On February 15 2014 23:55 Luppy1 wrote: Before talking about attracting new players, maybe he should consider why SC2 is struggling to even retain existing ones.
No game can retain fans forever. People get tired and move on, otherwise great games would last forever. That is obviously not the case as with brood war, quake 3, cs1.6 and other great titles.
I don't think sc2 is losing viewers in any dramatic way, but the influx of new viewers is very small and seems limited to release of the game/expansions. This is the biggest problem, not people leaving for other games which is completely natural. We need people who grow tired of their current games to get into sc2, just like people who get tired of sc2 get into theirs.
Lol and Dota2 are only so popular because they are free to play and have a lot of players. Since only a percentage of those players will watch tournaments and streams of pro players a bigger base will still create a big audience.
If Sc2 was free, it would have more viewers.
Also LoL and Dota 2 are by far easier games to play, so they get more players. Also as only team games they are easier to lose because you can always blame others or spread blame to whole team. While on Sc2 when people lose they stop playing because they can only blame themselves or "balance"
I can't say my personal experiences follows from Khaldor's opinion. I put close to 100 hours into league and I'm still a total nub. When my friends are playing, I need someone to tell me what's going on. I guess he's referring to casual players who play a couple hours a day.
I do think the main attractions of viewing MOBAs is the attraction of watching what you play and the attraction of playing MOBAs mainly comes from - being free-to-play - having a wide variety of characters you can play as, all for free, opening up a variety of new and exciting (supposedly -_-) things to try and see! - having a system that means before paying money or using your character selection points, you get different characters each week (Encouraged variety! Yay!) while still allowing some free points so you can choose to always have your first favourites available - Computer requirements are lowish - Pwetty pictures! - only having to control one thing at a time and the game not being super fast paced. Easy!
On the topic of macro not being easy to show, I think the production tab and things like that encourage current observers to be lazy and unaware of what they could be showing to viewers.
Back in Brood War (back in the ol' days :D), you didn't have that production tab, so Korean Proleague and Starleague observers would manually select all of the gateway/barracks/factories in a base on click on some of the eggs to show which units was being created and also just the fact that units WERE being created. This showed new viewers that it's not all automated production and that yes, the players are continuing to keep up with unit production.
It's easier to show newer users how things are done by the players when they switch to a player's camera and in that short space of time you see all the amazingly quick unit selections, unburrowing of lurkers followed by running and surrounding actions for the lings, followed by burrowing of the lurkers and then see the bloody results. Very impressive to viewers.
It can also be great for showing the macro in that you'll suddenly see Flash's screen, executing something on the field and then going back to his base to click 9 buildings and queue up a unit at each of them in under 3 seconds, then grab two SCVs and tell them to make a pair of supply depots, then scan some map locations and successfully reveal the enemy protoss army moving through the area, unsiege his tanks and push the bulk of his army into an advantageous position to take the high ground near the location the protoss seems to be heading for.
With the production tab, observers are clicking on very little. They could afford to click on units more often to show upgrades (many don't use Gameheart or do, but do not have the little upgrade indicator at the bottom of the screen that others do). Personally I'd like to see short switches to first-person perspective more often.
For playing, the force mechanics like chronoboost, MULEs, Queens injecting larva and placing/spreading creep tumours feel like tedious extra mechanics that don't add fun to playing the game, but observers could be showing a little more of that (at least seems like something for the zerg functions anyway; the others don't happen as often), commenting on what injections do etc. The trouble is that to all experienced players and viewers, it would get really tedious to hear and there would be a lot of negative feedback for it because people would think the casters sound #@$%ing stupid, but if new viewers are to appreciate what they're doing and be impressed, it's a bit hard without explanations from casters. I'm pretty sure many fanboys and fangirls barely played BW but loved watching it and from time to time I see people in SC2 chat saying they enjoy watching but they've still never played the game. Because of this, I would say it's a dilemma for the community.
Can we bear it if there's a lot more seemingly blatantly obvious commentary that helps newer players get into at least watching the game or do we maintain our sense of casting "standards" and do little to make it an easier learning experience for newer viewers? Obviously there are different casters for random games that can help people to get into watching it, such as Husky for those who like the energetic and DAy[9] for those who want a more analytical explanation that still works for newer people, but that sort of casting doesn't really happen at live events and I don't know about you, but if I were browsing twitch.tv or were in Korea and wanted to watch a bit of a game I'd heard about but knew nothing about, I'd look for a tournament stream.
~~ On the topic of new viewers not understanding things they see in a game, I only really agree about pinpointing the units like High Templar. They can be hard to see amongst the blob of zealots, stalkers, colossi and whatever else (another trouble of anything vaguely resembling a deathball). There have been some games recently, I think Rain vs RorO was one, which had great examples of units needing to be close enough so that they need only move 0-2 range before storming while needing to be constantly controlled in order to avoid getting sniped by locusts, roaches etc. If the camera shows this darting and dancing and players become aware over the course of the game that those units are essentially fragile little wizards that can cast murderous storms, new players should be able to be excited and nervous about that.
On the other hand, while I dislike the MOBA genre, I have barely any experience of playing it (concept, watching and what little I have played just don't appeal to me) but because I appreciate complexity when I think it adds to the game, I am still a little curious about all the huge number of characters and different rune trees etc., so I have tried tuning into big stream a few times occasionally. My god the fights were a crazed mess. Abilities flying everywhere from god knows which characters. You can get used to the characters, but it's chaotic trying to understand who has which abilities out of over 100 characters in LoL now (right?) with 5 abilities on each and many different skins so that you could be tricked into not realising that character you saw last Monday is the same as the one you see today. Obviously a normal 5v5 has just 10 characters at once though, but for me I found it pretty confusing. Hasn't always been that bad though, sometimes people do simple short range teleport->attack->retreat moves and that's very easy to follow...but then things like blink mostly are too.
This has been a thread of personal opinions masquerading as facts.
I find hero interactions and MOBAs in general confusing as hell, Starcraft being 1v1 just is easier for me to follow, MOBA observing is difficult given you have 10 participants. I've had more success in getting non-SC players sort of understanding the goings-on, than I have ever had in watching MOBAs without playing. Anyway, it's purely anecdotal, but I don't hide that.
Part of the issue for me has always been a lack of FPViews, they add a hell of a lot to making SC2 that much more visceral.
Stuff like that is sick.
What isn't cool are deathballs and passive macro games into just a few engagements that end quite quickly. Nothing new there though.
I just wish people (irony inc) would stop projecting their every desire onto a title. An RTS without much macro and a lot of automation could be sweet, but why ever think of taking SC down that direction? Even with the current changes from BW it's still a mechanically demanding game, and that's part of the fun for me and many others.
personally i like dota 2 better becos it is more interesting. the coordination of diiferent heros is beautiful and I especially love watching QW invoker control teamfights as you can see him moving around with high speeds around the fight and placing skillful tornado-EMP and ice walls to kite as well as occasionally cold snaps to help the team out . I wouldnt say sc2 has no flashy plays but it feels kinda boring when you compare it to high action games like dota 2 where action happens almost immediatedly from god-knows-wat SC2 has many different factors that can affect the game like maps . As MC has said maps cause the imbalanceness of PvT and maps are hard to design to be able to be considered balance to you will go between races to dominate when map pools change . Dota 2 only has one real map(excluding events) and this map has 2 sides with both side having different advantages like dire having the rosh advantage or radiant SF having an advantage of farming
On February 16 2014 15:03 hai2u wrote: Khaldor is wrong here. If he were correct, W3 would have been more popular than BW.
It was in Europe and everywhere else besides Korea. And I don't think people understand how much the culture in Korea influenced the rise of eSports. This would not have been possible in any other country. The PC Bang culture, the focus on Seoul as the hub for everything and tons of other aspects that are absolutely unique to the country.
People need to stop trying to "defend" StarCraft. Nobody is saying the game is bad. Hell if I would be saying that why did I then spend the last 3 years working my ass off to provide content and push it? I'm only saying that it is an aspect that has to be considered when we talk about the future of the genre.
Btw, can somebody please include this follow up video into the opening post:
I think some of my points didn't really come across properly and I wanted to address a few of the responses I got so far
EDIT: a lot of people don't really seem to be willing to actually think about what I am saying. It's a VERY difficult topic to talk about imho as it is very diverse. You have to actually put some thought into it and be open about the basic points that I make. It's food for thought as I've been saying already, picking a single line or statement out of context and homing in on it doesn't really do anything for anybody
EDIT 2: after reading more of the comments I have to highlight again that my main point is not about RTS vs. MOBAs. The comparison comes to mind easily because of the nature of the discussion. But the main point is the micro vs. macro aspect and how to get people EXCITED about what's happening and also why it's easier to be passionated about a game with a strong micro focus. Maybe one could add that to the opening post as well
I think the premise is true: micro is very cool to spectate and easy to understand; SC2 kind of fails in delivering in this department
Provided i understood the premise correctly, here's what i think:
Heroes fucking suck and are difficult to understand. First time i've watched WC3 and a MOBA game i had the same reaction: What the hell is going on? Lots of shiny effects going around, some buildings that were "shops?"or something, lots of spells and effects that did stuff but couldn't tell what (apart from the ones that clearly did dmg); a 3 way battlefield that you had to keep tabs on at all times; lots of numbers on the screen (LOL)
On the other hand, first time i've seen BW: side A vs side B; both sides used mostly 2 unit types with a 3 in support. ex: Mutalisk Zergling vs marine medic, Zealot Dragoon vs Vulture Tank; The design of these units was so diferent and constrasting that it was obvious to anyone who was who in a battle.
Talking about the battle: they often lasted for tens of seconds to a few minutes, plus there were relatively few units on one screen (talking about BW here) so any and all movements (micro) was very clear to see. Armies being spread over several screens also gave the impression of an epic army/ battle.
So IMO SC2/3 does not have to be more like MOBAs or to implement heroes or god knows what. It needs to be a PROPER RTS, more like BW. -away with the stupid deathballs and unit clumping. It is very difficult on the eye to see 2 200/200 armies packed in 1/3 of a screen, especially when the compositions are very diverse. Once the fights begin it's a mess of colors and explosions for a few seconds aaand it's gone. Definition of cluster fuck right there. -the unit compositions need to be simpler. The fewer unit tipes each side gets, the easier it is to keep track of what is what. Zealot Dragoon vs Vulture Tank, NOT Zealot, Stalker, Immortal, Archon, Colossus, Templar MSC vs Marine Marauder Ghost, Medivac (will we add mines in the future?) Keep it simple and focus on micro and positioning, not flashy lasers. -battles need to last way longer. It's very hard to tell what is happening in a big fight even for experienced players and let alone for new ones. Micro is extremly watered down as a consequence. This is the most important part of the game, you don't want it to be over in a flash. -basic unit design; the majority of (new) units in SC2 have very limited micro capabilities. The thread on "unit micro" goes in great detail here.
I'l stop here and say that, IMO, SC2 does not have to be more like a different genre, it needs to be more like what it is SUPPOSED to be in the first place!
okay, first of all, lets just stop calling Dota a MOBA or some crap like that, Dota is an original game and every other is Dota - like, not any kind of massively obscure bullshit assuption game
the main reason why people are losing their passion for starcraft is the whole practicing environment by itself, I'm playing Starcraft 2 for the last month since I kinda found the passion for the game again after playing some BW and for the last 8(?) years I've been playing Dota
the major issue is that you can't really enjoy practicing Starcraft, there're lot of things in the game that can go horribly wrong or some really silly strategies you can lose against and it creates a lot of anger towards YOURSELF for making some stupid mistake; in Dota you can practice playing in a more fun way mostly because of the diversity of the game (every single game is different and brings you new challenges) and mostly because of the SOCIAL ASPECT
nerds are a kind of people that is naturally more introvert-ish (not my case tho) and are spending a lot of time locked up in their respective rooms playing their minds out, the thing is that deep down a very little part of these people truly want to stay alone in that room, every god damn nerd wants to talk with someone about the game, wants to play a game with a friend just for the sake of killing him every now and then; the biggest difference Dota creates is when you lose, it's either yours or your teammates fault, that makes all the difference
I have to agree with the hero factor that Khaldor pointed out, why do you guys think that we absolutely LOVE moments when we call some unit "Billy the marine" and keep cheering for that unit for the rest of the game?
Starcraft is a great game like Dota, it's still really bloody amazing to watch the game ever for the casual audience (everyone can tell whether they see a massive storm or collosi firing lazers) but it's really not fun practicing on a daily basis unless you're living in a team house or something with that social aspect I was mentioning earlier being added
One particular OSL, not at Brood War's peak, got 525,000 viewers on TV, 8000 in the live audience, and 2-3 thousand non-Koreans watching a restream. Did anything in Warcraft 3 ever get over half a million viewers? Just because it was bigger outside Korea doesn't mean it was bigger as a whole than Brood War.
because kids these days are suffering from adhd or some kind of learning deficiency. reading books has become a laughing matter aside from the popular young adult fiction series which feature extremely poor writing.
mobas are actually very simple games, particularly lol, which is the shallowest of them all. it seems complex because there are a 100 heroes to learn, grasp and adapt to. but once you get the hang of them, excluding buffs/nerfs/changes, it becomes a static exercise.
BW on the other hand seems simple because there are only what, 12 units per side you have to get to know? But the strategies are endless. Imagine we were back in 2001. It was a tabula rasa. Where do you begin? What builds are good? What is the general strategy you should go for? There are no solid answers - you have to figure out yourself. It is a beautiful game.
TBH, people just have to come to terms with the fact that the RTS fanbase splintered off into hero arenas. Starcraft 2 has the monopoly of traditional RTS because it's a great game supported by Blizzard. Yes we whine in hopes that it could be (in our individual opinions) improved, but SC2 is in fact successful. It's the "non-traditional" RTS crowd, be it whatever term you choose, that have transplanted over into the MOBA audience.
While I agree with your point that micro makes for a better viewer experience, I don't think MOBAs are massively better in that regard. Watching a big marine split or a clutch baneling mine is intense. Sure SC2 puts an emphasis on developing infrastructure, but there's a shit ton of downtime in MOBAs too. If you focus on 1 individual player, how much time is devoted to fighting vs farming neutrals/warding/pulling/etc.? It's up to the individual to decide what's more boring, RTS macro or MOBA farming.
As far as the casual appeal, I think we should really differentiate between LoL's audience and Dota's audience. LoL I can only speculate draws casuals off being the first "FREE" MOBA and having cute hero designs. On the other hand, I'm kinda skeptical that Dota draws casual viewers? Obviously rolling on assumptions (so feel free to clarift), but the community there seems even more hardcore than BW's. I don't know how much more casual viewers are, but I sure as hell believe SC2's audience has a higher % of non-active players.
One particular OSL, not at Brood War's peak, got 525,000 viewers on TV, 8000 in the live audience, and 2-3 thousand non-Koreans watching a restream. Did anything in Warcraft 3 ever get over half a million viewers? Just because it was bigger outside Korea doesn't mean it was bigger as a whole than Brood War.
As I was saying in my post and also in the second video: you people have to stop referring to BW when you are trying to make a point. The success of BW was unique to Korea which was in large parts because of the culture in Korea. Today the same thing would not happen by a longshot.
If you have missed what I said about it have a look at the second video. Nobody is saying BW was bad, nobody is even saying Wc3 is/was the better game. This is not about better or worse, both types of games have their fanbase. It's about what, in the long run, the future of RTS is going to look like in MY(!) opinion. And the reasons as to why I think that. Quoting stats from a 10 year old game that flourished under very specific circumstances in ONE(!) country in the world is not adding to the discussion at all. I can not understand why people think this would be relevant.
We can all try to emulate what happened back then. But thinking that this model is in any way applicable or indicative of how esports will/should/can grow is absolutely insane. eSports has it's roots in Korea, no doubt about that. But we long since passed the point where Korea is the country to look for innovation in the industry. They still have big advantages in infrastructure and other parts, but the growth is happening in EU and NA nowadays, not in Korea any longer.
In my opnion LoL and Dota 2 have more viewers because it is free. Many people understands the game and ready to watch it. And I dont think the main point is heroes.
Good follow up video, clarifies things a little more. Though I'm not the biggest fan of Heroelements like they have been used in WC3 for RTS games, it creates something like what I have talked about in the post on the first page naturally. Since your Hero's "macro" is to get experience, achieved through combat for the most part.
I think the main point is that good play should happen frequently and in a very catchy way during a game. Whether this is through Heroes running ramapant or waves and waves of Units trying to break a defensive position over and over again is probably not so important. But I guess the "hero" part you talk about shouldn't be taken to literally or too much in the context of WC3 or Mobas.
On February 16 2014 18:32 Prince_Stranger wrote: In my opnion LoL and Dota 2 have more viewers because it is free. Many people understands the game and ready to watch it.
That this plays a role goes without saying. But it's not as big a factor as people make it out to be. If you would make SC2 free to play today it would change very little. It would definitely have an impact, but not by as much as people seem to think.
I've also talked about this in the video (which you have obviously not watched). I ignored that argument the same way I didn't talk further about the team vs. solo argument since I wanted to add another one that has not really been discussed a lot so far. That's the entire point of the video, adding something new to the discussion and making people aware of it. Didn't call it food for thought for nothing
EPT
