| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Keep "my game is better than yours"-slapfights out of this. If the discussion devolves into simple bashing, this thread will be closed. | ||
|
Capped
United Kingdom7236 Posts
I'm not sure what it was that made the games so enjoyable for me, they just felt more "open". They were 10000x better for team-games too. I hope something like the "age of" series are the future of RTS games, WC3 looked amazing too. I hope they can release something to resemble these two games in its ideas and execution. SC2 just feels like a poor attempt at an RTS in comparison. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
Sc2 hits exactly my taste, I liked BW but fighting the game itself was annoying. The biggest selling point for me has always been the editor though, thats why AoE fell short for me. | ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On July 28 2014 03:53 Morbidius wrote: The engine is mostly already there as well. BW remake would be better than LotV, would be wildly more sucessful in korea, don't know about the rest of the world. I doubt blizzard wants to release a game that would be succesful in only a small market (BW afficionados and South Korea). SC2 might not be the succes BW was in that region, but it far surpassed the succes BW had in the rest of the world. For an RTS, SC2 has been an incredible succes in terms of both sales and player retention. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7032 Posts
On August 08 2014 22:36 maartendq wrote: I doubt blizzard wants to release a game that would be succesful in only a small market (BW afficionados and South Korea). SC2 might not be the succes BW was in that region, but it far surpassed the succes BW had in the rest of the world. For an RTS, SC2 has been an incredible succes in terms of both sales and player retention. Does anyone here have the numbers for melee games played for both starcraft 2 and warcraft 3 for 1, 2, 3 & 4 years after release? I would honestly guess sc2 is doing relatively worse, but I'd like to see numbers. | ||
|
Random()
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
The problem with SC2 wasn't that it was an RTS, it was that it was very poorly handled by Blizzard from the start and suffered from their lack of vision. Beginning with Battle.net issues, obsolete network model (e.g. not being able to jump in and observe the games of your friends in-client), lack of social features, outdated financial model (it is still not free to play), and heavy-handed attempts to impose it on Korea by hurting SC:BW. Their stubbornness in fixing long-standing design issues did not help either. I am sure that if Valve tried to make a modern RTS with their talent at making people send them truckloads of money for essentially nothing it would be extremely popular. | ||
|
TheBloodyDwarf
Finland7524 Posts
On August 08 2014 20:45 Tzyx wrote: I'll be waiting for WC4 until i die i fear  I think I'll be waiting for AoE4 until i die i fear  | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On August 08 2014 22:36 maartendq wrote: I doubt blizzard wants to release a game that would be succesful in only a small market (BW afficionados and South Korea). SC2 might not be the succes BW was in that region, but it far surpassed the succes BW had in the rest of the world. For an RTS, SC2 has been an incredible succes in terms of both sales and player retention. I dont think a BW remake would be the kind of success in Korea that you envision, unless they also changed their business model. BW is essentially free to play.... you go to a PC bang, game is installed, you can make a new account for free or login with your own account, make as many new ones as you want etc. And even if you wanted to play from home, game cost practically nothing for the past many years, and if you didn't want to play even that paltry sum, it was a very piratable game. So yeah, unless blizzard does SOMETHING free-to-play:ish, no RTS is going to see BW level success in Asia. | ||
|
Spaylz
Japan1743 Posts
Sadly, compared to other buy-to-play or pay-to-play games, RTS don't have that much to offer. The only "content" is the campaign (for Blizzard games), then it's multiplayer. Take a Dota 2-like model, add a ton of cosmetic stuff that has no effect on the balance/gameplay, and you've got a solid RTS model. I still believe. RTS will make it back somehow! And I believe the next big RTS will be much closer to WC3, albeit with a reduced focus on macro. Some sort of hybrid between RTS and MOBA. | ||
|
LeeJohnDong
Ireland58 Posts
| ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7032 Posts
On August 08 2014 23:58 Spaylz wrote: I feel like the free-to-play model is pretty ideal for RTS games too. Sadly, compared to other buy-to-play or pay-to-play games, RTS don't have that much to offer. The only "content" is the campaign (for Blizzard games), then it's multiplayer. Take a Dota 2-like model, add a ton of cosmetic stuff that has no effect on the balance/gameplay, and you've got a solid RTS model. I still believe. RTS will make it back somehow! And I believe the next big RTS will be much closer to WC3, albeit with a reduced focus on macro. Some sort of hybrid between RTS and MOBA. It's amazing that dota, which is just one map, can be used as a similar example to sc2 which has arcade, campaign and ladder. | ||
|
TMG26
Portugal2017 Posts
On August 09 2014 00:17 Grumbels wrote: It's amazing that dota, which is just one map, can be used as a similar example to sc2 which has arcade, campaign and ladder. Football only has a map as well. The great thing about Dota2 (besides the game itself) is the great client around it. The workshop is a great idea, most of the cosmetics added to the game aren't even made by Valve anymore. A Designer can live by making Dota2 cosmetics. Also, you can win cosmetics just by playing the game. At first you might not care about cosmetics, but after you have a few heroes pimped out, you start to want to trade something, then you start to want to buy. And then those cool chest appear and there goes your money. Also, community market. You can sell the cosmetics you got for steam money. DotaTV is another great thing. The player perspective, the in-game commentators, rewind, and the whole thing with tournament tickets and item drops by watching. And now, modding tools were released with the new Hammer and Source2, and it appears to be easy to create an RTS on those. It is just amazing what Valve has done with Dota2 and Steam Workshop. I wish Valve would do an RTS with all these features around it. and btw: even tough there isn't an oficial way to play mods on the client, there is already some fan made platforms to do so, like http://d2modd.in/mods <- and as you can see, it even has mods like Hero Line Wars. | ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On August 09 2014 00:12 LeeJohnDong wrote: I cant understand why Rome Total war or any of the Total War franchise is not mentioned at all here - Is it not classified as an RTS because of its strategic map elements? - It features alot of the ideas already implemented that are mentioned on improving the genre.. I think it's because Creative Assembly botched Rome 2. They have a lot of ambition, but not the budget and time (and talent?) needed to really make a product of which the Real Time battles are as good as the best RTS games out there, and the turn based gameplay matches Civilisation. | ||
|
Ravomat
Germany422 Posts
| ||
|
Spaylz
Japan1743 Posts
On August 09 2014 02:30 TMG26 wrote: Football only has a map as well. The great thing about Dota2 (besides the game itself) is the great client around it. The workshop is a great idea, most of the cosmetics added to the game aren't even made by Valve anymore. A Designer can live by making Dota2 cosmetics. Also, you can win cosmetics just by playing the game. At first you might not care about cosmetics, but after you have a few heroes pimped out, you start to want to trade something, then you start to want to buy. And then those cool chest appear and there goes your money. Also, community market. You can sell the cosmetics you got for steam money. DotaTV is another great thing. The player perspective, the in-game commentators, rewind, and the whole thing with tournament tickets and item drops by watching. And now, modding tools were released with the new Hammer and Source2, and it appears to be easy to create an RTS on those. It is just amazing what Valve has done with Dota2 and Steam Workshop. I wish Valve would do an RTS with all these features around it. and btw: even tough there isn't an oficial way to play mods on the client, there is already some fan made platforms to do so, like http://d2modd.in/mods <- and as you can see, it even has mods like Hero Line Wars. I doubt Valve will do a RTS. It's direct competition to Dota 2. Makes little sense on a business perspective. | ||
|
Technique
Netherlands1542 Posts
Sc2 is not that imo... and every other rts game is inactive and has been for years. Only thing interesting about sc2 is the skilled players that play it. | ||
|
Spaylz
Japan1743 Posts
I want WC3's sense of community back, with the good old chatrooms and all! Something that has us playing just for the sake of playing, and of course to win and to have fun. But not for esports. Nostalgia... | ||
|
anestetic
13 Posts
The worst thing someone can make is get to bronze (because the game is utterly hard to play :jokes),then he responds to me:"Well you can't make sc2 partly f2p because it has a campaign." Suddenly month ago more or less,blizzard announces that their Hearthstone game will feature a campaign,and that the first wing will be free,otherones you need to pay for it...but wait isn't heartstone a f2p game? Isn't that possible with sc2 also? To stay on topic,I'll elaborate my statements,I have a ton of friends,that when they look sc2 they go like"this is nice,cool,blabla etc.." but when ask them to buy the game they just go:"nah brah,got my lol,and dota2 f2p". So in essence my personal opinion on RTS genre is not how to improve the genre,then how to make the RTS games more accesible to a casual,or to a group. | ||
|
fleeze
Germany895 Posts
On August 09 2014 05:07 anestetic wrote: Year ago,or maybe half a year ago,I asked my friend,why doesn't blizzard make the sc2 multiplayer f2p?? The worst thing someone can make is get to bronze (because the game is utterly hard to play :jokes),then he responds to me:"Well you can't make sc2 partly f2p because it has a campaign." Suddenly month ago more or less,blizzard announces that their Hearthstone game will feature a campaign,and that the first wing will be free,otherones you need to pay for it...but wait isn't heartstone a f2p game? Isn't that possible with sc2 also? To stay on topic,I'll elaborate my statements,I have a ton of friends,that when they look sc2 they go like"this is nice,cool,blabla etc.." but when ask them to buy the game they just go:"nah brah,got my lol,and dota2 f2p". So in essence my personal opinion on RTS genre is not how to improve the genre,then how to make the RTS games more accesible to a casual,or to a group. you can already play sc2 multiplayer for free, especially with friends.... wtf are you talking about. On August 09 2014 04:33 Spaylz wrote: Oh yes absolutely, screw esports. Such a fun-killer. I want WC3's sense of community back, with the good old chatrooms and all! Something that has us playing just for the sake of playing, and of course to win and to have fun. But not for esports. Nostalgia... wc3 was a pretty good esport as well. i'm surprised TL always forgets about it. | ||
|
TMG26
Portugal2017 Posts
On August 09 2014 05:23 fleeze wrote: you can already play sc2 multiplayer for free, especially with friends.... wtf are you talking about. wc3 was a pretty good esport as well. i'm surprised TL always forgets about it. Sky is still the Chinese poster-man for esports. @sc2: You can't ladder with free sc2, you can't create a game and play vs medium bots. And why can't you do that? | ||
|
anestetic
13 Posts
[QUOTE]On August 09 2014 05:07 anestetic wrote: Year ago,or maybe half a year ago,I asked my friend,why doesn't blizzard make the sc2 multiplayer f2p?? The worst thing someone can make is get to bronze (because the game is utterly hard to play :jokes),then he responds to me:"Well you can't make sc2 partly f2p because it has a campaign." Suddenly month ago more or less,blizzard announces that their Hearthstone game will feature a campaign,and that the first wing will be free,otherones you need to pay for it...but wait isn't heartstone a f2p game? Isn't that possible with sc2 also? To stay on topic,I'll elaborate my statements,I have a ton of friends,that when they look sc2 they go like"this is nice,cool,blabla etc.." but when ask them to buy the game they just go:"nah brah,got my lol,and dota2 f2p". So in essence my personal opinion on RTS genre is not how to improve the genre,then how to make the RTS games more accesible to a casual,or to a group.[/QUOTE] you can already play sc2 multiplayer for free, especially with friends.... wtf are you talking about. With the starter edition you can't ladder,and imo as a begginer in a RTS is do unranked/ranked matches wich btw if you didn't know are not available with the starter pack,to have them you need to buy the game. And my reference to friends was in a way that they like the game,but they don't want to buy it,they don't want to spend money cause they have mobas that are free and give them almost near the same experience as sc2(laddering,leagues,competitive mode etc...) | ||
| ||
|
|
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
Spirit vs Mixu
Clem vs TBD
RSL Revival
Serral vs Rogue
BlizzCon
IdrA vs MC
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs JyJ
Soulkey vs hero
WardiTV Weekly
Monday Night Weeklies
Afreeca Starleague
Snow vs Shinee
Shine vs EffOrt
GSL
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
