EPTThere are tons of free to play games, all with an own engine and launcher.
Why would i need to play a custom game in the sc2 engine?
Maybe Dota2's custom game scene will prove me wrong though.
SC2, the community and balance mods - Page 3
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
There are tons of free to play games, all with an own engine and launcher. Why would i need to play a custom game in the sc2 engine? Maybe Dota2's custom game scene will prove me wrong though. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 23 2015 20:17 The_Red_Viper wrote: I believe mods aren't successful anymore because they simply aren't needed. There are tons of free to play games, all with an own engine and launcher. Why would i need to play a custom game in the sc2 engine? Maybe Dota2's custom game scene will prove me wrong though. If you have a huge friend list where someone is always online and wants to play some fun game... why talk in a game and then launch a different game? :-) Though since you can now add friends in the way that you can chat with them through bnet launcher, my answer isn't that good, I agree  | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
If you have a huge friend list where someone is always online and wants to play some fun game... why talk in a game and then launch a different game? :-) Well from my experience people don't hang out in battlenet to plan what to do. It's rather skype/steam. Truth is that most mods are little games which are fun for 20 minutes and then you already saw everything, mods simply don't have the quality of all these other free games out there. Maybe the dota2 scene is strong/will become strong, i don't know. Imo custom games are a nice addition if you already are a fan of the main game, but nobody would download sc2 to play the arcade most likely, it just is not worth it. | ||
|
RoomOfMush
1296 Posts
| ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 24 2015 20:57 RoomOfMush wrote: Plenty of people have voted that they would not want to play a mod, but only few have actually left a reply why. Should we assume the other voters agree with all the opinions mentioned in this thread? Are there no other reasons? Well, I haven't raed the thread but my reasons are: 1 long waiting time 2 no match making 3 leaving after the game has started In the end it's just annoying. I wait 4 minutes for a player, then the player wants to play a boring difficulty of the mod(for me), or I want to play a boring difficulty for the player(I am not the APM godlike monster as others  ) so the player either leaves or rages or lose the game in the middle.I am OK with playing on boring difficulty as long as the other player plays the game and have fun, I go to arcade to rest. I don't go there to read rage lines from my teammates. I don't play 1v1 arcade, this comes from custom games in WoL. I(diamond) have met in 6 games(to warm up for ladder) 2 players way above my level and 4 players way below my level. In the end I stopped warming up because it usually didn't work because the game was just boring or frustrating. | ||
|
xongnox
540 Posts
| ||
|
PineapplePizza
United States749 Posts
I would really, really like to see a tl.net-sanctioned SC2 promod, preferably one where the project manager is not hotbid | ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
I actually think sc2 has done quite a good job of that relative to most games out there. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
| ||
|
Ansibled
United Kingdom9872 Posts
On September 27 2015 09:04 PineapplePizza wrote: I'd like to see how those poll results would look if we added, "assume there is a sustainable community and ladder" :/ I would really, really like to see a tl.net-sanctioned SC2 promod, preferably one where the project manager is not hotbid No giant muta? | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On September 24 2015 23:41 deacon.frost wrote: Well, I haven't raed the thread but my reasons are: 1 long waiting time 2 no match making 3 leaving after the game has started On September 27 2015 09:59 ShambhalaWar wrote: I wouldn't want to play a mod because I would want an amazing matchmaking system and ranking system. I actually think sc2 has done quite a good job of that relative to most games out there. Has the idea ever been thrown around for designing some out of client matchmaking for SC2 mods using replays as verification? Any deal breaking issues anyone can think of that would be problematic for this? Could make it compatible with any mod, so that if lets say Starbow does not have many players, we could see a list of how many people queueing for any other mod? Should help with a lower population of mod players... | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On September 27 2015 11:58 Spyridon wrote: Has the idea ever been thrown around for designing some out of client matchmaking for SC2 mods using replays as verification? Any deal breaking issues anyone can think of that would be problematic for this? Could make it compatible with any mod, so that if lets say Starbow does not have many players, we could see a list of how many people queueing for any other mod? Should help with a lower population of mod players... Why take extra steps to mimic the step that is most readily available? | ||
|
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
On September 27 2015 11:58 Spyridon wrote: Has the idea ever been thrown around for designing some out of client matchmaking for SC2 mods using replays as verification? Any deal breaking issues anyone can think of that would be problematic for this? Could make it compatible with any mod, so that if lets say Starbow does not have many players, we could see a list of how many people queueing for any other mod? Should help with a lower population of mod players... This is that sort of client: http://eros.starbowmod.com/ | ||
|
RoomOfMush
1296 Posts
On September 27 2015 09:04 PineapplePizza wrote: I'd like to see how those poll results would look if we added, "assume there is a sustainable community and ladder" :/ Since there is a very real possibility of that never happening I didnt want to include such an option. The poll was supposed to help mod developers evaluate their chances. But of course, you could also start your own poll with that. | ||
|
summerloud
Austria1201 Posts
after that, im gna try starbow. im definitely open towards playing mods, and i think either a good mod or another RTS (atlas?) will carry on the bw torch. ive lost hope for lotv for the most part. | ||
|
summerloud
Austria1201 Posts
On September 22 2015 10:13 Pontius Pirate wrote: That was confirmed to be a bug, because they were noticing that the regular attack wasn't actually connecting since they implemented the 30 charge damage, and then said bug was fixed after the balance changes were finalized for that patch, leading to the ridiculous scenario of Zealots dealing 46-52 damage on charge impact. It was intended to be roughly equal to just 2 attacks, similar to the 1.5 attacks that it is about equal to in the current patch. i dont believe that for a second. its not the only completely retarded design change they ever implemented. pylon overcharge, anyone? apart from that, does anyone think frequent tourneys could make up at least a bit for the lack of matchmaking? | ||
|
insitelol
845 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
One has to remember that 1v1 is the most complicated and somewhat stressful experience, so team games should be actively promoted. Things like 3v3 BGH or Fast were far more popular on BNet than "real" 1v1, same as War3 probably had more people playing AT/RT than 1v1. Ergo the system should also include a more relaxing, non-competitive environment. Being constantly ranked/rated and matched with opponents of similar strength almost 100% of the time ends up creating annoying pressure; when you press the button you know that you will have to give your best/tryhard—while people coming back from a day at school/college/office/whatever are not necessarily searching for that. In some aspects the chaotic lottery of unranked public games is more fun than a strict 50/50 system with some dumb emphasis on irrelevant icons/medals/whatever that ends up frustrating people because they plateau. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On September 28 2015 00:21 TheDwf wrote: The most important thing is not a ladder, but the ability to find opponents quickly and effortlessly. The SC1 ladder system flopped badly, so the vast majority of people were simply playing on customs with a simple wins-losses-disc system; the teams were not necessarily even, but it didn't prevent people from playing. Having something that allows you to compare your level to others is fine, and even necessary for 1v1, but for team games the crux is to find other players quickly. If there is some discrepancy between the level of players it doesn't matter as much. One has to remember that 1v1 is the most complicated and somewhat stressful experience, so team games should be actively promoted. Things like 3v3 BGH or Fast were far more popular on BNet than "real" 1v1, same as War3 probably had more people playing AT/RT than 1v1. Ergo the system should also include a more relaxing, non-competitive environment. Being constantly ranked/rated and matched with opponents of similar strength almost 100% of the time ends up creating annoying pressure; when you press the button you know that you will have to give your best/tryhard—while people coming back from a day at school/college/office/whatever are not necessarily searching for that. In some aspects the chaotic lottery of unranked public games is more fun than a strict 50/50 system with some dumb emphasis on irrelevant icons/medals/whatever that ends up frustrating people because they plateau. Another think about stack ranked systems. In real life, some tech companies stack rank their workers output to determine whether a person is doing well or not. And every time (even if they don't punish you for not doing well in the stack rank) it simply creates a more stressful environment because suddenly your mistakes and flaws are visible for all the world to see. No one goes "Oh you're bronze? That's awesome! I'm just a bots player myself--good on you for taking the plunge" and instead the dialogue is "lol Masters ezpz noobs" so that if you're an SC2 player who is not in the top 2% of the game you feel like you are inferior. Stack rank ALWAYS gives this feeling. Whether in games or in real life. | ||
|
EatingBomber
1017 Posts
On September 28 2015 00:21 TheDwf wrote: The most important thing is not a ladder, but the ability to find opponents quickly and effortlessly. The SC1 ladder system flopped badly, so the vast majority of people were simply playing on customs with a simple wins-losses-disc system; the teams were not necessarily even, but it didn't prevent people from playing. Having something that allows you to compare your level to others is fine, and even necessary for 1v1, but for team games the crux is to find other players quickly. If there is some discrepancy between the level of players it doesn't matter as much. One has to remember that 1v1 is the most complicated and somewhat stressful experience, so team games should be actively promoted. Things like 3v3 BGH or Fast were far more popular on BNet than "real" 1v1, same as War3 probably had more people playing AT/RT than 1v1. Ergo the system should also include a more relaxing, non-competitive environment. Being constantly ranked/rated and matched with opponents of similar strength almost 100% of the time ends up creating annoying pressure; when you press the button you know that you will have to give your best/tryhard—while people coming back from a day at school/college/office/whatever are not necessarily searching for that. In some aspects the chaotic lottery of unranked public games is more fun than a strict 50/50 system with some dumb emphasis on irrelevant icons/medals/whatever that ends up frustrating people because they plateau. All true. But isn't the function of a non-competitive, unranked, 1v1 system sufficiently served by the existing 'unranked' option? If I recall correctly, in WC3, nobody played 1v1 games in the custom games section of Battle.net, and neither did anyone play them on LAN platforms (Garena, etc), as most of the games played in such environments were just that - custom games. Is it not enough to allow for a LAN system where people are able to host their own custom games, and even 1v1 games if they want to, but also to continuously promote the 1v1 official ladder? | ||
| ||
