EPTDestiny on where he thinks SC2 is heading. - Page 25
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
TAMinator
Australia2706 Posts
| ||
|
Sea_Food
Finland1612 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/995DT.png) Source http://goo.gl/lKCOJ | ||
|
tyner
176 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10606 Posts
On October 17 2012 20:04 Ksyper wrote: Didnt they take the ladder system from wc3? Anyways I can see some of the things you said and I hope this post becomes popular enough so that someone from blizzard sees it and brings it up in the next board meeting or whatever. I would hate to see SC2 going down the drain like D3 and WoW did. Nah, they made a new one (which was fine). They should just have improved on WC3 Bnet and put in the new MMS/Ladder.. No one would have bitched about that... Yet they decided to start from scratch... If they would have delivered Bnet2.0 at the release of SC/BW (or WC3) these games would never had the success they had. | ||
|
LimitSEA
Australia9580 Posts
| ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On October 17 2012 18:55 Andr3 wrote: I get what he's trying to say to implement more things so that "casuals" can grind out decals/visual goodies, etc. But BW didn't have any one this, there were UMS maps as Destiny states but how much of the population really played them? A hell of a lot of them? BGH/custom games were massively easier to find than 1v1 ladder games. And the vast majority of casual BW players who moved onto other games undoubtedly played more BGH/multiplayer/UMS/FFA than they did 1v1 ladder games. You had the same effect in WC3 as well, particularly with the huge expansion of the capabilities of the map editor. UMS was core to the casual fanbase for both games. | ||
|
Sea_Food
Finland1612 Posts
On October 17 2012 20:10 Velr wrote: Nah, they made a new one (which was fine). They should just have improved on WC3 Bnet and put in the new MMS/Ladder.. No one would have bitched about that... Yet they decided to start from scratch... If they would have delivered Bnet2.0 at the release of SC/BW (or WC3) these games would never had the success they had. But how would you inform your facebook friends that you won a game on daybreak? | ||
Teoita
Italy12246 Posts
Come to think of it, add a faction to the Dire and Radiant and it might work out nicely for a competitive game. | ||
|
SinCitta
Germany2127 Posts
Personally, I never cared about UMS. I find them a waste of time and often badly made. Often the most dumbest, grindiest UMS are the ones most well received. I find DotA and its clones boring from a game philosophical standpoint and before I play them, I quit playing multiplayer titles altogether. BUT I agree that they are great to keep people in the Battle.net and create a campfire for people to gather up in moderated clan channels, for example. Moreover, I like how centralized the SC2 community is in the web with TL and /r/starcraft but on the other hand, I miss the cozy little, sometimes regional sites of WC3 that have a more personal touch. In the big sites, most people are unimportant nobodys, requiring them to to stir up drama or making threads about worn-out, but popular topics (balance/caster bashing/...). SC2's numbers aren't bad by any means, they just pale in comparison to the numbers of other games.. In WC3, we would have gone crazy if we got such numbers in the west. But that's why I don't actually care if the hype bandwagon is in SC2 town as long there is a passionate followship of the game. I don't need esports to grow super big or SC2 to become the number one esports to gain some weird of inner satisfaction. But problem is, in the first years the "industry of SC2" built upon non-stop growth and some BW people thought "BW Korea is happening with SC2 in the West right now" (which would allow investment in infrastructure and growth) while it was IMHO more evident that SC2's hype would decrease and again only a core audience would stay. RTS just don't have a mass appeal in the West no matter what even if Blizzard made everything right from the get go. Sometimes I think people forget or ignore this fact because they listen to people that must be optimistic because they benefit from it. Also, do tournaments really think they can draw masses long term if they invest in some elite few and fill the rest with some popular players? People won't stick in esports if they don't have personal involvement and there is no personal involvement with no amateur scene. Game-wise, SC2's biggest problem is that player mistakes don't add up each other but they multiply each other. This leads to plays where marginalizing errors is the most important thing to do and the best gameflow is basically a railroad. This is a problem from the lowest levels to the highest levels. In higher levels, you can have some forks in the gameflow, but many of them manifest themselves as coinflips. Also, this leads to terrible, terrible teamgames, the starcraft mode that gets played the most by casual players. My original game origins come from the Age-of series. Every game "opens, broadens" to a phase where creativity, cunning and strategic thinking becomes important, but the majority of SC2 games never opens and broadens and nothing new and exciting happens. Especially in PvZ/ZvP. Some people say, designing a game around esports is wrong. But that they follow the "design for esports" philosophy lacks evidence in reality. No friggin' LAN support! If you think this does matter only for the pros in tournaments, you are wrong. Publishers anti-consumer policies are percepted by non-hardcore gamers and is even a more important point for then, as the hardcore starcrafters will stick no matter what. No former progamers in their design team. It is the most obvious thing to do with a company with that many resources that tries to take over the success. HIRE THE GUYS THAT DID IT. And the current WoL metagame is stuck and is not that exciting either. The community gets a feeling that the support somehow exists but that it is not doing something anymore for WoL. Esports means long-term support and while perpetual balancing by the developer is frowned upon, it is obvious that the metagame is stuck in a bad way. I disagree that the community can do nothing. While Destiny knows the community as his fan- or haterbase that mails sponsors with mean or good things, the community can do so much more. The problem of SC2 is not only that it could not carry over what SC1 had. Its problem is also that it didn't do new, exciting stuff. What was the main driver of exciting, new stuff? The community. I have the feeling that the community behaves way more entitled and tells Blizzard to fix this and fix that when in the past some people of the community just DID stuff (iccup, replay websites, esports websites, maps, WaaaghTV, Garena, DotA and so many things more). In SC2, we have this amazing Liquipedia, but it is not a "frontpage" thing. Because of the old anti-spoiler policies in the SC scene, we don't have a general live ticker (where scores from every relevant tournament is tracked) which is so incredible practical and benefits tournaments that wouldn't have the biggest attention anyways. I mentioned it above already but the community completely failed to establish a mostly-non-profit amateur league. The main problem for this is because we are overflowed with tournaments every weekend and cups with winner-takes-it-all are the most attractive for low-budget hosts. | ||
|
bokeevboke
Singapore1674 Posts
For me, nail into the coffin was when TL started covering Dota 2. That just says "well we still believe in sc2 but we need a backup plan"  | ||
|
Sea_Food
Finland1612 Posts
On October 17 2012 20:13 Teoita wrote: So, it boils down to "let's hope Valve makes an RTS" :D Come to think of it, add a faction to the Dire and Radiant and it might work out nicely for a competitive game. http://ageofempiresonline.com/en/ | ||
|
EvilContrarian
United States26 Posts
My laddering friends never had a compelling game play experience with my non-laddering friends. The non-ladder players, which were greater in number, only wanted to play co-op v comps. We could never get a solid session off because there wasn't a mode that was appealing to all. The lack of a compelling UMS community doomed this type of interaction. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
Narcind
Sweden2489 Posts
On October 17 2012 19:18 Cuce wrote: and I said, primary responsibility of starcraft is not having big numbers, it is being a good rts game Without the big numbers, there's no pro scene. Without a pro scene, there's hardly anyone playing. I completely agree with Destiny on this, and Blizzard has to do something if they want sc2 to still have a scene and people actually playing it in 2 years. Out of everyone I know that bought sc2 (probably like 30-40 people, ranging from bronze all the way up to grandmaster), 2 or 3 still play the game. I don't play the game either, and I don't even remember (aside from watching catz for like 2 hours when hots beta was released) when the last time I watched the game was. | ||
|
Bojas
Netherlands2397 Posts
I don't think we will keep our part of the ESPORTS market with Valve and Riot doing so well. ESL already ditched SC2 for LoL on their main stage. Other tournaments are adopting Dota 2, TL is now covering Dota 2 etc. There are also tons of examples on how to make a game friendly for casuals who can give the game enough numbers to make big tournament organizers break even or even make a profit. I read a while ago that Blizzard is thinking about making SC2 free to play and by god I hope they do so while creating other fancy options for the game to increase ROI for both sponsors and tournaments and Blizzards profit at the same time. Heck, 10 million people play WoW. I played WoW myself and I think a large number of them could be interested in playing sc2 and/or watching it if it was free to play. | ||
|
ionlyknowmymind
14 Posts
Anyways... I really hope Blizz will get better. | ||
|
Inex
Bulgaria443 Posts
I think they should focus on a better player experience, give new players different map pool, with more resources, islands only, etc., new ladder modes, just make it so that new players can have fun messing around with the game. | ||
|
Teoita
Italy12246 Posts
| ||
|
Swift118
United Kingdom335 Posts
Its not like other games that built popularity through a playerbase and then blew up into a real competeive scene, SC2 was kinda forced straight on release to big the e-sports big title, without letting the game grow to that point first. Still its a good game and defo worth trying for a while if your into rts. I am also a bit pissed at sc2 as they seem to have dominated the rts scene, number of rts releases in last 2 years at an all time low since probably as far back as 1994. Hope some other rts games are released in near future. | ||
|
Bojas
Netherlands2397 Posts
On October 17 2012 20:23 Teoita wrote: None is going to spend 60 bucks for a single player Starcraft campaign. If they released HOTS now their sales would be ridicolously low. 50% of the people who buy SC2 only play the campaign. So it would be lower but I think that number alone says something about a different group of players within the SC2 community. I'm going to dig up a source, just a second. Edit:http://penny-arcade.com/report/editorial-article/we-play-alone-together-why-conventional-wisdom-about-single-player-games-is | ||
| ||
