This says it all.
Blizzard will never make changes to SC2 that will kill the esport scene.
|
On October 07 2011 20:42 Trumpet wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2011 19:56 Novalisk wrote:
If Blizzard started making the game easy to play it would indeed be bad for eSports, but you failed to show any pattern suggesting this could happen in the future. What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier? Blizzard already did "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics." It's called SC2, and it's been pretty damn successful.
I never said "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics". I also asked for changes made to SC2, not the SC franchise as a whole.
The mechanics in SC2 were simplified because as Blizzard figured, the BW mechanics contributed very little to the spectator experience. The game has a very high skill ceiling without them, and Blizzard made the change so the players could focus on activities more engaging to the spectators. This is different from making the game easier solely for the purpose of making it easier.
|
On October 07 2011 21:02 Novalisk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2011 20:42 Trumpet wrote:On October 07 2011 19:56 Novalisk wrote:
If Blizzard started making the game easy to play it would indeed be bad for eSports, but you failed to show any pattern suggesting this could happen in the future. What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier? Blizzard already did "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics." It's called SC2, and it's been pretty damn successful. I never said "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics". I also asked for changes made to SC2, not the SC franchise as a whole. The mechanics in SC2 were simplified because as Blizzard figured, the BW mechanics contributed very little to the spectator experience. The game has a very high skill ceiling without them, and Blizzard made the change so the players could focus on activities more engaging to the spectators. This is different from making the game easier solely for the purpose of making it easier.
That quote was from the OP actually, wasn't all directed towards you specifically, I should have made that clear.
The rest of your point is largely subjective though. If you think that sc2's changes in mechanics were unanimously well received, you should look up how much hell was raised on these forums about them.
|
On October 07 2011 21:02 Novalisk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2011 20:42 Trumpet wrote:On October 07 2011 19:56 Novalisk wrote:
If Blizzard started making the game easy to play it would indeed be bad for eSports, but you failed to show any pattern suggesting this could happen in the future. What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier? Blizzard already did "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics." It's called SC2, and it's been pretty damn successful. I never said "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics". I also asked for changes made to SC2, not the SC franchise as a whole. The mechanics in SC2 were simplified because as Blizzard figured, the BW mechanics contributed very little to the spectator experience. The game has a very high skill ceiling without them, and Blizzard made the change so the players could focus on activities more engaging to the spectators. This is different from making the game easier solely for the purpose of making it easier.
Wow are you kidding? In BW there are terms such as 'Jangbi Storms' SC2 will never have such a term because of smart casting. You are wayyyy off base here.
What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier?
This has been discussed to death since beta but i'll bite.
Removal of micro intensive units. Lurkers, Defilers, Science vessels, Reavers etc.
Addition of 'anti-micro' functionality. 1a, MBS, Smart cast.
Removal of defenders advantage (No uphill miss chance.)
|
Good read! Kept me interested throughout the post.
|
On October 07 2011 21:02 Novalisk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2011 20:42 Trumpet wrote:On October 07 2011 19:56 Novalisk wrote:
If Blizzard started making the game easy to play it would indeed be bad for eSports, but you failed to show any pattern suggesting this could happen in the future. What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier? Blizzard already did "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics." It's called SC2, and it's been pretty damn successful. I never said "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics". I also asked for changes made to SC2, not the SC franchise as a whole. The mechanics in SC2 were simplified because as Blizzard figured, the BW mechanics contributed very little to the spectator experience. The game has a very high skill ceiling without them, and Blizzard made the change so the players could focus on activities more engaging to the spectators. This is different from making the game easier solely for the purpose of making it easier.
Seriously?? Wow... just wow...
|
You understand wow didn't get any simpler going from tbc to wotlk, people just started to get better at it? There is also a limit to how many times you can do the same action and not become better at it, both with pvp and pve in that game. Hence why the game is almost dead now (in terms of pvp) because you can't do anything new/creative.
The game NEVER had the support of the wow community, if you consder about 5% of the community actually did arena, and then the good ones where like 0.1-0.2% of that 5%. It could never ever sustain as an esport because it was never made to be an esport, nor did blizzard ever have any plans to help with it. It's was a mmo, with a sub game inside it, that is all.
You can't put wow logic to sc2, the games are beyond different, one is made PURELY for a casual gamer that enjoys what an mmo brings, one is an rts, which has huge support for the esport scene, which blizzard intended.
Your whole post is pretty pointless and wrong :/
|
On October 07 2011 20:42 Trumpet wrote:
Overall, I think yall are giving game companies way too much credit. Blizzard didn't do anything to make BW an "esport," the community did. From maps, to tournaments, to teams, to sponsors, to this very site were all community driven.
Yes, but I have to remind you that there are no LAN features for SC2 + the fact that there was no real eSport BW. Sure there were some tournaments like the one Artosis, Tasteless and Day9 participated but it was not clos to the scale yu have now. Only Korea had real eSport in BW.
On October 07 2011 20:42 Trumpet wrote:This risk of companies suddenly pulling out of progaming is funny as well, because it's largely already happened. The companies that are sponsoring pro teams now are companies that have done the research and know what they're doing is a sound investment. When other companies see good investments in "esports," they'll follow with their sponsorship, and not a moment sooner. At the end of the day, Pepsi doesn't care if SC2's gameplay is so bad that it becomes rock paper scissors in the GSL as long as their sponsorship sells drinks. TLDR: calm down, everything will be A-OK
Yes, it's true that Pepsi doesn't care, but if Pepsi looses 1 Millions $ in investment because some lame new patch came out...well i think they will begin to care ! ^^
It means also that if you have a stable environement more companies will invest in eSports.
Afterall we don't care if they care or not, I mean if they invest, good for us ! it would be better if they carred but you can't have everything ! =)
|
On October 07 2011 22:08 ShadeR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2011 21:02 Novalisk wrote:On October 07 2011 20:42 Trumpet wrote:On October 07 2011 19:56 Novalisk wrote:
If Blizzard started making the game easy to play it would indeed be bad for eSports, but you failed to show any pattern suggesting this could happen in the future. What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier? Blizzard already did "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics." It's called SC2, and it's been pretty damn successful. I never said "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics". I also asked for changes made to SC2, not the SC franchise as a whole. The mechanics in SC2 were simplified because as Blizzard figured, the BW mechanics contributed very little to the spectator experience. The game has a very high skill ceiling without them, and Blizzard made the change so the players could focus on activities more engaging to the spectators. This is different from making the game easier solely for the purpose of making it easier. Wow are you kidding? In BW there are terms such as 'Jangbi Storms' SC2 will never have such a term because of smart casting. You are wayyyy off base here. Show nested quote +What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier? This has been discussed to death since beta but i'll bite. Removal of micro intensive units. Lurkers, Defilers, Science vessels, Reavers etc. Addition of 'anti-micro' functionality. 1a, MBS, Smart cast. Removal of defenders advantage (No uphill miss chance.)
On October 07 2011 22:16 fabiano wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2011 21:02 Novalisk wrote:On October 07 2011 20:42 Trumpet wrote:On October 07 2011 19:56 Novalisk wrote:
If Blizzard started making the game easy to play it would indeed be bad for eSports, but you failed to show any pattern suggesting this could happen in the future. What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier? Blizzard already did "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics." It's called SC2, and it's been pretty damn successful. I never said "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics". I also asked for changes made to SC2, not the SC franchise as a whole. The mechanics in SC2 were simplified because as Blizzard figured, the BW mechanics contributed very little to the spectator experience. The game has a very high skill ceiling without them, and Blizzard made the change so the players could focus on activities more engaging to the spectators. This is different from making the game easier solely for the purpose of making it easier. Seriously?? Wow... just wow...
I'm not saying Blizzard made all the right decisions, I'm saying the motivation behind their decisions was not just "Let's make the game easier so more people play it", but more focused around "Let's remove things most spectators don't pay attention to".
|
On October 07 2011 20:59 Thorakh wrote:
Blizzard will never make changes to SC2 that will kill the esport scene.
If they win more money by bringing new customers to SC2 than with the eSport scene why not ?
I mean business wise it's the best decision...
Moral wise I doubt it but that's not the question.
|
Actually spectators do pay a lot of attention to mechanics. What make janbi storms amazing to the viewers eyes is the skill needed to pull them out.
Blizzard really tripped there =[
|
This is a god awful idea in every way imaginable.
No company would use that label because you're automatically boxing out a huge demographic based on that presentation. The people who give a shit about any given esport are the people who actually play the game, and that doesn't matter what level they're at. Advertisers care about the amount of eyes watching the game, not how hardcore and dedicated those people the very small segment of competitive gamers are.
and I really can't think of a game that's had a patch that decimated the game to the point where it completely died out... and it's not as if companies were to adopt such a dumb label that they'd never patch the game again either.
Stability, from an advertiser's perspective, has nothing to do with the game itself, patches, etc. It's all about the competitors in that given gaming genre, because the entire gaming industry is just a series of bubbles and trends. If Command and Conquer were to come out with a new game and it was immensely popular and built up a competitive scene, then SC2 has an issue with stability since it's a direct competitor in the genre and will be leeching off players and eyes, even if those gamers are playing both games. Having an older game go up against a brand new game in the same genre is a lot more alarming to an advertiser than a crappy patch, which wouldn't even register on their radar
|
With that post i didn't wanted to start a war on WoW vs SC2 or SC2 vs BW.
I just wanted to giva an example (actually 2 examples if you count the one I gave of Counter Strike) of games that had on a point in time an eSport scene (should it be willingly designed like this or not) and where the companies actually decided that they wanted more customers versus having an eSport scene.
I don't know if Starcraft will go this way, I certainly don't hope so but sometimes you have to prevent things from happening. So if you have something like a "eSport status / label" you would inherently block those things from happening.
I also think that developping eSport is a better "long-term" decision than just making the game evolve to something that would attract more customers but that "long-term" decisions are rarely taken by companies like Blizzard because shareholders don't have the same inside that gamers / tournament organisers / casters have, I think that even if the game was created and maintained by designers they wouldn't really know how to make the game evolve even if they they get sometimes infos by pro-gamers.
To take the same metaphor than in the "Social Network" movie where they talked about Facebook and said : "That it is like creating the best party ever and end it at 11" I would say that "It's like organising the best party ever but yourself are going to sleep at 11".
|
Isn't the appeal of all sports watching professional athletes continually push limits to the extreme. The viewer is left with a feeling of awe and have a clear understanding that these people a doing things that they themselves could never do. Nobody watches gymnastics and wishes the horizontal poles were more like school yard monkey bars..
|
@Haws : Yes, it's true that only a small population is playing competitively but I don't think that it is conceivable to have Starcraft II (or any competitive game) without any casters / tournaments or pro-gamers on it.
Because even if people don't specially care about it they like to see tutorials, competition, good players or just comment on the game even if they don't know a lot about it.
If you look in actual sports most of people watching soccer / football on the Tv don't actually play.
they still root for a team and follow leagues and tournaments.
It's a part of the entertainement culture.
|
It would be great to have some comments from Pro-Gamers or Casters and their opinion !
|
On October 07 2011 23:42 LunaSea wrote:
It would be great to have some comments from Pro-Gamers or Casters and their opinion !
Hawk is a pro-gamer...
|
On October 07 2011 23:10 LunaSea wrote:
@Haws : Yes, it's true that only a small population is playing competitively but I don't think that it is conceivable to have Starcraft II (or any competitive game) without any casters / tournaments or pro-gamers on it.
Because even if people don't specially care about it they like to see tutorials, competition, good players or just comment on the game even if they don't know a lot about it.
If you look in actual sports most of people watching soccer / football on the Tv don't actually play.
they still root for a team and follow leagues and tournaments.
It's a part of the entertainement culture.
'Yes, it's true that only a small population is playing competitively but I don't think that it is conceivable to have Starcraft II (or any competitive game) without any casters / tournaments or pro-gamers on it.' What does even answer in regards to what I said previouslY??
and as far as people watching soccer that don't play: everyone who likes the sport has played it at one time or another, even if it's a bs pick up game at the park, as a kid, on a real team... it's not nearly as simple as take an event, throw it on tv, profit. Soccer is as popular as it is because the barrier for playing is as cheap as buying a ball. Shit, even in dirt areas of Africa, kids make soccer balls by wrapping dried skins and stuff. People, no matter how involved they may be/once were, appreciate a sport much more then they themselves have participated at some point. That is the driving force behind any popular sport.
The hurdle to get into competitive video games is much more considerable. Especially when it's a computer game. And segmenting that further by giving it a label of ESPORTS would only further the gap in a growing industry that needs as many eyes as it can get
|
On October 07 2011 18:54 drsnuggles wrote:
You're completely wrong about comparing SC2 to WoW. WoW was never about eSports, even when a small scene formed, Blizzard never had incentives to build WoW into an eSport, whereas with SC2 they have no incentive not to, as it's a great way to get revenue for them (in the long run, they will sell broadcasting licenses to companies).
This this this 100x times
I come from wow myself and even tho i hate them for killing the game wow was a money making machine based of 8 millions ppl playing and about 4 million actual gamers, blizzard must have thought that the "ppl just playing" were going to leave soon ( since there are a lot of ppl who bought the game around the end of vanilla only cuz there "gamer" friends praised the game ) so they decided to sacrifice the gamer part of wow for the "just playing" part of wow due to income, even tho i criticize there decision and i considered blizzard "as worse as EA" since then this won't happen to sc due to the "main stream" of income coming from gamers/spectators not from "just playing to have singel player and bronze league" guys.
Also wow was obviously going to die at some point so you could just as well speculate they were planing to kill it and get the most out of it in cata since there "main team" was working on sc2 and there new mmo ( yes they said the 2 mmo's will coexist but blizzard says many things and they don't always plan on doing as they said )... That is my option about what happened to wow and why it won't happen to sc2... tho i think it is a valid concern for not-esport game that are begging to become a good esport material and then get slamed by the producer like in wow case.
|
I daresay SC2 was made primarily with the intent to tap the esport market.
Tournament organizers don't really care that in 6 months or a year the game might die off as an esport because they'll just switch to another game that is popular w/ a thriving competitive scene. If you design the game w/ esports features in mind (spectators, replays, pause), then it shouldn't require a ton of extra effort to implement them and should be offset by whatever tournament fees and free publicity you get from competitive events. If you try to shoehorn the features in after the game has been out for awhile, you'll likely run into a lot of issues and require more manpower to implement them. The whole notion of a special label w/ excess restrictions is entirely unnecessary.
|
I agree it sucks when a major patch ruins a tournament however I don't see why Blizzard would kill esports (lol). I don't know whether of not they're "killing WoW" but I can understand if they do since they're making Titan. I haven't been following WoW for a long time and I think the esport side of it was pretty bad anyway. From what I remember they listened to community and buffed/nerfed each spec at some point to please everyone in the end.
I don't like the idea of getting games changed faster. SC2 has had too many balance patches already. Instead I like to see progamers come up with new stuff. Also lol at making changes in agreement with casters whos knowledge of the game is really shallow compared to the biased progamers that actually play in ESPORTS events.
|
You can milk from WoW because of the subscription, but you can't milk from SC2 the way you milk in WoW. From the business standpoint, 2 games are completely different.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
On October 07 2011 21:02 Novalisk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2011 20:42 Trumpet wrote:On October 07 2011 19:56 Novalisk wrote:
If Blizzard started making the game easy to play it would indeed be bad for eSports, but you failed to show any pattern suggesting this could happen in the future. What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier? Blizzard already did "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics." It's called SC2, and it's been pretty damn successful. I never said "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics". I also asked for changes made to SC2, not the SC franchise as a whole. The mechanics in SC2 were simplified because as Blizzard figured, the BW mechanics contributed very little to the spectator experience. The game has a very high skill ceiling without them, and Blizzard made the change so the players could focus on activities more engaging to the spectators. This is different from making the game easier solely for the purpose of making it easier.
Don't talk about stuff that you have no idea about.
|
On October 08 2011 03:14 Kipsate wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2011 21:02 Novalisk wrote:On October 07 2011 20:42 Trumpet wrote:On October 07 2011 19:56 Novalisk wrote:
If Blizzard started making the game easy to play it would indeed be bad for eSports, but you failed to show any pattern suggesting this could happen in the future. What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier? Blizzard already did "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics." It's called SC2, and it's been pretty damn successful. I never said "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics". I also asked for changes made to SC2, not the SC franchise as a whole. The mechanics in SC2 were simplified because as Blizzard figured, the BW mechanics contributed very little to the spectator experience. The game has a very high skill ceiling without them, and Blizzard made the change so the players could focus on activities more engaging to the spectators. This is different from making the game easier solely for the purpose of making it easier. Don't talk about stuff that you have no idea about.
What makes you think I don't? FYI, I was a BW spectator before I became an SC2 spectator. I can voice my opinion from a spectator standpoint regarding this matter.
To reiterate... There are many things Blizzard did wrong in their transition from BW to SC2, but as I see it, the goal of making the game easier to play wasn't the driving force behind any of these mistakes. I refuse to believe that Blizzard would create a game aimed for spectators, and then remove features important to the spectator experience just to make the game easier to play.
|
Even the suits that run Acti-Blizz should be able to grasp the concept that killing the spectator aspect of SC2 would kill the game as a whole. I don't really agree with all the balance changes Blizz makes (or the speed they implement them) but it is reassuring to know that pro players are regularly contacted for input on the matter.
|
@Offhand : Not if you win more money by simplifying the game.
@BadBinky : Titan will be avaible in 3-4 years minimum and WoW is already dead for 1-2 years so if Titan would be the reason, the the timing would be really bad !
@Hawk : It's true that people watching soccer / football played it at one point in time but when they watch it it's also because other friends watch it too and that they don't wan't to be rejected of that social group.
|
On October 07 2011 20:21 LunaSea wrote:
@unkzz : yes actualy thy did, I know that a lot of players were asked for their opinion.
About PvE, there was also drama in that part of the game (Ex : Ensidia #1 Lich King kill where the guild was banned for some time and the GM quits...etc).
But I don't agree with the fact that WoW never was an eSport. For some years there even was a WoW event at Mlg's !
No, they didnt. I was heavily invested in the WoW arena scene once upon a time, and up untill BC they had done no such thing, wotlk neither afaik. There's a difference asking Serennia if DK's are overpowered and actually accepting help from players to balance the game, SC2 has David Kim who knows his stuff, WoW had nobody except Paragon testing PvE content in cata. The true proof to them not listening to players is just look at the games balance over time, the game has never been close to balanced. Matches are decided more by setup then by player skill, and has been since druids came along in BC. If you don't have a fotm comp, you won't go far in a tournament, its as easy as that.
WoW is the worst e-sport game of all time, it was forced into an e-sport because it was so popular, yet not even the "pro players" felt it was a legitimate e-sport game, it was a joke. And Blizzard hasn't done anything to help it maintain its e-sport status, they made a spectator client, that's all they ever did.
And the game was dumbed down so everyone could experience raid content, even if you had and IQ in the single digits you could do raids. If you played Cata, and did some arena you know what i say to be true since i just have to say resto shamans. They were bad in PvE, walking unkillable caster lockdown gods in PvP. Hell name me any arena season from BC to start of cata and i can name you two or three classes that remained insanely overpowered for several months, that's not an e-sport game, and thats not them trying, sorry.
|
On October 08 2011 04:38 Novalisk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2011 03:14 Kipsate wrote:On October 07 2011 21:02 Novalisk wrote:On October 07 2011 20:42 Trumpet wrote:On October 07 2011 19:56 Novalisk wrote:
If Blizzard started making the game easy to play it would indeed be bad for eSports, but you failed to show any pattern suggesting this could happen in the future. What changes have Blizzard made to SC2 for the sole purpose of making the game easier? Blizzard already did "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics." It's called SC2, and it's been pretty damn successful. I never said "excessively simplify the gameplay / mechanics". I also asked for changes made to SC2, not the SC franchise as a whole. The mechanics in SC2 were simplified because as Blizzard figured, the BW mechanics contributed very little to the spectator experience. The game has a very high skill ceiling without them, and Blizzard made the change so the players could focus on activities more engaging to the spectators. This is different from making the game easier solely for the purpose of making it easier. Don't talk about stuff that you have no idea about. What makes you think I don't? FYI, I was a BW spectator before I became an SC2 spectator. I can voice my opinion from a spectator standpoint regarding this matter. To reiterate... There are many things Blizzard did wrong in their transition from BW to SC2, but as I see it, the goal of making the game easier to play wasn't the driving force behind any of these mistakes. I refuse to believe that Blizzard would create a game aimed for spectators, and then remove features important to the spectator experience just to make the game easier to play.
Yeah right... i like it when people say something completely wrong and then say "BUT I WATCHED BW" and think people actually believe them, or if it even validates their argument. You have no idea what you are talking about and have never played BW seriously in your life.
|
The main difference between WoW and SC2 is that SC2 was designed from the ground up to be an e-sport. WoW was not.
In the beginning PvP was little more than a side game, designed to be a fun alternative to raiding, or in many cases a place to show off best the hard earned rewards you got from raiding.
Somewhere along the line, the community began demanding segregation of PvP from PvE content and when the Arena was born and Resilience came into the game that segregation became a reality that hasn't really gone away. Somewhere in there, the developers got the idea to try out the Arena as an e-sport but I think after a while that idea died once the developers and the players realized that it's impossible to design a game like WoW to be a balanced e-sport when it was never intended to be that.
SC2 is different. From day 1 this game was designed to be a competitive e-sport and in 1 year it's already way more balanced and fun to watch competitively than the short lived wow e-sports scene ever was.
|
I don't understand why a game needs to be complex for it to be competitive?
Tennis, golf, basketball, fishing, bowling, chess, car racing... none of these are excessively complicated.
Micro in Starcraft (BW or SC2) has no skill cap achievable by human beings, the game will forever be competitive and playable as an esport. No matter how simple macro is, you will always have tactics, strategy and micro.
WoW died as an eSport because it is not spectator friendly. You interrupted that spell? Cool good for you, but nobody else other people who actively arena a significant portion and are looking out for such things could tell that you did because the user interface of the game is not spectator friendly. There are 6 individual players in an arena all of which have 20+ spells/skills. It is hard enough to spectate an unfamiliar MOBA game when each character has 4 spells maximum. WoW arena was a clusterfuck.
|
Canada11339 Posts
On October 08 2011 01:01 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2011 23:10 LunaSea wrote:
@Haws : Yes, it's true that only a small population is playing competitively but I don't think that it is conceivable to have Starcraft II (or any competitive game) without any casters / tournaments or pro-gamers on it.
Because even if people don't specially care about it they like to see tutorials, competition, good players or just comment on the game even if they don't know a lot about it.
If you look in actual sports most of people watching soccer / football on the Tv don't actually play.
they still root for a team and follow leagues and tournaments.
It's a part of the entertainement culture. 'Yes, it's true that only a small population is playing competitively but I don't think that it is conceivable to have Starcraft II (or any competitive game) without any casters / tournaments or pro-gamers on it.' What does even answer in regards to what I said previouslY?? and as far as people watching soccer that don't play: everyone who likes the sport has played it at one time or another, even if it's a bs pick up game at the park, as a kid, on a real team... it's not nearly as simple as take an event, throw it on tv, profit. Soccer is as popular as it is because the barrier for playing is as cheap as buying a ball. Shit, even in dirt areas of Africa, kids make soccer balls by wrapping dried skins and stuff. People, no matter how involved they may be/once were, appreciate a sport much more then they themselves have participated at some point. That is the driving force behind any popular sport. The hurdle to get into competitive video games is much more considerable. Especially when it's a computer game. And segmenting that further by giving it a label of ESPORTS would only further the gap in a growing industry that needs as many eyes as it can get
I would agree with this. The main issue is accessibility for newcomers- good computer and you have to buy the game and hope some of your friends will buy it. Soccer's easy. One person has a ball, a ton of people can play. For the same reason LoL gets such a high count on their streams. Ease of accessibility to the game itself. As long as you have the computer to run it, you can play for free. I started playing and I convinced a few friends to play it too. SC2- with the old demo system, most wouldn't buy it based on word of mouth. I had to lend out my account for longer periods of time to convince them. It's far harder to get friends on board when absolutely everyone has to pay $60 to play.
It's for that reason, I think Blizzard's new demo idea is much better. Actually, for Heart of the Swarm, I think they ought advertise the free-to-play aspect of it (even if it's only one race on a couple maps. LoL you only get 2 maps anyways.) This is the best thing Blizzard can do to promote esports rather than creating an exclusive label. And rather than dumbing down micro-intensive units like the high templar. The easy to learn, hard to master philosophy ought to have recognized that some units, newbies will never use effectively and may not use at all and that's alright. (When you first started, who used high templars or thought vultures were the most useless things in the world ?) And the difficulty of effectively using these units is what makes it interesting. Otherwise it's just a light show. Hard to do and it kills stuff? That's impressive.
Pushing partial free-to-play (which is essentially what the old pirated LAN stuff did in BW) is the best way to push SC2's popularity, not new labels.
|
Canada2068 Posts
^ Haha, really true. Who remembers playing the SC Vanilla shareware demo on multiplayer using dial-up internet that gave you a map pool reaching a grand total of 1 map and you were forced to use Terran? Anyone never use vultures, because the mines were too much of a hassle to plant and I didn't like the idea that the mines got used up when every other unit has infinite ammo? (I never used reavers for the same reason)
|
Yeah I think that Blizzard didn't want to spend the money to design WoW as an esports. Arena wasn't balanced even at the end of BC and only got worse in WOTLK. Personally I stopped playing because of this. But it's an MMO so people will keep playing and more people will play if its simple.
On the other hand it's important that SC2 be a competitive e-sports or else the game would die down very quickly like most RTS do. If it was simple people still wouldn't play because there wouldn't be that much to do besides the same matchups all the time.
I could go on but basically you can't use the same business model for an MMORPG and an RTS game and in both cases Blizzard have the right approach IMO. Too bad for people like me who enjoyed difficult raiding, but I'm a minority.
|
I never took the PvP in that game seriously.
Its endlessness and the need to continually add PvE content, new spells, and more desirable gear is basically the reason why it can never be truly balanced as a PvP game. There are always combinations of classes that are garbage and others that are ridiculously strong. Where's the balance in that?
I think blizzard should continue to dumb down the game to the point where the most casual gamers feel like playing. The more they get, the better. Like that we can enjoy quality games that are worth playing competitively, instead of trying to turn WoW into something it could never be.
|
As an esport fan, this thread is making me losing hope in humanity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
