|
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 19 2014 13:47 pmp10 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 08:39 The_Red_Viper wrote: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.
The strange thing about BW is that it was able to foster both casual players and hardcore gamers much like LoL and DotA.
|
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.
Actually, the ton of free to play / indie games are the reason no one cares about the Arcade.
The underlying reason people don't play SC2 casually (whereas they did in almost every other RTS in existence) is because of its game design, centered around 1v1 and nothing else. Bnet also has a big part in that it's made especially for laddering and that custom games have been thrown out the windows. Custom games are a HUGE part of RTS.
|
Actually scrap all the add-ons and focus on the basic of a RTS game.
A RTS game is to maximize the potential of the army you have better than the opponent and then brag about it to his face. People like to challenge themselves and theorycraft about all kind of strategies you can pull with the units so there must be a lot of direction to take with those units. This means that one unit shouldn't only do one things only but have multiple usages throughout with plenty of options.
And this is really what separate MOBAs from the modern RTS games in that there are many options and choices you can make with your guy and the fun lies in making the correct decision to maximize their use. So in order to compete with MOBAs, the units's micro potential must be increased instead of being one dimensional.
Another huge reason why MOBAs is played a lot is because you can show off to many more people of your skills. Instead of showing off to only 1 person, you get to show off in front of not only your enemy but your team mate but there is a solution to it and it is to develop the ability for spectator to join in midgame in order to see what the guys is doing and there should be like a cash incentive between the players.
What I mean is this: Two players going at it vs each. Spectators can join in at any time, they can say put up XXX amount of money for the winner of the game and it will appear on screen saying so-and-so have just increase the stake of the match by XXX amount. This is to have players to play better for comeback.
The game should have lobbies for games and show the number of spectators and the ranks of the players and you can join in, increase the stake of the game to see those two fighting even harder.
This is great in two ways, first it is basically a self sustaining professional gaming outlet for the players to simply improving their level play and make a good living on it. And it also sent a message to the newbies that "Wow if I get really good at the game, I can be like them."
RTS game can definitely be social at the level of the MOBAs.
Another great idea would be to introduce talking on mic in the game. How awesome would it be to spectate two players going at it vs each and have to hear them trash talking to each other? People would pay great money for that.
|
I don't think the social aspect is as big of a deal as people make it out to be. If the game is fun for casuals, it is easy to introduce people to it and play in groups. The problem is that the skill floor required to enjoy playing the meat of the game (1v1) is simply too high. People enjoy playing league of legends not just because it is easier; they enjoy it because it is easy to be good enough to actually play the game. As long as you understand how to lane decently well and know how all the heroes work, you can probably play a moba at a high mechanical level with minimal practice. With sc2, there are so many mechanical skills you need to learn (mouse movement, hotkey setups, spending resources, adding supply structures, making units, using spells,etc.) before you can actually get to the deep strategic aspects of the game that most players simply give up before they can get there and start having fun. It's not fun to lose simply because the other guy was better and made more units than you. You want the game winner to be determined by who outstrategized the other player rather than who is so much better mechanically that they simply win.
Note: I consider rushes, timing attacks, fast tech, flanking maneuvers, drops, ling backstabs,etc. as "outstrategizing" someone. These kinds of things are interesting strategic and tactical decisions and have nothing to do with raw mechanics.
If you want to bring in casual players, something has to be done to make the S in RTS more accessible. Whether that is giving production facilities "macros" (allow buildings to cycle unit construction in a set order like marine-marine-marauder or something), or expediting worker production (have scvs and probes), I don't know. That is definitely something that can be up for discussion. But right now, the 1v1 game is simply not fun if you either don't have any friends to show you the ropes or have the willingness and time to put the work in to improve your mechanics.
It has been suggested that RTS will be more fun if they are more MOBA-like. I think MOBA are a lot deeper than people make them out to be, but the genre emphasizes very different skillsets from traditional RTS games. When I play DotA2 or LoL with my friends, I play it for the unique experience of building up my heroes strength, then working together with my teammates to take down the enemy base. I don't want a sequel to War3 to replace sc2 as the next generation of RTS. Warcraft 3 was unique and had a unique niche that combined RTS elements with RPGs. I want my RTS games to just be about establishing a base, fighting for map control and information, and finally duking it out army vs army across the entire map all the while trying to make cool plays and outsmart my opponent.
*One more thing: I'd like to note that bw is actually slower than sc2. Generally speaking, units had lower movement speed and attack speed and building construction times were longer. Despite having more to do, you technically had more time to do it before. Maybe slowing the game down to allow people more time to control battles and bases is another direction for RTS games to take?
|
I was one of the best Brood War players in Europe and a SC2 Grandmaster, that said, I think there's more strategic depth in Dota 2 than in any of the StarCraft games. However, the vast majority of it comes out only when you play as a team of five.
I quit StarCraft mostly because of the social aspect. Solo grinding against barcodes just gets boring after a while. Dota 2 I can play with my RL friends. I'm quite a lot better than them nowadays, but it still works out and is fun for everyone.
The big down side of being a team game is of course that its not as fun to play with randoms and I recently cut back on all my solo gaming in Dota to play more poker. Which by the way is a strategy game that keeps the casuals both playing and paying by having a large element of randomness.
|
maybe team sc2 should have had a separate team mode with completely different balancing/gameplay? For example, have maps with a main and natural for each player with infinite resources like BW money maps, include the campaign units, maybe even the ability to customize your set of units like in the campaign to add variety?
The transition from the campaign to 1v1 or team melee is jarring, to say the least, for most casual gamers. a casual multiplayer mode tied into the campaign might have helped
|
On May 19 2014 13:47 pmp10 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 08:39 The_Red_Viper wrote: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.
Great, I agree.
So when Blizzard acknowledges that and stop catering to casuals ? :D
They made the most hardcore post-BW Esport title, why not put your money on that instead of facelifting it into something that it cannot become in current reality.
|
On May 19 2014 16:01 DinoToss wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 13:47 pmp10 wrote:On May 19 2014 08:39 The_Red_Viper wrote: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. Great, I agree. So when Blizzard acknowledges that and stop catering to casuals ? :D They made the most hardcore post-BW Esport title, why not put your money on that instead of facelifting it into something that it cannot become in current reality.
Blizzard's SC2 is the opposite of catering to casuals.. I also don't think they can make SC2 into a casual-friendly game either. Not unless they do some insanely drastic changes for Lotv, which they won't.
That doesn't mean other RTS can't be made that are fun to play casually while also being competitive.
|
On May 19 2014 16:04 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 16:01 DinoToss wrote:On May 19 2014 13:47 pmp10 wrote:On May 19 2014 08:39 The_Red_Viper wrote: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:
[quote]
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. Great, I agree. So when Blizzard acknowledges that and stop catering to casuals ? :D They made the most hardcore post-BW Esport title, why not put your money on that instead of facelifting it into something that it cannot become in current reality. Blizzard's SC2 is the opposite of catering to casuals.. I also don't think they can make SC2 into a casual-friendly game either. Not unless they do some insanely drastic changes for Lotv, which they won't. That doesn't mean other RTS can't be made that are fun to play casually while also being competitive.
Yeah, well i maybe went little overboard with that, but they won't replicate BW/WC3 success when it comes to social aspect, because the reality of gaming is different than it was before.
They need to propose something new and extraordinary to reinvent starcraft as social game.
|
On May 19 2014 16:04 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 16:01 DinoToss wrote:On May 19 2014 13:47 pmp10 wrote:On May 19 2014 08:39 The_Red_Viper wrote: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:
[quote]
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. Great, I agree. So when Blizzard acknowledges that and stop catering to casuals ? :D They made the most hardcore post-BW Esport title, why not put your money on that instead of facelifting it into something that it cannot become in current reality. Blizzard's SC2 is the opposite of catering to casuals.. I also don't think they can make SC2 into a casual-friendly game either. Not unless they do some insanely drastic changes for Lotv, which they won't. That doesn't mean other RTS can't be made that are fun to play casually while also being competitive.
By showing them the Depth of Micro video, David Kim said that casuals won't understand those micro tricks and therefore won't consider them.
They are catering toward them though with MBS, automine, unlimited building select and army.
And instead of introducing high micro potential units, they are moving away from it by removing Carrier micro, Lurkers, Vultures, Muta stacking, Reavers with simple A-moving units like Swarm Host, Broodlords, Colossus, Tempests, Vikings, etc.
|
Great that we have now two threads where we discuss basically the same thing!
|
On May 19 2014 16:25 urboss wrote:
Great that we have now two threads where we discuss basically the same thing!
Wait, you mean you cannot discuss RTS games on TL.net without getting into a circlejerk about the real dead game, Broodwar?
|
On May 19 2014 16:20 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 16:04 Incognoto wrote:On May 19 2014 16:01 DinoToss wrote:On May 19 2014 13:47 pmp10 wrote:On May 19 2014 08:39 The_Red_Viper wrote: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:
[quote]
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. Great, I agree. So when Blizzard acknowledges that and stop catering to casuals ? :D They made the most hardcore post-BW Esport title, why not put your money on that instead of facelifting it into something that it cannot become in current reality. Blizzard's SC2 is the opposite of catering to casuals.. I also don't think they can make SC2 into a casual-friendly game either. Not unless they do some insanely drastic changes for Lotv, which they won't. That doesn't mean other RTS can't be made that are fun to play casually while also being competitive. By showing them the Depth of Micro video, David Kim said that casuals won't understand those micro tricks and therefore won't consider them. They are catering toward them though with MBS, automine, unlimited building select and army. And instead of introducing high micro potential units, they are moving away from it by removing Carrier micro, Lurkers, Vultures, Muta stacking, Reavers with simple A-moving units like Swarm Host, Broodlords, Colossus, Tempests, Vikings, etc.
That's just blizzard being silly with their priorities. They might try to cater towards casuals with the examples you just gave, but fundamentally speaking the game isn't designed for casuals at all, given how unforgiving the game is. You have strong units which are very easy to use: Roaches, Swarm Hosts, etc, but at the same time you have units/strategies which can end a game in the matter of seconds. Same goes for Bnet, it's not made for the casual social experience. Again, SC2 is a decent game but it's far, very far, from being perfect and it's decent only because it's a genuinely good game if you're looking for highly competitive play.
|
On May 19 2014 16:42 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 16:25 urboss wrote:
Great that we have now two threads where we discuss basically the same thing! Wait, you mean you cannot discuss RTS games on TL.net without getting into a circlejerk about the real dead game, Broodwar?
lol, yeah no matter what's the topic, Broodwar will eventually come up and take over the discussion.
If that doesn't happen, then balance whining or SC2 bashing will be there to seal the deal for the thread.
|
On May 19 2014 16:53 urboss wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 16:42 Big J wrote:On May 19 2014 16:25 urboss wrote:
Great that we have now two threads where we discuss basically the same thing! Wait, you mean you cannot discuss RTS games on TL.net without getting into a circlejerk about the real dead game, Broodwar? lol, yeah no matter what's the topic, Broodwar will eventually come up and take over the discussion. If that doesn't happen, then balance whining or SC2 bashing will be there to seal the deal for the thread.
Both threads have brought up interesting and relevant points that, imo, do a fairly good job of assessing the problem with RTS games. The discussions have been really interesting. Of course SC2 will come under scrutiny; it's the current industry standard, isn't it?
Don't worry about problems that haven't taken place yet.  :p
|
No, you're right discussions are pretty good so far.
StarCraft 2 is the industry standard, but it is based on a concept that hasn't fundamentally changed since 20 years.
The problem is that whenever people post innovative ideas to transform the genre, the (implied) reply often goes like this:
"This looks nothing like the StarCraft I'm used to.
I'm not gonna play that!
And nobody else will play that either!"
|
What's also fun to think about, is that back in the broodwar/counter strike days servers were a lot more local and so everyone felt so pro, beating some of the better players on those servers, where as now with a huge regional ladder, it's really hard to feel significant at all.
As a spectator sport I really cannot find anything wrong with SC2, it's a much better experience than the MOBA genres IMO, but it can be tough for a casual with ladder anxiety, no flourishing Arcade system and with team games looked down upon.
I asked plenty of my casual friends to play 2v2's but they all don't want to be a burden, even though I don't care.
|
On May 19 2014 16:04 Incognoto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 16:01 DinoToss wrote:On May 19 2014 13:47 pmp10 wrote:On May 19 2014 08:39 The_Red_Viper wrote: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:
[quote]
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. Great, I agree. So when Blizzard acknowledges that and stop catering to casuals ? :D They made the most hardcore post-BW Esport title, why not put your money on that instead of facelifting it into something that it cannot become in current reality. Blizzard's SC2 is the opposite of catering to casuals.. I also don't think they can make SC2 into a casual-friendly game either. Not unless they do some insanely drastic changes for Lotv, which they won't. That doesn't mean other RTS can't be made that are fun to play casually while also being competitive.
Actually, setting the default game speed to Normal instead of Faster would help a lot to maintain a casual playerbase since it significantly lowers the APM required to be somewhat decent at this game. Starcraft 2 is way too much about mechanics and numbers and not enough about strategy (i.e. more about clicking than about thinking) for anyone not in masters league. Winning a game in starcraft by outthinking an opponent who has a numerically superior force is nigh impossible. Sure he can be outmicroed (which basically means you can click your units faster than he can, which is just mechanical) but he cannot be defeated by some smart manouevre.
|
On May 19 2014 17:42 ejozl wrote:
As a spectator sport I really cannot find anything wrong with SC2, it's a much better experience than the MOBA genres IMO, but it can be tough for a casual with ladder anxiety, no flourishing Arcade system and with team games looked down upon.
Can you actually prove the Arcade system is not flourishing?
Can anyone (other than Blizzard)?
|
On May 19 2014 13:55 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2014 13:47 pmp10 wrote:On May 19 2014 08:39 The_Red_Viper wrote: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. The strange thing about BW is that it was able to foster both casual players and hardcore gamers much like LoL and DotA.
I think the point of this though is that "casual" and "hardcore" people weren't really playing the same game. "Hardcore" gamers played 1v1 melee while "casual" players played custom games. However, nobody really wants to play a custom game when you could just play some new indie game on steam that doesn't have to work around the particularities of a game client that was built for something else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
