EPTDestiny on where he thinks SC2 is heading. - Page 42
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Vague
170 Posts
| ||
|
chrissummers
243 Posts
| ||
|
AnomalySC2
United States2073 Posts
On October 18 2012 02:35 Vague wrote: One thing that could help SC is if Blizzard doesn't wait 8 years to make SC3. Given how many amazing new games come out each year, SC2 just won't be able to compete with the new stuff pretty soon. Blizzards approach to SC has to be more dynamic. We will need a SC3 in a few years or we will die. Sadly this won't happen unelss blizzard invests a lot on this project (the current team won't be able to pull the trick). I disagree with that. You can't make NBA basketball version 2011 (now with jetpacks!), 2012, etc etc. Once you have an esport, so long as it's good enough, you're done. That's the game. | ||
|
MVega
763 Posts
On October 18 2012 02:35 Vague wrote: One thing that could help SC is if Blizzard doesn't wait 8 years to make SC3. Given how many amazing new games come out each year, SC2 just won't be able to compete with the new stuff pretty soon. Blizzards approach to SC has to be more dynamic. We will need a SC3 in a few years or we will die. Sadly this won't happen unelss blizzard invests a lot on this project (the current team won't be able to pull the trick). What? StarCraft 2 is honestly the only game worth playing in the RTS genre right now. Nobody else makes RTS games that even come close. They can make 50 billion dota clones and fps games every year, but as far as RTS goes StarCraft 2 is it. Now if StarCraft 3 DID get released it would split the community up even more. That would probably kill StarCraft altogether. | ||
|
Valadash
Canada31 Posts
On October 18 2012 01:58 VanGarde wrote: See this is the problem though you can't both have the cake and eat it. Starcraft is a game with a following that wants a mechanically challenging game. Broodwar was successful for that reason. You can't keep the game that way while also pandering too much to the "casual" gamer. You know what you get then? World of warcraft arena. You know there are non balance changes you can do to the game to make it appeal more to casuals like myself included. Like cosmetic stuff and features like the warcraft 3 tournament system. All I want with SC2 is some type thing to look forward to when I play. Look at DOTA 2. When I play a bad game and it was a rough loss sometimes I get an item and that makes me forget I just lost. So even if you lose in DOTA 2 you still feel good about it. In SC2 if you lose you get points/rank taken away from you. Not saying that we should not lose rank/points but we should gain something else. | ||
|
NightOne
Canada215 Posts
Which brings me to my next point. The title: "Destiny on where he thinks..." Zero fucks given. This article should be titled something like "State of the ga... " oh wait.. people already did that.. maybe "Current Status of SC2...." oh wait... Like I said, there's some valid points in this article, but lets not kid ourselves that this hasn't been covered already and is basically just another one-time article that Destiny attempts to write in order to throw the spotlight back onto him. | ||
|
Akta
447 Posts
On October 18 2012 02:17 VanGarde wrote: Starcraft doesn't need to "win" but unlike what you say a lot of people seem to argue that the sc2 esports scene is not doing fine. Like Destiny stated, most event organizers appear to be losing money while probably hoping esports will attract larger audiences "soon", most teams seem to be quite poor and so on. All which could be fine if the general interest was increasing but by the looks of things, it's been decreasing.And yet worker saturation and auto-mining is precisely the first thing that pro's complained about when they got their hands on the hots beta. The problem is psychological. Starcraft 2 is doing fine, there are now more games on the esports market that are also doing fine, this is a good thing, not the death of Starcraft. Starcraft does not even need to be the biggest esports game as long as games can coexist which I am certain that they can. People are afraid, and going with the knee jerk reaction to this and there is a danger in being too eager to just get the game more popular. I am convinced that it is way more important for games to define a niche and a personality than to be so broad that they appeal to all gamers. If dota and lol can coexist while being almost the same game, then surely starcraft can coexist with moba games too. I can't help but draw similarities between this issue and Microsoft / Apple. Apple was a huge innovator in the early days of the Macintosh then the company almost went out of business, after returning to the company Steve Jobs correctly identified that the problem had been a culture at Apple where the people who ran the company ran it under the assumption that for Apple to win Microsoft had to lose, not only that they also spread themselves too thin, having products in every market as a means to compete with Microsoft. They changed their mentality with a focus on defining a more personalized image and instead of going after every market they cut all products but their best and focused only on those and today the company is prosperous again. Starcraft 2's existence in esports is not dependent on other games failing, nor is it necessary or even desirable for sc2 to appeal to all gamers. Starcraft 2 already has build a loyal following of players, instead of chasing after new ones the game should keep polishing on it's own personality to retain it's viewer base. | ||
|
zhurai
United States5660 Posts
| ||
|
VanGarde
Sweden755 Posts
On October 18 2012 02:39 Valadash wrote: You know there are non balance changes you can do to the game to make it appeal more to casuals like myself included. Like cosmetic stuff and features like the warcraft 3 tournament system. All I want with SC2 is some type thing to look forward to when I play. Look at DOTA 2. When I play a bad game and it was a rough loss sometimes I get an item and that makes me forget I just lost. So even if you lose in DOTA 2 you still feel fine. In SC2 if you lose you get points/rank taken away from you. Not saying that we should not lose rank/points but we should gain something else. I don't even know how to being to approach that. It is a competitive game, if the solution is to make everyone feel like a winner even when they lose then I don't know. You don't get anything for losing in LoL either and that game is seemingly doing just as well. You do have something to look forward to in competitive games, winning and improving and that is often represented through points or ranks. You can't get away from that in any game, if you want a game where you have something to strive for but can't lose then none of the games we are discussing is for you, in that case I suggest World of Warcraft. | ||
|
AbideWithMe
207 Posts
On October 18 2012 02:16 RMonkeyF wrote: Waits for Hots beta for noticeable "bump" in viewers. "bump" goes away after 1 week. Makes thread on TL to attract attention to self. Noticeable bump in viewers. Eventually comes to the understanding he is a loser. I don't know where starcraft 2 is heading. But i can see where incompetent morons who only look for streaming revenue are heading. That's a bold statement but not completely uncalled for. To be honest I was actually expecting far more responses in this direction with an op with such a questionable past. Destiny was one of the first criticising SC2 for not having enough money in it if I'm not mistaken and he also was pretty fast when it came to switching games up and using his fame in the SC2 community for streaming completely different games (LoL being one). | ||
|
Danule
Canada20 Posts
On October 18 2012 02:17 VanGarde wrote: And yet worker saturation and auto-mining is precisely the first thing that pro's complained about when they got their hands on the hots beta. The problem is psychological. Starcraft 2 is doing fine, there are now more games on the esports market that are also doing fine, this is a good thing, not the death of Starcraft. Starcraft does not even need to be the biggest esports game as long as games can coexist which I am certain that they can. People are afraid, and going with the knee jerk reaction to this and there is a danger in being too eager to just get the game more popular. I am convinced that it is way more important for games to define a niche and a personality than to be so broad that they appeal to all gamers. If dota and lol can coexist while being almost the same game, then surely starcraft can coexist with moba games too. I can't help but draw similarities between this issue and Microsoft / Apple. Apple was a huge innovator in the early days of the Macintosh then the company almost went out of business, after returning to the company Steve Jobs correctly identified that the problem had been a culture at Apple where the people who ran the company ran it under the assumption that for Apple to win Microsoft had to lose, not only that they also spread themselves too thin, having products in every market as a means to compete with Microsoft. They changed their mentality with a focus on defining a more personalized image and instead of going after every market they cut all products but their best and focused only on those and today the company is prosperous again. Starcraft 2's existence in esports is not dependent on other games failing, nor is it necessary or even desirable for sc2 to appeal to all gamers. Starcraft 2 already has build a loyal following of players, instead of chasing after new ones the game should keep polishing on it's own personality to retain it's viewer base. I agree with this 100% | ||
|
VanGarde
Sweden755 Posts
On October 18 2012 02:42 Akta wrote: Starcraft doesn't need to "win" but unlike what you say a lot of people seem to argue that the sc2 esports scene is not doing fine. Like Destiny stated, most event organizers appear to be losing money while probably hoping esports will attract larger audiences "soon", most teams seem to be quite poor and so on. All which could be fine if the general interest was increasing but by the looks of things, it's been decreasing. Perhaps that is so, but if that is the case it is either because A) Sc2 grew too much and is now shrinking back to the actual capacity of the esports scene or B) there is no actual capacity for an esports scene in the long term. Neither of these are any different for LoL or dota or sc2. If that is the case then the sad reality is that there is not enough of an esports market to uphold any game to the point we want it to be and both LoL and dota will suffer the exact same thing. I have a hard time believing that teams for those games have any better chance of turning a profit than sc2 teams have. | ||
|
Vandal
United States138 Posts
On October 18 2012 02:35 Vague wrote: One thing that could help SC is if Blizzard doesn't wait 8 years to make SC3. Given how many amazing new games come out each year, SC2 just won't be able to compete with the new stuff pretty soon. Blizzards approach to SC has to be more dynamic. We will need a SC3 in a few years or we will die. Sadly this won't happen unelss blizzard invests a lot on this project (the current team won't be able to pull the trick). Starcraft games in the future should follow the free-to-play model. The success of LoL as an esport is in part due to the huge playerbase watching the tournaments. Even if Blizzard makes SC2 extremely casual to get more players interested you can't beat the ease-of-entry of other games if they're free. | ||
|
Riquiz
Netherlands402 Posts
| ||
|
PesteNoire
151 Posts
I enjoy the team aspect of games but now in masters in 3v3, what fun is it to queue only to lose to 10 pool/hellion/cannon rushing arranged teams? The game is a disaster. | ||
|
p1cKLes
United States342 Posts
| ||
|
LOLItsRyann
England551 Posts
On October 18 2012 02:43 zhurai wrote: does destiny even play sc2 still? O_o Yes, he's currently tryharding in MoW, streams everyday... | ||
|
Vandeam
Norway28 Posts
| ||
|
Kenpark
Germany2350 Posts
On October 18 2012 02:14 SolidMustard wrote: Hmm you don't make a lot of sense. In LoL you play with people who have the same lvl as you, so they have runes if you do, they dont if you dont Not when you play with friends like I said. I think most people get to new games by their friends at least thats how I started. If I play with my level 30 friend I obv get laned with other high level players, who have way more runes/talents than I have with level 20. Also runes are role specific. If I start with playing ad carry and want to play ap mid for a change, I kinda have the same problem described above. So before I am level 30 and have the optimal runeset for all 5 roles I start with a disadvantage. The same is also true the other way around. I saved all my points for level 20 to buy the best ad carry runes you can have and now I start with a pretty big advantage laning against everybody, who didnt do the same. I think that is a pretty big flaw in the game. The game should be around skill and not who has the best runes or even paid for them. I mean who many games do I need for like 4-5 heros for every role, with all the best runes for each role ? I dont know but probably at least 300-400 games. | ||
|
XXXSmOke
United States1333 Posts
IMO no competition=Blizz can do whateve the fuck they want and people will play it cuz its the only decent option. At this rate I have so much more faith in those companys than Blizzard, which is really sad because I have been die hard blizzard since the beginning. | ||
| ||
