|
Keep "my game is better than yours"-slapfights out of this. If the discussion devolves into simple bashing, this thread will be closed. |
Poll: What would be most important in bringing the RTS genre back to life?Instant Action (6) 40% Free-to-Play (5) 33% Heroes (3) 20% Focus on Team Play (1) 7% Personalized Experience (0) 0% 15 total votes Your vote: What would be most important in bringing the RTS genre back to life? (Vote): Instant Action
(Vote): Free-to-Play
(Vote): Personalized Experience
(Vote): Focus on Team Play
(Vote): Heroes
|
On May 15 2014 20:15 urboss wrote:Poll: What would be most important in bringing the RTS genre back to life?Instant Action (6) 40% Free-to-Play (5) 33% Heroes (3) 20% Focus on Team Play (1) 7% Personalized Experience (0) 0% 15 total votes Your vote: What would be most important in bringing the RTS genre back to life? (Vote): Instant Action
(Vote): Free-to-Play
(Vote): Personalized Experience
(Vote): Focus on Team Play
(Vote): Heroes
none of those.. what you need is proper game design.
|
On May 15 2014 19:38 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2014 17:02 InVerno wrote:
I've saw an hundred of people starting enjoy this game (helped them out with a team), and i saw the same people quitting it after 2years.. this isn't the right samplesize to claim i've the truth in my hands about the "bad things" of this game, but hell no, there're a lot of clichès in this thread.. basically everything involving players "not understanding the deep of this game" or "playing moba cuz now they can shit others" or "because they don't want to challenge" and things like that, imho are just crap. I don't want to explain with a wot this, i'm just saying, players are the clients, blizzard is the producer, if something goes wrong with product, is NEVER a client mistake. And the capslock for never is intended. coming from a business graduate and working in a merchandising company, I can tell you that's not the case at all. Client can be wrong and quite often is wrong. However the company is to provide a product that can satisfy most clients desire, something that sc2 does well enough. You will always have clients with unrealistic expectations or impossible to please. And what a company do is to take in feedback for reference
What's the correlation with my point? i'm not saying that a good company always delivers all the clients desires, who in the world can believe that. I'm saying that who try to sell me the story "this game is a gem, the fault is people just not understanding it" is wrong. This isn't some sort of an essay movie with an arab poem inside, it's a videogame, a product for masses, made to have fun. If people doesn't have fun (because thats the problem, not the autospawning creeps), well it's a fail of the company. Try to sell a cubic ball and then blame i don't know who (but not yourself) for not understanding your awesome idea to have fun in the new century...Saying this i'm not evaluating the game at all. sc2 statisfy most clients desideres well enought? it's of for me. But if you know someone who quitted, please don't think "oh, he hasn't understand the game.." because it's blizzard not understanding him, not the opposite.
|
On May 15 2014 20:52 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2014 20:15 urboss wrote:Poll: What would be most important in bringing the RTS genre back to life?Instant Action (6) 40% Free-to-Play (5) 33% Heroes (3) 20% Focus on Team Play (1) 7% Personalized Experience (0) 0% 15 total votes Your vote: What would be most important in bringing the RTS genre back to life? (Vote): Instant Action
(Vote): Free-to-Play
(Vote): Personalized Experience
(Vote): Focus on Team Play
(Vote): Heroes
none of those.. what you need is proper game design.
Sure, that's kind of implied.
For any game you need proper game design to be successful.
This isn't specific to the RTS genre.
|
On May 15 2014 20:52 InVerno wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2014 19:38 ETisME wrote:On May 15 2014 17:02 InVerno wrote:
I've saw an hundred of people starting enjoy this game (helped them out with a team), and i saw the same people quitting it after 2years.. this isn't the right samplesize to claim i've the truth in my hands about the "bad things" of this game, but hell no, there're a lot of clichès in this thread.. basically everything involving players "not understanding the deep of this game" or "playing moba cuz now they can shit others" or "because they don't want to challenge" and things like that, imho are just crap. I don't want to explain with a wot this, i'm just saying, players are the clients, blizzard is the producer, if something goes wrong with product, is NEVER a client mistake. And the capslock for never is intended. coming from a business graduate and working in a merchandising company, I can tell you that's not the case at all. Client can be wrong and quite often is wrong. However the company is to provide a product that can satisfy most clients desire, something that sc2 does well enough. You will always have clients with unrealistic expectations or impossible to please. And what a company do is to take in feedback for reference What's the correlation with my point? i'm not saying that a good company always delivers all the clients desires, who in the world can believe that. I'm saying that who try to sell me the story "this game is a gem, the fault is people just not understanding it" is wrong. This isn't some sort of an essay movie with an arab poem inside, it's a videogame, a product for masses, made to have fun. If people doesn't have fun (because thats the problem, not the autospawning creeps), well it's a fail of the company. Try to sell a cubic ball and then blame i don't know who (but not yourself) for not understanding your awesome idea to have fun in the new century...Saying this i'm not evaluating the game at all. sc2 statisfy most clients desideres well enought? it's of for me. But if you know someone who quitted, please don't think "oh, he hasn't understand the game.." because it's blizzard not understanding him, not the opposite.
Why do you think blizzard does not understand him?
Let's take an example of people introducing Classical music to you, and you dislike classical, you think it is slow, it needs more beats and no vocal whatever.
Is it a problem of the composer then?
Do you think the composer doesn't know it doesn't have bears or vocal and slow?
Obviously not.
People keep mistakenly label what they dislike about something that actually feature of the game, as flaw/bad points.
saying he doesn't understand it is right because he just doesn't get what's good about it.
Is it that person's fault? No because everyone has different unique taste.
there is no right or wrong here. this isn't something that you can use some standard and point out the product is non-conformancing.
|
Russian Federation125 Posts
If you merge rts and moba you will get something like Warcraft 3.
So all we need is Warcraft 4.
I think that after release of Movie for WorldOfWarcraft Blizz will announce Warcraft4
|
On May 15 2014 21:11 dargul wrote:
If you merge rts and moba you will get something like Warcraft 3.
So all we need is Warcraft 4.
I think that after release of Movie for WorldOfWarcraft Blizz will announce Warcraft4
If they do, it will probably still take until 2018 before they release it.
|
You mean "Soon™ after 2018"
|
But "Instant Action" and "Heroes" is not what SC2 is lacking.
It just has some very irritating game design flaws.... I mean, just look at Protoss/Warpgate...
|
On May 15 2014 19:23 ShadoWYP wrote:
I think the problem with Starcraft is, that it doesnt really have a nice UI. Honestly, I think the gameplay itself is awesome, but the social experience is horrible. Yes, they improved alot since the release of SC2 (chat channels, arcade, ui got simplified) but still, compared to games like DOTA 2 or LOL its a complete joke. There is so many stuff that you could add to the game (ingame shop like dota 2, being able to watch ongoing pub games or tournaments INGAME, being able to download replays INGAME (btw, replaysites are not updating much anymore), blogposts from blizzard INGAME and so on.
When starcraft 2 got released, there was huge hype about this game. Everyone of my friends bought it, even though they never really played RTS. They played and like 1 or 2 Laddergames, and quit playing cause there was nothing else to do + you feel alone all the time while playing.
Yes!!!!!!!
We need better AI and UI for Starcraft 2. Let the AI handle the grunt work such as macro. Let the human handle the micro and the big overall decision making and strategy (what to build, where to scout, do drop play or not, etc.).
Furthermore, the BNET social experience is pretty terrible. It's all laddering and competition. No random fun games.
Also, they should decrease the cost of overlord drop to 100/100. It'll make the game much more interesting.
|
On May 15 2014 05:53 trifecta wrote:
Games focused on team/social play have usually eclipsed the popularity 1v1 focused games. Look at Quake 3 vs. CS, classic RTS vs moba. Playing multiplayer has always been a niche... your average casual gamer plays the single player and never touches the multi. Team-based games lower the barrier for people who don't usually play online for many reasons. Unfortunately, team melee in sc2 is pretty bad, the arcade was undercooked, and the social features of bnet were nonexistent for a long time. Popular competitive multiplayer games are exceptions to the rule regardless of how hardcore or casual the game's mechanics are.
Exactly!
Nowadays, you can pick any game on a SmartPhone and I bet it's multiplayer.
Facebook is full of "multiplayer games".
Multiplayer is not an option anymore, it has become the only option.
None of the kids growing up nowadays are interested in playing a game against the AI anymore.
Either RTS games manage to complete this shift to casual multiplayer, or they will vanish.
Btw, SC2 has NOT managed this shift yet.
|
Northern Ireland25599 Posts
|
On May 15 2014 20:52 Incognoto wrote:
none of those.. what you need is proper game design.
agreed!
|
On May 15 2014 21:53 Velr wrote:
But "Instant Action" and "Heroes" is not what SC2 is lacking.
It just has some very irritating game design flaws.... I mean, just look at Protoss/Warpgate...
you are right ! Look at the bunker !
|
On May 15 2014 21:53 Velr wrote:
But "Instant Action" and "Heroes" is not what SC2 is lacking.
It just has some very irritating game design flaws.... I mean, just look at Protoss/Warpgate...
This isn't about transforming SC2 into something else, this is about making the RTS genre more popular.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland25599 Posts
Thanks btw for those who have linked to other RTS titles, some look pretty interesting will try and play a few.
|
On May 15 2014 22:31 Wombat_NI wrote:
Thanks btw for those who have linked to other RTS titles, some look pretty interesting will try and play a few.
Add WarWind to that list. It's just awesome. (and old)
|
I think you guys have this all wrong... Its not about the instant action its about the Downtime vses the action time.... If your downtime is at a ratio 1:3 or even 1:4 on a complete game then or just for small battles then the game is going to feel like the downtime is not worth it. If you don't believe me go on youtube watch a game of Flash vs Jaedong then watch SC2 any recent game.... the comparison is night and day.... in BW you aren't afraid to combat your opponent in SC2 you have a lot of standstill and just army movement with no action its frustrating as a viewer but in sc2 if you lose your army you most likely have lost the game but its not the players fault...
If you think about it mobas have downtime to but its so small its immeasurable and in a moba you don't lose the whole game if you make a single mistake even at the higher levels.
|
On May 15 2014 22:37 Pirfiktshon wrote:
I think you guys have this all wrong... Its not about the instant action its about the Downtime vses the action time.... If your downtime is at a ratio 1:3 or even 1:4 on a complete game then or just for small battles then the game is going to feel like the downtime is not worth it. If you don't believe me go on youtube watch a game of Flash vs Jaedong then watch SC2 any recent game.... the comparison is night and day.... in BW you aren't afraid to combat your opponent in SC2 you have a lot of standstill and just army movement with no action its frustrating as a viewer but in sc2 if you lose your army you most likely have lost the game but its not the players fault...
If you think about it mobas have downtime to but its so small its immeasurable and in a moba you don't lose the whole game if you make a single mistake even at the higher levels.
There was a lot of game in BW where it was like no rush 20minutes. That's why Flash was considered a boring player at some point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
