EPTStarCraft 2: What's The Problem - Page 77
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
CreationSoul
Romania231 Posts
| ||
|
Ambre
France416 Posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-fulfilling_prophecy | ||
|
NukeD
Croatia1612 Posts
On October 14 2013 00:23 Thieving Magpie wrote: Mech play was the *only* play in BW TvP for about ten years. No one complained that the composition was boring because the focus of the game was the difficult UI and so they didn't complain that they only saw 1 unit comp. SC2 is different, people complain when there is only 1 unit comp because the unit comp choices *is* the strategic element of the game. If you played MMMM every game for 10 years would you get bored? Because that didn't really happen in BW. Its about focus of game experience. Notice how I didn't talk about game balance or even if the matchup was boring. I said that viewers don't like only 1 comp match ups (Broodfestor play for example) and that when players are forced into just 1 unit comp that the gameplay gets boring. With difficult UI, it doesn't matter how repetitive the strategy is, the fun is in fighting the UI (Take Tetris, or Sonic, or Mario for example). While there is truth to your statement, I think the main reason why same unitcomp in BW TvP didnt get boring is the unit interactions which are a lot more fun in BW than SC2. Also different map design mattered a lot more in BW so it always refreshed thegame. | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On October 14 2013 01:38 Ambre wrote: Even though some good points are raised, I think all of the eventual benefits that comes from criticism will never balance the damage done by speechs like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-fulfilling_prophecy Since Blizzard has shown zero response to positive and constructive feedback about the structural problems of the game, negative outcry and publicity is pretty much the only other avenue available. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 14 2013 01:27 CreationSoul wrote: I think that all this "SC2 is dying" is beginning to enter our our subconscious and we are actually starting to believe it. And because we (the fans) believe it, then it will happen. I think its just a case of being butt-hurt. Magic the Gathering has people flying all over the world playing for thousands of dollars, pro players and pro teams. And yet the streams for their highest levels of competitions peak at 10k-16k. No one would call their product a dead failure and is actually in a resurgence. If an MTG tournament could pull in the low 43k viewers that iem is getting right now it would be a record breaking experience for them let alone if they start getting viewers in the 90k-100k that BIG events have at times. What people are upset about is not that "SC2 is dying" but that League of Legends is doing better; and how dare their "not real game" (league) do better than our "real game" (SC2). | ||
|
DusTerr
2520 Posts
On October 14 2013 02:07 Thieving Magpie wrote: I think its just a case of being butt-hurt. Magic the Gathering has people flying all over the world playing for thousands of dollars, pro players and pro teams. And yet the streams for their highest levels of competitions peak at 10k-16k. No one would call their product a dead failure and is actually in a resurgence. If an MTG tournament could pull in the low 43k viewers that iem is getting right now it would be a record breaking experience for them let alone if they start getting viewers in the 90k-100k that BIG events have at times. What people are upset about is not that "SC2 is dying" but that League of Legends is doing better; and how dare their "not real game" (league) do better than our "real game" (SC2). That and people that couldn't see past their own short-comings in the game - blaming blizzard for not making a game they could be good at. On October 14 2013 02:04 Squat wrote: Since Blizzard has shown zero response to positive and constructive feedback about the structural problems of the game, negative outcry and publicity is pretty much the only other avenue available. Saying the game needs improvements is very different from saying that the game is dying. | ||
|
Xiphos
Canada7507 Posts
On October 14 2013 02:35 DusTerr wrote: That and people that couldn't see past their own short-comings in the game - blaming blizzard for not making a game they could be good at. Saying the game needs improvements is very different from saying that the game is dying. Woah, woah. Now you are just blowing it out of your ass. Blizzard cannot be anymore lenient in SC2 as an RTS title. The facilitated so many "tedious" aspect of the game comparing to BW. In comparison BW was so much more difficult mulitask-speaking and your hand-eye co-ordination have to be on the top every seconds of the game. BUT however, people still liked that game even though of its difficulty because it is FUN to improve on the tine details. There are just simply more "cool" and "awesome" stuff to do in a BW game than SC2 game. P.S. SC2 as a game won't necessarily "die". But because of its such atrocious state, the professional "scene" will fade out further into the background as time passes by. So yeah less people watching = sponsors dropping = no money = players retiring = less people watching. Its a vicious cycle. And the reason why less people watching is EXACTLY because of the flaw of the game. | ||
|
TheBloodyDwarf
Finland7524 Posts
On October 09 2013 00:04 shaftofpleasure wrote: Have you seen girls stalking your favorite player when he went to a mall? Have you seen your favorite player's parent pray for you when you were playing in a tournament? Have you seen your favorite player on a advertisement that was sponsored by the country he is representing? Have you seen your favorite team being sponsored by a huge company that is remotely related to gaming? BW was accepted .. something SC2 will never truly become with how things are going on for it How people can forget RedBull?... | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
On October 14 2013 03:57 Xiphos wrote: So yeah less people watching = sponsors dropping = no money = players retiring = less people watching. Its a vicious cycle. And the reason why less people watching is EXACTLY because of the flaw of the game. I want to focus on your statement "Less people watching". Where exactly do you see LESS people watching? I remember posts from 2011 saying "OMG GUYS WE HAVE CONSTANT 30K VIEWERS, HOW INSANE!!". Now we are sitting at 100k for WCS/Dreamhack, 50k for IEM NY(not even finals) .... I don't see the "Less people watching" you are talking about. EDIT: Currently 76k people watching SC2, Almost all of them for IEM NY streams. I see pros retiring, I see players moving on to other games, but I don't see "less starcraft", "less viewers" or "less tournaments" whatsoever. And about the BW vs SC2 discussion: I thought we were over that. I thought we were in unity when we said "We have our favourites, we will never change the opinion of the other guy". The topic(SC2 vs BW) is way too subjective and speculative to make it wortwhile. | ||
|
CreationSoul
Romania231 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On October 14 2013 02:04 Squat wrote: Since Blizzard has shown zero response to positive and constructive feedback about the structural problems of the game, negative outcry and publicity is pretty much the only other avenue available. Blizzard has answered those questions a thousand times already. No, they won't dumb down the AI. No, they won't bring back BW units. No, they won't hugely change the game in balance updates. No, SC2 won't go f2p over night. Yes, they will consider bigger changes for new expansions. Yes, they are trying to promote/improve the tournament scene. Even if they don't update the WCS format weekly, because someone on TL brought up a drawback of the format that could or could not be negative. Yes, they are improving b.net as much as their resources allow them to. Yes, they are trying to promote alternative playstyles. But they will let the game develope freely and won't force things into the game. ... They won't answer those questions every week just because someone who isn't satisfied with the answers makes another thread. | ||
|
Serpico
4285 Posts
On October 14 2013 04:46 Big J wrote: Blizzard has answered those questions a thousand times already. No, they won't dumb down the AI. No, they won't bring back BW units. No, they won't hugely change the game in balance updates. No, SC2 won't go f2p over night. Yes, they will consider bigger changes for new expansions. Yes, they are trying to promote/improve the tournament scene. Even if they don't update the WCS format weekly, because someone on TL brought up a drawback of the format that could or could not be negative. Yes, they are improving b.net as much as their resources allow them to. Yes, they are trying to promote alternative playstyles. But they will let the game develope freely and won't force things into the game. ... They won't answer those questions every week just because someone who isn't satisfied with the answers makes another thread. Well of course the devs doubled down, you've never heard them once say they've made a mistake with their core design of the game. Smacks of a lack of humility really. | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On October 14 2013 04:46 Big J wrote: But they will let the game develope freely and won't force things into the game. Zerg Roach Warren The Tunneling Claws upgrade now increases burrowed Roach movement speed from 1.41 to 2.25. [DK's Justification] We just don’t see Tunneling Claws coming into play much. There’s some really cool micro potential with burrow-moving Roaches, and we'd like to see how this goes in a test map. blizzard has, at will, and many times, dictated the direction they want the game to go with unneeded buffs and strategy killing nerfs | ||
|
Rodiel3
France1158 Posts
| ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
On October 14 2013 04:46 Big J wrote: Blizzard has answered those questions a thousand times already. No, they won't dumb down the AI. No, they won't bring back BW units. No, they won't hugely change the game in balance updates. No, SC2 won't go f2p over night. Yes, they will consider bigger changes for new expansions. Yes, they are trying to promote/improve the tournament scene. Even if they don't update the WCS format weekly, because someone on TL brought up a drawback of the format that could or could not be negative. Yes, they are improving b.net as much as their resources allow them to. Yes, they are trying to promote alternative playstyles. But they will let the game develope freely and won't force things into the game. ... They won't answer those questions every week just because someone who isn't satisfied with the answers makes another thread. They've been pretty clear that any drastic changes to the game are extremely unlikely. It's simply a matter of having a fundamental disagreement about whether SC2 is a good enough game as it is. Blizzard obviously thinks the game is basically sound, protoss, forcefields, 3 base symmetrical ecos, terrible terrible damage and lots of other shit included. A lot of people disagree with that. At this point, I doubt they would have the resources or approval from higher ups to spend any serious time or money on redesigning core aspects of the game, it's doing sort of ok and there is not much to indicate that a huge overhaul would suddenly cause it to explode to LoL levels(that ship has well and truly sailed). Pretty much the only thing that could cause them to reconsider their sacred cows is enough negative feedback and large drops in viewership and players. That's kind of the point. If they are told enough times that the game is flawed and generally not fun, they might eventually listen. It's a small hope, but still. I just wish they would come clean, and tell us straight up whether the kind of changes that are being argued for are in any way even being considered, or if the game is what it is and they have no intention of changing it beyond polish. At least then every fan and player could make a choice to either move on or stick around and offer real feedback and suggestions. Well of course the devs doubled down, you've never heard them once say they've made a mistake with their core design of the game. Smacks of a lack of humility really. There was an interview with an anonymous ex blizzard employee a few years ago, he or she basically said that most of the lead design folks on the big titles are/were more or less unbearable assholes with a serious case of narcissus complex. Admitting a mistake was pretty much unheard of. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7028 Posts
On October 14 2013 06:16 Squat wrote: There was an interview with an anonymous ex blizzard employee a few years ago, he or she basically said that most of the lead design folks on the big titles are/were more or less unbearable assholes with a serious case of narcissus complex. Admitting a mistake was pretty much unheard of. Are you talking about this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=416158 | ||
|
Squat
Sweden7978 Posts
If I recall correctly, that person was a former WoW GM so not exactly closely linked to SC2, but the insight into the people running the game, even if shallow, is interesting. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7028 Posts
On October 14 2013 06:37 Squat wrote: That's the one yes. If I recall correctly, that person was a former WoW GM so not exactly closely linked to SC2, but the insight into the people running the game, even if shallow, is interesting. That's not a few years ago though, that's four months ago.  And that person is not exactly the best source (someone bitter about being fired by Blizzard, plus it's all secondhand info). | ||
|
Velouria
United States78 Posts
Blizzard could be and maybe needs to be more helpful for the E-Sports scene, increasing tournament overall prize pot is the first step they should take. People complained about Forcefields for the longest time, complained about units clumping, now every single Pro splits and makes arcs like BW and we still havent reached the ceiling there, people rightfully complained about the maps being too small, and now we have a variety of medium and large maps. There is no inherent core design flaw in SC2, it just keeps getting better. | ||
|
XXXSmOke
United States1333 Posts
On October 14 2013 07:25 Velouria wrote: We just had a great series of ZvZ of all things and a foreigner almost take the whole cake, this thread is pointless. I think we can all agree over time SC2 has added not subtracted strategies which makes each player play his MU a certain way and in turn makes for a better viewing experience. Blizzard could be and maybe needs to be more helpful for the E-Sports scene, increasing tournament overall prize pot is the first step they should take. People complained about Forcefields for the longest time, complained about units clumping, now every single Pro splits and makes arcs like BW and we still havent reached the ceiling there, people rightfully complained about the maps being too small, and now we have a variety of medium and large maps. There is no inherent core design flaw in SC2, it just keeps getting better. Forcefields are still terrible game design, people complain less because FF' wont be changed this late in the game. We have had splitting since the game came out, the problem is that no matter how good you split or arc your army the battle will still be over in less than 10 seconds and will probably decide the game right there. That is a huge design flaw aka Terrible Terrible damage. Maps are about the only thing that has been fixed with SC2 and a lot of people theorized that would fix the games problems and it did not. The fact that a foreigner even almost won is actually one of the biggest problems with SC2....... The game plays more like poker than a RTS. Certain builds are auto loss to other builds despite mechanics. Mechanics should be at least 80% of an RTS, the faster player should be able to dominate a lower player. Then the last 20% should be about strategy and smart plays. That is if you want a game that is entertaining and fun to watch. So do you want to try again? | ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://seoulspace.co.kr/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/2009-final.jpeg)
![[image loading]](http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2011/12/31/211530.jpg)
