|
Keep "my game is better than yours"-slapfights out of this. If the discussion devolves into simple bashing, this thread will be closed. |
On February 09 2015 15:46 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2015 08:03 BisuDagger wrote:On February 08 2015 07:59 Eliezar wrote:
If you think the possibilities are endless in broodwar but not StarCraft 2 that is an opinion. The only thing that was limitless in broodwar was fighting the AI instead of the opposing player. Why bother to make this statement? It's a myopic assertion of BW that will only cause negative reactions. The difference between you and the poster before is that he stated his comment as an opinion and you stated your last sentence as if it was fact. Well. . .I went back to see the other things he has posted about BW, and I guess it should be no surprise. Show nested quote +
Literally, after Broodwar came out the competitive scene was almost dead within 6 months (2 ladder seasons).
Show nested quote +BW didn't thrive because it had high microability. BW thrived because there were almost no other good online options to play with friends
So were you playing StarCraft from and through the Broodwar transition through the Korea transition into the War3 transition.
I was there from day 1 and played after Warcraft 3 came out...I played it on the competitive seen traveling to multiple 4-5 figure tournaments where I placed and won. So turn your fan boy off and discuss the real Broodwar and not the Broodwar that is a Team Liquid urban legend.
|
On February 11 2015 09:10 Eliezar wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2015 15:46 Falling wrote:On February 08 2015 08:03 BisuDagger wrote:On February 08 2015 07:59 Eliezar wrote:
If you think the possibilities are endless in broodwar but not StarCraft 2 that is an opinion. The only thing that was limitless in broodwar was fighting the AI instead of the opposing player. Why bother to make this statement? It's a myopic assertion of BW that will only cause negative reactions. The difference between you and the poster before is that he stated his comment as an opinion and you stated your last sentence as if it was fact. Well. . .I went back to see the other things he has posted about BW, and I guess it should be no surprise. but the game itself was not balanced and was overly tediouis.
Literally, after Broodwar came out the competitive scene was almost dead within 6 months (2 ladder seasons).
BW didn't thrive because it had high microability. BW thrived because there were almost no other good online options to play with friends So were you playing StarCraft from and through the Broodwar transition through the Korea transition into the War3 transition. I was there from day 1 and played after Warcraft 3 came out...I played it on the competitive seen traveling to multiple 4-5 figure tournaments where I placed and won. So turn your fan boy off and discuss the real Broodwar and not the Broodwar that is a Team Liquid urban legend.
You exhale hate for BW, that is good, enjoy whatever game you like it  . hf gl
|
On February 09 2015 23:42 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2015 21:22 ejozl wrote:
I am proud that Blizzard don't force out changes, just for the sake of shaking up the meta game. The coolest things to have ever happened in e-sports games, is when you have a meta game that seems so figured out and then along comes a revolutionist and invents a new way for the game to be played. To keep the game best for proffesionals, I agree. The problem is that a game lives and dies of the casuals. If the game isnt interesting to play for everyone, the game dies. A stagnant metagame is the easiest way to achieve that. Having a pro come around and find new strategies does unfortunately not make the game more fun for regular Joe
However, Blizzard doesn't really care about the casual player. They will never put in a casual improvement (e.g. removing cheese from the game) at the expense of the pro game.
|
On February 09 2015 15:46 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2015 08:03 BisuDagger wrote:On February 08 2015 07:59 Eliezar wrote:
If you think the possibilities are endless in broodwar but not StarCraft 2 that is an opinion. The only thing that was limitless in broodwar was fighting the AI instead of the opposing player. Why bother to make this statement? It's a myopic assertion of BW that will only cause negative reactions. The difference between you and the poster before is that he stated his comment as an opinion and you stated your last sentence as if it was fact. Well. . .I went back to see the other things he has posted about BW, and I guess it should be no surprise. Show nested quote +
Literally, after Broodwar came out the competitive scene was almost dead within 6 months (2 ladder seasons).
Show nested quote +BW didn't thrive because it had high microability. BW thrived because there were almost no other good online options to play with friends
RIP BW only good game of 1998-1999.
|
On February 11 2015 10:04 fethers wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2015 23:42 Excludos wrote:On February 09 2015 21:22 ejozl wrote:
I am proud that Blizzard don't force out changes, just for the sake of shaking up the meta game. The coolest things to have ever happened in e-sports games, is when you have a meta game that seems so figured out and then along comes a revolutionist and invents a new way for the game to be played. To keep the game best for proffesionals, I agree. The problem is that a game lives and dies of the casuals. If the game isnt interesting to play for everyone, the game dies. A stagnant metagame is the easiest way to achieve that. Having a pro come around and find new strategies does unfortunately not make the game more fun for regular Joe However, Blizzard doesn't really care about the casual player. They will never put in a casual improvement (e.g. removing cheese from the game) at the expense of the pro game. Why would they remove cheese, cheese really good for casuals and low skill people to get ez wins.
|
On February 11 2015 10:08 lestye wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2015 10:04 fethers wrote:On February 09 2015 23:42 Excludos wrote:On February 09 2015 21:22 ejozl wrote:
I am proud that Blizzard don't force out changes, just for the sake of shaking up the meta game. The coolest things to have ever happened in e-sports games, is when you have a meta game that seems so figured out and then along comes a revolutionist and invents a new way for the game to be played. To keep the game best for proffesionals, I agree. The problem is that a game lives and dies of the casuals. If the game isnt interesting to play for everyone, the game dies. A stagnant metagame is the easiest way to achieve that. Having a pro come around and find new strategies does unfortunately not make the game more fun for regular Joe However, Blizzard doesn't really care about the casual player. They will never put in a casual improvement (e.g. removing cheese from the game) at the expense of the pro game. Why would they remove cheese, cheese really good for casuals and low skill people to get ez wins.
You can't really remove cheese since its, by nature, a relative term for "my opponent did something faster than I expected them to do it"
No matter the pace of the game, cheese will always be an option.
|
On February 11 2015 10:35 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2015 10:08 lestye wrote:On February 11 2015 10:04 fethers wrote:On February 09 2015 23:42 Excludos wrote:On February 09 2015 21:22 ejozl wrote:
I am proud that Blizzard don't force out changes, just for the sake of shaking up the meta game. The coolest things to have ever happened in e-sports games, is when you have a meta game that seems so figured out and then along comes a revolutionist and invents a new way for the game to be played. To keep the game best for proffesionals, I agree. The problem is that a game lives and dies of the casuals. If the game isnt interesting to play for everyone, the game dies. A stagnant metagame is the easiest way to achieve that. Having a pro come around and find new strategies does unfortunately not make the game more fun for regular Joe However, Blizzard doesn't really care about the casual player. They will never put in a casual improvement (e.g. removing cheese from the game) at the expense of the pro game. Why would they remove cheese, cheese really good for casuals and low skill people to get ez wins. You can't really remove cheese since its, by nature, a relative term for "my opponent did something faster than I expected them to do it" No matter the pace of the game, cheese will always be an option.
It doesn't have to be absolute. There are ways to make Cheese harder to execute and easier to defend.
|
On February 11 2015 10:40 fethers wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2015 10:35 Thieving Magpie wrote:On February 11 2015 10:08 lestye wrote:On February 11 2015 10:04 fethers wrote:On February 09 2015 23:42 Excludos wrote:On February 09 2015 21:22 ejozl wrote:
I am proud that Blizzard don't force out changes, just for the sake of shaking up the meta game. The coolest things to have ever happened in e-sports games, is when you have a meta game that seems so figured out and then along comes a revolutionist and invents a new way for the game to be played. To keep the game best for proffesionals, I agree. The problem is that a game lives and dies of the casuals. If the game isnt interesting to play for everyone, the game dies. A stagnant metagame is the easiest way to achieve that. Having a pro come around and find new strategies does unfortunately not make the game more fun for regular Joe However, Blizzard doesn't really care about the casual player. They will never put in a casual improvement (e.g. removing cheese from the game) at the expense of the pro game. Why would they remove cheese, cheese really good for casuals and low skill people to get ez wins. You can't really remove cheese since its, by nature, a relative term for "my opponent did something faster than I expected them to do it" No matter the pace of the game, cheese will always be an option. It doesn't have to be absolute. There are ways to make Cheese harder to execute and easier to defend.
No, you're misunderstanding me, cheese is a relative term that grows not from the existence of specific types of strategies, but by the existence of cost cutting strategies without long term goals.
Right now cheese is 6pools and and proxy 2rax plays. But if you make it so those are impossible/not profitable, then the community will shift to complaining about those "cheesy 2base play" or "cheesy 3base play" and so on and so forth. Because, realistically speaking, mature players don't care what a strategy is chosen by the opponent.
Case in point, I remember when people complained about MMA's "cheesy" 5 base siege tank attrition style TvZ play on Shakuras Plateau where he used terrain and siege lines to weaken the zerg player's 6th base.
People will call anything they consider unfair to them "cheese" and it doesn't matter if its a 6pool or a 5base vs 6base map specific strategy. People will *ALWAYS* complain about it.
|
On February 11 2015 10:04 fethers wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2015 23:42 Excludos wrote:On February 09 2015 21:22 ejozl wrote:
I am proud that Blizzard don't force out changes, just for the sake of shaking up the meta game. The coolest things to have ever happened in e-sports games, is when you have a meta game that seems so figured out and then along comes a revolutionist and invents a new way for the game to be played. To keep the game best for proffesionals, I agree. The problem is that a game lives and dies of the casuals. If the game isnt interesting to play for everyone, the game dies. A stagnant metagame is the easiest way to achieve that. Having a pro come around and find new strategies does unfortunately not make the game more fun for regular Joe However, Blizzard doesn't really care about the casual player. They will never put in a casual improvement (e.g. removing cheese from the game) at the expense of the pro game.
Its difficult to determine whether Blizzard caters to the casual or pro players, but majority of the changes have been made for the pro scene.
I sincerely think removing cheese from the game would hurt more than improve the game for casual players. In my experience, most of the casuals cheesed against me. As well, learning how to stop cheese is a big step to becoming a better player.
|
The reason Blizzard takes so damn long, is because they only accept the best solutions. Things that caters to all.
With the addition of the 12 workers start, we can only hope for more technical cheese. Involving Forcefields, Burrow, Siege Tanks, Banshee's, what have you.
|
|
|
so once dota2 gets a halfa decent engine, we might suffer it maybe
|
learning how to stop cheese is a big step to becoming a better player
If the cheese doesn't exist you don't have to learn the specific reaction to it. Cheese is the worst thing for casuals, far worse than demanding mechanics. It forces you to invests countless hours into figuring out that one way to react to your opponent building a base in your base.
Just so that next game you lose to your opponent building towers in your base. Or building invisible units at 6mins.
And then you need a lot of time to figure out all of those builds as well, so you cannot really be a casual if you don't cheese yourself. The time spent is just too much.
Cheeses are much better when they are about building an unregularily big army at home and then moving out (e.g. the 2010 1base 3rax stuff). Then it is about dealing with an army, not with some stupid shannenigans that you don't know will hit you unless you already know the game inside out anyways.
|
On February 15 2015 01:16 Big J wrote:If the cheese doesn't exist you don't have to learn the specific reaction to it. Cheese is the worst thing for casuals, far worse than demanding mechanics. It forces you to invests countless hours into figuring out that one way to react to your opponent building a base in your base. Just so that next game you lose to your opponent building towers in your base. Or building invisible units at 6mins. And then you need a lot of time to figure out all of those builds as well, so you cannot really be a casual if you don't cheese yourself. The time spent is just too much. Cheeses are much better when they are about building an unregularily big army at home and then moving out (e.g. the 2010 1base 3rax stuff). Then it is about dealing with an army, not with some stupid shannenigans that you don't know will hit you unless you already know the game inside out anyways.
I don't think casuals will ever be okay with a "specific" type of cheese. Whatever the cheese is, they will whine about it the same.
|
On February 15 2015 03:18 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2015 01:16 Big J wrote:learning how to stop cheese is a big step to becoming a better player If the cheese doesn't exist you don't have to learn the specific reaction to it. Cheese is the worst thing for casuals, far worse than demanding mechanics. It forces you to invests countless hours into figuring out that one way to react to your opponent building a base in your base. Just so that next game you lose to your opponent building towers in your base. Or building invisible units at 6mins. And then you need a lot of time to figure out all of those builds as well, so you cannot really be a casual if you don't cheese yourself. The time spent is just too much. Cheeses are much better when they are about building an unregularily big army at home and then moving out (e.g. the 2010 1base 3rax stuff). Then it is about dealing with an army, not with some stupid shannenigans that you don't know will hit you unless you already know the game inside out anyways. I don't think casuals will ever be okay with a "specific" type of cheese. Whatever the cheese is, they will whine about it the same.
well even professionals whine about it, so
|
On February 15 2015 01:16 Big J wrote:If the cheese doesn't exist you don't have to learn the specific reaction to it. Cheese is the worst thing for casuals, far worse than demanding mechanics. It forces you to invests countless hours into figuring out that one way to react to your opponent building a base in your base. Just so that next game you lose to your opponent building towers in your base. Or building invisible units at 6mins. And then you need a lot of time to figure out all of those builds as well, so you cannot really be a casual if you don't cheese yourself. The time spent is just too much. Cheeses are much better when they are about building an unregularily big army at home and then moving out (e.g. the 2010 1base 3rax stuff). Then it is about dealing with an army, not with some stupid shannenigans that you don't know will hit you unless you already know the game inside out anyways.
.
You say it like it's a bad thing.
A strategy game with less strategies is simply less interesting. It might be less rage-inducing, but we all know the dangers of a stagnant meta-game - people stop playing because it's boring.
You're also making assumptions that casuals don't like games to end fast, or on their own terms. I would say casuals want a game to be short and exciting. Cheese delivers that almost immediate threat and also gives the more offensive-minded player the ability to put a countdown timer to the end of the game. This isn't just not bad for casuals, but perfect for casuals, since at any time, when life comes calling, they can pull off a strategy that ends the game now as opposed to eventually.
In general, every game that requires a certain amount of practice and intrinsic knowledge will be a difficult environment for what we call casual players to thrive in. Their performance suffers for obvious reasons, but as long as the matchmaking system gives them games they can win, they can still find a niche in which they can have fun and still experience the thrill of competition and all the risks that go along with competing (the potential to have your ass handed to you).
I think RTS games are excellent and still have a place in the market. There are just a lot of other options out there for gamers. They aren't forced to play anything at the end of the day, and games that their circles of friends play, or games that come out on console, or mobile devices will typically appeal to people for reasons that transcend your idea or my idea of what a good game is.
Genres can't be generalized based on our observations of one game in a genre. In a way, MOBA games are RTS games (in more ways than they came from RTS engines originally). I personally think they kinda suck and are boring after about 100 hours, but obviously there are many people who disagree. Apparently, they satisfy enough criteria to keep people playing and interested. My belief is that they typically satisfy a basic need of many people - that is they are free to play in most cases.
PC games that cost money to play fully will have less players nowadays. We can't let this sway our opinions on the viability of the genres and games that we love in the current marketplace. Marketplaces are very trend-based and tend to gravitate toward these trends quite heavily (look at MOBAS, MMORPGs, and sandbox survival MMOs). These trends may seem like the preferences of gamers have changed, but it's actually the developers who have flooded the marketplace with these trend games in an attempt to find the next League of Legends, World of Warcraft, or WarZ / DayZ. This doesn't mean that RTS, puzzle games, generic FPS, racing games, fighting games, or the myriad of options are somehow no longer viable. It just means that the guys with the money are putting money into projects they hope will have the revenue stream of a pop-culture phenomenon.
We will get to watch many developers fade into obscurity as they try to latch on to someone else's successful idea. Those people lack originality and never had a chance to begin with. RTS is still a beloved genre of many gamers, and it is only suffering from a difficulty to port the conecpt onto touch screens and consoles - which, for obvious reasons are platforms that they were never intended for.
|
On February 15 2015 03:43 dUTtrOACh wrote:
RTS is still a beloved genre of many gamers, and it is only suffering from a difficulty to port the conecpt onto touch screens and consoles - which, for obvious reasons are platforms that they were never intended for.
I don't think that it needs touch or console. It just needs a good F2P model, or cheap to buy model. Also, having a nice engine and if possible a "brand".
Dota2 and CS:GO are nice examples. Dota2 got extremely big after other Mobas were released and did not really achieved anything. (excluding LoL of course, I am talking in a post-LoL world).
CS:GO is still growing faster and faster despite the most popular FPS now being console FPS that get released every year.
I believe this 2 games flourished because they had a legacy name, one was F2P that had everything playable unlocked from start, the other was selling for 5€ or 3€ on steam sales.
Dota2 tried to emulate as much as possible from the wc3 mod. Balance patches are delivered to both almost at the same time. Dota2 keeps the game play familiar to older players, but also introduces new hotkeys and new tools.Alt-clicking stuff is a god-send.
CS:GO did not have a good start, but following some input from the pros and commutnity made it become the huge success that it is today.
I'll use Grey Goo as an example now. It is an RTS, but it has a few issues:
->45€ release price
->really heavy engine
-> no marketing
-> no replays
-> the brand is pretty much "some of these guys worked in old C&C games"
The game is actually pretty good, but that is not really enough to make it popular.
It also makes RTS an easier genre to jump in thanks to the macro automations.
->You can auto-produce units as long as you have income for them so you don't have to be constantly queuing stuff.
->Workers are also automatically build.
->hotkeys are something diferent but nice, they work like Smite/Tribes:A chat messages, you can build or tech anything with quert.
-> Everything is available through those hotkeys, you dont have to put your factories and command center in control groups to build or upgrade stuff.
So i think the reason it "failed" is pretty much what a put above.
But how can a traditional RTS have a F2P model? or a really low price ?
Would skins work in RTS?
|
I think that if Blizzard could make a decent F2P WC4, the hype would switch again for some RTS.
|
On February 15 2015 04:26 TMG26 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2015 03:43 dUTtrOACh wrote:
RTS is still a beloved genre of many gamers, and it is only suffering from a difficulty to port the conecpt onto touch screens and consoles - which, for obvious reasons are platforms that they were never intended for.
I don't think that it needs touch or console. It just needs a good F2P model, or cheap to buy model. Also, having a nice engine and if possible a "brand". Dota2 and CS:GO are nice examples. Dota2 got extremely big after other Mobas were released and did not really achieved anything. (excluding LoL of course, I am talking in a post-LoL world). CS:GO is still growing faster and faster despite the most popular FPS now being console FPS that get released every year. I believe this 2 games flourished because they had a legacy name, one was F2P that had everything playable unlocked from start, the other was selling for 5€ or 3€ on steam sales. Dota2 tried to emulate as much as possible from the wc3 mod. Balance patches are delivered to both almost at the same time. Dota2 keeps the game play familiar to older players, but also introduces new hotkeys and new tools.Alt-clicking stuff is a god-send. CS:GO did not have a good start, but following some input from the pros and commutnity made it become the huge success that it is today. I'll use Grey Goo as an example now. It is an RTS, but it has a few issues: ->45€ release price ->really heavy engine -> no marketing -> no replays -> the brand is pretty much "some of these guys worked in old C&C games" The game is actually pretty good, but that is not really enough to make it popular. It also makes RTS an easier genre to jump in thanks to the macro automations. ->You can auto-produce units as long as you have income for them so you don't have to be constantly queuing stuff. ->Workers are also automatically build. ->hotkeys are something diferent but nice, they work like Smite/Tribes:A chat messages, you can build or tech anything with quert. -> Everything is available through those hotkeys, you dont have to put your factories and command center in control groups to build or upgrade stuff. So i think the reason it "failed" is pretty much what a put above. But how can a traditional RTS have a F2P model? or a really low price ? Would skins work in RTS?
I never said I want to see RTS games on touch / console... I said that the difficulty to port the genre to these platforms makes the genre APPEAR to be less popular.
Grey Goo isn't even close to the excellence that is SC2. It's an okay little game, but it's nothing special. At its height, it won't be as popular even as SC2. It's... just not good enough. To call it the next great RTS is an insult to other titles that actually are good.
Making RTS easier or more accessible in too many ways actually dumbs it down too much for it to retain any kind of die-hard fan-base. Sure, people will play, some will have fun, but if the game is too easy to play it won't last very long, it won't appeal to more skilled players, and if it were to become an eSport it wouldn't hold the same reverence as something like Broodwar, or to a lesser extent, SC2. People don't watch pro sports or the olympics to watch regular people playing an easy game. They want to see exceptional people doing very difficult things and making them look easy.
RTS is a very difficult thing to get right. I think Blizzard did okay with SC2, but it's gone downhill in many ways; lack of creativity and overall lack of caring on the part of the developer, to name a few. Legacy of the Void needs to be an exceptionally good expansion to revitalize interest in SC2, but it will probably just be a bunch of half-assed concepts poorly executed and simply balanced to appease the competitive scene. This may very well be the dying cry of the last good RTS for some time, but I don't think SC2 will be the last great RTS game. There may just be a dark age while people try to imitate the other successful RTS games of the past (C&C, AoE, BW, WC, CoH, Total War, etc, etc).
The games industry as a whole suffers from a lack of original ideas, because of corporate interests and the watering down of artistic expression by modern culture. There are exceptions, of course, but for the most part, I'm not talking out of my ass. Most of the big budget, "game of the year" type titles at the moment are just rehashed classics or safe concepts that latch onto some bandwagon (talking games like Dead Island, Destiny, etc.)
RTS isn't the only genre that currently suffers from shit developers or stale ideas.
|
On February 11 2015 09:10 Eliezar wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2015 15:46 Falling wrote:On February 08 2015 08:03 BisuDagger wrote:On February 08 2015 07:59 Eliezar wrote:
If you think the possibilities are endless in broodwar but not StarCraft 2 that is an opinion. The only thing that was limitless in broodwar was fighting the AI instead of the opposing player. Why bother to make this statement? It's a myopic assertion of BW that will only cause negative reactions. The difference between you and the poster before is that he stated his comment as an opinion and you stated your last sentence as if it was fact. Well. . .I went back to see the other things he has posted about BW, and I guess it should be no surprise. but the game itself was not balanced and was overly tediouis.
Literally, after Broodwar came out the competitive scene was almost dead within 6 months (2 ladder seasons).
BW didn't thrive because it had high microability. BW thrived because there were almost no other good online options to play with friends So were you playing StarCraft from and through the Broodwar transition through the Korea transition into the War3 transition. I was there from day 1 and played after Warcraft 3 came out...I played it on the competitive seen traveling to multiple 4-5 figure tournaments where I placed and won. So turn your fan boy off and discuss the real Broodwar and not the Broodwar that is a Team Liquid urban legend.
oh man you made me laugh big time
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
