|
Big J I know where you're coming from, I'm plenty disappointed from Blizzard myself.
But you cannot deny that they are great Game Designers. The problems we have with them are at such an incredibly high level, 99% of the players out there won't even know what those mean.
Those type of standards is something no other company can uphold at this time when it comes to RTS.
Oh and btw Day9 has made a name for himself on Youtube and as a gaming-personality. Whether this makes him a great gamedesigner I don't know, but I also don't know if we can say that David Kim is a good game designer for what SC2 is. The awesome parts of it seem to date back before he was the big man in charge.
I think working on a great game and being responsible for a lot of it's best feats is more credibility/qualification than "being a personality.".
|
On September 27 2015 23:16 KeksX wrote:But you cannot deny that they are great Game Designers. The problems we have with them are at such an incredibly high level, 99% of the players out there won't even know what those mean. Haha, a lot of people would argue with that. To me it seems extremely naive, but perhaps you are right. Maybe they are on the whole new level, nobody else understand the game or what's fun.
|
On September 28 2015 00:13 Tuczniak wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2015 23:16 KeksX wrote:But you cannot deny that they are great Game Designers. The problems we have with them are at such an incredibly high level, 99% of the players out there won't even know what those mean. Haha, a lot of people would argue with that. To me it seems extremely naive, but perhaps you are right. Maybe they are on the whole new level, nobody else understand the game or what's fun.
Are we playing and enjoying this game for 5 years now or are we not?
Or are you here because the game is so incredibly bad?
|
After playing several games on the current patch I can say for sure that SC2 never has been that little fun to me since release of WoL! I actually consider quitting 1v1 multiplayer, as everything feels so fast paced, unforgiving and coin-flippy ...
|
Day9 is better game desigmer than David Kim. These feedbacks threads are hard to read these days lol.
|
On September 28 2015 00:13 Tuczniak wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2015 23:16 KeksX wrote:But you cannot deny that they are great Game Designers. The problems we have with them are at such an incredibly high level, 99% of the players out there won't even know what those mean. Haha, a lot of people would argue with that. To me it seems extremely naive, but perhaps you are right. Maybe they are on the whole new level, nobody else understand the game or what's fun.
Yes, for the most part the vocal crowd of self-proclaimed game design experts don't understand the game. Blizzard has made some really great changes recently, like the new Photon Overcharge alone gives Protoss so much extra flexibility and depth, but most people only seem to care about Blizzard making the game easier so that mechanics will stop blocking their strategical genius from shining through, which they think they possess.
|
I think working on a great game and being responsible for a lot of it's best feats is more credibility/qualification than "being a personality.".
How do you know the game is great? Aren't you just guessing?
But you cannot deny that they are great Game Designers. The problems we have with them are at such an incredibly high level, 99% of the players out there won't even know what those mean.
Game-design is about the 99%. There is a huge misconception that game-design is about esports, whereas it's about making an expereince that is fun the target audience (the 99%).
So when people don't enjoy playing the game it's a sign that they are not good game-designers.
|
On September 28 2015 01:47 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +I think working on a great game and being responsible for a lot of it's best feats is more credibility/qualification than "being a personality.". How do you know the game is great? Aren't you just guessing?
I'm talking about SC2 Design Team(specifically David Kim) vs Day9. I know that SC2 is great because I, and many others, have been enjoying it for 5 years now.
But you cannot deny that they are great Game Designers. The problems we have with them are at such an incredibly high level, 99% of the players out there won't even know what those mean
Game-design is about the 99%. There is a huge misconception that game-design is about esports, whereas it's about making an expereince that is fun the target audience (the 99%).
So when people don't enjoy playing the game it's a sign that they are not good game-designers.
I'm not talking about eSports. I'm not doing eSports. You're not doing eSports. No one but a few hundred players are doing eSports. However there's a ton of players out there enjoying 1v1 ladder. There are 100k+ people watching tournaments, and all of those are enjoying the work of the SC2 Game Design team.
|
Ｉ ｒｅａｌｌｙ ｒｅａｌｌｙ ｈｏｐｅ Ｂｌｉｚｚａｒｄ ｇｏｅｓ ｂａｃｋ ｔｏ ＨｏｔＳ Ｃｈｒｏｎｏ Ｂｏｏｓｔ
|
On September 27 2015 21:41 KeksX wrote:Show nested quote +but i have more faith in the design choices because i think Day9 knows what he is doing (moreso than blizzard's design team) What makes you say that? Show nested quote +
And no, why should i lower my expecations for a rts game? It's really simple, if i don't like the product i won't play (and maybe watch) it, idc if it is from blizzard, valve, riot or anyone else.
You already lowered them, just not for Blizzard. Otherwise you wouldn't say the things you just said. You have 0 reason to believe Atlas will be good since they gave you nothing but talking. Maybe Atlas will turn out to be great and the best RTS ever, but right now it's just a company that was trying to ride off of a hypewave around HTML5 and failed to deliver so far.
Day9 sometimes talks about gamedesign on his stream and back then in his dailys (about rts design in general)
I really liked these thoughts and rts philosophies. Obviously this doesn't mean that he can create a great game, but right now i have hope that he can.
And no i didn't lower any expectations, we just don't know much about atlas, as soon as there is an actual alpha/beta to play and i see the gameplay i can comment further on it.
Right now there is just hope (partly because of day9, but also because it might be the only competetive rts we will get in a long time)
I like sc2, but as Big J said i also think that it could be EASILY made a lot better because the basis is pretty good. The details aren't though and this is exactly what makes the difference in the end.
|
However there's a ton of players out there enjoying 1v1 ladder. There are 100k+ people watching tournaments, and all of those are enjoying the work of the SC2 Game Design team.
Well there aren't 100K concurrent viewers anymore (maybe at blizzcoN). But the number of esport viewers means nothing when it comes do being a good designer or not. The designers job is to make the company he is working for the most amount of money (over the longer haul). You do that by making a game that is fun to play. David Kim hasn't been capable of that.
And when it comes to esports, I don't agree that the design team has done anything impressive when it comes to making the game more fun to watch
The RTS genre in inheriently a more interesting genre to watch as an esport than MOBA's and thus the player-to-viewer ratio is higher. So given the conditions, it's also obvious that Blizzard has an easier time making a viewerfriendly game than Riot/Valve has with LOL/DOTA.
Let's look at some criterias for good design below:
- Great micro interactions - Thus are very limited. Most micro interactions are pretty terrible.
- Diversity - Sc2 has awfull diversity.
- Comeback potential? Isn't very high. We seldomly see back-and-fourth games as many games are snowbally.
- Lots of action? I guess Blizzard has "solved" this by overbuffing harass units, but it's not really difficult to do that. What is difficult is rewarding different types of early/midgame aggressive tools with lots of counterplay that feels fun for both players. Blizzard hasn't been capable of that.
I know that SC2 is great because I, and many others, have been enjoying it for 5 years now.
So let's assume - hypothetically - that Sc2's active multiplayer active playerbase is twice of what it actually is. What adverb would you then use to describe David Kim's design skill?
You already set the bar pretty high by using the term "great"?
I would only use great to someone who really succeeded in making an easy-to-learn difficult to master game with great micro interactions, a ton of diversity and lots of back-and-fourth games.
What David Kim is mediocore. He is definitely not worse than the average redditor or TL dude but his trackrecord isn't good and his comments/articles show alot of flaws in his methodology.
|
The RTS genre in inheriently a more interesting genre to watch as an esport than MOBA's and thus the player-to-viewer ratio is higher. So given the conditions, it's also obvious that Blizzard has an easier time making a viewerfriendly game than Riot/Valve has with LOL/DOTA
I don't see why this should be true at all 
|
On September 28 2015 02:38 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +The RTS genre in inheriently a more interesting genre to watch as an esport than MOBA's and thus the player-to-viewer ratio is higher. So given the conditions, it's also obvious that Blizzard has an easier time making a viewerfriendly game than Riot/Valve has with LOL/DOTA I don't see why this should be true at all
It's easier to identify skill in an RTS. Microing multiple units at once is difficult and seperates players.
And viewers want to be impressed by seeing pro players make sick moves. In MOBA's it requires some very complicated hero design for that to be the case.
|
On September 28 2015 02:33 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +However there's a ton of players out there enjoying 1v1 ladder. There are 100k+ people watching tournaments, and all of those are enjoying the work of the SC2 Game Design team. Well there aren't 100K concurrent viewers anymore (maybe at blizzcoN). But the number of esport viewers means nothing when it comes do being a good designer or not. The designers job is to make the company he is working for the most amount of money (over the longer haul). You do that by making a game that is fun to play. David Kim hasn't been capable of that.
Then why are you and all the other whiners here when the game isn't fun to play?
Whether you like it or not. SC2 has been extremely succesful, it's the uncontested #1 RTS game 5 years straight and has an active player base of 200-300k people five years after its release. How many games have been this succesful?
If you don't enjoy the game then that's fine but don't assume that all other people agree with your sentiments.
The majority of players find sc2 incredibly fun to play otherwise it wouldn't have been this succesful.
And you only get a succesful game by having a brilliant fantastic game designer which DK is.
|
On September 28 2015 02:42 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2015 02:38 The_Red_Viper wrote:The RTS genre in inheriently a more interesting genre to watch as an esport than MOBA's and thus the player-to-viewer ratio is higher. So given the conditions, it's also obvious that Blizzard has an easier time making a viewerfriendly game than Riot/Valve has with LOL/DOTA I don't see why this should be true at all It's easier to identify skill in an RTS. Microing multiple units at once is difficult and seperates players. And viewers want to be impressed by seeing pro players make sick moves. In MOBA's it requires some very complicated hero design for that to be the case.
Meh, it is almost NEVER possible to identify any skill if you didn't play the game yourself. You simply have no idea how hard something is to execute.
So i really doubt your explanation is sound.
The advantage mobas have (team games in general) is that all the action on the map is done by a lot of players, which makes it a lot easier to enforce i guess.
Obviously the game design of mobas (with creeps and lanes) helps a ton.
Sc2 doesn't have any real way to enforce action which is why we oftentimes have turtle games.
LoL actually does an impressively BAD job enforcing action considering that it is a moba, ironically people watch it regardless.
|
Meh, it is almost NEVER possible to identify any skill if you didn't play the game yourself. You simply have no idea how hard something is to execute
Yeh sure, I am talking about it for players who have played the game. When you can see units being moved around, it's quite visually. However, when the skillcap is related to some strategic or timingspecific it becomes a ton harder for the average person to be impressed.
Like it's no coincidence that Heroes of the Storm viewernumbers are still below that of Starcraft, even though the game has a ton of action. The issue is that as viewer you just see five players clashing together and spamming abilities, which is something that every rank 1 player can do (mechanically speaking).
When it comes to watchability for people who have not played the game I think both MOBA's and RTS suffer a lot. FPS games have a bit of an advantage here and obvious sportsgames (fifa/madden) are the easiest to sell to a broader audience.
The advantage mobas have (team games in general) is that all the action on the map is done by a lot of players, which makes it a lot easier to enforce i guess.
Obviously the game design of mobas (with creeps and lanes) helps a ton.
Sc2 doesn't have any real way to enforce action which is why we oftentimes have turtle games.
I don't think there is a fundamental difference between the RTS and the MOBA genre in that regard. I think RTS games could (and will have in the future - * Project Atlas *) an objective focus that rewards players for going out on the map to be aggressive.
The fact that Starcraft wasn't designed in mind to be a "next-generation" RTS, but rather continued on with the 90s version of building a base and doing nothing for the first 5-10 mins is imo just another indication that these aren't brilliant designers. Brilliant designers sets trends and innovates because they understand what the future consumer/gamer appreciates.
Then why are you and all the other whiners here when the game isn't fun to play?
Good thing this is a discussion forum and I am not playing the game while writing.
Which reminds me, why are you here when you think the game is fun to play? Why not play the game?
Yes I know, logic is a bitch and sometimes your doublestandards bites you.
Whether you like it or not. SC2 has been extremely succesful, it's the uncontested #1 RTS game 5 years straight and has an active player base of 200-300k people five years after its release. How many games have been this succesful?
Again you are setting the bar high. If 200-300k numbers are EXTREMELY SUCCESFUl. What is Dota then? What is LOL? What is WOW.
FYI, Starcraft is the least succesful Blizzard franchise.
Seriously man, get your adjectives under control.
The majority of players find sc2 incredibly fun to play otherwise it wouldn't have been this succesful.
The majority of Dota players think Dota is better than LOL and thus DOTA must be better than LOL according to your logic.
Please start thinking twice about the actual implications of what your saying before you write. This is getting tiring.
And you only get a succesful game by having a brilliant fantastic game designer which DK is.
I just listed some criterias for good design where he clearly hasn't done a great/fantastic job. Your not even commenting on that but just repeating your nonsense logic. Your just making selfulfilling statements over and over to proove your nonsense logic.
|
On September 28 2015 03:07 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +Then why are you and all the other whiners here when the game isn't fun to play? Good thing this is a discussion forum and I am not playing the game while writing. Which reminds me, why are you here when you think the game is fun to play? Why not play the game?
So why do you go to a forum of a game you don't play and talk shit? I don't go to the LoL forums either and say how bad the game is and only noobs play that.
Again you are setting the bar high. If 200-300k numbers are EXTREMELY SUCCESFUl. What is Dota then? What is LOL? What is WOW.
FYI, Starcraft is the least succesful Blizzard franchise.
Seriously man, get your adjectives under control.
So every game except LoL and Dota is a failure? And you can't compare games from different genres. The RTS market is not as big anymore so it's very impressive that sc2 could maintain such a high player and viewer count.
I just listed some criterias for good design where he clearly hasn't done a great/fantastic job. Your not even commenting on that but just repeating your nonsense logic. Your just making selfulfilling statements over and over to proove your nonsense logic.
I think the criteria of a random TL guy are pretty worthless compared to the criteria of the lead designer of the biggest RTS for the last 5 years.
|
You guys demonize David Kim as if he could do whatever he wanted. He's probably the most understaffed lead designer in modern times. Not all his design choices are design choices; he has to ship this game in 2 months!
When WOL and HotS came, he was NOT in charge. There's a lot of mess to clean.
You can bash Blizzard all you want, but attacking DK personally is unfair.
That said...
Come one Blizzard, wtf! Don't rush this shit!
|
On September 28 2015 02:33 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +I know that SC2 is great because I, and many others, have been enjoying it for 5 years now. So let's assume - hypothetically - that Sc2's active multiplayer active playerbase is twice of what it actually is. What adverb would you then use to describe David Kim's design skill? You already set the bar pretty high by using the term "great"? I would only use great to someone who really succeeded in making an easy-to-learn difficult to master game with great micro interactions, a ton of diversity and lots of back-and-fourth games. What David Kim is mediocore. He is definitely not worse than the average redditor or TL dude but his trackrecord isn't good and his comments/articles show alot of flaws in his methodology.
I'm not tying this to numbers, I just expressed the fact that a significant portion of players are enjoying this game for 5 years straight which in my eyes is great.
"Great" is not an objective term you can tie to some arbitrary scale and I'm not sure why you want me to do that.
Of course this is largely a subjective opinion but there are some undeniable facts as well.
I would only use great to someone who really succeeded in making an easy-to-learn difficult to master game with great micro interactions, a ton of diversity and lots of back-and-fourth games.
What has SC2 been for you? I like to anti-circlejerk about SC2 as much as the next guy, but all of the things you mentioned are definitely a part of SC2, maybe more and less depending on what time of meta/patch/expansion you look at, but SC2 is definitely not a boring, monotone game with only onesided matches.
Anyway, I'm not going to go down the route of trying to nitpick things. Blizzard's design team has many many flaws, but they still have developed the game I've loved for the past 5 years and to say that that is "mediocre" would simply be a lie. You are around since 2010 as well, Hider. Either you love mediocrity or you're being dishonest with yourself.
|
What has SC2 been for you? I
Well when I got into Sc2 I used to be obsessed about trying to improve. When you are focussed on improving you think less about whether the core gameplay is fun or not.
However, today I really just wanna play a game more casually, and now all of the design flaws of the game becomes obvious because it's so hard to get into some of the fun parts of the game (which are great micro interactions).
Specifically regarding macromechanics, I don't really feel them as much as - say someone like TB - because I spend enough time to practice them and thus I can actually focus on micro. So the exact issue I am talking about is not actually as relevanta for me as it is for a lot of other people.
The RTS genre still has gigantic potential imo and it's why I am very interested in this from a design discussion.
I think Project Atlas has a lot of the right ideas, but RTS design is very complicated with lots of factors to take into account. So even if they get one or two areas correct, the game might still not work out.
Most importantly for me is how the micro will feel in the game. If micro interactions are fun and have a high skillcap, I think the game could be really succesful.
Blizzard's design team has many many flaws, but they still have developed the game
The thing that stands out to me for Starcraft compared to other RTS games is that the game doesn't run in slow motion. I don't know why every RTS game designer think its interesting to have units that take 4 minutes to get from one side of the map to another.
More importantly, units in slowmotion typically aren't very microable. Like Imagine stimmed marines at 1.5 movement speed... Pretty limited how you could micro those units.
I also don't think Starcraft is a bad game or that David Kim sucks, however I feel the multiplayer experience is mediocre.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
