|
On July 28 2011 14:45 aksfjh wrote:
Wow @ the amount of people who hate features. For TL, apparently, SC2 could be an ASCII graphic RTS without win/loss/point tracking, portraits, player color choices, CE features, and player aliases. Heck, we should rescind our requests for real chat channels, clan support, detailed stat tracking, etc. All of these are superficial aspects that don't actually improve the competitiveness, right? All the millions of owners of SC2 only want ladder game after ladder game to know how good they are and to get better. I mean, how could anybody else EVER have any fun any other way?!
Seriously though, this is a good idea. TL is full of haters of any kind of change. They even seem to think that vetoes ACTUALLY give people an advantage and make a sizable difference in their ladder ranking. Also, I have never heard of a player/spectator confused by CE thors against regular thors.
Overall, there's nothing wrong with adding extra incentive to play. Stuff like being able to choose ladder color and add vetoes could do a lot in getting people more involed in ladder and calming some jitters. Right now, if you lose a game, you don't gain a thing. At least XP might push people to overcome that fear to get another veto or get Vikings that shoot fireworks. After the cap out, maybe they'll overcome that overall fear and be good at the same time. It happens a lot in COD.
My only change would be to the rate based on league and an addition of points through customs. Bronze should get hardly any points compared to the rest. Custom maps should give a capped daily reward for playing one with 4+ randoms.
Would you recommend a negative bonus for lower leagues?
Gold players earn 5% less XP
Silver players earn 10% less XP
Bronze players earn 15% less XP
Something of that sort? I feel it would really make the genuine players in the league feel bad. Perhaps instead the XP required to level would be increased by a fair amount, so the higher leagues that earn bonuses would progress at a normal rate, while the lower leagues that provide small bonuses or no bonuses level significantly slower.
Yes, no?
|
On July 28 2011 13:36 Demonhunter04 wrote:
It's a bit disheartening that the huge majority of players need things like this, that give them the delusion of achieving something significant, to keep them playing. However, maintaining the player base is very important, so this might not be a bad idea. As long as this does not interfere with gameplay, it's all good.
I disagree and agree.
I partially disagree because some people do not find SC2 fun. WC3 ladder was basically deserted(well compared to before the DotA years) in 2005+ when DotA was gaining momentum. (Take note Blizzard actually did somewhat care about hackers back then).
WC3 had levels, icons, etc but DotA didn't (it's just a more relaxing and fun game to play. Sometimes you have to do something relaxing after a rough day or something. Of course ignoring all the BM in DotA like games >.>).
And finally I partially agree because I blame TF2. Hats stealing players away from SC2 obviously. Can you get hats by playing SC2? No? Yep why waste time on SC2 when you can get hats on TF2 (although there is an item cap limit per week which is equal to about 10 hours play time :\).
As for why play SC2? Some people may find it kind of pointless if they do not find it fun. Why grind out to be a better player with a better rank for example when they do not find the game fun in the first place? (Unless they're going pro of course).
People play boring grindfest MMOs because once you're past the grind, there's potentially actual fun things you can do (PvP, PvE) or you can just play casually and grind. With SC2 there's no real incentive once you become the best players (with the exception of money which is a whole nother level of playing).
|
Amazing idea! In terms of modern day video game entertainment sc2 must follow the model of other games to keep it's player base. 100% support,
|
You could also yous this to "earn" new sound effects, or allow you to change your colors, or even change your UI (be interesting to have a Zerg U.I. and Zerg warnings (ie "Need more minerals", "Hive Cluster under attack" "Need more overlords" etc while actually playing Terran.)
And there is also the coolness of changing the background of the standard game client to predefined variants or even loading in your own images
|
I actually read everything you posted because I love this idea so much.
/sign
|
No. God no. Fuck No. Fuck God No.
I would stop playing sc2 the day i had to level up my account for anything.
The rewards for playing a lot are improved skills and the satisfaction that you don't suck as much as you did yesterday.
if you want to be respected for your hobbies you should just work hard at them regardless of the superfluous pixel rewards you do or don't get.
|
On July 28 2011 14:57 Eknoid4 wrote:
No. God no. Fuck No. Fuck God No.
I would stop playing sc2 the day i had to level up my account for anything.
The rewards for playing a lot are improved skills and the satisfaction that you don't suck as much as you did yesterday.
if you want to be respected for your hobbies you should just work hard at them regardless of the superfluous pixel rewards you do or don't get.
No you won't. As it is you are playing games to get achievements and profile pictures already.
|
how about we have everyone be able to customize their background and leave achievements deal with everything else?
|
On July 28 2011 14:49 Chargelot wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2011 14:45 aksfjh wrote:
Wow @ the amount of people who hate features. For TL, apparently, SC2 could be an ASCII graphic RTS without win/loss/point tracking, portraits, player color choices, CE features, and player aliases. Heck, we should rescind our requests for real chat channels, clan support, detailed stat tracking, etc. All of these are superficial aspects that don't actually improve the competitiveness, right? All the millions of owners of SC2 only want ladder game after ladder game to know how good they are and to get better. I mean, how could anybody else EVER have any fun any other way?!
Seriously though, this is a good idea. TL is full of haters of any kind of change. They even seem to think that vetoes ACTUALLY give people an advantage and make a sizable difference in their ladder ranking. Also, I have never heard of a player/spectator confused by CE thors against regular thors.
Overall, there's nothing wrong with adding extra incentive to play. Stuff like being able to choose ladder color and add vetoes could do a lot in getting people more involed in ladder and calming some jitters. Right now, if you lose a game, you don't gain a thing. At least XP might push people to overcome that fear to get another veto or get Vikings that shoot fireworks. After the cap out, maybe they'll overcome that overall fear and be good at the same time. It happens a lot in COD.
My only change would be to the rate based on league and an addition of points through customs. Bronze should get hardly any points compared to the rest. Custom maps should give a capped daily reward for playing one with 4+ randoms. Would you recommend a negative bonus for lower leagues? Gold players earn 5% less XP Silver players earn 10% less XP Bronze players earn 15% less XP Something of that sort? I feel it would really make the genuine players in the league feel bad. Perhaps instead the XP required to level would be increased by a fair amount, so the higher leagues that earn bonuses would progress at a normal rate, while the lower leagues that provide small bonuses or no bonuses level significantly slower. Yes, no?
Simply making bronze players get no bonus for something like division rank and league. Silver gets bonus for division rank but not league, then the other leagues get bonuses for both rank and league. The rewards should be by wins/losses as well, and not in game performance, except maybe winning point categories over your opponent. For example, a gold player ranked top 8 would get +50 for a win, +10 for being gold, +15 for being top 8 (after the game), and then +10 for every category "won" (may need to rework categories to make it fair).
|
On July 28 2011 14:57 Eknoid4 wrote:
No. God no. Fuck No. Fuck God No.
I would stop playing sc2 the day i had to level up my account for anything.
The rewards for playing a lot are improved skills and the satisfaction that you don't suck as much as you did yesterday.
if you want to be respected for your hobbies you should just work hard at them regardless of the superfluous pixel rewards you do or don't get.
You could easily ignore such a feature. Nothing would force you to partake in the options that it makes available. You don't NEED to put a nice icon on your marine's chest plate. But the option would be open to you.
Stop raging, and start thinking.
|
I don't understand, but ok xD
|
|
|
to people saying customized units screw up the game. the CE thor doesnt seem to cause much confusion...
|
On July 28 2011 15:00 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2011 14:49 Chargelot wrote:On July 28 2011 14:45 aksfjh wrote:
Wow @ the amount of people who hate features. For TL, apparently, SC2 could be an ASCII graphic RTS without win/loss/point tracking, portraits, player color choices, CE features, and player aliases. Heck, we should rescind our requests for real chat channels, clan support, detailed stat tracking, etc. All of these are superficial aspects that don't actually improve the competitiveness, right? All the millions of owners of SC2 only want ladder game after ladder game to know how good they are and to get better. I mean, how could anybody else EVER have any fun any other way?!
Seriously though, this is a good idea. TL is full of haters of any kind of change. They even seem to think that vetoes ACTUALLY give people an advantage and make a sizable difference in their ladder ranking. Also, I have never heard of a player/spectator confused by CE thors against regular thors.
Overall, there's nothing wrong with adding extra incentive to play. Stuff like being able to choose ladder color and add vetoes could do a lot in getting people more involed in ladder and calming some jitters. Right now, if you lose a game, you don't gain a thing. At least XP might push people to overcome that fear to get another veto or get Vikings that shoot fireworks. After the cap out, maybe they'll overcome that overall fear and be good at the same time. It happens a lot in COD.
My only change would be to the rate based on league and an addition of points through customs. Bronze should get hardly any points compared to the rest. Custom maps should give a capped daily reward for playing one with 4+ randoms. Would you recommend a negative bonus for lower leagues? Gold players earn 5% less XP Silver players earn 10% less XP Bronze players earn 15% less XP Something of that sort? I feel it would really make the genuine players in the league feel bad. Perhaps instead the XP required to level would be increased by a fair amount, so the higher leagues that earn bonuses would progress at a normal rate, while the lower leagues that provide small bonuses or no bonuses level significantly slower. Yes, no? Simply making bronze players get no bonus for something like division rank and league. Silver gets bonus for division rank but not league, then the other leagues get bonuses for both rank and league. The rewards should be by wins/losses as well, and not in game performance, except maybe winning point categories over your opponent. For example, a gold player ranked top 8 would get +50 for a win, +10 for being gold, +15 for being top 8 (after the game), and then +10 for every category "won" (may need to rework categories to make it fair).
Ah! Very good idea I think. I will try to make a comprehensive XP system like this, and if successful, will replace my current system. <3 thanks, and you'll be credited for it too.
|
i actually could less either way, i play to get better.... But I totally see the player base that would respond to this. So i think its a really good idea dude!.
my idea for like level 48- Get to hear other races music even if you arent playing them!
best idea ever? I know right
|
On July 28 2011 14:59 Emporio wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2011 14:57 Eknoid4 wrote:
No. God no. Fuck No. Fuck God No.
I would stop playing sc2 the day i had to level up my account for anything.
The rewards for playing a lot are improved skills and the satisfaction that you don't suck as much as you did yesterday.
if you want to be respected for your hobbies you should just work hard at them regardless of the superfluous pixel rewards you do or don't get. No you won't. As it is you are playing games to get achievements and profile pictures already.
Please explain to me how that is a leveling up system?
Don't try to be all smart if you aren't going to actually read what I say.
|
I'd also like to point out that doing this sort of thing also helps player retention in the long run. Let's say you get to max level after a month of play. Are you going to just stop because you finally got your Santa broodlord, battlecruiser, and carrier? Hell no! You're going to show those off, but even after that, you've invested so much time getting to level 50 that simply quitting becomes less desirable. You've made the investment to get better rewards and consequently got better doing so, and hopefully built an auto response mechanism that rewards simply playing with the feeling of accomplishment.
|
eh. Starcraft is a competitive game. There is no progression, there are no perks, there are no weekly heroes to test drive, no alternate costumes to unlock. You are given a ball and a net, and an opponent to score against. Have fun. If you'd rather the field be littered with confetti, laughs and 1st place ribbons for everyone, go play T-ball. Here, your time is worth nothing. Only your skill. You are not rewarded for trying. You are rewarded for succeeding. And your reward is an edit to some specific set of bits somewhere in cyberspace. Is that not enough for you?
The reward is the game in itself, imo.
+ Show Spoiler + Strangely this is very similar to my outlook on afterlife/religion. weird.
|
I like the achievement system we have right now... win games, get portraits! I'm pretty sure customizable in game units is something blizzard can think on their own, and is still on the same thought bubble as user portraits. (meaning, the way people feel about portraits now is probably the same way they'd feel about customizable units, some people just dont care.)
|
I would definitely be into customizing my units' appearance with things I've earned through playing, but, as was mentioned, they would have to be clearly distinguishable from research/upgrade-based appearance changes (roaches' spikes from tunneling claws/marines' combat shields). Blizzard has stated that they want to implement more things like these in Heart of the Swarm and Legacy of the Void, so it keeping the two kinds separate would be important. Perhaps it would work if, say, upgrade-based changes are model changes, i.e. 3D, and experience-based changes are textural.
On July 28 2011 13:44 shtdisturbance wrote:
I play to win, not to get something. Reason why I hate COD and I like halo 2-3.
I'm the same way. In my opinion, the best rewards are skill-based. You don't get them if you play poorly. You can only get them if you play well. That's the only way to be proud of the stuff you get. They don't represent all the wasted time you threw at the game, they represent to you and to everybody else that you played well.
A major problem for me is that the league system is not specific enough to give me a good sense of whether I'm improving or not. In Halo 2 and 3, because there were fifty levels, you would get feedback on whether you were improving, staying the same, or getting worse on a pretty regular basis. It was nice. Being able to see your opponents' levels before each game was nice, too. (I know you're told whether or not you're favored, but it's nicer to have something more concrete.) Also, everyone started at level 1, and, slowly, as the levels increased, players were weeded out until only so many remained standing. I like that system, I think because it imbues every player with a sense of forward momentum, like "Let's see how far this can go before this run peters out." It feels better to me than SC2's league system.
I don't think SC2 will ever get rid of the leagues, so instead I propose a sixty level system running through masters, with levels 1-9 in bronze, 10-19 in silver, etc. This comes with a lot of benefits, including knowing how close you are to being promoted, and where you stand in your league. I also propose abolishing divisions. They don't do anything.
Showing people their skill level more precisely would do wonders to improve players' motivation to play, and integrating it into the current league system would be awesome. I think this would be a great way to solve the OP's problem. What do you guys think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
