|
Keep "my game is better than yours"-slapfights out of this. If the discussion devolves into simple bashing, this thread will be closed. |
On May 16 2014 03:11 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2014 03:09 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 16 2014 02:59 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 16 2014 02:48 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Blizzard has moved on... their 4 other franchises have a much higher profit potential. and Blizzard is not like EA they don't juggle 10 titles at once. we've seen 1 game and 1 expo is the last 15 years and i'd be surprised to Blizzard produces this much new content for the RTS genre in the next 15 years. On May 16 2014 02:37 Plansix wrote: As long as your metric for success isn't "become more popular than LoL", a lost of RTS games can be successful. "can be successful" is so open ended its meaningless. CoH2 was "successful"... how are they likin' that 2 second input delay? how much do think HuK actually plays it? i'm guessing never... the guy just cringes when he talks about it. now if you have 50 million bucks you're not doing anything with... instead of investing it in a sure thing like Bungie Studios.. i recommend you give it to Petroglyph.. they have a nice fireplace and they can burn through that $50 million in about 1 year. If it turns a profit, its successful, if it has a consistent scene, even if niche, then its successful. BW disappeared from the foreign scene with a whimper, only being played in Korea where the playerbase didn't even buy the game depending on PC bangs to buy them 10-30 copies at a time. But no one would call BW a failure. No one would call AoE a failure just because it doesn't have a massive pro scene. No one calls C&C a failure despite it getting behind in cultural popularity than SC. There are MANY MANY ways for games to be successful. Open your mind dude. thanks for your reply sir. C&C and AoE profitability began eroding 10 years ago. It got to the point where these series were no longer profitabile. Hence, MS shut down Ensemble and EA closed both EALA and Victory Games. These long standing huge franchises have not been replaced or superseded by other franchises because the RTS genre can't support it. they closed them down because the new products they released were not successful. Red Alert 3 being a failure doesn't mean Red Alert was not successful.
EALA was part of a succession of failures before EA closed it down.
Kane's Wrath, RA3, RA3:Uprising, and <gulp> C&C4 failed.
If there is no future profit projected for Red Alert EA won't fund a studio to make a game.
Every big time publisher is either pulling out of the RTS genre altogether or diminishing their investment.
Blizzard isn't exactly "doubling down" on the genre by having their RTS team make a MOBA. And WCS gets smaller each year.
|
On May 16 2014 03:14 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2014 03:11 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 16 2014 03:09 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 16 2014 02:59 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 16 2014 02:48 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Blizzard has moved on... their 4 other franchises have a much higher profit potential. and Blizzard is not like EA they don't juggle 10 titles at once. we've seen 1 game and 1 expo is the last 15 years and i'd be surprised to Blizzard produces this much new content for the RTS genre in the next 15 years. On May 16 2014 02:37 Plansix wrote: As long as your metric for success isn't "become more popular than LoL", a lost of RTS games can be successful. "can be successful" is so open ended its meaningless. CoH2 was "successful"... how are they likin' that 2 second input delay? how much do think HuK actually plays it? i'm guessing never... the guy just cringes when he talks about it. now if you have 50 million bucks you're not doing anything with... instead of investing it in a sure thing like Bungie Studios.. i recommend you give it to Petroglyph.. they have a nice fireplace and they can burn through that $50 million in about 1 year. If it turns a profit, its successful, if it has a consistent scene, even if niche, then its successful. BW disappeared from the foreign scene with a whimper, only being played in Korea where the playerbase didn't even buy the game depending on PC bangs to buy them 10-30 copies at a time. But no one would call BW a failure. No one would call AoE a failure just because it doesn't have a massive pro scene. No one calls C&C a failure despite it getting behind in cultural popularity than SC. There are MANY MANY ways for games to be successful. Open your mind dude. thanks for your reply sir. C&C and AoE profitability began eroding 10 years ago. It got to the point where these series were no longer profitabile. Hence, MS shut down Ensemble and EA closed both EALA and Victory Games. These long standing huge franchises have not been replaced or superseded by other franchises because the RTS genre can't support it. they closed them down because the new products they released were not successful. Red Alert 3 being a failure doesn't mean Red Alert was not successful. EALA was part of a succession of failures before EA closed it down. Kane's Wrath, RA3, RA3:Uprising, and <gulp> C&C4 failed. If there is no future profit projected for Red Alert EA won't fund a studio to make a game.
So EA ruined Westwood's legacy. That has nothing to do with wether people want to play RTS or not.
|
Shockingly, studios that make shitty games that don't sell get shit down. Those that make good games do not. RTS has nothing to do with that.
|
On May 16 2014 02:54 Laertes wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2014 23:06 ETisME wrote:On May 15 2014 22:22 Laertes wrote:On May 14 2014 23:25 ETisME wrote:On May 14 2014 22:29 Incognoto wrote:
etisme, assuming that someone out of the blue just comes out with a completely new RTS, would you say that this RTS would be a flop? It wouldn't sell and people wouldn't play it for longer than maybe a year? This would be the case because there aren't enough people interested in RTS or because SC2 is just better than this new RTS, so people would just stick to SC2? well I can't really make any statement, a completely new RTS doesn't necessary will flop, but for there to be a whole new RTS, there must exist a market that looks profitable at the very least, won't you say? I guess what you want to argue about is that it can be just that there is no competition for SC2 and so the RTS scene looks dead? But if there is such a high demand for an alternative to SC2, I am not seeing it, despite how much complains there are. The closest is probably starbow, which has probably the most support a Mod can ever hope for (axiom+TB followers and basetradeTV) and even some of the most popular figureheads in SC2 scene streaming and promoting it but still unable to make any breakthrough in terms of viewership (take away axiom/basetrade TV followers) and even the game itself is lacking in players in general. I believe SC2 serves as a game that cater to traditional standard RTS game and it has taken up most of the market there is there already. But there might still be room for other RTS that are extremely innovative, something like CoH or DoW style, but these games are rare and even when one appear, it doesn't mean the popularity of RTS can go back to its prime years. of cause there can be still rooms for other non-SC style RTS like red alert and AoE but both have failed pretty horribly last time and I highly doubt any company will be willing to invest again anytime soon and prefer to re-release in HD remaster instead The problem is the measurement of playerbase/viewership. There are a number of factors that contribute to Starbow's nicheness. *The game is too hard for the average player, Starcraft 2 does this well but because it designs to the lowest common denominator, it means the high end is comparatively worse than Broodwar. *The Starcraft 2 fanboys don't like it on principle. It got spammed on reddit or something atrociously stupid to hate on it for and now the Starcraft 2 fanboys will downvote it without even bothering to click the link or read the thread. It's disgusting and skews how popular starbow could be. *The lines are drawn in the sand. People think its one or the other, but Starbow could be a great game to play alongside SC2. You can watch starbow when its on and it doesn't mean you are abandoning SC2 or anything like that. If we got a major tournament for Starbow with lots of pro players and a huge prize pool it could draw lots of viewership, as long as its the biggest thing going on at the time. Ultimately there are more but these are the few that really impact things. As far as I know, Artosis and tasteless streaming starbow made it to front page of the starcraft reddit, I don't see it being that hated, it just failed to make enough to actually make a switch or even try it out and stay because they like it. How would you explain starbow reddit being pretty empty then? Or even the starbow tl thread is heavily bumped in order to stay in front page. Like I said, the game already received some of the biggest support a mod can ever hope for. Starbow already has its invitational, showmatch and ladder cups. You can't blame the lack of growth for lack of tournament content either. You have innovation and impact who both are in spot light of gsl, how big of an exposure is that. You have basetradetv who can take a few hundreds or thousand viewers even when khaldor is casting. I tend to think people will choose how to spend their time most efficiently for them and that's how it worked for lol and dota. Some would play both and some would play one or another. But it isn't stopping starbow to grow either. It only makes starbow more of a competition to sc2. I don't want to talk about this anymore anyway, it's only a minor example of my point and going to derail the thread. My point was that there seems to be lacking in a demand for an alternative basic old school rts other than sc2 in the market. I fail to see how talking about this is going to derail the thread. To me it seems like you don't want your ideas challenged, but you were the one to bring up starbow so you have to defend your points. That's how it works. The Starbow Reddit is a poor example because it suffers from a vicious cycle: No one goes there so no one bothers to post there so no one goes there so no one bothers to post there. There are a lot of people who are casually interested in Starbow, but the main limiting factor is how much harder Starbow is then SC2. Noobs really see that they are bad and it bothers them, it hurts them inside. After the invitational the ladder had 30 people queueing at any one time with 109 online each night. That number dropped off because ESL had dropped Starbow mid-february and Starbow was already waning before the invitational. ESL dropped Starbow because the hype was dying down and they equated the hype with the apex, confusing raw viewer numbers with persistent viewer numbers. Finally, the starbow showmatches peaked at 30000, and the maximum prize pool was 150$ and there were only a couple of games. Most of the crowd during those showmatches left in the middle of the TvT(Most people assume mirror matches are bad and prefer non-mirrors instead). And of course Franscar was no match for Innovation, we were hoping he would take a game but honestly it is too hopeful to think that these players who are at best going to beat someone like BeastyQT and at worst going to lose to Avilo(this is only a half joke, he sucks at Starbow as well), would beat a korean BW progamer who at the top of his game was one of the best in the world.
Starbow in and of itself is just mediocre. The maps were especially annoying. I guess its okay if you want a change and I have some friends that kept playing it religiously and finally stopped. The one thing I think Starbow did that should have made the Koreans notice was that they truly opened the idea up to having an official mod of the Korean pro scene. They don't like something? Just change it...
|
On May 16 2014 03:18 Plansix wrote:
Shockingly, studios that make shitty games that don't sell get shit down. Those that make good games do not. RTS has nothing to do with that.
RA3 was great fun. it was not profitable.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/command-conquer-red-alert-3
and Ya, AoE sucks balls too.
you can keep coming up with excuses for every RTS franchise.
let's see what amazing epic experiences replace them.
the over all market has already declined big time.
|
On May 16 2014 03:14 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2014 03:11 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 16 2014 03:09 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 16 2014 02:59 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 16 2014 02:48 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Blizzard has moved on... their 4 other franchises have a much higher profit potential. and Blizzard is not like EA they don't juggle 10 titles at once. we've seen 1 game and 1 expo is the last 15 years and i'd be surprised to Blizzard produces this much new content for the RTS genre in the next 15 years. On May 16 2014 02:37 Plansix wrote: As long as your metric for success isn't "become more popular than LoL", a lost of RTS games can be successful. "can be successful" is so open ended its meaningless. CoH2 was "successful"... how are they likin' that 2 second input delay? how much do think HuK actually plays it? i'm guessing never... the guy just cringes when he talks about it. now if you have 50 million bucks you're not doing anything with... instead of investing it in a sure thing like Bungie Studios.. i recommend you give it to Petroglyph.. they have a nice fireplace and they can burn through that $50 million in about 1 year. If it turns a profit, its successful, if it has a consistent scene, even if niche, then its successful. BW disappeared from the foreign scene with a whimper, only being played in Korea where the playerbase didn't even buy the game depending on PC bangs to buy them 10-30 copies at a time. But no one would call BW a failure. No one would call AoE a failure just because it doesn't have a massive pro scene. No one calls C&C a failure despite it getting behind in cultural popularity than SC. There are MANY MANY ways for games to be successful. Open your mind dude. thanks for your reply sir. C&C and AoE profitability began eroding 10 years ago. It got to the point where these series were no longer profitabile. Hence, MS shut down Ensemble and EA closed both EALA and Victory Games. These long standing huge franchises have not been replaced or superseded by other franchises because the RTS genre can't support it. they closed them down because the new products they released were not successful. Red Alert 3 being a failure doesn't mean Red Alert was not successful. EALA was part of a succession of failures before EA closed it down. Kane's Wrath, RA3, RA3:Uprising, and <gulp> C&C4 failed. If there is no future profit projected for Red Alert EA won't fund a studio to make a game. Every big time publisher is either pulling out of the RTS genre altogether or diminishing their investment.
Yes. As I said, the new products were not successful. But calling the lack of a C&C4 as a the deathknell of RTS games suggests a metric where unless you beat Call of Duty you're a failure--and that's something I can't abide by.
The fighting game genre is not dead just because there are only 3-4 titles that are popular. And the RTS genre is not dead just because C&C4 was cancelled.
the current market trend is people want free games. So very few high budget releases will make a profit--period. Do you really think LoL would be as big as it is if it was $60 a pop?
|
dude, when Blizzard speaks with their actions and produces another full RTS game let me know.
from 1994 to 2003 Blizz pumps out new RTS games non-stop.
since 2003 we've seen 1 expo and 1 game and blizz is on the record the RTS team is on a MOBA.
does Blizzard move their WoW team over to some new RTS concept game? no.
does Blizzard have the WoW team do anything but make more WoW content?
all the growth in Blizzard as a company since 2003 has come from an MMO not an RTS.
as AAA level teams continue to grow in size ( see Destiny ) Blizz continue to limp along with the same tiny RTS team.
and 2 other top notch RTS franchises are gone and have not been replaced.
I go by Blizzard's actions. Not their PR spin.
On May 16 2014 03:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:
The fighting game genre is not dead just because there are only 3-4 titles that are popular. And the RTS genre is not dead just because C&C4 was cancelled.
the current market trend is people want free games. So very few high budget releases will make a profit--period. Do you really think LoL would be as big as it is if it was $60 a pop?
umm, C&C4 was completed and released and sold very badly.
|
Blizzard is a studio with creative people. They don't want to make RTS games for 20 years straight. No one does. Why do you think studios that are making their 2nd or 3rd sequel are bleeding talent? No one make the same game for 15 years straight.
|
Does anyone have some numbers on how well Dota and LoL are doing in terms of revenue?
How do they compare to other RTS titles?
Is it possible that MOBAs are popular exactly because they are free to play?
(Or in other words, no one actually pays for them)
How often do casual players make purchases inside MOBAs?
How much does the average gamer spend on a MOBA?
Did Riot Games reach break even with LoL?
How profitable was Dota2 for Valve?
|
On May 14 2014 05:34 ShiaoPi wrote:
so you want Warcraft IV? :DDD
TRUTH. I'm sure I can't be the only Warcraft 3 fan here that played WC3:TFT as their first competitive RTS (I played SC, but I just did BGH, etc). I miss the hero and micro wars.
|
Why would a developer put in millions of dollars into a new RTS, when the RTS players of today can't find the RTS games that already exist today?
The fact that 90+% of RTS players only play starcraft is a big statement from the players to developers.
|
Valve releases zero data on dota, but it's widely accepted that its main purpose to get you to install steam on your PC.
Who knows for lol, but they are making bank. But none of that matters for RTS games. It's like asking "how can 3d shooters get league numbers".
|
On May 16 2014 03:34 Plansix wrote:
Blizzard is a studio with creative people. They don't want to make RTS games for 20 years straight. No one does. Why do you think studios that are making their 2nd or 3rd sequel are bleeding talent? No one make the same game for 15 years straight.
ah so because WoW is only 8 years old and the RTS team is all the same guys from back in 1994 they are getting bored.
ROFLMAO. there is turnover.. if u think the RTS team consists of all the guys from '94 youre dreaming.
no, Blizzard is a studio that generates profit that may have some creative people in it. do not reverse cause and effect.
the cause is profit and the effect is paid employees who may be creative.. or may not.
no,
the WoW team has not been moved off of WoW and onto a MOBA beceause WoW makes more money than any RTS game Blizzard has made.
SC makes less than Diablo and WoW so it team is what gets cannibalized when its time to make a MOBA.
and it gets publicly talked about because investors know its the least profitable.
|
Lol. Lack of strategic depth?
I guess you never watched competitive Dota 2.
|
On May 16 2014 03:26 JimmyJRaynor wrote:dude, when Blizzard speaks with their actions and produces another full RTS game let me know. from 1994 to 2003 Blizz pumps out new RTS games non-stop. since 2003 we've seen 1 expo and 1 game and blizz is on the record the RTS team is on a MOBA. does Blizzard move their WoW team over to some new RTS concept game? no. does Blizzard have the WoW team do anything but make more WoW content? all the growth in Blizzard as a company since 2003 has come from an MMO not an RTS. as AAA level teams continue to grow in size ( see Destiny ) Blizz continue to limp along with the same tiny RTS team. and 2 other top notch RTS franchises are gone and have not been replaced. I go by Blizzard's actions. Not their PR spin. Show nested quote +On May 16 2014 03:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:
The fighting game genre is not dead just because there are only 3-4 titles that are popular. And the RTS genre is not dead just because C&C4 was cancelled.
the current market trend is people want free games. So very few high budget releases will make a profit--period. Do you really think LoL would be as big as it is if it was $60 a pop?
umm, C&C4 was completed and released and sold very badly.
Blizzard only made 2 RTS game before SC2.
Blizzard's total RTS contributions stands at 3.
You know what franchise has made Blizz the most money? Warcraft 1. by franchise standards, Warcraft has been bigger than Starcraft. By release standards, Warcraft has been bigger, more widespread, and more accepted than Starcraft. comparably speaking, Broodwar was an absolute failure and it was only Blizzard's interest in pushing the product that gave them the go ahead to make a sequel.
|
The genre is good, but you have to put out a quality product to make it work. And the quality of SC2 just got worse from 2011 onwards and so the playerbase deminished. I know some people, who are not really into PC gaming, but love to play AoE 2 for example. The potential players are there, you just need to put out some quality product and you´ll catch them!
Edit:
Blizzard put out 5 RTS with 5 add ons games so far:
Warcraft + Add on
Warcraft 2 + Add on
Starcraft + Add on
Warcraft 3 + Add on
Starcraft 2 + Add on
|
On May 16 2014 03:48 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2014 03:26 JimmyJRaynor wrote:dude, when Blizzard speaks with their actions and produces another full RTS game let me know. from 1994 to 2003 Blizz pumps out new RTS games non-stop. since 2003 we've seen 1 expo and 1 game and blizz is on the record the RTS team is on a MOBA. does Blizzard move their WoW team over to some new RTS concept game? no. does Blizzard have the WoW team do anything but make more WoW content? all the growth in Blizzard as a company since 2003 has come from an MMO not an RTS. as AAA level teams continue to grow in size ( see Destiny ) Blizz continue to limp along with the same tiny RTS team. and 2 other top notch RTS franchises are gone and have not been replaced. I go by Blizzard's actions. Not their PR spin. On May 16 2014 03:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:
The fighting game genre is not dead just because there are only 3-4 titles that are popular. And the RTS genre is not dead just because C&C4 was cancelled.
the current market trend is people want free games. So very few high budget releases will make a profit--period. Do you really think LoL would be as big as it is if it was $60 a pop?
umm, C&C4 was completed and released and sold very badly. Blizzard only made 2 RTS game before SC2. Blizzard's total RTS contributions stands at 3. You know what franchise has made Blizz the most money? Warcraft 1. by franchise standards, Warcraft has been bigger than Starcraft. By release standards, Warcraft has been bigger, more widespread, and more accepted than Starcraft. comparably speaking, Broodwar was an absolute failure and it was only Blizzard's interest in pushing the product that gave them the go ahead to make a sequel.
read my post above about profitability relative to Diablo and WoW.
Blizzard is not increasing its investment in RTS.
|
On May 16 2014 03:44 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2014 03:34 Plansix wrote:
Blizzard is a studio with creative people. They don't want to make RTS games for 20 years straight. No one does. Why do you think studios that are making their 2nd or 3rd sequel are bleeding talent? No one make the same game for 15 years straight. ah so because WoW is only 8 years old and the RTS team is all the same guys from back in 1994 they are getting bored. ROFLMAO. there is turnover.. if u think the RTS team consists of all the guys from '94 youre dreaming. no, Blizzard is a studio that generates profit that may have some creative people in it. do not reverse cause and effect. the cause is profit and the effect is paid employees who may be creative.. or may not. no, the WoW team has not been moved off of WoW and onto a MOBA beceause WoW makes more money than any RTS game Blizzard has made. SC makes less than Diablo and WoW so it team is what gets cannibalized when its time to make a MOBA.and it gets publicly talked about because investors know its the least profitable.
I already told you. Heroes of the Storm is built on the SC2 engine. Of course the same people that developed that are developing it. Also MOBAs are a subgenre of RTS games
Multiplayer online battle arena (MOBA), also known as action real-time strategy (ARTS) or Hero Brawler, is a sub-genre of the real-time strategy (RTS) genre of video games (source Wikipedia)
Of course RTS developers are going to develop an RTS... Not RPG developers. Not ARPG developers. RTS developers.
|
On May 16 2014 03:48 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2014 03:26 JimmyJRaynor wrote:dude, when Blizzard speaks with their actions and produces another full RTS game let me know. from 1994 to 2003 Blizz pumps out new RTS games non-stop. since 2003 we've seen 1 expo and 1 game and blizz is on the record the RTS team is on a MOBA. does Blizzard move their WoW team over to some new RTS concept game? no. does Blizzard have the WoW team do anything but make more WoW content? all the growth in Blizzard as a company since 2003 has come from an MMO not an RTS. as AAA level teams continue to grow in size ( see Destiny ) Blizz continue to limp along with the same tiny RTS team. and 2 other top notch RTS franchises are gone and have not been replaced. I go by Blizzard's actions. Not their PR spin. On May 16 2014 03:22 Thieving Magpie wrote:
The fighting game genre is not dead just because there are only 3-4 titles that are popular. And the RTS genre is not dead just because C&C4 was cancelled.
the current market trend is people want free games. So very few high budget releases will make a profit--period. Do you really think LoL would be as big as it is if it was $60 a pop?
umm, C&C4 was completed and released and sold very badly. Blizzard only made 2 RTS game before SC2. Blizzard's total RTS contributions stands at 3. You know what franchise has made Blizz the most money? Warcraft 1. by franchise standards, Warcraft has been bigger than Starcraft. By release standards, Warcraft has been bigger, more widespread, and more accepted than Starcraft. comparably speaking, Broodwar was an absolute failure and it was only Blizzard's interest in pushing the product that gave them the go ahead to make a sequel.
Hm, why do you say that?
The numbers i find place it around the best selling PC games ever, at aprox 10 mil. units sold.
|
When we look at the sales of the franchises, according to Wikipedia,
StarCraft is at 17 million total
Diablo is at 20 million total
Not so much difference to be honest.
At least there is no immediate reason to be concerned about StarCraft.
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_game_franchises
@Thieving_Magpie: stop posting incorrect data , you are doing this the second time already in this thread.
StarCraft was the 8th best selling video game of all time!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
