EPTKhaldor's thoughts about the future of RTS - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
SmackDiablo
United States49 Posts
| ||
|
plogamer
Canada3132 Posts
On February 16 2014 01:56 The_Red_Viper wrote: i never thought i would say this, but most of the comments in this thread don't really touch his points at all, this is mostly the same stuff we see in any other thread, even reddit did a better job.. This isn't about the business model, khaldor already did a video about this kind of stuff, why can't people ONE time argue about the topic and don't just feel the need to completely change it? Khaldor's main points i feel are: - Mobas generate more exciting moments - Mobas are easier to appreciate and understand from a casual point of view (heroes and stuff) Now he concludes that the next rts should have heroes aswell if it wants to be successful. That is pretty much the basic you should argue about, not if sc2 isn't free to play or lol "is easier to play" . I think BigJ has an interesting point of view and adds something to the table, the rest of the posts (ok not all of them, but most) are just mindblowing ignorant and i really doubt you guys even watched the video... Starcraft is so much easier for casuals with great casting and great observing. It's purely anecdotal, but when I showed few different broadcasts to my friends - guess which they found more entertaining? The ones they found more entertaining had the following qualities. Casting which was energetic and on point, did not go into too far into analysis or predictions (which frankly alienates casuals since they don't get it). And observing which was smooth and did not miss important events. | ||
|
SoFrOsTy
United States525 Posts
It is very simple, if people play, they will watch. Starcraft has less players than MOBA games, therefore less viewers. Growing up, most guys play football, can relate to and understand the game. Everyone knows how a race works, thus NASCAR popularity. RTS is complex and therefore will always be niche. Warcraft version of RTS will not remedy this complexity. Heroes aren't what people love, they love watching good players play a game they are familiar with. | ||
|
zelevin
United States237 Posts
Spells in league of legends are the focus of visual effects. In Starcraft, there are many spell casters, (sentries, infestors, ravens, etc...) and some spells have sub par animations. EMP is the first that comes to mind. In game 1 of Jjakji vs Dear at IEM Cologne 2014, the final battle was the protoss death ball vs the Terran bio (marine/marauder/medivac/viking/ghost). They had a post game analysis of it, and the person analyzing the game talked about viking positioning changing the game... However, there were a couple of EMP's that landed on the high templar. The casters didn't see it. The analyzer didn't see it. I barely saw it. EMP's are unnoticeable. I have heard numerous times, "EMP's can change the game!" when watching PvT. If EMP's are so pivotal, their animation should be extravagant! Stalkers, after being EMP'd should should have visible electricity pulsing on them and making their movement appear messed up or aimless (with no actual effect). Feedback is a great example of a well-done animation. It makes a high pitched sound and has a great flash of light. A feedbacked medivac may only lose 15 hit points, but you think, "HOLY CRAP IT'S DEAD!" because of the excellent animation. I've heard casters and crowds react explosively when a couple of feedbacks are cast on medivacs. Psi storm has a great sound, but I think the visual effect can be enhanced. right now it's just a circle with some shiny things inside. At the ender's tournament, the color changes according to the player's game color -- I personally think red psi storms look great. I think an increase of the radius of the visual effect of psi storm would help it. (just with something that looks like horizontal lightning bolts straying from the circle of effect.) Fungal growth is done right depending on the units. I think the fungaled stalker animation is incomplete. If a colossus is fungaled, you know it. if a marauder is fungaled, you know it. Fungaled stalkers aren't as easily seen. There are more spells that could be changed, but it isn't that important. You get the idea. If Blizzard changed the look of these spells, then the flashy visuals that people look for will be there. | ||
|
ElBlanco
Australia140 Posts
If anything SC2 gets pretty damn good numbers considering the active playerbase. LoL has how many millions of people playing at any given time? The SC2 playerbase would be measured in the thousands. I'd say that says that the game must be pretty enjoyable to watch, it seems to hold onto viewers pretty well. Basically it's very hard to get people to know about or become interested in your game as an esport unless they're playing it. Whilst LoL has 100 times more people playing (or whatever the number is) it will also get a lot more viewers. You can build your viewership without necessarily growing the player base but it's a lot more difficult. | ||
|
Holy_AT
Austria978 Posts
But he should focus on playing the games itself. As a general rule, I think it is correct to say that those who play are those who watch. And mobas are more easier and less stressful for the general gamer and they are free to play so they attract more gamers which in turn leads to more viewers. And mobas are a team game and I think that this is an aspect that he did not focus on at all. I think team games in general introduce their own element of dynamics and are therefore much more enjoyable. Even in "conventional" sports team games are the crowd favorite most of the time. Soccer, football, hokey, baseball, basketball in comparison to tennis for example. Racing sports are a bit different, maybe you have a team in Formula one consisting of 2 drivers but for the viewer he has always multiple drivers to watch and not just two slugging it out. I thing its the accessibility of the game to new players and the better possibilities of comebacks and turn arounds that make them more enjoyable. | ||
|
Deleted User 26513
2376 Posts
Just look what games are popular today : CoD, Battlefield, BoreZ, some random WoWCloneMMO, LoL and that is pretty much it. Surprisingly LoL is the hardest in that list. The funny thing is that the starcraft comunity itself bring this to themselves. You wanted the game to be so much like BW(completely outdated game that will have no success in modern age) that blizzard was kinda forced to make a game with extreme learning curve. Fortunatelly they added some new features like MBS, easier unit managment and smartcasting that saved the game. SC2 is not dead and won't die for a long time, but it will be a niche game, if Blizzard doesn't make drastic changes with the third(and last) expansion. By the way this has nothing to do with F2P... From the games I listed only LoL is free. F2P =\= popular. Also I agree with Khaldor that games that are focused on one important figure(the Hero, the soldier or whatever) are easier to follow than a game that is focused on managing economy and massive armies. I personally hope that Blizzard will make WC4 and that will revive the genre again | ||
|
HolydaKing
21253 Posts
Imba Blademaster led to funny games! | ||
|
Spaylz
Japan1743 Posts
On February 16 2014 02:11 ElBlanco wrote: The reason LoL gets so many more viewers than SC2 is because so many more people play it. That's where people get the interest to watch these things in the first place. LoL is far more accessible than SC2 and people enjoy the team aspect as well (team games are generally more popular and this applies to real sports as well). That is, of course, true. Most people will only watch the game(s) they play themselves. It still leaves an underlying thought: why is SC2 not played more? The RTS genre may have died out, since essentially, SC2 is the only real title that holds up on a competitive level right now. But I don't think it's quite done yet. It may simply need a little overhaul to get back into the good graces of the masses. I mean, WC3 basically spawned LoL & DotA 2. DotA 2 is nothing short of a HD remake of the WC3 custom map. It literally adds nothing to the game itself except for better graphics and a better engine. It's still incredibly successful (granted, Valve has a lot to do with that). I strongly believe that a RTS game which would evolve toward the MOBA genre without suppressing the key elements of a RTS would be successful. A hybrid version of a RTS/MOBA game would, in my opinion, be very successful. The degree to which the RTS game would take after MOBAs and suppress the more "core" elements of true RTS games (resource gathering, base building, etc.) could vary, but I believe there is a recipe for success out there. That is the main point of Khaldor: he looks at WC3 and its distant descendants (MOBAs) and argues about a "new" type of RTS that would please both the casual viewers and the more serious gamers. | ||
|
Defenestrator
400 Posts
On February 16 2014 00:04 Big J wrote: Can't really agree with this. I've played (the old) Dota a lot (back in the days), still I don't really get what is going on in the MOBA battles. Imo to get excited about MOBAs you have to know all the Heroes and spells involved. Like, when I tried to watch LoL, it was just random stuff and effects going off and people randomly dying, since I had no clue what possibilities were there. Agree with this. I feel like if I had more experience with MOBAs I would understand what is going on more as a spectator, but even so it's hard to focus on 5 characters at once at times. With SC2 I understand everything that is going on, but as many on TL have pointed out, a lot of the problems with SC2 are stale gameplay. I am really starting to get bored of SC2 games. If you look at the history of SC2, there have been huge periods of boring gameplay (protoss deathballs, BL/infestor, now swarmhosts) that drive away viewers. If build diversity was stronger and micro mechanics mattered more, along with less of an element of chance, SC2 would have retained many of the viewers that it has lost over the years. Overall MOBAs seem considerably easier to design for than a complex game like SC2; since there are so many heroes, perfect balance means almost nothing, while it is everything in SC2. However, if an RTS game does arise that emphasizes sick micro and 2-3 different late-game gameplans per matchup (that are not stale), then the games become considerably more exciting to watch. Maybe Starbow? | ||
|
ElBlanco
Australia140 Posts
On February 16 2014 02:28 Spaylz wrote: That is, of course, true. Most people will only watch the game(s) they play themselves. It still leaves an underlying thought: why is SC2 not played more? The RTS genre may have died out, since essentially, SC2 is the only real title that holds up on a competitive level right now. But I don't think it's quite done yet. It may simply need a little overhaul to get back into the good graces of the masses. I mean, WC3 basically spawned LoL & DotA 2. DotA 2 is nothing short of a HD remake of the WC3 custom map. It literally adds nothing to the game itself except for better graphics and a better engine. It's still incredibly successful (granted, Valve has a lot to do with that). I strongly believe that a RTS game which would evolve toward the MOBA genre without suppressing the key elements of a RTS would be successful. A hybrid version of a RTS/MOBA game would, in my opinion, be very successful. The degree to which the RTS game would take after MOBAs and suppress the more "core" elements of true RTS games (resource gathering, base building, etc.) could vary, but I believe there is a recipe for success out there. That is the main point of Khaldor: he looks at WC3 and its distant descendants (MOBAs) and argues about a "new" type of RTS that would please both the casual viewers and the more serious gamers. SC2 is a very difficult and stressful game and unlike team games you have no one to blame but yourself for the loss. In some cases the losses can also be frustrating where you felt like there was little you could do. I think your idea is interesting and i'd love to see it done. It's why i love the macro/micro mini game so much, it feels great to just focus on one side of the game and it's actually a really fun team game. Man i'd love to have an actual ladder for it. I still think that the SC2 player base could be expanded without making as big changes as you're recommending. | ||
|
raga4ka
Bulgaria5679 Posts
On February 16 2014 01:56 The_Red_Viper wrote: i never thought i would say this, but most of the comments in this thread don't really touch his points at all, this is mostly the same stuff we see in any other thread, even reddit did a better job.. This isn't about the business model, khaldor already did a video about this kind of stuff, why can't people ONE time argue about the topic and don't just feel the need to completely change it? Khaldor's main points i feel are: - Mobas generate more exciting moments - Mobas are easier to appreciate and understand from a casual point of view (heroes and stuff) Now he concludes that the next rts should have heroes aswell if it wants to be successful. That is pretty much the basic you should argue about, not if sc2 isn't free to play or lol "is easier to play" . I think BigJ has an interesting point of view and adds something to the table, the rest of the posts (ok not all of them, but most) are just mindblowing ignorant and i really doubt you guys even watched the video... Well i argued what i believed is the cause of SC2 failing . I don't think that MOBAS generate more excitement and are more easier to appreciate when you control 1 unit ... The only thing that could interest me in a "Hero" is the story/lore behind it . I enjoyed WC3's single player as much as BW and SC2 . League of Legends doesn't really have a lore behind it's "heroes" . One page of some random text describing a character isn't a lore . Starcraft is way more complex than controling 1 unit , so the only thing that brings in more players/viewers is the accesibily , simplisity and personal preference of the games . If Blizzard and Kespa worked together at promoting a free to play SC2 you would have kissed your LoL glory goodbye at least in Korea . Broodwar was already bigger or as big as LoL in Korea right now , so it would have been only natural that SC2 would have been gigantic . Bad blood between Kespa and Blizzard is what did the game in , suboptimal game design helped . As you can see , as i and probably many other predicted you are forced to work with Kespa if you want for something to succeed as an eSports in Korea. Anything else is just temporary (eSF). Kespa has the money and power to make it happen. MOBA doesn't bring in more players / viewers then RTS , because of the "Heroes". There will always be one main eSports game in a game gender . In RTS this is SC2 and Blizzard and Kespa failed to establish it as the main eSports game. No competition for developing RTS games also played a role . LOL at least has Dota to compete , while SC2 has what ? There was an online free to play Generals game coming from the CnC series , EA games is failing hard making it happen ... What people have wrote above me are also valid points . | ||
|
_SpiRaL_
Afghanistan1636 Posts
On February 16 2014 02:28 Spaylz wrote: That is, of course, true. Most people will only watch the game(s) they play themselves. It still leaves an underlying thought: why is SC2 not played more? The RTS genre may have died out, since essentially, SC2 is the only real title that holds up on a competitive level right now. But I don't think it's quite done yet. It may simply need a little overhaul to get back into the good graces of the masses. I mean, WC3 basically spawned LoL & DotA 2. DotA 2 is nothing short of a HD remake of the WC3 custom map. It literally adds nothing to the game itself except for better graphics and a better engine. It's still incredibly successful (granted, Valve has a lot to do with that). I strongly believe that a RTS game which would evolve toward the MOBA genre without suppressing the key elements of a RTS would be successful. A hybrid version of a RTS/MOBA game would, in my opinion, be very successful. The degree to which the RTS game would take after MOBAs and suppress the more "core" elements of true RTS games (resource gathering, base building, etc.) could vary, but I believe there is a recipe for success out there. That is the main point of Khaldor: he looks at WC3 and its distant descendants (MOBAs) and argues about a "new" type of RTS that would please both the casual viewers and the more serious gamers. So like Warcraft 4? | ||
|
Ljas
Finland725 Posts
| ||
|
mikumegurine
Canada3145 Posts
and Teamwork and coordination, and which player on who team is the ACE player and the best player, who is carrying who, etc alot of people like to play and watch competitive TEAM games, Halo, CoD, all FPS games, MOBAs, etc | ||
|
lessQQmorePEWPEW
Jamaica921 Posts
| ||
|
mikumegurine
Canada3145 Posts
its not only due to the "free to play" factor, SC2 is basically F2P now (not counting ladder) | ||
|
QuixoticO
Netherlands810 Posts
On February 15 2014 23:31 Saumure wrote: Chess does not provide flashy visual stuff. Neither do old movies, yet they are better most of the time. There is no other point you 'developped' to give thoughts on ... Great point and strengthens Khaldor's points. For the more casual viewer Football, Basketball, Hollywood movies are more entertaining but that doesn't mean they are better compared to Chess or Film Noir. | ||
|
Spaylz
Japan1743 Posts
Perhaps. It depends on Blizzard. The differences between WC2 and WC3 were astonishing. It brought on a whole new type of RTS games, and indirectly created MOBAs. If WC4 were to be as revolutionizing as WC3, then maybe. But taking into account the progression from BW to SC2, I doubt it. Also, the environment of WC3 was much more pleasant than the current environment of SC2, mostly due to BNet 2.0, once again. | ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
On February 16 2014 00:00 zerK wrote: I rly love sc2, but all my friends that are casual dont like it because its too hard and not really user friendly. Not fun for a casual player...  Why the sad face? There is room in this World for many things. You don't go to a chess tournament and ask the participants to talk trash, to dress like adolescent punks, just to appeal to the brain dead masses, there is fake wrestling for that. You don't go to an opera house and ask the musicians to sing about drugs and whores and have stripers on the side with fireworks in the background, just to appeal to the masses. | ||
| ||
