|
On September 27 2015 16:05 Nimrod.519 wrote:
When I finally reached masters league after countless hours of play, I realized that what I had been trying to do was not play a game of strategy, but play a game of rock, paper, scissors. Every action I took was a reaction to an opponent's play where the consequence of a non-perfect response cost me the game. SC2 became not a game of strategy where I could use my creativity and playstyle to defeat an opponent, but a game where I just responded right or wrong and I won or lost my game accordingly. There was so little room for deviation that I could no longer express myself in my play. I think this lack of self expression was what cost me the fun in the end, and this all relates back to the game-ending (disproportionate consequence of action-reaction) nature of the unit designs in the game.
Um...if you are reacting to your opponents play are you not playing strategically? Scissors paper rock is a game where you make decisions without knowing your opponents decision. You do know and you are making decisions based on what your opponent is doing.
Do you mean that there's no variation from the standard? That there is a correct response to everything you see and therefore there's nothing to choose? You feel like you don't have a choice because you see and you respond? Hate to tell you but that is basically every competitive sport out there. You made masters league. The top players in the world.
In a competitive environment this will always be the case. Pick any sport, do you see teams throw new game changing ideas every week? No you don't. The rules for basketball doesn't say you have to have your 5 players positioned in a certain way, it has been worked out over the years that this is the best way to have your team set up. Baseball doesn't dictate how you should lay out your field. Even MOBAs at the competitive level, you have certain line ups and roles that are required to make a team and the higher your rank, the less new strategies and ideas you will see.
|
I've read the whole topic and want to add my two cents — I'm a noob player, playing against harder AI at the moment, I haven't yet played multiplayer matches (I suppose you should play multiplayer when you're able to beat the hardest AI easily so it's not interesting anymore), And I should say, the game IS fun with all this harassment units, different tech options and a certain degree of unpredictability - what your opponent will throw at you next?
The game IS hard, and it is made for hardcore players, it's also very demanding in terms of concentration and mental energy you have to commit to control all the units and bases, especially in multiplayer, but you can always play the campaign once again, or play against AI at your current skill level, So you may try different strategies and try your own play style. It's simple - play as you want and see if it works.
Of all things in SC2 matchmaking I really dislike just one - it's manual spawn larva for zerg, it's my favourite race, but I switched to terran since I couldn't keep up with all the injects — this ability took my apms which are already quite low (38), so I had less time to micro my army and to macro my economy. MULEs are so much easier and I feel that's unfair to novice zerg players. Of course you can build macro hatcheries, but that's quite an investment that will certainly put you behind in the game.
SC2 has something common with poker - you should try to "read" your opponent to succeed and invest your apms in scouting, so you could come up with a good strategy. And of course you should have higher APM to beat better players — what's your brilliant strategy worth if you don't have enough time to implement it? Starcraft is a very exciting game and it'also quite exhausting. So when I just want to relax a little I play a turn-based strategy, thankfully there's a lot of decent ones nowdays.
|
On September 28 2015 23:32 furling wrote:
I've read the whole topic and want to add my two cents — I'm a noob player, playing against harder AI at the moment, I haven't yet played multiplayer matches (I suppose you should play multiplayer when you're able to beat the hardest AI easily so it's not interesting anymore), And I should say, the game IS fun with all this harassment units, different tech options and a certain degree of unpredictability - what your opponent will throw at you next?
The game IS hard, and it is made for hardcore players, it's also very demanding in terms of concentration and mental energy you have to commit to control all the units and bases, especially in multiplayer, but you can always play the campaign once again, or play against AI at your current skill level, So you may try different strategies and try your own play style. It's simple - play as you want and see if it works.
Of all things in SC2 matchmaking I really dislike just one - it's manual spawn larva for zerg, it's my favourite race, but I switched to terran since I couldn't keep up with all the injects — this ability took my apms which are already quite low (38), so I had less time to micro my army and to macro my economy. MULEs are so much easier and I feel that's unfair to novice zerg players. Of course you can build macro hatcheries, but that's quite an investment that will certainly put you behind in the game.
SC2 has something common with poker - you should try to "read" your opponent to succeed and invest your apms in scouting, so you could come up with a good strategy. And of course you should have higher APM to beat better players — what's your brilliant strategy worth if you don't have enough time to implement it? Starcraft is a very exciting game and it'also quite exhausting. So when I just want to relax a little I play a turn-based strategy, thankfully there's a lot of decent ones nowdays.
MULEing isn't analogous to injecting. The races are different, and arguments like this really just ignore that and try and equate them. For example, I could equally say Zerg has it easier than Terran because they don't have to build production as heavily or because they don't have to go back to build supply depots.
|
Lets all relax here and realize the truth.
This game is done. Its over. Dead. Kaput.
It doesnt take a prophet to realize that almost nobody will be playing it in about 2 years time, so lets just all learn the hard lesson that in order to make a successful game it mustnt be an esport or a watcher friendly game, or a high skill requiring game, it just has to be fun enough to a beginner so that he will want to invest time into it.
This game is not such a thing. It s a soulcrushing chain of sad experiences until you reach the mechanical skills in order for the strategy and your decisions in game to actually matter. All while being taxing on your eyes,hands and mental health.
If we learned anything from the massively successful games of past years Dota and Lol we realise that the sole recipe of success is that these games are a fucking blast, ESPECIALLY for the noobs. Its not about balamce or about the needed skill cap in order to play a class, its simply about the fact that on avarage a game is a very positive experience that leaves you wanting for more.
And here is where sc2 has utterly failed. The baggage of broodwar has charged this game with preconceived heavy requirements of needed skill, tight balance as well as esports viablility. Encumbring burdens for such inexperienced game designers which made them totally forget that above all you just need to make the game fun for your average or nooby player.
As this game will continue its inevitable demise towards its death 2 years from now, lets all take a moment to leave aside our elitism and just recognise that this game never had that magical appeal that great games truly have. Having achieved this personally, moving on to greener pastures has never been easier.
Thanks for reading.
|
On September 28 2015 23:53 Ansibled wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2015 23:32 furling wrote:
I've read the whole topic and want to add my two cents — I'm a noob player, playing against harder AI at the moment, I haven't yet played multiplayer matches (I suppose you should play multiplayer when you're able to beat the hardest AI easily so it's not interesting anymore), And I should say, the game IS fun with all this harassment units, different tech options and a certain degree of unpredictability - what your opponent will throw at you next?
The game IS hard, and it is made for hardcore players, it's also very demanding in terms of concentration and mental energy you have to commit to control all the units and bases, especially in multiplayer, but you can always play the campaign once again, or play against AI at your current skill level, So you may try different strategies and try your own play style. It's simple - play as you want and see if it works.
Of all things in SC2 matchmaking I really dislike just one - it's manual spawn larva for zerg, it's my favourite race, but I switched to terran since I couldn't keep up with all the injects — this ability took my apms which are already quite low (38), so I had less time to micro my army and to macro my economy. MULEs are so much easier and I feel that's unfair to novice zerg players. Of course you can build macro hatcheries, but that's quite an investment that will certainly put you behind in the game.
SC2 has something common with poker - you should try to "read" your opponent to succeed and invest your apms in scouting, so you could come up with a good strategy. And of course you should have higher APM to beat better players — what's your brilliant strategy worth if you don't have enough time to implement it? Starcraft is a very exciting game and it'also quite exhausting. So when I just want to relax a little I play a turn-based strategy, thankfully there's a lot of decent ones nowdays. MULEing isn't analogous to injecting. The races are different, and arguments like this really just ignore that and try and equate them. For example, I could equally say Zerg has it easier than Terran because they don't have to build production as heavily or because they don't have to go back to build supply depots.
Yes, that is true, but at the end of the day, it's APM that matters a lot at the novice level (in my experience), and as a zerg player you have more things to worry about, injects being the most frustrating one. As a terran, if you missed a supply cap, you can call down additional supply from orbital command, or grab several workers and shift-build more depots (also barraks, factories etc) simultaneously, both these things do not require your continuous attention as injects do. And if you missed calling a mule, you can just call two in a row, or spend energy elsewhere. As a zerg you have to constantly check if your queens have enough energy and if they are in position to do an inject or you'll have smaller army, which is not at all great.
|
Just have to say I agree with the direction u're going here, the sc2 multiplayer design team over the years trying to cater to the old guard and the elitist have done a disservice to the SC universe, instead of moving with the times it got too many things stuck in the past and as such couldn't incorporate the new age players, instead of having a booming community it has a community of people who have been playing SC since the original one which can only decay. The problems are now becoming apparent even tho the signs were all there since WoL.
Now the community has been trained to think a RTS needs to have intensive macro to be fun, and that skill is about how fast u can move your hands even tho that means high level play is all about factory work. Learn how to do your job and repeat it until you can do it faster than everybody else.
In the current gaming world most of this views are unacceptable, most games now are small breadth and very deep, easy to learn, extremely hard to master. SC has stayed in the past with it's extremely hard do learn policy, most players cannot see how deep the game is because they didn't put hundreds of hours into getting their macro up to par.
All this falls in deaf ears because people are stuck in a mentality of "This is what I learned and I'm not willing to loose it."
|
On September 28 2015 23:53 Ansibled wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2015 23:32 furling wrote:
I've read the whole topic and want to add my two cents — I'm a noob player, playing against harder AI at the moment, I haven't yet played multiplayer matches (I suppose you should play multiplayer when you're able to beat the hardest AI easily so it's not interesting anymore), And I should say, the game IS fun with all this harassment units, different tech options and a certain degree of unpredictability - what your opponent will throw at you next?
The game IS hard, and it is made for hardcore players, it's also very demanding in terms of concentration and mental energy you have to commit to control all the units and bases, especially in multiplayer, but you can always play the campaign once again, or play against AI at your current skill level, So you may try different strategies and try your own play style. It's simple - play as you want and see if it works.
Of all things in SC2 matchmaking I really dislike just one - it's manual spawn larva for zerg, it's my favourite race, but I switched to terran since I couldn't keep up with all the injects — this ability took my apms which are already quite low (38), so I had less time to micro my army and to macro my economy. MULEs are so much easier and I feel that's unfair to novice zerg players. Of course you can build macro hatcheries, but that's quite an investment that will certainly put you behind in the game.
SC2 has something common with poker - you should try to "read" your opponent to succeed and invest your apms in scouting, so you could come up with a good strategy. And of course you should have higher APM to beat better players — what's your brilliant strategy worth if you don't have enough time to implement it? Starcraft is a very exciting game and it'also quite exhausting. So when I just want to relax a little I play a turn-based strategy, thankfully there's a lot of decent ones nowdays. MULEing isn't analogous to injecting. The races are different, and arguments like this really just ignore that and try and equate them. For example, I could equally say Zerg has it easier than Terran because they don't have to build production as heavily or because they don't have to go back to build supply depots.
That's not the point. What he says can be summed up as:
(1) The game is too fast
(2) The game doesn't allow you enough to allocate your attention the way you want
(3) The game is too unforgiving
With the silly campaigns for more automation everywhere, I always savour the fact that SC2 is much more newbie-unfriendly than his predecessor despite the fact that you had so much more to do by yourself in SC1. The difference is:
(1) You had more time to play (economy was not booming as fast, battles happened on a smaller scale and were not as brutal).
(2) The margin of error was larger since (a) on average, less was at stake and (b) you could fall back on stronger defensive positions (attacking and immediately exploiting a lead was much harder). Your position in the game didn't degrade as fast as in SC2, where you can lose in a matter of seconds to various things.
(3) The fact that you were required everywhere made it so that players could play their strengths and choose what part of the game they wanted to focus on. Mr. Macro could spend all his time in his base (and barely bother to watch fights! something absolutely unimaginable in SC2 for certain compositions), Mr. Harass could allocate his attention to his raids, Mr. Lategame could slowly develop towards his high tech composition, etc. In SC2 the game decides too much for you how you will play, which results in a repetitive and arid gameplay where players are limited and cannot play their true style/are pidgeon-holed into certain openings and patterns, etc.
Many things in SC2 should be conceived as little bonus which add up rather than absolute requirements that make you lose if you fail to perform them at level X or Y. Same for macro boosters, all it takes is a 50-60% nerf in efficiency and voilà... All their negative effects are suddenly gone and high(er) level players can still use them while low level players can focus on base management or unit control if they want. Instead of that, people who barely reach one effective action per second are immediately rushed into the action, with said action being more violent than ever... Nonsense.
|
Russian Federation66 Posts
lotv beta was about very interesting changes:
12 workers
less minerals in fields
reduce attack speed of units (too hard for blizz to rebalance it, they cant fix broodlords in wol and sh in hots in time)
removing macro mechanics (too hard for blizz to tweak terrans a bit lol)
so, lotv is going to be hots with 12 workers and lots of "new" units with moba-like abilities.
|
On September 29 2015 00:31 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2015 23:53 Ansibled wrote:On September 28 2015 23:32 furling wrote:
I've read the whole topic and want to add my two cents — I'm a noob player, playing against harder AI at the moment, I haven't yet played multiplayer matches (I suppose you should play multiplayer when you're able to beat the hardest AI easily so it's not interesting anymore), And I should say, the game IS fun with all this harassment units, different tech options and a certain degree of unpredictability - what your opponent will throw at you next?
The game IS hard, and it is made for hardcore players, it's also very demanding in terms of concentration and mental energy you have to commit to control all the units and bases, especially in multiplayer, but you can always play the campaign once again, or play against AI at your current skill level, So you may try different strategies and try your own play style. It's simple - play as you want and see if it works.
Of all things in SC2 matchmaking I really dislike just one - it's manual spawn larva for zerg, it's my favourite race, but I switched to terran since I couldn't keep up with all the injects — this ability took my apms which are already quite low (38), so I had less time to micro my army and to macro my economy. MULEs are so much easier and I feel that's unfair to novice zerg players. Of course you can build macro hatcheries, but that's quite an investment that will certainly put you behind in the game.
SC2 has something common with poker - you should try to "read" your opponent to succeed and invest your apms in scouting, so you could come up with a good strategy. And of course you should have higher APM to beat better players — what's your brilliant strategy worth if you don't have enough time to implement it? Starcraft is a very exciting game and it'also quite exhausting. So when I just want to relax a little I play a turn-based strategy, thankfully there's a lot of decent ones nowdays. MULEing isn't analogous to injecting. The races are different, and arguments like this really just ignore that and try and equate them. For example, I could equally say Zerg has it easier than Terran because they don't have to build production as heavily or because they don't have to go back to build supply depots. That's not the point. What he says can be summed up as: (1) The game is too fast (2) The game doesn't allow you enough to allocate your attention the way you want (3) The game is too unforgiving With the silly campaigns for more automation everywhere, I always savour the fact that SC2 is much more newbie-unfriendly than his predecessor despite the fact that you had so much more to do by yourself in SC1. The difference is: (1) You had more time to play (economy was not booming as fast, battles happened on a smaller scale and were not as brutal). (2) The margin of error was larger since (a) on average, less was at stake and (b) you could fall back on stronger defensive positions (attacking and immediately exploiting a lead was much harder). Your position in the game didn't degrade as fast as in SC2, where you can lose in a matter of seconds to various things. (3) The fact that you were required everywhere made it so that players could play their strengths and choose what part of the game they wanted to focus on. Mr. Macro could spend all his time in his base (and barely bother to watch fights! something absolutely unimaginable in SC2 for certain compositions), Mr. Harass could allocate his attention to his raids, Mr. Lategame could slowly develop towards his high tech composition, etc. In SC2 the game decides too much for you how you will play, which results in a repetitive and arid gameplay where players are limited and cannot play their true style/are pidgeon-holed into certain openings and patterns, etc. Many things in SC2 should be conceived as little bonus which add up rather than absolute requirements that make you lose if you fail to perform them at level X or Y. Same for macro boosters, all it takes is a 50-60% nerf in efficiency and voilà... All their negative effects are suddenly gone and high(er) level players can still use them while low level players can focus on base management or unit control if they want. Instead of that, people who barely reach one effective action per second are immediately rushed into the action, with said action being more violent than ever... Nonsense.
Brilliant reply and a great sum up of why the game is a miserable experience. Could not have said it any better. I keep wondering how the design went so far off track to reach this place.
|
There's only so much hand holding you can to do grab lower players, and I am actually happy with that. If lower skilled people can't first get into Starcraft cause it is too hard, that is fine by me they can learn to love it by watching it instead. Though widow mines are not very noob friendly, they can be very entertaining to watch and might inspire a lower level player to start playing and learn the game.
Following a Riot design blog and dummifying the game to increase the beginner player base and pool is not something that will make Starcraft 2 a better Esport, it's what made LoL one of the most popular games there is. But that is based on the design of their hero system and it being a team game, making it much more forgiving to new players, but those designs are not what made it a successful Esport, and what makes it a successful Esport will be different than what makes SC2 a good Esport, and thank god for that.
While, yes I do think LOTV is a mess right now and a lot of balance needs to be sorted out and fixed. I still have a lot of fun with it, and I know that is in part because I have the experience to pull off things in it that newer players wouldn't be able to. And I think that is perfectly okay, I like that SC2 rewards the time you put into it, and that it isn't just a game you can pick up and play. Starcraft doesn't need to emulate LoL to be a good Esport, it needs to be a platform for the very best decision makers and players to showcase their skill in a game with a high skill ceiling and millions of possibilities.
Also OP I bet you would have hated reaver drops in BW if you think drop harass is too annoying
|
This is the dumbest thread on Team Liquid. I was waiting for the sarcasm tag because I thought this post was mocking the community for whining too much, but then I realized OP was serious.
Starcraft is, first and foremost, a strategy game. If you remove all of the tools that exist to punish greed or mistakes with detection and defense, then what are you left with? Just a game where players are separated by their mechanics only.
I happen to think all of those things make the game more fun, for the most part. God forbid a player ever has to think about what their opponent is doing.
|
On September 29 2015 00:04 Kranyum wrote:
Lets all relax here and realize the truth.
This game is done. Its over. Dead. Kaput.
It doesnt take a prophet to realize that almost nobody will be playing it in about 2 years time, so lets just all learn the hard lesson that in order to make a successful game it mustnt be an esport or a watcher friendly game, or a high skill requiring game, it just has to be fun enough to a beginner so that he will want to invest time into it.
This game is not such a thing. It s a soulcrushing chain of sad experiences until you reach the mechanical skills in order for the strategy and your decisions in game to actually matter. All while being taxing on your eyes,hands and mental health.
If we learned anything from the massively successful games of past years Dota and Lol we realise that the sole recipe of success is that these games are a fucking blast, ESPECIALLY for the noobs. Its not about balamce or about the needed skill cap in order to play a class, its simply about the fact that on avarage a game is a very positive experience that leaves you wanting for more.
And here is where sc2 has utterly failed. The baggage of broodwar has charged this game with preconceived heavy requirements of needed skill, tight balance as well as esports viablility. Encumbring burdens for such inexperienced game designers which made them totally forget that above all you just need to make the game fun for your average or nooby player.
As this game will continue its inevitable demise towards its death 2 years from now, lets all take a moment to leave aside our elitism and just recognise that this game never had that magical appeal that great games truly have. Having achieved this personally, moving on to greener pastures has never been easier.
Thanks for reading.
As a novice game designer I would have to agree with most of your points, and that is a very saddening experience. I have also played Starcraft for countless of hours and reached GM multiple times, my motivation to play was not that I wanted that awesome starcraft experience with cool moments and that awesome feeling good games give you. Starcraft gave me that feeling of a competitive environment where you could truly test your skill versus an opponent. This however does not last forever as competing for the sake of competing is not very rewarding, the only sense of fun the game gave me was when I finally beat that protoss all inner or that cheesy zerg. I was happy not because the game was fun, but that I could finally beat all of the bullshit thrown at my face. It was the feeling of competition that made me push through the bullshit to hopefully reach green pastures and once you got there you realized the green pastures were at best grey. It just never became a fun experience.
Looking at a game like Heroes of the Storm, a game which is currently skyrocketing in popularity, a game which requires very little skill and has a low skill ceiling, a game opposite of starcraft 2. This game is gaining so much momentum because its very rewarding to play. This is because of in game rewards, something starcraft 2 doesn't have. These rewards are not gold and buying heroes, it is landing that skillshot and getting that sweet impact sound or getting that nice level up animation. In heroes I do not care as much about winning since the gameplay is very rewarding.
Comparing heroes and starcraft would be like comparing Mario and I wanna be the guy and looking at which one is more popular, the game who makes people feel awesome from playing or the game that you can only get enjoyment out of if you master it and finally beat all of the bullshit that is thrown towards you.
|
On September 29 2015 00:04 Kranyum wrote:
Lets all relax here and realize the truth.
This game is done. Its over. Dead. Kaput.
It doesnt take a prophet to realize that almost nobody will be playing it in about 2 years time, so lets just all learn the hard lesson that in order to make a successful game it mustnt be an esport or a watcher friendly game, or a high skill requiring game, it just has to be fun enough to a beginner so that he will want to invest time into it.
This game is not such a thing. It s a soulcrushing chain of sad experiences until you reach the mechanical skills in order for the strategy and your decisions in game to actually matter. All while being taxing on your eyes,hands and mental health.
If we learned anything from the massively successful games of past years Dota and Lol we realise that the sole recipe of success is that these games are a fucking blast, ESPECIALLY for the noobs. Its not about balamce or about the needed skill cap in order to play a class, its simply about the fact that on avarage a game is a very positive experience that leaves you wanting for more.
And here is where sc2 has utterly failed. The baggage of broodwar has charged this game with preconceived heavy requirements of needed skill, tight balance as well as esports viablility. Encumbring burdens for such inexperienced game designers which made them totally forget that above all you just need to make the game fun for your average or nooby player.
As this game will continue its inevitable demise towards its death 2 years from now, lets all take a moment to leave aside our elitism and just recognise that this game never had that magical appeal that great games truly have. Having achieved this personally, moving on to greener pastures has never been easier.
Thanks for reading.
Not to shit on your point, but I have the suspicion that you are really bad at this game.
|
On September 29 2015 00:04 Kranyum wrote:
Lets all relax here and realize the truth.
This game is done. Its over. Dead. Kaput.
It doesnt take a prophet to realize that almost nobody will be playing it in about 2 years time, so lets just all learn the hard lesson that in order to make a successful game it mustnt be an esport or a watcher friendly game, or a high skill requiring game, it just has to be fun enough to a beginner so that he will want to invest time into it.
This game is not such a thing. It s a soulcrushing chain of sad experiences until you reach the mechanical skills in order for the strategy and your decisions in game to actually matter. All while being taxing on your eyes,hands and mental health.
If we learned anything from the massively successful games of past years Dota and Lol we realise that the sole recipe of success is that these games are a fucking blast, ESPECIALLY for the noobs. Its not about balamce or about the needed skill cap in order to play a class, its simply about the fact that on avarage a game is a very positive experience that leaves you wanting for more.
And here is where sc2 has utterly failed. The baggage of broodwar has charged this game with preconceived heavy requirements of needed skill, tight balance as well as esports viablility. Encumbring burdens for such inexperienced game designers which made them totally forget that above all you just need to make the game fun for your average or nooby player.
As this game will continue its inevitable demise towards its death 2 years from now, lets all take a moment to leave aside our elitism and just recognise that this game never had that magical appeal that great games truly have. Having achieved this personally, moving on to greener pastures has never been easier.
Thanks for reading.
game is dead because rts isn't fun except for a vanishingly small amount of people. i think rts exists in this weird space like roguelikes, where there's a lot of extremely unforgiving aspects that define what an rts is and removing them creates these weird rts-lites (mobas) that are more forgiving and casual friendly. it's like comparing nethack/dcss to binding of isaac or rogue legacy; the base game is too hardcore for 99% of players and they won't be able to enjoy it without totally changing what the game's about
|
On September 29 2015 02:00 bjornkavist wrote:
There's only so much hand holding you can to do grab lower players, and I am actually happy with that. If lower skilled people can't first get into Starcraft cause it is too hard, that is fine by me they can learn to love it by watching it instead. Though widow mines are not very noob friendly, they can be very entertaining to watch and might inspire a lower level player to start playing and learn the game.
Uh? No one is going to start playing the game because they saw a Widow Mine shot on some stream. If the game is too frustrating, people won't drop by the streams. They will simply leave.
Following a Riot design blog and dummifying the game to increase the beginner player base and pool is not something that will make Starcraft 2 a better Esport
(1) SC2 doesn't need to become a better esport, it needs to be a better game. The game comes before the esport and players are more important than spectators. If your player base collapses, so will stream numbers since those who watch are primilarily those who play.
(2) There is no need to dumb down the game to make it more friendly for low level players! Things like slowing down the pace of the game, removing hardcounters or increasing the chances to come back from a deficit can benefit both low and high level players.
|
I don't really go for the circle jerk that Sc2 is too hardcore for most gamers and thus why it doesn't have as big a player base as some of the hugely popular games. I just think it's a combination of RTS being pretty unpopular right now, Sc2 not exactly being all it can be and team based games being where the e-sports scene is focused on atm.
When people going for the casual vote on why Sc2 is not lining up with LoL's numbers people start to bring up BW. Shit, UMS provided me more fun than the dodgy arcade section. I will agree that was something better for casuals for sure, but as for the main game, well I think some people have been smoking a bit too much of the good old stuff since their last session with BW. I don't think I need to go into details, but that game is definitely not casual friendly and much less so than Sc2. A great game for people who invest a lot of time into, and a great pro scene it once had.
The "make it easy" crowd also talk about needing breakneck speed in order to play Sc2. Like what level are we talking about reaching here? Because when I last played you could get pretty damn high up in masters whilst hovering somewhere around the 100apm mark. Whilst you won't be fucking with Innovation with that apm you will be able to compete with the vast, vast majority of players if you play solid in general such as making good decisions, controlling armies well and taking good trades. Another casual apologist argument is the need to strictly follow the meta which restricts strategies and fun. In a 1v1 game for most levels of the play the meta doesn't even have to be something a player acknowledges.
Just bad arguments in general from people who are only going to play a 1v1 RTS title for a little while before moving onto a Moba or another team based game where they can blame their team-mates for losses. Blizzard recently dropped a super casual game that played right into the "make it easy" camp, and that game is a non-event for a Blizz title. Definitely areas where Blizz can improve Sc2, no doubt, and I hope they do even though I doubt I will be playing.
|
On September 29 2015 03:17 TheDwf wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On September 29 2015 02:00 bjornkavist wrote:
There's only so much hand holding you can to do grab lower players, and I am actually happy with that. If lower skilled people can't first get into Starcraft cause it is too hard, that is fine by me they can learn to love it by watching it instead. Though widow mines are not very noob friendly, they can be very entertaining to watch and might inspire a lower level player to start playing and learn the game. Uh? No one is going to start playing the game because they saw a Widow Mine shot on some stream. If the game is too frustrating, people won't drop by the streams. They will simply leave. Show nested quote +Following a Riot design blog and dummifying the game to increase the beginner player base and pool is not something that will make Starcraft 2 a better Esport (1) SC2 doesn't need to become a better esport, it needs to be a better game. The game comes before the esport and players are more important than spectators. If your player base collapses, so will stream numbers since those who watch are primilarily those who play. (2) There is no need to dumb down the game to make it more friendly for low level players! Things like slowing down the pace of the game, removing hardcounters or increasing the chances to come back from a deficit can benefit both low and high level players.
I can agree with those points and a lot of the points you made in your previous post, but I don't think making the game easier will make it a better game like a lot of the things the OP suggests. Also I legitimately had a friend get into playing SC2, Terran specifically from watching someone use widow mines on stream lol
|
8. The cannon rush.
Solution: I don't have a solution, sorry.
ez.
forge requires gateway.
There's no goddamn reason to have forge first builds. just remove it and balance protoss early game to be able to defend ling rushes.
|
I respect your opinion OP.
The thing is as platinum noob I wouldn´t want to play a game with those changes you propose.
I really enjoy the way TvZ plays (from both sides btw)....I can completely see why the game isn´t fun for some people.
At the end of the day you would be ruining the game for the people that are actually playing it in hope for a possibly not even existing crowd. Not every game needs to be easy or beginner friendly.
|
On September 29 2015 00:04 Kranyum wrote:
Lets all relax here and realize the truth.
This game is done. Its over. Dead. Kaput.
It doesnt take a prophet to realize that almost nobody will be playing it in about 2 years time, so lets just all learn the hard lesson that in order to make a successful game it mustnt be an esport or a watcher friendly game, or a high skill requiring game, it just has to be fun enough to a beginner so that he will want to invest time into it.
This game is not such a thing. It s a soulcrushing chain of sad experiences until you reach the mechanical skills in order for the strategy and your decisions in game to actually matter. All while being taxing on your eyes,hands and mental health.
If we learned anything from the massively successful games of past years Dota and Lol we realise that the sole recipe of success is that these games are a fucking blast, ESPECIALLY for the noobs. Its not about balamce or about the needed skill cap in order to play a class, its simply about the fact that on avarage a game is a very positive experience that leaves you wanting for more.
And here is where sc2 has utterly failed. The baggage of broodwar has charged this game with preconceived heavy requirements of needed skill, tight balance as well as esports viablility. Encumbring burdens for such inexperienced game designers which made them totally forget that above all you just need to make the game fun for your average or nooby player.
As this game will continue its inevitable demise towards its death 2 years from now, lets all take a moment to leave aside our elitism and just recognise that this game never had that magical appeal that great games truly have. Having achieved this personally, moving on to greener pastures has never been easier.
Thanks for reading.
It's not just that. The game was not that beginner friendly at 2010 either, however there was a scene which was fun to follow, with many personalities and different tournaments etc. The thing is, Blizzard (WCS), community's obsession with Koreans, and people who spent way too much money (looking at IPL and NASL here) killed NA scene, which in my opinion made the game fun for most. I don't give a rats ass anymore and don't watch the game anymore, as Korean #24 or some foreigner I haven't heard at all won another tournament, game quality is important but as Destiny put it so nicely some time ago, can a layman like me recognize the subtle differences between the best and very-best players? I watched to be entertained, and SC2 delivered this back then.
The scene was fun, EG Team House was fun, MLG was fun I stayed up late for hours to watch that, Idra was loads of fun whether you loved or hated him, State of the Game, Inside the Game (Goatlust anyone) and all of that was LOADS of fun. There was a spirit, an identity to the scene. Koreans were cool because they played strong, but they were not the only important thing for me. I never even got to masters, but I enjoyed watching it until late 2012.
The game and its mechanics may be flawed, but this does not prevent it from being entertaining to watch, and that is not attained solely by the game's characteristics. The scene we had was amazing and that 2-3 year period I had so much fun following the scene, even though I was still terrible at the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
