|
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 18 2014 22:37 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2014 21:45 Hider wrote:
What you need is one game that draws the casuals and then has a reasonably high skill ceiling so that progaming can evolve from it. The game itself has to do the whole work, not some other games that happen to be playable when you bought the original one. Sure, such Arcade Games will help you draw in people that sooner or later will also try the main game, but they do not make them get into esports or even just keep on playing it when they don't really like it.
I think there needs to be different modes here really. One "easy" mode for casuals (that could be teamgamed based and reduces the total amount of mechanics required) and then a 1on1 based mode that has a really high skill ceiling. Obviously the teamgamebased mode of SC2 doesn't really work anywhere near good enough for two reasons; 1) Build orders/refining timings are still way way too important --> high entrance barrier 2) You need to execute the same level of mechancs in 2v2 as in 1on1. I think you should be able to split the amont of mechanics required when you go into teambased mode (so you only need to perform roughly half of the tasks in a 2v2 as in a 1on1). That will, however, obviously require some radical change from the current way RTS's works. This is obviously theorycraft, but imo the thing with RTS as we know them is that there is a huge "real-time simulation" part in it that is just about your own skill and not about interacting. Meanwhile competitive sports like tennis or football are so incredibly interesting to play for the masses, because the skill required is mostly determined by the skill you play against. You can score really nice goals and pull off the same tricks professional players do in football, when your opponent is just as bad as you are. Because he won't tackle you in the ways you'd be tackled in proplay, and a sprintduel will still be the same sprintduel as on the prolevel, just a little bit slower. On the flipside, instead of playing Starcraft you could also play your favorite transport simulator game (I can recommend Simutrans) and will see that a lot of the skills you need in those games are very similar, which is knowledge about which investments to do when and how to build up your own infrastructure. And by just getting faster and more knowledgable, you will get much better in transport simulators too. So instead of having easier or harder modes, I would rather hope to find a way to largely multiply the situations in which it is all about how good your opponent is in relation to you, whether *something* works or not. Meanwhile that *something* should feel to you the exact same as when you watch it being done by a proplayer. Even though it is not, because your opponent would have given you a much harder time if he wasn't just your own skilllevel.
What you mean is that a player should be able to feel that he just did a great play, no matter the skill bracket he is in.
I agree.
|
Canada11324 Posts
On May 18 2014 05:52 lamprey1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2014 05:42 Eliezar wrote:
First, WoW is a subscription based game and cannot be compared to any other of Blizzard's titles, so just give that up saying they keep producting content for it. All paid MMOs keep a team working on it, no one time purchase games keep a large team working on them after the project is done.
Second, Blizzard has supported StarCraft 2 already more than it supported the original Diablo. It supported the game with 1 expansion the same as it supported Warcraft 2, Warcraft 3, Diablo 2, and StarCraft.
Third, Blizzard is actively pumping money into eSports for StarCraft 2 in a way that it has never before.
i just go by how often Blizzard is asking for money from the RTS fans. Blizzard themselves knows they can't get any money out of the genre.. its like taking blood from a stone. which is why they've asked for $40 in 5 years. Blizzard knows RTS fans won't spend money. MMO fans will spend money.
Isn't that par for the course for Blizzard though? 98 to 03 was a five year gap between SC and WC3. 03 to 10 was a seven year gap! Post-WCII they've not exactly been known for pumping out games in hurry. What's changed is that they've found a way to get a couple small quality projects on the go, and get money inbetween the big projects. But I don't think that spells the end of Blizzard and RTS or that they don't see much money in RTS. I suspect they've simply found a way to make even more money by diversifying.
Also. I would totaly play that game LaLuSh described. I've dreamed about playing such a large scale RTS since I knew there were RTS games.
|
You can score really nice goals and pull off the same tricks professional players do in football, when your opponent is just as bad as you are. Because he won't tackle you in the ways you'd be tackled in proplay, and a sprintduel will still be the same sprintduel as on the prolevel, just a little bit slower.
On the flipside, instead of playing Starcraft you could also play your favorite transport simulator game (I can recommend Simutrans) and will see that a lot of the skills you need in those games are very similar, which is knowledge about which investments to do when and how to build up your own infrastructure. And by just getting faster and more knowledgable, you will get much better in transport simulators too.
My point is that it's a turnoff for (the majority) of casuals who aren't looking to improve, but rather to just have fun 2 hours a week playing the game if the mechanical reuqirements are too signifciant.
For instance, when you play Sc2 it's very stressful becasue there are so many things you need to do. That's ofc also it's biggest strenght, but that only applies to those looking to improve. I can tell you that all the APM you need to have to play Sc2 is a big turnoff for all of my IRL friends, and I think if there was a mode with signifcant reduced mechanical requirements, they would def. consider to play it. Esp if you could combine it with the social elements of teamgame based play.
|
On May 19 2014 02:12 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +You can score really nice goals and pull off the same tricks professional players do in football, when your opponent is just as bad as you are. Because he won't tackle you in the ways you'd be tackled in proplay, and a sprintduel will still be the same sprintduel as on the prolevel, just a little bit slower.
On the flipside, instead of playing Starcraft you could also play your favorite transport simulator game (I can recommend Simutrans) and will see that a lot of the skills you need in those games are very similar, which is knowledge about which investments to do when and how to build up your own infrastructure. And by just getting faster and more knowledgable, you will get much better in transport simulators too. My point is that it's a turnoff for (the majority) of casuals who aren't looking to improve, but rather to just have fun 2 hours a week playing the game if the mechanical reuqirements are too signifciant. For instance, when you play Sc2 it's very stressful becasue there are so many things you need to do. That's ofc also it's biggest strenght, but that only applies to those looking to improve. I can tell you that all the APM you need to have to play Sc2 is a big turnoff for all of my IRL friends, and I think if there was a mode with signifcant reduced mechanical requirements, they would def. consider to play it. Esp if you could combine it with the social elements of teamgame based play.
Oh yeah, that i fully agree with.
I'd just rather have everyone playing the exact same game and have the mechanical requiremenz being very low because your opponent and the game cannot force more out of you at your level.
|
On May 18 2014 05:02 BungaBunga wrote:
To expand on LaLush's idea:
- World wide MMORTS
- Starts in stone age
- Terrain is the actual earth modeled from Google Earth
- 45 different races similar to Civilization
- You control area by stationing troops and building cities
- If your race is defeated, you respawn as an ally of the one that defeated you
- Continue until one race achieves world domination
- Races advance through ages according to the available tech
- Since no one can play 24/7: If you quit, the game continues and your race is taken over by another player.
- The next time you login, you can check progress, ask to take over or start a new game with a new race.
This sounds really great!
So I'm wondering, would something like that be technically feasible?
While you're playing you are obviously only focusing on one point of the globe.
Therefore, there is no need to load the whole world model every time from the server.
When your armies get bigger, you need to be able to zoom out accordingly without losing sight of your troops.
I guess Planetary Annihilation must have solved this somehow.
However, when you have conquered several countries or when your armies are cut off in the middle, there needs to be a way to quickly switch between battlefields without additional loading time.
There also needs to be a way to surrender if you have only few troops left.
So that you can respawn as an ally.
One potential problem could be that there will be pacts between players, like in Civ5 or in FFA.
|
On May 19 2014 02:19 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 02:12 Hider wrote:You can score really nice goals and pull off the same tricks professional players do in football, when your opponent is just as bad as you are. Because he won't tackle you in the ways you'd be tackled in proplay, and a sprintduel will still be the same sprintduel as on the prolevel, just a little bit slower.
On the flipside, instead of playing Starcraft you could also play your favorite transport simulator game (I can recommend Simutrans) and will see that a lot of the skills you need in those games are very similar, which is knowledge about which investments to do when and how to build up your own infrastructure. And by just getting faster and more knowledgable, you will get much better in transport simulators too. My point is that it's a turnoff for (the majority) of casuals who aren't looking to improve, but rather to just have fun 2 hours a week playing the game if the mechanical reuqirements are too signifciant. For instance, when you play Sc2 it's very stressful becasue there are so many things you need to do. That's ofc also it's biggest strenght, but that only applies to those looking to improve. I can tell you that all the APM you need to have to play Sc2 is a big turnoff for all of my IRL friends, and I think if there was a mode with signifcant reduced mechanical requirements, they would def. consider to play it. Esp if you could combine it with the social elements of teamgame based play. Oh yeah, that i fully agree with. I'd just rather have everyone playing the exact same game and have the mechanical requiremenz being very low because your opponent and the game cannot force more out of you at your level.
You're getting this wrong imo.
Some games are fun to play when you're playing opponents your skill level. E.g. LoL or Dota 2, even brood war (BGH). These games can be very fun even if you play at a low level. Yet those same games have a very high skill cap if played by pros. That's what an RTS needs to be successful.
SC2 is pretty good as an esport: It's got a constantly evolving, deep metagame. Two high calibre players can show some very, very entertaining games. The thing is that it's less "fun" than the other titles mentioned before because of how volatile the game is played.
You can lose a game instantly in SC2 if you let just a little small thing slip. That's fine if the game is being played at a high level, but I imagine it's very, very annoying for Bronze level players to have to deal with things like a basic baneling bust, drops, hellions, warp gate all-ins, flying a flock of muta into mines/thors, etc. The fact that it's very easy to lose a game instantly when playing SC2 makes it very entertaining to watch at a high level of play, but the game is pretty shitty if you're looking to chill.
Compare that to an Age of Empires game, Nexus wars, MOBAs, WC3 (I think?) or even Brood War. Yes, Brood War. Many people played BW for fun, iirc Koreans would take girls on dates to pc bangs even. All very good fun to play casually, all (well not Nexus wars) can also be played at a high level with a high skill ceiling. The game that is being played casually with a cold beer open is the exact same game that is being played by professionals with 300+ APM.
|
On May 18 2014 21:45 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2014 03:19 lamprey1 wrote:On May 18 2014 03:01 Incognoto wrote:On May 18 2014 00:31 Trustworthy-Tony wrote:On May 18 2014 00:12 ZodaSoda wrote:On May 17 2014 22:18 Trustworthy-Tony wrote:
If there were a requirement to be at least gm in Starcraft or 5k rating in DotA to be allowed to post here, the discussion might actually be useful. That isn't much, but it would prevent the most clueless to spread nonsense. That discussion is about as useful as this discussion... Being good at games =/= understanding development Having a clue how the game works strategically, mechanically and tactically is painfully apparrently not a thing people consider necessary to having an opinion. That's the thing with opinions, anyone can have them. You don't need to be GM or 5k+ to play or enjoy Dota 2 or SC2. Casual players are just as entitled to having their views on what makes a game fun for them as pro players do. We're not talking balance here, we're talking what would make good game design. Browder, Morhaime and Sigaty are not GMs. they've forgotten more about game design than every GM on all 3 ladders combined. ummm ya LOL i found at least 1 pretty glaring error. D3 was at 10+ million in 2012. and another that is almost certainly an error WoL was at 4.5 million in december 2010. its hard to believe only 100,000 units sold for the next 3 years, especially with all those $20 Walmart sales. http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ACTI/3176091296x0x440263/2a37de98-400f-4916-9bb3-ae5ddf1b86b8/ATVI C4Q10 slides FINAL.pdf I think those numbers excluded digital sales. Show nested quote +
What you need is one game that draws the casuals and then has a reasonably high skill ceiling so that progaming can evolve from it. The game itself has to do the whole work, not some other games that happen to be playable when you bought the original one. Sure, such Arcade Games will help you draw in people that sooner or later will also try the main game, but they do not make them get into esports or even just keep on playing it when they don't really like it.
I think there needs to be different modes here really. One "easy" mode for casuals (that could be teamgamed based and reduces the total amount of mechanics required) and then a 1on1 based mode that has a really high skill ceiling. Obviously the teamgamebased mode of SC2 doesn't really work anywhere near good enough for two reasons; 1) Build orders/refining timings are still way way too important --> high entrance barrier 2) You need to execute the same level of mechancs in 2v2 as in 1on1. I think you should be able to split the amont of mechanics required when you go into teambased mode (so you only need to perform roughly half of the tasks in a 2v2 as in a 1on1). That will, however, obviously require some radical change from the current way RTS's works.
I think you forget that this is what custom games are for. As far as I know, casuals are more interested in playing custom maps and mods than the ladder, particularly 1v1.
|
On May 19 2014 02:46 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 02:19 Big J wrote:On May 19 2014 02:12 Hider wrote:You can score really nice goals and pull off the same tricks professional players do in football, when your opponent is just as bad as you are. Because he won't tackle you in the ways you'd be tackled in proplay, and a sprintduel will still be the same sprintduel as on the prolevel, just a little bit slower.
On the flipside, instead of playing Starcraft you could also play your favorite transport simulator game (I can recommend Simutrans) and will see that a lot of the skills you need in those games are very similar, which is knowledge about which investments to do when and how to build up your own infrastructure. And by just getting faster and more knowledgable, you will get much better in transport simulators too. My point is that it's a turnoff for (the majority) of casuals who aren't looking to improve, but rather to just have fun 2 hours a week playing the game if the mechanical reuqirements are too signifciant. For instance, when you play Sc2 it's very stressful becasue there are so many things you need to do. That's ofc also it's biggest strenght, but that only applies to those looking to improve. I can tell you that all the APM you need to have to play Sc2 is a big turnoff for all of my IRL friends, and I think if there was a mode with signifcant reduced mechanical requirements, they would def. consider to play it. Esp if you could combine it with the social elements of teamgame based play. Oh yeah, that i fully agree with. I'd just rather have everyone playing the exact same game and have the mechanical requiremenz being very low because your opponent and the game cannot force more out of you at your level. You're getting this wrong imo. Some games are fun to play when you're playing opponents your skill level. E.g. LoL or Dota 2, even brood war (BGH). These games can be very fun even if you play at a low level. Yet those same games have a very high skill cap if played by pros. That's what an RTS needs to be successful. SC2 is pretty good as an esport: It's got a constantly evolving, deep metagame. Two high calibre players can show some very, very entertaining games. The thing is that it's less "fun" than the other titles mentioned before because of how volatile the game is played. You can lose a game instantly in SC2 if you let just a little small thing slip. That's fine if the game is being played at a high level, but I imagine it's very, very annoying for Bronze level players to have to deal with things like a basic baneling bust, drops, hellions, warp gate all-ins, flying a flock of muta into mines/thors, etc. The fact that it's very easy to lose a game instantly when playing SC2 makes it very entertaining to watch at a high level of play, but the game is pretty shitty if you're looking to chill. Compare that to an Age of Empires game, Nexus wars, MOBAs, WC3 (I think?) or even Brood War. Yes, Brood War. Many people played BW for fun, iirc Koreans would take girls on dates to pc bangs even. All very good fun to play casually, all (well not Nexus wars) can also be played at a high level with a high skill ceiling. The game that is being played casually with a cold beer open is the exact same game that is being played by professionals with 300+ APM.
This applies to Blizz type RTS games that are high pressure, it makes it hard to play the game for "fun" as your objective is trying to win, and there are always try hards that are going to do some easy strategy that you need a perfect response to or you lose(cannon rush/7gate etc..). You can make these games fun if your lower the ceiling.
Its not the learning curve either, MGO had a steep learning curve for noobs but once you learn to headshot people consistently you are on equal grounds with everyone else and you can play it casually for fun or tryhard and have fun either way. I've had more fun playing MGO2 than I had killing the LK after months of grinding ICC(you wont understand how amazing this feels unless it was your main goal since day1 of WoW).
With starcraft if your a top level pro its quite hard to play at a bronze level just because your mechanics are strong enough that you have an intuitive sense on how to get somewhere where bronze people just dont. So you will never be able to match the best and worse player together and have a fun game for either of them unless you create an absurd requirement on yourself like kill the opponent with workers. Thats the biggest problem.
RTS games in general are going to be similar versions of each other until someone finds a new mechanic that can be added to these games which add something to it. Blizz could make a new RTS game where you can add multiple win conditions that could help the game genre.
And the MOBA/RTS stuff is just stupid. They are 2 different games with different audiences, they appeal to different people, its like comparing SC2 with WoW PvP. No reason to try to compete with LoL/Dota. SC2 isn't dying or anything, its that too much money was pumped into it the first 2 years of WoL which made it seem bigger and more lucrative than it actually should be. The money was unsustainable.
|
I don't buy that argument that you can't have a fun game for both noobs and strong players.
It works for other sports as well.
Beginners that play tennis or football can have loads of fun.
Chess is lots of fun as a noob.
I also believe that you can have lots of fun with SC2 as a beginner.
That is, as long as you play against other noobs.
My guess is that the number of players in Bronze league is just too high.
It follows that total noobs end up playing against a lot more experienced Bronze players.
Since the noobs will get defeated often early on, they lose interest in the game.
Therefore: Make a lot more sub-leagues within Bronze league, so that the complete beginners never face the top Bronze players.
|
On May 19 2014 04:06 urboss wrote:
I don't buy that argument that you can't have a fun game for both noobs and strong players.
It works for other sports as well.
Beginners that play tennis or football can have loads of fun.
Chess is lots of fun as a noob.
I also believe that you can have lots of fun with SC2 as a beginner.
That is, as long as you play against other noobs.
My guess is that the number of players in Bronze league is just too high.
It follows that total noobs end up playing against a lot more experienced Bronze players.
Since the noobs will get defeated often early on, they lose interest in the game.
Therefore: Make a lot more sub-leagues within Bronze league, so that the complete beginners never face the top Bronze players.
as an RTS ages it gets harder for completely new players to jump on board.
because , most of the players are people who've played the game for many months.
the # of completely new players entering an RTS diminishes with time. and so it makes it harder for completely new players to find each other.
this sort of thing has already happened with many older RTS's.
Blizzard has done a better job of "protecting nOObs" and "protecting inexperienced players" via SC2's match maker... than any other RTS ever.
Dustin Browder take a bow.
|
On May 19 2014 04:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 04:06 urboss wrote:
I don't buy that argument that you can't have a fun game for both noobs and strong players.
It works for other sports as well.
Beginners that play tennis or football can have loads of fun.
Chess is lots of fun as a noob.
I also believe that you can have lots of fun with SC2 as a beginner.
That is, as long as you play against other noobs.
My guess is that the number of players in Bronze league is just too high.
It follows that total noobs end up playing against a lot more experienced Bronze players.
Since the noobs will get defeated often early on, they lose interest in the game.
Therefore: Make a lot more sub-leagues within Bronze league, so that the complete beginners never face the top Bronze players.
as an RTS ages it gets harder for completely new players to jump on board. because , most of the players are people who've played the game for many months.
That's so true!
I have friends that sort of are in to RTS, but because they never got in to SC2 from the beginning, now it's out of the question. It is an ego thing of course, but still sucks.
|
imo this is one of the most productive threads that i've seen on teamliquid for a long time, i hope blizzard or valve is reading for all of the insight
|
I don't understand the "RTS is a hard game to get into". Have people become genetically dumber over the past decade or something? RTS is RTS, if you're interested in managing an economy, building a base and then controlling an army, then you play RTS games. If that doesn't interest you, you don't.
This applies to Blizz type RTS games that are high pressure, it makes it hard to play the game for "fun" as your objective is trying to win, and there are always try hards that are going to do some easy strategy that you need a perfect response to or you lose(cannon rush/7gate etc..). You can make these games fun if your lower the ceiling.
Its not the learning curve either, MGO had a steep learning curve for noobs but once you learn to headshot people consistently you are on equal grounds with everyone else and you can play it casually for fun or tryhard and have fun either way. I've had more fun playing MGO2 than I had killing the LK after months of grinding ICC(you wont understand how amazing this feels unless it was your main goal since day1 of WoW).
With starcraft if your a top level pro its quite hard to play at a bronze level just because your mechanics are strong enough that you have an intuitive sense on how to get somewhere where bronze people just dont. So you will never be able to match the best and worse player together and have a fun game for either of them unless you create an absurd requirement on yourself like kill the opponent with workers. Thats the biggest problem.
RTS games in general are going to be similar versions of each other until someone finds a new mechanic that can be added to these games which add something to it. Blizz could make a new RTS game where you can add multiple win conditions that could help the game genre.
"Blizz type" RTS games are somehow high pressure? I don't know about WC3 but SC2 was definitely designed to be a high pressure RTS due to how ridiculously easy it is to do a LOT of damage and how difficult it is to avoid taking damage (relative to doing damage). Somehow though, BW remains much more mechanically demanding than SC2 ever will be. This is mostly due to the out-dated UI, but combine that with a well designed RTS and you have an excellent game. AoC is the exact same thing really (AoC is more mechanically demanding than SC2). The thing is that neither AoC nor BW were designed to be high pressure RTS, they were just designed to be fun. Both were actual fun games, in which people had the choice to either play 1v1 competitively (objective = winning) or play team games / custom games / FFAs / custom maps (objective = fun). The real kicker is that both competitive 1v1 and fun game play is based on the exact same game.
SC2 is centered entirely around 1v1, both in the aspect of esports and laddering. It's designed to be a competitive, high pressure game, which is why casuals don't like it. Has Blizzard ever even considered balance changes for team games? Never.. Blizzard realized their mistake and that's why they pushed the Arcade, something that has no equivalent in any game that I can think of. Don't get me wrong, SC2 is a great game, but it's not a very fun game.
PS: Valve if you ever read this thread, grow a pair and publish an RTS.
|
On May 19 2014 04:39 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 04:29 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On May 19 2014 04:06 urboss wrote:
I don't buy that argument that you can't have a fun game for both noobs and strong players.
It works for other sports as well.
Beginners that play tennis or football can have loads of fun.
Chess is lots of fun as a noob.
I also believe that you can have lots of fun with SC2 as a beginner.
That is, as long as you play against other noobs.
My guess is that the number of players in Bronze league is just too high.
It follows that total noobs end up playing against a lot more experienced Bronze players.
Since the noobs will get defeated often early on, they lose interest in the game.
Therefore: Make a lot more sub-leagues within Bronze league, so that the complete beginners never face the top Bronze players.
as an RTS ages it gets harder for completely new players to jump on board. because , most of the players are people who've played the game for many months. That's so true! I have friends that sort of are in to RTS, but because they never got in to SC2 from the beginning, now it's out of the question. It is an ego thing of course, but still sucks.
they will draw beginner Bronze players though... u should encourage them to give it a try.
i convinced a woman who is over 45 who works at my #1 customer site.... i convinced her to try SC2 and 2v2s with me as her partner
she is now in gold in 1v1s and is a card carrying Blizzard fan-girl. ( well as much as a woman over 45 can be a girl) 
that said, she is very competitive and very technically inclined.
this issue we both agree on with SC2 is 1000X worse with stuff like C&C3 and CoH1. nOObs just get curb stomped so hard in those games.... everyone has their set build orders... and timings.. and if 100% don't know exactly what u r doing .. u r dead.
|
On May 19 2014 02:46 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 02:19 Big J wrote:On May 19 2014 02:12 Hider wrote:You can score really nice goals and pull off the same tricks professional players do in football, when your opponent is just as bad as you are. Because he won't tackle you in the ways you'd be tackled in proplay, and a sprintduel will still be the same sprintduel as on the prolevel, just a little bit slower.
On the flipside, instead of playing Starcraft you could also play your favorite transport simulator game (I can recommend Simutrans) and will see that a lot of the skills you need in those games are very similar, which is knowledge about which investments to do when and how to build up your own infrastructure. And by just getting faster and more knowledgable, you will get much better in transport simulators too. My point is that it's a turnoff for (the majority) of casuals who aren't looking to improve, but rather to just have fun 2 hours a week playing the game if the mechanical reuqirements are too signifciant. For instance, when you play Sc2 it's very stressful becasue there are so many things you need to do. That's ofc also it's biggest strenght, but that only applies to those looking to improve. I can tell you that all the APM you need to have to play Sc2 is a big turnoff for all of my IRL friends, and I think if there was a mode with signifcant reduced mechanical requirements, they would def. consider to play it. Esp if you could combine it with the social elements of teamgame based play. Oh yeah, that i fully agree with. I'd just rather have everyone playing the exact same game and have the mechanical requiremenz being very low because your opponent and the game cannot force more out of you at your level. You're getting this wrong imo. Some games are fun to play when you're playing opponents your skill level. E.g. LoL or Dota 2, even brood war (BGH). These games can be very fun even if you play at a low level. Yet those same games have a very high skill cap if played by pros. That's what an RTS needs to be successful. SC2 is pretty good as an esport: It's got a constantly evolving, deep metagame. Two high calibre players can show some very, very entertaining games. The thing is that it's less "fun" than the other titles mentioned before because of how volatile the game is played. You can lose a game instantly in SC2 if you let just a little small thing slip. That's fine if the game is being played at a high level, but I imagine it's very, very annoying for Bronze level players to have to deal with things like a basic baneling bust, drops, hellions, warp gate all-ins, flying a flock of muta into mines/thors, etc. The fact that it's very easy to lose a game instantly when playing SC2 makes it very entertaining to watch at a high level of play, but the game is pretty shitty if you're looking to chill. Compare that to an Age of Empires game, Nexus wars, MOBAs, WC3 (I think?) or even Brood War. Yes, Brood War. Many people played BW for fun, iirc Koreans would take girls on dates to pc bangs even. All very good fun to play casually, all (well not Nexus wars) can also be played at a high level with a high skill ceiling. The game that is being played casually with a cold beer open is the exact same game that is being played by professionals with 300+ APM.
yes, and LoL and DotA follow exactly that principle I have posted to a large degree.
E.g. hitting and dodging skillshots is something that scales very well with skill for both sides, but even at the lowest levels you can replicate it with the same outcome and feel like a pro.
The basic strategies like ganking don't require you to "have your macromechanics up so that you can hit that 200/200 roach max at the right time" (and that is a very easy strategy already).
BGH is completely different, because it dose not follow competitive principles as it usually features more than 2teams. That's why people of lower skill can enjoy it, since there is no real builds or timings from one side against another, as this would just make the players not involved much stronger comparatively. Whatever happens happens.
Would you play BGH 1v1 or 4v4, the exact same problems that SC2 and normal BW have for casuals would arise. That is as Hider says the timing/BO reliance or as you put it, that you can die instantly.
|
On May 19 2014 05:22 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 02:46 Incognoto wrote:On May 19 2014 02:19 Big J wrote:On May 19 2014 02:12 Hider wrote:You can score really nice goals and pull off the same tricks professional players do in football, when your opponent is just as bad as you are. Because he won't tackle you in the ways you'd be tackled in proplay, and a sprintduel will still be the same sprintduel as on the prolevel, just a little bit slower.
On the flipside, instead of playing Starcraft you could also play your favorite transport simulator game (I can recommend Simutrans) and will see that a lot of the skills you need in those games are very similar, which is knowledge about which investments to do when and how to build up your own infrastructure. And by just getting faster and more knowledgable, you will get much better in transport simulators too. My point is that it's a turnoff for (the majority) of casuals who aren't looking to improve, but rather to just have fun 2 hours a week playing the game if the mechanical reuqirements are too signifciant. For instance, when you play Sc2 it's very stressful becasue there are so many things you need to do. That's ofc also it's biggest strenght, but that only applies to those looking to improve. I can tell you that all the APM you need to have to play Sc2 is a big turnoff for all of my IRL friends, and I think if there was a mode with signifcant reduced mechanical requirements, they would def. consider to play it. Esp if you could combine it with the social elements of teamgame based play. Oh yeah, that i fully agree with. I'd just rather have everyone playing the exact same game and have the mechanical requiremenz being very low because your opponent and the game cannot force more out of you at your level. You're getting this wrong imo. Some games are fun to play when you're playing opponents your skill level. E.g. LoL or Dota 2, even brood war (BGH). These games can be very fun even if you play at a low level. Yet those same games have a very high skill cap if played by pros. That's what an RTS needs to be successful. SC2 is pretty good as an esport: It's got a constantly evolving, deep metagame. Two high calibre players can show some very, very entertaining games. The thing is that it's less "fun" than the other titles mentioned before because of how volatile the game is played. You can lose a game instantly in SC2 if you let just a little small thing slip. That's fine if the game is being played at a high level, but I imagine it's very, very annoying for Bronze level players to have to deal with things like a basic baneling bust, drops, hellions, warp gate all-ins, flying a flock of muta into mines/thors, etc. The fact that it's very easy to lose a game instantly when playing SC2 makes it very entertaining to watch at a high level of play, but the game is pretty shitty if you're looking to chill. Compare that to an Age of Empires game, Nexus wars, MOBAs, WC3 (I think?) or even Brood War. Yes, Brood War. Many people played BW for fun, iirc Koreans would take girls on dates to pc bangs even. All very good fun to play casually, all (well not Nexus wars) can also be played at a high level with a high skill ceiling. The game that is being played casually with a cold beer open is the exact same game that is being played by professionals with 300+ APM. yes, and LoL and DotA follow exactly that principle I have posted to a large degree. E.g. hitting and dodging skillshots is something that scales very well with skill for both sides, but even at the lowest levels you can replicate it with the same outcome and feel like a pro. The basic strategies like ganking don't require you to "have your macromechanics up so that you can hit that 200/200 roach max at the right time" (and that is a very easy strategy already). BGH is completely different, because it dose not follow competitive principles as it usually features more than 2teams. That's why people of lower skill can enjoy it, since there is no real builds or timings from one side against another, as this would just make the players not involved much stronger comparatively. Whatever happens happens. Would you play BGH 1v1 or 4v4, the exact same problems that SC2 and normal BW have for casuals would arise. That is as Hider says the timing/BO reliance or as you put it, that you can die instantly.
Most BW players also played comp stomps, 3v5, NR20, FastestMapEver, etc...
Most BW players were not playing 1v1, heck, they weren't even doing clan wars. Just an endless day of Lurker Defense, A Day at School, Legends Open RPG, etc...
BW was casual because most players did not give a damn about 1v1 play.
|
On May 19 2014 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 05:22 Big J wrote:On May 19 2014 02:46 Incognoto wrote:On May 19 2014 02:19 Big J wrote:On May 19 2014 02:12 Hider wrote:You can score really nice goals and pull off the same tricks professional players do in football, when your opponent is just as bad as you are. Because he won't tackle you in the ways you'd be tackled in proplay, and a sprintduel will still be the same sprintduel as on the prolevel, just a little bit slower.
On the flipside, instead of playing Starcraft you could also play your favorite transport simulator game (I can recommend Simutrans) and will see that a lot of the skills you need in those games are very similar, which is knowledge about which investments to do when and how to build up your own infrastructure. And by just getting faster and more knowledgable, you will get much better in transport simulators too. My point is that it's a turnoff for (the majority) of casuals who aren't looking to improve, but rather to just have fun 2 hours a week playing the game if the mechanical reuqirements are too signifciant. For instance, when you play Sc2 it's very stressful becasue there are so many things you need to do. That's ofc also it's biggest strenght, but that only applies to those looking to improve. I can tell you that all the APM you need to have to play Sc2 is a big turnoff for all of my IRL friends, and I think if there was a mode with signifcant reduced mechanical requirements, they would def. consider to play it. Esp if you could combine it with the social elements of teamgame based play. Oh yeah, that i fully agree with. I'd just rather have everyone playing the exact same game and have the mechanical requiremenz being very low because your opponent and the game cannot force more out of you at your level. You're getting this wrong imo. Some games are fun to play when you're playing opponents your skill level. E.g. LoL or Dota 2, even brood war (BGH). These games can be very fun even if you play at a low level. Yet those same games have a very high skill cap if played by pros. That's what an RTS needs to be successful. SC2 is pretty good as an esport: It's got a constantly evolving, deep metagame. Two high calibre players can show some very, very entertaining games. The thing is that it's less "fun" than the other titles mentioned before because of how volatile the game is played. You can lose a game instantly in SC2 if you let just a little small thing slip. That's fine if the game is being played at a high level, but I imagine it's very, very annoying for Bronze level players to have to deal with things like a basic baneling bust, drops, hellions, warp gate all-ins, flying a flock of muta into mines/thors, etc. The fact that it's very easy to lose a game instantly when playing SC2 makes it very entertaining to watch at a high level of play, but the game is pretty shitty if you're looking to chill. Compare that to an Age of Empires game, Nexus wars, MOBAs, WC3 (I think?) or even Brood War. Yes, Brood War. Many people played BW for fun, iirc Koreans would take girls on dates to pc bangs even. All very good fun to play casually, all (well not Nexus wars) can also be played at a high level with a high skill ceiling. The game that is being played casually with a cold beer open is the exact same game that is being played by professionals with 300+ APM. yes, and LoL and DotA follow exactly that principle I have posted to a large degree. E.g. hitting and dodging skillshots is something that scales very well with skill for both sides, but even at the lowest levels you can replicate it with the same outcome and feel like a pro. The basic strategies like ganking don't require you to "have your macromechanics up so that you can hit that 200/200 roach max at the right time" (and that is a very easy strategy already). BGH is completely different, because it dose not follow competitive principles as it usually features more than 2teams. That's why people of lower skill can enjoy it, since there is no real builds or timings from one side against another, as this would just make the players not involved much stronger comparatively. Whatever happens happens. Would you play BGH 1v1 or 4v4, the exact same problems that SC2 and normal BW have for casuals would arise. That is as Hider says the timing/BO reliance or as you put it, that you can die instantly. Most BW players also played comp stomps, 3v5, NR20, FastestMapEver, etc... Most BW players were not playing 1v1, heck, they weren't even doing clan wars. Just an endless day of Lurker Defense, A Day at School, Legends Open RPG, etc... BW was casual because most players did not give a damn about 1v1 play.
So the real question we should be asking ourselves here is why was there were so much more people playing custom games in BW than SC2.
|
On May 19 2014 08:30 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 19 2014 05:22 Big J wrote:On May 19 2014 02:46 Incognoto wrote:On May 19 2014 02:19 Big J wrote:On May 19 2014 02:12 Hider wrote:You can score really nice goals and pull off the same tricks professional players do in football, when your opponent is just as bad as you are. Because he won't tackle you in the ways you'd be tackled in proplay, and a sprintduel will still be the same sprintduel as on the prolevel, just a little bit slower.
On the flipside, instead of playing Starcraft you could also play your favorite transport simulator game (I can recommend Simutrans) and will see that a lot of the skills you need in those games are very similar, which is knowledge about which investments to do when and how to build up your own infrastructure. And by just getting faster and more knowledgable, you will get much better in transport simulators too. My point is that it's a turnoff for (the majority) of casuals who aren't looking to improve, but rather to just have fun 2 hours a week playing the game if the mechanical reuqirements are too signifciant. For instance, when you play Sc2 it's very stressful becasue there are so many things you need to do. That's ofc also it's biggest strenght, but that only applies to those looking to improve. I can tell you that all the APM you need to have to play Sc2 is a big turnoff for all of my IRL friends, and I think if there was a mode with signifcant reduced mechanical requirements, they would def. consider to play it. Esp if you could combine it with the social elements of teamgame based play. Oh yeah, that i fully agree with. I'd just rather have everyone playing the exact same game and have the mechanical requiremenz being very low because your opponent and the game cannot force more out of you at your level. You're getting this wrong imo. Some games are fun to play when you're playing opponents your skill level. E.g. LoL or Dota 2, even brood war (BGH). These games can be very fun even if you play at a low level. Yet those same games have a very high skill cap if played by pros. That's what an RTS needs to be successful. SC2 is pretty good as an esport: It's got a constantly evolving, deep metagame. Two high calibre players can show some very, very entertaining games. The thing is that it's less "fun" than the other titles mentioned before because of how volatile the game is played. You can lose a game instantly in SC2 if you let just a little small thing slip. That's fine if the game is being played at a high level, but I imagine it's very, very annoying for Bronze level players to have to deal with things like a basic baneling bust, drops, hellions, warp gate all-ins, flying a flock of muta into mines/thors, etc. The fact that it's very easy to lose a game instantly when playing SC2 makes it very entertaining to watch at a high level of play, but the game is pretty shitty if you're looking to chill. Compare that to an Age of Empires game, Nexus wars, MOBAs, WC3 (I think?) or even Brood War. Yes, Brood War. Many people played BW for fun, iirc Koreans would take girls on dates to pc bangs even. All very good fun to play casually, all (well not Nexus wars) can also be played at a high level with a high skill ceiling. The game that is being played casually with a cold beer open is the exact same game that is being played by professionals with 300+ APM. yes, and LoL and DotA follow exactly that principle I have posted to a large degree. E.g. hitting and dodging skillshots is something that scales very well with skill for both sides, but even at the lowest levels you can replicate it with the same outcome and feel like a pro. The basic strategies like ganking don't require you to "have your macromechanics up so that you can hit that 200/200 roach max at the right time" (and that is a very easy strategy already). BGH is completely different, because it dose not follow competitive principles as it usually features more than 2teams. That's why people of lower skill can enjoy it, since there is no real builds or timings from one side against another, as this would just make the players not involved much stronger comparatively. Whatever happens happens. Would you play BGH 1v1 or 4v4, the exact same problems that SC2 and normal BW have for casuals would arise. That is as Hider says the timing/BO reliance or as you put it, that you can die instantly. Most BW players also played comp stomps, 3v5, NR20, FastestMapEver, etc... Most BW players were not playing 1v1, heck, they weren't even doing clan wars. Just an endless day of Lurker Defense, A Day at School, Legends Open RPG, etc... BW was casual because most players did not give a damn about 1v1 play. So the real question we should be asking ourselves here is why was there were so much more people playing custom games in BW than SC2.
I think that is pretty simple tbh. Nobody plays custom games anymore cause there are a ton of indie games / free to play games that are EXACTLY like these arcade games (just better). I don't wanna say that there is no potential userbase for arcade, but it really isn't a big reason to download sc2 at all.
|
On May 19 2014 08:30 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 19 2014 05:22 Big J wrote:On May 19 2014 02:46 Incognoto wrote:On May 19 2014 02:19 Big J wrote:On May 19 2014 02:12 Hider wrote:You can score really nice goals and pull off the same tricks professional players do in football, when your opponent is just as bad as you are. Because he won't tackle you in the ways you'd be tackled in proplay, and a sprintduel will still be the same sprintduel as on the prolevel, just a little bit slower.
On the flipside, instead of playing Starcraft you could also play your favorite transport simulator game (I can recommend Simutrans) and will see that a lot of the skills you need in those games are very similar, which is knowledge about which investments to do when and how to build up your own infrastructure. And by just getting faster and more knowledgable, you will get much better in transport simulators too. My point is that it's a turnoff for (the majority) of casuals who aren't looking to improve, but rather to just have fun 2 hours a week playing the game if the mechanical reuqirements are too signifciant. For instance, when you play Sc2 it's very stressful becasue there are so many things you need to do. That's ofc also it's biggest strenght, but that only applies to those looking to improve. I can tell you that all the APM you need to have to play Sc2 is a big turnoff for all of my IRL friends, and I think if there was a mode with signifcant reduced mechanical requirements, they would def. consider to play it. Esp if you could combine it with the social elements of teamgame based play. Oh yeah, that i fully agree with. I'd just rather have everyone playing the exact same game and have the mechanical requiremenz being very low because your opponent and the game cannot force more out of you at your level. You're getting this wrong imo. Some games are fun to play when you're playing opponents your skill level. E.g. LoL or Dota 2, even brood war (BGH). These games can be very fun even if you play at a low level. Yet those same games have a very high skill cap if played by pros. That's what an RTS needs to be successful. SC2 is pretty good as an esport: It's got a constantly evolving, deep metagame. Two high calibre players can show some very, very entertaining games. The thing is that it's less "fun" than the other titles mentioned before because of how volatile the game is played. You can lose a game instantly in SC2 if you let just a little small thing slip. That's fine if the game is being played at a high level, but I imagine it's very, very annoying for Bronze level players to have to deal with things like a basic baneling bust, drops, hellions, warp gate all-ins, flying a flock of muta into mines/thors, etc. The fact that it's very easy to lose a game instantly when playing SC2 makes it very entertaining to watch at a high level of play, but the game is pretty shitty if you're looking to chill. Compare that to an Age of Empires game, Nexus wars, MOBAs, WC3 (I think?) or even Brood War. Yes, Brood War. Many people played BW for fun, iirc Koreans would take girls on dates to pc bangs even. All very good fun to play casually, all (well not Nexus wars) can also be played at a high level with a high skill ceiling. The game that is being played casually with a cold beer open is the exact same game that is being played by professionals with 300+ APM. yes, and LoL and DotA follow exactly that principle I have posted to a large degree. E.g. hitting and dodging skillshots is something that scales very well with skill for both sides, but even at the lowest levels you can replicate it with the same outcome and feel like a pro. The basic strategies like ganking don't require you to "have your macromechanics up so that you can hit that 200/200 roach max at the right time" (and that is a very easy strategy already). BGH is completely different, because it dose not follow competitive principles as it usually features more than 2teams. That's why people of lower skill can enjoy it, since there is no real builds or timings from one side against another, as this would just make the players not involved much stronger comparatively. Whatever happens happens. Would you play BGH 1v1 or 4v4, the exact same problems that SC2 and normal BW have for casuals would arise. That is as Hider says the timing/BO reliance or as you put it, that you can die instantly. Most BW players also played comp stomps, 3v5, NR20, FastestMapEver, etc... Most BW players were not playing 1v1, heck, they weren't even doing clan wars. Just an endless day of Lurker Defense, A Day at School, Legends Open RPG, etc... BW was casual because most players did not give a damn about 1v1 play. So the real question we should be asking ourselves here is why was there were so much more people playing custom games in BW than SC2.
Because unlike SC2, BW was a fun RTS to play around in. SC2 was designed with nothing other than competitive 1v1 in mind. BW was not, BW was a fling from Blizzard that accidentaly became one of the best games of all time.
|
On May 19 2014 08:39 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 08:30 Xiphos wrote:On May 19 2014 08:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On May 19 2014 05:22 Big J wrote:On May 19 2014 02:46 Incognoto wrote:On May 19 2014 02:19 Big J wrote:On May 19 2014 02:12 Hider wrote:You can score really nice goals and pull off the same tricks professional players do in football, when your opponent is just as bad as you are. Because he won't tackle you in the ways you'd be tackled in proplay, and a sprintduel will still be the same sprintduel as on the prolevel, just a little bit slower.
On the flipside, instead of playing Starcraft you could also play your favorite transport simulator game (I can recommend Simutrans) and will see that a lot of the skills you need in those games are very similar, which is knowledge about which investments to do when and how to build up your own infrastructure. And by just getting faster and more knowledgable, you will get much better in transport simulators too. My point is that it's a turnoff for (the majority) of casuals who aren't looking to improve, but rather to just have fun 2 hours a week playing the game if the mechanical reuqirements are too signifciant. For instance, when you play Sc2 it's very stressful becasue there are so many things you need to do. That's ofc also it's biggest strenght, but that only applies to those looking to improve. I can tell you that all the APM you need to have to play Sc2 is a big turnoff for all of my IRL friends, and I think if there was a mode with signifcant reduced mechanical requirements, they would def. consider to play it. Esp if you could combine it with the social elements of teamgame based play. Oh yeah, that i fully agree with. I'd just rather have everyone playing the exact same game and have the mechanical requiremenz being very low because your opponent and the game cannot force more out of you at your level. You're getting this wrong imo. Some games are fun to play when you're playing opponents your skill level. E.g. LoL or Dota 2, even brood war (BGH). These games can be very fun even if you play at a low level. Yet those same games have a very high skill cap if played by pros. That's what an RTS needs to be successful. SC2 is pretty good as an esport: It's got a constantly evolving, deep metagame. Two high calibre players can show some very, very entertaining games. The thing is that it's less "fun" than the other titles mentioned before because of how volatile the game is played. You can lose a game instantly in SC2 if you let just a little small thing slip. That's fine if the game is being played at a high level, but I imagine it's very, very annoying for Bronze level players to have to deal with things like a basic baneling bust, drops, hellions, warp gate all-ins, flying a flock of muta into mines/thors, etc. The fact that it's very easy to lose a game instantly when playing SC2 makes it very entertaining to watch at a high level of play, but the game is pretty shitty if you're looking to chill. Compare that to an Age of Empires game, Nexus wars, MOBAs, WC3 (I think?) or even Brood War. Yes, Brood War. Many people played BW for fun, iirc Koreans would take girls on dates to pc bangs even. All very good fun to play casually, all (well not Nexus wars) can also be played at a high level with a high skill ceiling. The game that is being played casually with a cold beer open is the exact same game that is being played by professionals with 300+ APM. yes, and LoL and DotA follow exactly that principle I have posted to a large degree. E.g. hitting and dodging skillshots is something that scales very well with skill for both sides, but even at the lowest levels you can replicate it with the same outcome and feel like a pro. The basic strategies like ganking don't require you to "have your macromechanics up so that you can hit that 200/200 roach max at the right time" (and that is a very easy strategy already). BGH is completely different, because it dose not follow competitive principles as it usually features more than 2teams. That's why people of lower skill can enjoy it, since there is no real builds or timings from one side against another, as this would just make the players not involved much stronger comparatively. Whatever happens happens. Would you play BGH 1v1 or 4v4, the exact same problems that SC2 and normal BW have for casuals would arise. That is as Hider says the timing/BO reliance or as you put it, that you can die instantly. Most BW players also played comp stomps, 3v5, NR20, FastestMapEver, etc... Most BW players were not playing 1v1, heck, they weren't even doing clan wars. Just an endless day of Lurker Defense, A Day at School, Legends Open RPG, etc... BW was casual because most players did not give a damn about 1v1 play. So the real question we should be asking ourselves here is why was there were so much more people playing custom games in BW than SC2. I think that is pretty simple tbh. Nobody plays custom games anymore cause there are a ton of indie games / free to play games that are EXACTLY like these arcade games (just better). I don't wanna say that there is no potential userbase for arcade, but it really isn't a big reason to download sc2 at all.
That's an excellent point.
The gaming space has changed a lot from 1998.
There is no hope of getting casual players to stick with SC2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
