|
On September 26 2013 00:36 nottapro wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 14:39 Big J wrote:On September 25 2013 03:27 nottapro wrote:
My experience with trying to introduce people to SC2.
First reaction: It looks boring.
Then months later, after constant harassing, you maybe if your lucky convince them to try it.
Playing reaction: I have no idea what I am doing, this is way to complicated, I suck at this game, nothing is happening. I can't control my units.
If your extremely lucky, they will have this horrible experience for the next 2 months and not quit, always hating the game, clueless why you keep telling it is entertaining but working their asses off to maybe one day have fun
They finally get a handle on the basics: This is fun! Lets play SC2!
This lasts for about 6-7 months until
Final reaction: I got into a higher league, its way too hard now, I have to be in lower league to have fun so I am constantly losing games. I think Ill just quit instead.
And its over. Yeah, exactly. I could name roughly 10 friends that played or were interested in SC2 but don't play it these days. The two most common reasons: -) "It's too hard to play at any reasonable level. I don't want to take part in this spam-click-fest." -) "It's too time consuming to get anywhere." Not once did I hear the comment: "Guys, my problem is that the game is badly designed for reason XYZ." Yes, totally in agreement. Blizzard can make the game as balanced as they like. I don't disagree with anyone who wants to see a more dynamic and better designed esports title. These ideas are not mutually exclusive. Its a totally separate argument. In my opinion, its important to stress that casual players need to have an option to reduce the stress and difficulty of the game mechanics, handicaps are a proven way to allow that. Imagine, you could invite your friend over who has never played SC2, allow him to play against you with handicaps while you play on normal settings. Within 2-3 games he can start to come up with strategies, have a chance at beating you, learn the basic meta without getting bogged down in a stress inducing 2 month learning curve. This is how you grow interest in the game, by allowing easy access to it. Maybe he will one day learn the real mechanics, maybe he won't, it doesn't matter, you can now play with your friend and he will invite his friends to play with him. It has no effect on the pro's. The alternative, we keep doing what we are doing, no handicaps, no casual mode. We already know the results, player base grows extremely slowly if at all, as new players will continue to fail to pass the games initial overbearing learning curve, and you will never retain casual interest, as people with stress in their lives will simply ditch SC2 for a more friendly fun game. Making the game casual friendly, doesn't have to sacrifice any of the games difficulty, it just needs to provide options for people who don't have the ability or interest to be hardcore.
Doesn't the game already have handicaps for custom games? There is a handicap option that lets you lower the health of all your units and buildings by a percentage to even things out against a weaker player.
And there are already a lot of Arcade maps that attempt to cater to the casual audience. Granted, they're not necessarily all officially-supported, and the Arcade interface still doesn't quite lure a player-base like the old Battle.net interfaces of BW and WC3, but there are still a lot of casual options in there, not to mention team game ladders and FFA.
|
On September 26 2013 00:36 nottapro wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 14:39 Big J wrote:On September 25 2013 03:27 nottapro wrote:
My experience with trying to introduce people to SC2.
First reaction: It looks boring.
Then months later, after constant harassing, you maybe if your lucky convince them to try it.
Playing reaction: I have no idea what I am doing, this is way to complicated, I suck at this game, nothing is happening. I can't control my units.
If your extremely lucky, they will have this horrible experience for the next 2 months and not quit, always hating the game, clueless why you keep telling it is entertaining but working their asses off to maybe one day have fun
They finally get a handle on the basics: This is fun! Lets play SC2!
This lasts for about 6-7 months until
Final reaction: I got into a higher league, its way too hard now, I have to be in lower league to have fun so I am constantly losing games. I think Ill just quit instead.
And its over. Yeah, exactly. I could name roughly 10 friends that played or were interested in SC2 but don't play it these days. The two most common reasons: -) "It's too hard to play at any reasonable level. I don't want to take part in this spam-click-fest." -) "It's too time consuming to get anywhere." Not once did I hear the comment: "Guys, my problem is that the game is badly designed for reason XYZ." Yes, totally in agreement. Blizzard can make the game as balanced as they like. I don't disagree with anyone who wants to see a more dynamic and better designed esports title. These ideas are not mutually exclusive. Its a totally separate argument. In my opinion, its important to stress that casual players need to have an option to reduce the stress and difficulty of the game mechanics, handicaps are a proven way to allow that. Imagine, you could invite your friend over who has never played SC2, allow him to play against you with handicaps while you play on normal settings. Within 2-3 games he can start to come up with strategies, have a chance at beating you, learn the basic meta without getting bogged down in a stress inducing 2 month learning curve. This is how you grow interest in the game, by allowing easy access to it. Maybe he will one day learn the real mechanics, maybe he won't, it doesn't matter, you can now play with your friend and he will invite his friends to play with him. It has no effect on the pro's. The alternative, we keep doing what we are doing, no handicaps, no casual mode. We already know the results, player base grows extremely slowly if at all, as new players will continue to fail to pass the games initial overbearing learning curve, and you will never retain casual interest, as people with stress in their lives will simply ditch SC2 for a more friendly fun game. Making the game casual friendly, doesn't have to sacrifice any of the games difficulty, it just needs to provide options for people who don't have the ability or interest to be hardcore.
Wow, I actually love the idea of an "automatic handicap fun mode" with complex rules. Sounds like something that would need a ton of work and testing, but wow that could be fun. Like, when you play unranked, there is no "ladder". You can play against anybody and you get a handicap/assistance depending on your MMR.
Like, bronze scrub could meet Grubby there on equal terms and his stuff would just have a ton of buffs and grubby's stuff would be crazily underpowered.
Imagine: Grubby's forcefields only lasting 5seconds and his units being severly weaker in damage output and hitpoints. His probes only would return 3.5minerals per trip.
Meanwhile our bronze league scrub is playing some stupid one base defensive spine crawler build, feeling like the king because his 50 supply at 10mins are a huge threat to 3base Grubby, who has to severly outexpand and outmicro our little friend. 
I guess that is too hard to balance (and very abuseable), but hell I imagine this being fun when you meet a way inferior player and have to come up with a thousand and one ways to break him, meanwhile whatever he comes up with is a very threatening strategy.
|
On September 25 2013 16:28 DinoToss wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 03:39 Thieving Magpie wrote:On September 25 2013 03:27 nottapro wrote:
My experience with trying to introduce people to SC2.
First reaction: It looks boring.
Then months later, after constant harassing, you maybe if your lucky convince them to try it.
Playing reaction: I have no idea what I am doing, this is way to complicated, I suck at this game, nothing is happening. I can't control my units.
If your extremely lucky, they will have this horrible experience for the next 2 months and not quit, always hating the game, clueless why you keep telling it is entertaining but working their asses off to maybe one day have fun
They finally get a handle on the basics: This is fun! Lets play SC2!
This lasts for about 6-7 months until
Final reaction: I got into a higher league, its way too hard now, I have to be in lower league to have fun so I am constantly losing games. I think Ill just quit instead.
And its over. But! Uh... Well... Uh... Damn.... Accurate beyond reason  I'm just imagining what it would be like trying to get them to play Broodwar.... Have you ever played BGH, ffa etc? It was quite fun and trollish environment. Much more light hearted than matchmaking ladder with big egos starting from bronze.
The best were 7v1 comp BGH games but you don't don't check the allied victory box 
Don't even backstab, just wait and watch. Better than reality TV.
|
On September 26 2013 01:29 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 16:28 DinoToss wrote:On September 25 2013 03:39 Thieving Magpie wrote:On September 25 2013 03:27 nottapro wrote:
My experience with trying to introduce people to SC2.
First reaction: It looks boring.
Then months later, after constant harassing, you maybe if your lucky convince them to try it.
Playing reaction: I have no idea what I am doing, this is way to complicated, I suck at this game, nothing is happening. I can't control my units.
If your extremely lucky, they will have this horrible experience for the next 2 months and not quit, always hating the game, clueless why you keep telling it is entertaining but working their asses off to maybe one day have fun
They finally get a handle on the basics: This is fun! Lets play SC2!
This lasts for about 6-7 months until
Final reaction: I got into a higher league, its way too hard now, I have to be in lower league to have fun so I am constantly losing games. I think Ill just quit instead.
And its over. But! Uh... Well... Uh... Damn.... Accurate beyond reason I'm just imagining what it would be like trying to get them to play Broodwar.... Have you ever played BGH, ffa etc? It was quite fun and trollish environment. Much more light hearted than matchmaking ladder with big egos starting from bronze. The best were 7v1 comp BGH games but you don't don't check the allied victory box Don't even backstab, just wait and watch. Better than reality TV.
Well, just show me the money so that my operation cwal can break the black sheep wall. In case of emergency, it's a good day to die anyways? (or was that last one wc2?).
|
On September 26 2013 01:34 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2013 01:29 Thieving Magpie wrote:On September 25 2013 16:28 DinoToss wrote:On September 25 2013 03:39 Thieving Magpie wrote:On September 25 2013 03:27 nottapro wrote:
My experience with trying to introduce people to SC2.
First reaction: It looks boring.
Then months later, after constant harassing, you maybe if your lucky convince them to try it.
Playing reaction: I have no idea what I am doing, this is way to complicated, I suck at this game, nothing is happening. I can't control my units.
If your extremely lucky, they will have this horrible experience for the next 2 months and not quit, always hating the game, clueless why you keep telling it is entertaining but working their asses off to maybe one day have fun
They finally get a handle on the basics: This is fun! Lets play SC2!
This lasts for about 6-7 months until
Final reaction: I got into a higher league, its way too hard now, I have to be in lower league to have fun so I am constantly losing games. I think Ill just quit instead.
And its over. But! Uh... Well... Uh... Damn.... Accurate beyond reason I'm just imagining what it would be like trying to get them to play Broodwar.... Have you ever played BGH, ffa etc? It was quite fun and trollish environment. Much more light hearted than matchmaking ladder with big egos starting from bronze. The best were 7v1 comp BGH games but you don't don't check the allied victory box Don't even backstab, just wait and watch. Better than reality TV. Well, just show me the money so that my operation cwal can break the black sheep wall. In case of emergency, it's a good day to die anyways? (or was that last one wc2?).
lol I don't recall the last two being part of BW but anything is possible
Anyone miss lurker defense? I loved using the orange vultures by creating a slanted wall with 6 of the vultures to funnel enemy units into a line, and then having the other 2 vultures be moved commanded to disrupt unit movement to get an extra 2-3 hits off of the stacked lurkers
And golems! Oh, those golem maps were much better without select all units features, because even if you were behind your opponent couldn't just squish your army with their double supply advantage.
Oh, high school days
|
On September 26 2013 00:48 Nerevar wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2013 00:36 nottapro wrote:On September 25 2013 14:39 Big J wrote:On September 25 2013 03:27 nottapro wrote:
My experience with trying to introduce people to SC2.
First reaction: It looks boring.
Then months later, after constant harassing, you maybe if your lucky convince them to try it.
Playing reaction: I have no idea what I am doing, this is way to complicated, I suck at this game, nothing is happening. I can't control my units.
If your extremely lucky, they will have this horrible experience for the next 2 months and not quit, always hating the game, clueless why you keep telling it is entertaining but working their asses off to maybe one day have fun
They finally get a handle on the basics: This is fun! Lets play SC2!
This lasts for about 6-7 months until
Final reaction: I got into a higher league, its way too hard now, I have to be in lower league to have fun so I am constantly losing games. I think Ill just quit instead.
And its over. Yeah, exactly. I could name roughly 10 friends that played or were interested in SC2 but don't play it these days. The two most common reasons: -) "It's too hard to play at any reasonable level. I don't want to take part in this spam-click-fest." -) "It's too time consuming to get anywhere." Not once did I hear the comment: "Guys, my problem is that the game is badly designed for reason XYZ." Yes, totally in agreement. Blizzard can make the game as balanced as they like. I don't disagree with anyone who wants to see a more dynamic and better designed esports title. These ideas are not mutually exclusive. Its a totally separate argument. In my opinion, its important to stress that casual players need to have an option to reduce the stress and difficulty of the game mechanics, handicaps are a proven way to allow that. Imagine, you could invite your friend over who has never played SC2, allow him to play against you with handicaps while you play on normal settings. Within 2-3 games he can start to come up with strategies, have a chance at beating you, learn the basic meta without getting bogged down in a stress inducing 2 month learning curve. This is how you grow interest in the game, by allowing easy access to it. Maybe he will one day learn the real mechanics, maybe he won't, it doesn't matter, you can now play with your friend and he will invite his friends to play with him. It has no effect on the pro's. The alternative, we keep doing what we are doing, no handicaps, no casual mode. We already know the results, player base grows extremely slowly if at all, as new players will continue to fail to pass the games initial overbearing learning curve, and you will never retain casual interest, as people with stress in their lives will simply ditch SC2 for a more friendly fun game. Making the game casual friendly, doesn't have to sacrifice any of the games difficulty, it just needs to provide options for people who don't have the ability or interest to be hardcore. Doesn't the game already have handicaps for custom games? There is a handicap option that lets you lower the health of all your units and buildings by a percentage to even things out against a weaker player. And there are already a lot of Arcade maps that attempt to cater to the casual audience. Granted, they're not necessarily all officially-supported, and the Arcade interface still doesn't quite lure a player-base like the old Battle.net interfaces of BW and WC3, but there are still a lot of casual options in there, not to mention team game ladders and FFA.
It's not a very useful handicap for newbies, they will have already had to have learnt build orders, unit counters, supply depots, worker building, etc in order for it to make any difference. Most newbies make 1 or 2 marines and stare at 12 lost svcs idly sitting around in their base, find out they are supply blocked, massively behind economically, unable to attack at macro at the same time and just quit from frustration.
They get overwhelmed by the mechanics, macroing and learning which unit counters which. They need things which simplify the mechanic demands and macroing. So they can focus on one thing at a time. Like: automated supply depots being built, clicking on a building selects all buildings of that type (they dont use hotkeys), Idle workers returning to mineral mining automatically, automated workers being built, larger spheres of vision, popups identifying what units will counter the enemy unit they are being attacked by (they don't know why they lost 50 zerglings to one hellbat, they just know they are frustrated), build orders explained while playing so they dont have to write them down (why do they need to write a to do list on a piece of paper off a random website, when its such a core game mechanic, the game should provide them with basic build orders)
|
On September 26 2013 01:45 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2013 01:34 Big J wrote:On September 26 2013 01:29 Thieving Magpie wrote:On September 25 2013 16:28 DinoToss wrote:On September 25 2013 03:39 Thieving Magpie wrote:On September 25 2013 03:27 nottapro wrote:
My experience with trying to introduce people to SC2.
First reaction: It looks boring.
Then months later, after constant harassing, you maybe if your lucky convince them to try it.
Playing reaction: I have no idea what I am doing, this is way to complicated, I suck at this game, nothing is happening. I can't control my units.
If your extremely lucky, they will have this horrible experience for the next 2 months and not quit, always hating the game, clueless why you keep telling it is entertaining but working their asses off to maybe one day have fun
They finally get a handle on the basics: This is fun! Lets play SC2!
This lasts for about 6-7 months until
Final reaction: I got into a higher league, its way too hard now, I have to be in lower league to have fun so I am constantly losing games. I think Ill just quit instead.
And its over. But! Uh... Well... Uh... Damn.... Accurate beyond reason I'm just imagining what it would be like trying to get them to play Broodwar.... Have you ever played BGH, ffa etc? It was quite fun and trollish environment. Much more light hearted than matchmaking ladder with big egos starting from bronze. The best were 7v1 comp BGH games but you don't don't check the allied victory box Don't even backstab, just wait and watch. Better than reality TV. Well, just show me the money so that my operation cwal can break the black sheep wall. In case of emergency, it's a good day to die anyways? (or was that last one wc2?). lol I don't recall the last two being part of BW but anything is possible Anyone miss lurker defense? I loved using the orange vultures by creating a slanted wall with 6 of the vultures to funnel enemy units into a line, and then having the other 2 vultures be moved commanded to disrupt unit movement to get an extra 2-3 hits off of the stacked lurkers And golems! Oh, those golem maps were much better without select all units features, because even if you were behind your opponent couldn't just squish your army with their double supply advantage. Oh, high school days
Oh sorry, "In case of emergency" was not meant as a cheat.
And "it's a good day to die" is the WC2 equivalent of "power overwhelming". Sad that there is no cow level. Would have been quite the gathering there. Food for though for blizzard to never release a game again that does not have something for nothing.
|
On September 25 2013 16:23 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 15:44 Rabiator wrote:On September 25 2013 14:39 Big J wrote:On September 25 2013 03:27 nottapro wrote:
My experience with trying to introduce people to SC2.
First reaction: It looks boring.
Then months later, after constant harassing, you maybe if your lucky convince them to try it.
Playing reaction: I have no idea what I am doing, this is way to complicated, I suck at this game, nothing is happening. I can't control my units.
If your extremely lucky, they will have this horrible experience for the next 2 months and not quit, always hating the game, clueless why you keep telling it is entertaining but working their asses off to maybe one day have fun
They finally get a handle on the basics: This is fun! Lets play SC2!
This lasts for about 6-7 months until
Final reaction: I got into a higher league, its way too hard now, I have to be in lower league to have fun so I am constantly losing games. I think Ill just quit instead.
And its over. Yeah, exactly. I could name roughly 10 friends that played or were interested in SC2 but don't play it these days. The two most common reasons: -) "It's too hard to play at any reasonable level. I don't want to take part in this spam-click-fest." -) "It's too time consuming to get anywhere." Not once did I hear the comment: "Guys, my problem is that the game is badly designed for reason XYZ." You kinda dont make sense, because "bad design" leads to "its too complicated and time consuming". Design isnt "unit design" only ... and the problems of SC2 are the core design of "massive armies" in "automatically tight clumps" with "far too much economy and too easy control of units". All of them design flaws which lead to the reactions of your friends. Thing is: I only kinda dont make sense. Which means I actually make a lot of sense for a person that is not a notorious phrasemonger and gamebasher.
Rofl ... I explained why you dont make sense and still you bash me?
|
Yeah I think cheese (like 6 pool) is the biggest deterrent to new players. It's super easy to pull off, and super hard for a new player to defend against. I mean, you just picked up the game, and now you HAVE to scout precisely, wall (a lot of new players don't even know the precise cells to put structures in to wall), build marines fast, pull scv to repair wall, etc. or else you just DIE IN 5 MINUTES.
And there are so many cheeses - DTs, voidray rush, 4 gate, marine scv all-in, etc etc. It's so much nonsense for a new player to deal with.
|
On September 25 2013 16:31 lichter wrote:
We oncehad a 4 team 4v4 BGH tournament in my class in highschool, it was awesome
You could have had an 8-team 2v2v2v2 BGH tournament! :D
|
On September 26 2013 03:42 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 16:23 Big J wrote:On September 25 2013 15:44 Rabiator wrote:On September 25 2013 14:39 Big J wrote:On September 25 2013 03:27 nottapro wrote:
My experience with trying to introduce people to SC2.
First reaction: It looks boring.
Then months later, after constant harassing, you maybe if your lucky convince them to try it.
Playing reaction: I have no idea what I am doing, this is way to complicated, I suck at this game, nothing is happening. I can't control my units.
If your extremely lucky, they will have this horrible experience for the next 2 months and not quit, always hating the game, clueless why you keep telling it is entertaining but working their asses off to maybe one day have fun
They finally get a handle on the basics: This is fun! Lets play SC2!
This lasts for about 6-7 months until
Final reaction: I got into a higher league, its way too hard now, I have to be in lower league to have fun so I am constantly losing games. I think Ill just quit instead.
And its over. Yeah, exactly. I could name roughly 10 friends that played or were interested in SC2 but don't play it these days. The two most common reasons: -) "It's too hard to play at any reasonable level. I don't want to take part in this spam-click-fest." -) "It's too time consuming to get anywhere." Not once did I hear the comment: "Guys, my problem is that the game is badly designed for reason XYZ." You kinda dont make sense, because "bad design" leads to "its too complicated and time consuming". Design isnt "unit design" only ... and the problems of SC2 are the core design of "massive armies" in "automatically tight clumps" with "far too much economy and too easy control of units". All of them design flaws which lead to the reactions of your friends. Thing is: I only kinda dont make sense. Which means I actually make a lot of sense for a person that is not a notorious phrasemonger and gamebasher. Rofl ... I explained why you dont make sense and still you bash me?
I didn't relate anything I said to you, but interesting that you're feeling adressed.
About your "explanation" (which is just the same phrases you come down to no matter what's the topic): I'm not going to answer on them anymore. I did a few times as you kept on insisting that people can't "disprove" you and therefore don't even try... Well, the result was that despite you insiting on me (and others) answering you, you just didn't pick up the discussions afterwards. So why waste my time on arguing with you?
e.g. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=255254¤tpage=748#14944
|
On September 26 2013 04:48 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2013 03:42 Rabiator wrote:On September 25 2013 16:23 Big J wrote:On September 25 2013 15:44 Rabiator wrote:On September 25 2013 14:39 Big J wrote:On September 25 2013 03:27 nottapro wrote:
My experience with trying to introduce people to SC2.
First reaction: It looks boring.
Then months later, after constant harassing, you maybe if your lucky convince them to try it.
Playing reaction: I have no idea what I am doing, this is way to complicated, I suck at this game, nothing is happening. I can't control my units.
If your extremely lucky, they will have this horrible experience for the next 2 months and not quit, always hating the game, clueless why you keep telling it is entertaining but working their asses off to maybe one day have fun
They finally get a handle on the basics: This is fun! Lets play SC2!
This lasts for about 6-7 months until
Final reaction: I got into a higher league, its way too hard now, I have to be in lower league to have fun so I am constantly losing games. I think Ill just quit instead.
And its over. Yeah, exactly. I could name roughly 10 friends that played or were interested in SC2 but don't play it these days. The two most common reasons: -) "It's too hard to play at any reasonable level. I don't want to take part in this spam-click-fest." -) "It's too time consuming to get anywhere." Not once did I hear the comment: "Guys, my problem is that the game is badly designed for reason XYZ." You kinda dont make sense, because "bad design" leads to "its too complicated and time consuming". Design isnt "unit design" only ... and the problems of SC2 are the core design of "massive armies" in "automatically tight clumps" with "far too much economy and too easy control of units". All of them design flaws which lead to the reactions of your friends. Thing is: I only kinda dont make sense. Which means I actually make a lot of sense for a person that is not a notorious phrasemonger and gamebasher. Rofl ... I explained why you dont make sense and still you bash me? I didn't relate anything I said to you, but interesting that you're feeling adressed. About your "explanation" (which is just the same phrases you come down to no matter what's the topic): I'm not going to answer on them anymore. I did a few times as you kept on insisting that people can't "disprove" you and therefore don't even try... Well, the result was that despite you insiting on me (and others) answering you, you just didn't pick up the discussions afterwards. So why waste my time on arguing with you? e.g. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=255254¤tpage=748#14944
Stop this hatefest before it derails the thread.
@Rabiator, Big J's friends complained that SC2 is too hard. That is not a design complaint that is a "This game is too hard" complaint. No matter what the design of a game, if its too hard for someone then they won't play it. Not everyone hates SC2, many people love playing SC2, you not liking SC2 =/= Everyone hates SC2. To each their own.
|
On September 26 2013 01:07 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2013 00:36 nottapro wrote:On September 25 2013 14:39 Big J wrote:On September 25 2013 03:27 nottapro wrote:
My experience with trying to introduce people to SC2.
First reaction: It looks boring.
Then months later, after constant harassing, you maybe if your lucky convince them to try it.
Playing reaction: I have no idea what I am doing, this is way to complicated, I suck at this game, nothing is happening. I can't control my units.
If your extremely lucky, they will have this horrible experience for the next 2 months and not quit, always hating the game, clueless why you keep telling it is entertaining but working their asses off to maybe one day have fun
They finally get a handle on the basics: This is fun! Lets play SC2!
This lasts for about 6-7 months until
Final reaction: I got into a higher league, its way too hard now, I have to be in lower league to have fun so I am constantly losing games. I think Ill just quit instead.
And its over. Yeah, exactly. I could name roughly 10 friends that played or were interested in SC2 but don't play it these days. The two most common reasons: -) "It's too hard to play at any reasonable level. I don't want to take part in this spam-click-fest." -) "It's too time consuming to get anywhere." Not once did I hear the comment: "Guys, my problem is that the game is badly designed for reason XYZ." Yes, totally in agreement. Blizzard can make the game as balanced as they like. I don't disagree with anyone who wants to see a more dynamic and better designed esports title. These ideas are not mutually exclusive. Its a totally separate argument. In my opinion, its important to stress that casual players need to have an option to reduce the stress and difficulty of the game mechanics, handicaps are a proven way to allow that. Imagine, you could invite your friend over who has never played SC2, allow him to play against you with handicaps while you play on normal settings. Within 2-3 games he can start to come up with strategies, have a chance at beating you, learn the basic meta without getting bogged down in a stress inducing 2 month learning curve. This is how you grow interest in the game, by allowing easy access to it. Maybe he will one day learn the real mechanics, maybe he won't, it doesn't matter, you can now play with your friend and he will invite his friends to play with him. It has no effect on the pro's. The alternative, we keep doing what we are doing, no handicaps, no casual mode. We already know the results, player base grows extremely slowly if at all, as new players will continue to fail to pass the games initial overbearing learning curve, and you will never retain casual interest, as people with stress in their lives will simply ditch SC2 for a more friendly fun game. Making the game casual friendly, doesn't have to sacrifice any of the games difficulty, it just needs to provide options for people who don't have the ability or interest to be hardcore. Wow, I actually love the idea of an "automatic handicap fun mode" with complex rules. Sounds like something that would need a ton of work and testing, but wow that could be fun. Like, when you play unranked, there is no "ladder". You can play against anybody and you get a handicap/assistance depending on your MMR. Like, bronze scrub could meet Grubby there on equal terms and his stuff would just have a ton of buffs and grubby's stuff would be crazily underpowered. Imagine: Grubby's forcefields only lasting 5seconds and his units being severly weaker in damage output and hitpoints. His probes only would return 3.5minerals per trip. Meanwhile our bronze league scrub is playing some stupid one base defensive spine crawler build, feeling like the king because his 50 supply at 10mins are a huge threat to 3base Grubby, who has to severly outexpand and outmicro our little friend. I guess that is too hard to balance (and very abuseable), but hell I imagine this being fun when you meet a way inferior player and have to come up with a thousand and one ways to break him, meanwhile whatever he comes up with is a very threatening strategy.
I used to do this with my friend. Impossible to stop 6pools . Even if you wall as Terran, your buildings have such low hitpoints the Zerglings will cut right through them... haha it was ridiculous! He can A-move 6 lings and destroy like 16 workers :S.
|
I want to address the point that "SC2's design doesn't lend itself to introducing casual players to eSports". Instead of taking the Riot approach you mentioned, Blizzard just made the game easier and more approachable to casuals. While this 'helps' it creates the problem that "SC2's gameplay is inherently less fun to watch than Brood War, aside from the graphics. Matches feel stale and anticlimactic." Broodwar was really difficult but it was really popular. Why? It was free to play, it's as simple as that. It was really impressive to watch so people felt compelled to try it. SC2 doesn't look AS challenging or impressive, but it still looks that way, but nobody will pay 50$+ just to cause they saw a sick swarm host attack and it looked totally awesome. You just can't lure people into the game using Blizzard's model, and the less people play a game, the less hype there is, and so on.
It's sad to see blizzard so stubborn, learning nothing from anyone. Many businesses are doing great in eSports and blizzard fails to implement simple things like jumping into game to spectate, and take years to implement great community ideas. How long did we wait for group replays? Clan support? ..Still no Lan for tournaments either. They could of done WCS from the start instead of having people build businesses around SC2 just to eventually decide they wanted to control everything. They fail to take the blame too, and instead just keep being stubborn, implementing changes that nobody want while neglecting ideas that are continuously pushed by the community.
It's weak.
|
I agree with all of these points. Very well written post by Xeris we have here. I hope its get the attention by blizzard it deserves. Has it been submitted on reddit for visibility?
|
On September 26 2013 06:13 Advocado wrote:
I agree with all of these points. Very well written post by Xeris we have here. I hope its get the attention by blizzard it deserves. Has it been submitted on reddit for visibility?
Blizzard community managers read TL as well as Reddit.
And I don't think Reddit need help to be negative about the game anyway.
|
|
|
MOBA works because its f2p and team based play. Success is determined by accessibility, variability, and sustainability. Accessible because its f2p and its the new hip thing while you can't pirate SC2 (actually a big deal). Variable because of all the permutations of characters and team play, SC2 has it harder because everything must be perfectly balanced in a 1v1. And sustainable because you can have a frustrating or awesome game, and you can jump right into the next game with your friends, while SC2 requires you to keep on pushing through. The social system that drives continuous play is lost in SC2, not necessarily in BW, but perhaps that's just childhood nostalgia.
|
On September 26 2013 05:46 Steel wrote:
I want to address the point that "SC2's design doesn't lend itself to introducing casual players to eSports". Instead of taking the Riot approach you mentioned, Blizzard just made the game easier and more approachable to casuals. While this 'helps' it creates the problem that "SC2's gameplay is inherently less fun to watch than Brood War, aside from the graphics. Matches feel stale and anticlimactic." Broodwar was really difficult but it was really popular. Why? It was free to play, it's as simple as that. It was really impressive to watch so people felt compelled to try it. SC2 doesn't look AS challenging or impressive, but it still looks that way, but nobody will pay 50$+ just to cause they saw a sick swarm host attack and it looked totally awesome. You just can't lure people into the game using Blizzard's model, and the less people play a game, the less hype there is, and so on.
It's sad to see blizzard so stubborn, learning nothing from anyone. Many businesses are doing great in eSports and blizzard fails to implement simple things like jumping into game to spectate, and take years to implement great community ideas. How long did we wait for group replays? Clan support? ..Still no Lan for tournaments either. They could of done WCS from the start instead of having people build businesses around SC2 just to eventually decide they wanted to control everything. They fail to take the blame too, and instead just keep being stubborn, implementing changes that nobody want while neglecting ideas that are continuously pushed by the community.
It's weak.
When you say "Why was broodwar so popular" i think it is very important to mention that it was very popular in KOREA. The foreign scene was very very small, which i think comes from the problem that it was a damned hard game. I can't say what made it so popular in Korea, but i think it was a big culture thing with the PC bangs and so on. So you are right, that it being free was very important, and is super important for getting new players into sc2.
I agree that it is really hard, even if you tell someone "look he just earned 50k$ with this game" and they do want to try it, for "trying it" it needs to be free. The starter edition thing somehow hasn't quite done that, i don't know why, but it seems people just don't like the idea of trying something that isn't the full experience.
And when it comes to success i really wouldn't say sc2 has done bad.
Part of the staleness is simply because everybody always aims to min max, the nature of strategy games. It's really fun to sit on 2 base and build lots of Battle cruisers, but guess what? The opponent will either stop me before hand, or just have better units when i attack, at a reasonable level it is not gonna work.
The WCS from the start is a bit harsh imo especially it's not like there was a lack of tournaments or a competitive scene, it was just split up, which people indirectly miss now as soooo many pros are retiring because the best now take it all.On personal preference (so my opinion it may be a terrible idea) I would have loved the focus of wcs be on teams, not individual players. Give teams a budget to get like 6-8 players, make it 8-10 teams per region and let that be CONSTANT content of pro stuff like weekly things. From that start where you have pros allow open individual Big tournaments where everyone can participate and make the individual skill stand out. The important thing being that giving the teams a budget let's all the players actually go pro rather than using it as a unusual part time job to get them selves through uni.
Something that a lot of my friends miss btw was the many units from the campaign. I mean it would be chaotic but imagine if you could use every unit from the campaign, maybe using a WoL style upgrade thing with level ( I mean the stages thing not the individual unit upgrades, but like i think one was armor upgrades give 5% health increase OR attack upgrades give 5% attack increse etc. , maybe a terrible idea, saying from WoL cause i haven't played the Hots campaign yet) where you can also then focus yourself on something. The many units would prob make the game really interesting and not let it get stale.
However, it would be VERY chaotic, there would be many single tournament imbalances in flavour of the month style of thingy.
it would be lots of fun, and it would also let players focus on styles. I mean mech would be viable if you had all the mech units from the campaign right? probably?
Another thing is that the game is always the most interesting (at least for me) when new strats are emerging, not when innovation comes pout with a build that needs minimal perfection and it makes zergs die of frustration  , so having LOTS of units would make this harder to happen and allow for many different counter options.
These are all ideas, but unlikie many i don't think Blizz are doing a bad job, because i have no clue if these things would help or just ruin the game.
|
Just let this game die.
Blizzard made way too many design mistakes with it.
Just... just let it fade away. This game is bad. Just look at it.
That old Blizzard that made games out of dreams is now a greedy company incapable of delivering what we want. Let it die.
Please.
User was warned for this post
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
