|
On December 18 2014 01:29 Estancia wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 00:32 -Archangel- wrote:On December 18 2014 00:21 Umpteen wrote:On December 17 2014 22:56 maartendq wrote:On December 17 2014 22:27 AbouSV wrote:
While I kinda agree with most part and I wouldn't really mind most of those changes happening (skins, gameplay adaptations regarding the level etc...), by reading the comment it looks more like the core problem is not perceived as the same for everyone.
In my point you should not compare so much SCII to SC:GO, DotA2 or LoL in terms of readability, but more to chess actually.
SCII sure is a video game, but it tends to be more of an active and virtual version of chess than what is usually called a "casual game" (which depends on where the given casualty stops for everyone).
So:
Are chess "fun" to watch?
Not really, no.
Is chess a "ded game" (it's only been about six centuries)?
Not even close.
How many time chess has been patched in the last 50 years? Do people ask for a different shirt colour, or a bishop with fancy horns for when they win 50 game in a month?
Wait... What?!
Why do you care so much weather there are few millions people watching the game or "just" several tens of thousands?
As long as there are great tournaments (DH won't stop SCII (yet), it will just no be on the "big scene", no big deal really), excellent players to admire/look up to/pray for/be a fan of, and as long as when you connect to the game and look for a game you don't wait more that a few tenth of seconds whatever your level, well everything is just perfectly fine!
I know this is actually way too optimistic, but I deliberately wrote to sound this way, to contrast with the general mood of this topic. The problem with the chess comparison is that SC2 is exactly the other way around for many people: it's exhilirating to watch but not fun to play because even the slightest mistake can cost you the game. There's very little in terms of second chances in Starcraft 2. Look away for a second and lose you army to four or five banelings? Tap out. Didn't see those four medivacs fly towards you base because you were busy watching another part of the map? Tap out. Left one small gap in your queen-and-evolution-chamber wall allowing for a few blue flame hellions to roast all your drones? Tap out. I am all for learning to get better at a game (I love Dark Souls and the feeling of reward it gives you when you manage to tackle a seeminly impossible situation), but SC2 honestly takes things a bit too far. Even the aforementioned dark souls gave room for mistakes, to heal between boss attacks. Starcraft 2 does not. I disagree. The issues you're describing only kick in at a level of play well above what casual players would reach. Before you say that's wrong because it happens in Gold, hear me out. For me, the big difference between SC2 and LoL/CS is that in the latter games there is little or no ambiguity as to what you should be doing. A total novice LoL player can run out, whack mobs, fight other players, and the game will play out around him. In terms of decision making, it boils down to 'fish or cut bait'. Same with CS: you put bullets into other people while dodging theirs. Yes, there are layers and layers of tactics and strategies to learn, but none of that prevents you having fun to begin with. In both cases, the learning feedback loop is also direct and intuitive. You are, by and large, guided by the game mechanics. SC2 is nothing like that. It's hugely front-loaded with complexity, and learning from experience is very difficult. You only have to look at how obstinately and consistently low level players maintain that macro isn't why they lost to see what a bad job SC2 does of providing useful learning feedback. When you hear that Blizzard capped deck slots in Hearthstone because the feedback from casual players was "Woah, woah, I'm never going to even build a deck; that all looks too complicated for me", you can appreciate how monumentally inaccessible SC2 really is. The audience for CS and LoL is MOSTLY that level of player - just as it is for most games. So when you say that casual players are struggling because of hellion run-bys, that's simply not true. Casual players aren't even playing SC2, and that's why they aren't watching it either. I been on plenty of different forums and when people there don't like sc2 it is always the same: Sc2 has too much micro. Average gamers want to turtle, build armies and a move to victory. And this was what we did in BW at start. We never expanded, we just turtled until battlecruisers and carriers and sent those to battle. It was similar to how C&C was played before that but C&C had engineers that could take over enemy buildings at 2 minutes into the game and were obvious to use even for newbs. After you failed with those you turtled until you got to best units. Sc2 at lower level needs to be a different game than at diamond or master level. It needs two ladders and other casual content like Destiny said. Or it needs to focus on teamplay and leave 1v1 for the hardcore crowd Still kinda suprising how BW, despite having much much harsher mechanics than SCII, turned out to be enjoyable even for casual players, if they were matched against other casual player. I guess the custom maps did help attract casual players a lot, but sure as hell there were lots of casual players playing the game for fun. Playing on 1 base for 20 minutes, attacking with only 12 units at each time, etc etc. But if you were matched against another casual player, that shit was still damn fun. You could limit yourself and play the game easily, like by staying on one base and stuff. And playing like this made you appreciate pro gamers even more, because you knew how difficult it was to pull off all the stuff the pros were doing. In casual games you could just a-move, or ignore your macro and try to follow all the cool micros you see in pro games. Sitting in a psionic storm, or getting hit by a plague didn't mean that you instantly lost. Starcraft II on the other hand, doesn't have the same distinction that existed in pro games and casual games in BW. Engagements end within 10 seconds, instead of having constant skirmishes you have both players just macroing up/turtling and not engaging for 20 minute. Turtling tier 3 unit doesn't work that well anymore because of how shit they are (carriers and cattlebruisers used to be much better back in BW), and you are forced to go for the same composition you usually see in pro levels. As for engagements, just take a look at how brutal protoss vs terran is at casual level, where people barely bother to micro. Protoss player just have to get 1-2 templars, and press t and click on the terran army. The terran will usually leave their bio ball and don't really move out of the storm, causing all their units to die. Or getting chained fungalled to death in ZvX. Not splitting vs banelings and losing your entire bioball to it. Single mistakes that can cost you the game. How would you feel if you took 30 minute to mass up an army of battlecruisers and lost all of them in an instant because you just got chain fungalled to death? Back in BW not microing didn't necessarily killed you. It also required your opponent to micro efficiently to be able to kill you. You couldn't just select 4 high templars and storm, it would make all 4 of them storm the same area. You had to cycle through each one of them, and storm each area - which was what jangbi was famous for doing very efficiently. Having 1 good storm didn't spell disaster for your opponent, you had to get 3-4 good storms to be able to turn the tide of battle to you (notice : not instantly win game), in large scale engagements. In casual games you might see a storm or two go down in large engagements (if there were any), and the terrans could lose some of their units in the storm by not moving out, but considering the units weren't so clumped up back then the damage wasn't as large as it is now and didn't instantly kill the opponent. Plague was not a straight-up kill ability, it was meant to force engagements, unlike fungals which can straight up kill your opponent if he was not careful. I just feel that starcraft II is just not as fun to play as the BW counterpart, both for casual and maybe even for pro levels.
I agree in a sense. SC2 has really unforgiving engagements, but even for BW, 1v1 wasn't the most played mode at all. Having lived in Asia, and in Korea for the last 5 years, no one plays BW 1v1 - it's still team games or customs.
That's why I don't think the focus should be on 1v1. While it'd be great of engagements lasted longer, I think those are easier gameplay tweaks to make - when I think we should be overhauling teams and custom games.
|
On December 18 2014 01:29 Estancia wrote:
As for engagements, just take a look at how brutal protoss vs terran is at casual level, where people barely bother to micro. Protoss player just have to get 1-2 templars, and press t and click on the terran army. The terran will usually leave their bio ball and don't really move out of the storm, causing all their units to die. Or getting chained fungalled to death in ZvX. Not splitting vs banelings and losing your entire bioball to it. Single mistakes that can cost you the game. How would you feel if you took 30 minute to mass up an army of battlecruisers and lost all of them in an instant because you just got chain fungalled to death?
I heard this odd creaking sound as I read this, and realised it was the rarley used cogs in my brain trying to turn.
Would having units do differing levels of damage on the low ladders be a viable option?
If a storm didn't destroy bio instantly.. And less skilled had a chance to come back in the game.. It'd have more casual appeal?
In the same way that at a pro level in snooker the pockets are very tight and narrow - little to no margin for error - but the pockets in snooker clubs for the mere mortals are a lot wider and more forgiving.
So the damage units do could scale with your skill as you go up the ladder ranking system. The pro's would still have the same damage as units do now, it'd just be a lot more forgiving for new players etc.
|
with the "new" game lotv to come out, stand alone that is, they may be able to add the extra things we talked about 2 years ago, just like dotas client and lol, in game browsing, tournies, ranks, campaigns after the campaign . . .the lot. if this is going to be their last effort for another 10 years then it has to last and stand the test of time
|
On December 18 2014 00:40 Chaggi wrote:
IMO Focus on Customs and Team Games as the main game modes. If you look at the way BW and WC3 has gained success, that's traditionally the game modes that are the most popular. Hell, I used to play a lot of team games in BW just 2-3 years ago with some coworkers in Korea. When I asked them if they played 1v1 or Fish server at all, they just laughed at me and told me they weren't serious gamers.
Yup for sure. Was the same when I had small LANs with buddies. They all had a copy of WC3 and we would play 3-4 hours custom maps but I think none of them played more then 10 1v1 games in their whole life.
|
On December 18 2014 01:39 fruity. wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 01:29 Estancia wrote:
As for engagements, just take a look at how brutal protoss vs terran is at casual level, where people barely bother to micro. Protoss player just have to get 1-2 templars, and press t and click on the terran army. The terran will usually leave their bio ball and don't really move out of the storm, causing all their units to die. Or getting chained fungalled to death in ZvX. Not splitting vs banelings and losing your entire bioball to it. Single mistakes that can cost you the game. How would you feel if you took 30 minute to mass up an army of battlecruisers and lost all of them in an instant because you just got chain fungalled to death?
I heard this odd creaking sound as I read this, and realised it was the rarley used cogs in my brain trying to turn. Would having units do differing levels of damage on the low ladders be a viable option? If a storm didn't destroy bio instantly.. And less skilled had a chance to come back in the game.. It'd have more casual appeal? In the same way that at a pro level in snooker the pockets are very tight and narrow - little to no margin for error - but the pockets in snooker clubs for the mere mortals are a lot wider and more forgiving. So the damage units do could scale with your skill as you go up the ladder ranking system. The pro's would still have the same damage as units do now, it'd just be a lot more forgiving for new players etc.
The issue is that a lot of this stuff is balanced around the damage. If storms didn't instantly do X amount of damage, it's possible that bio could just steam roll the protoss, and that means a balance team for the casual ladders, and a balance team for the pro ladders, which I can't really see working out when we have half a balance team now.
|
On December 18 2014 01:44 REDBLUEGREEN wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 00:40 Chaggi wrote:
IMO Focus on Customs and Team Games as the main game modes. If you look at the way BW and WC3 has gained success, that's traditionally the game modes that are the most popular. Hell, I used to play a lot of team games in BW just 2-3 years ago with some coworkers in Korea. When I asked them if they played 1v1 or Fish server at all, they just laughed at me and told me they weren't serious gamers. Yup for sure. Was the same when I had small LANs with buddies. They all had a copy of WC3 and we would play 3-4 hours custom maps but I think none of them played more then 10 1v1 games in their whole life.
Exactly. I think we're all on TL and have stuck around here for a reason, and I think that's cause we play this game cause we're naturally competitive, and the most competitive mode is the 1v1 mode. If the people on here are the only ones we talk to about SC2, we're gonna think that 1's is the mode that everyone wants to play and fix. But I really just don't think that's true.
|
Couldnt you just blanket every thing though? In bronze unit damage is 40% less across the board, or whatever. Couldnt you just have a nice straight line graph of unit damage increasing (but still being relative) The higher to the top you got, or only in bronze - gold.
If all units were to get the same damage nerf hammer, wouldnt it still be balanced? Just more forgiving.
|
On December 18 2014 01:49 fruity. wrote:
Couldnt you just blanket every thing though? In bronze unit damage is 40% less across the board, or whatever. Couldnt you just have a nice straight line graph of unit damage increasing (but still being relative) The higher to the top you got, or only in bronze - gold.
If all units were to get the same damage nerf hammer, wouldnt it still be balanced? Just more forgiving.
It could work, and I think there's been some fun leagues in the past where they've tried increasing the HP and it played out fine. I think that's more of a game design discussion though and that could easily turn into a balance whine or bw vs sc2 type of talk.
|
Basicly if everyone bought all three expansions Blizzard has no longer interest in the game, from a financial perspective.
Sc2 must die soon after LotV to get people to buy HotS heroes and skins, and Cardpacks in HotS and PowerUps for Overwatch.
|
Two completely different genres. I can't see how killing off RTS means people will goto FPS.
|
On December 18 2014 01:47 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 01:44 REDBLUEGREEN wrote:On December 18 2014 00:40 Chaggi wrote:
IMO Focus on Customs and Team Games as the main game modes. If you look at the way BW and WC3 has gained success, that's traditionally the game modes that are the most popular. Hell, I used to play a lot of team games in BW just 2-3 years ago with some coworkers in Korea. When I asked them if they played 1v1 or Fish server at all, they just laughed at me and told me they weren't serious gamers. Yup for sure. Was the same when I had small LANs with buddies. They all had a copy of WC3 and we would play 3-4 hours custom maps but I think none of them played more then 10 1v1 games in their whole life. Exactly. I think we're all on TL and have stuck around here for a reason, and I think that's cause we play this game cause we're naturally competitive, and the most competitive mode is the 1v1 mode. If the people on here are the only ones we talk to about SC2, we're gonna think that 1's is the mode that everyone wants to play and fix. But I really just don't think that's true.
Yeah and I think there are conflicting interest as well.
Most here on TL like that SC is fast and stressful and hectic and we love it when we see we have broken 250 APM in the last game etc.
Most of my gamer friends really don't like stressful games, they play after work/university to relax with a beer or some weed on the side.
I think it is impossible to balance this. You slow the gameplay down and maybe more casual people would play 1v1 but the esports fans will hate it.
|
On December 18 2014 01:36 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 01:31 Big J wrote:On December 18 2014 01:23 Chaggi wrote:Those are a great list of changes that should be made, but would changing that really bring people back / bring in new players? That's the big issue with SC2 now is that the audience has shrunk, the future is bleak cause no one trusts Blizzard to do the right thing, we're getting PR talk from them in spades, and all we can do is sit on TL and brainstorm ideas that will never be used with no indication of why. Well, but all those talks about skins and custom maps marketplace and Interface improvements are nothing but marketing gags either. They don't change the reason why people don't play SC2, which is that the game itself. Not necessarily. The focus SC2 has had the last few years has been 1v1 I can get pretty passionate about 1v1 but I'm in the vast minority. If they improve the UI, custom games, and introduce a market place as another source for revenue - aka, take the focus off of the 1v1 mode, it's not that hard to see SC2 gain a greater audience.
Well, but marketing mods/arcade/Custom Games has little impact on Stracraft itself. That's just other games on the same client.
|
On December 18 2014 01:53 Chaggi wrote:
It could work, and I think there's been some fun leagues in the past where they've tried increasing the HP and it played out fine. I think that's more of a game design discussion though and that could easily turn into a balance whine or bw vs sc2 type of talk.
Husky had a fun as hell series on his youtube, let me go dig it up. One of the matches in there had all units did 50% less damage, was silly, but so fun to watch!
Anyway, balance whine is for the top tiers in SC2, it has to be balanced for the pro level. I agree. But this doesn't mean it can't be unbalanced in the low leagues.
Casual players want fun, as so many have said in many threads. If that storm or fungal, or rolling doom of banelings didn't instantly mean a casual would have to tap out. They could still fight on, it's not over yet! It's better right? More causal friendly.
|
A "subtle" difference I can spot between Blizzard and Valve is that Valve is relying HEAVILY on the community workshops to create new content! I mean, I've been playing CS:GO for about a year now and I really despise the case/key (microtransaction) model for skins and even maps, because it's technically NOT a f2p game, but charges you for every bit of extra content (operation passes are a fkn joke if you ask me) they find in community workshops, so essentially they aren't even developing this stuff all by themselves and just take the money from all those people who get entangled in this shit because it's literally gambling!
What's really detrimental here is that even throughout my (gaming) environment the focus is becoming less and less about being good/getting better at the game but instead more about showing off your cool skins... And those are people around their mid twenties, so just imagine how appealing these things can be to teenagers/younger folks and CS:GO just brought that to perfection with this gambling approach.
I really feel the video game industry is heading in a wrong direction with those micro transaction models and it really bothers me to see so many people supporting it. I've been into gaming for about 20 years now which might make me sound like a grandpa  and I clearly see that it all has changed A LOT, but not only for the better... I actually liked the days games were released when they were finished (yes, 1.0!!!), I paid 50-60 bucks for the cartridge (something physical) and had a game I still can play today without having to be logged in etc. ...
Well, I guess, I'm just a grandpa, after all.
|
Creager, sign of the times I guess, it would seem to be a more viable option to release games free than expect a one off of 50€ or whatever. I'm sure pirating is a big factor.
I dont play CS:GO, what do you mean by this gambling approach?
|
On December 18 2014 01:58 REDBLUEGREEN wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 01:47 Chaggi wrote:On December 18 2014 01:44 REDBLUEGREEN wrote:On December 18 2014 00:40 Chaggi wrote:
IMO Focus on Customs and Team Games as the main game modes. If you look at the way BW and WC3 has gained success, that's traditionally the game modes that are the most popular. Hell, I used to play a lot of team games in BW just 2-3 years ago with some coworkers in Korea. When I asked them if they played 1v1 or Fish server at all, they just laughed at me and told me they weren't serious gamers. Yup for sure. Was the same when I had small LANs with buddies. They all had a copy of WC3 and we would play 3-4 hours custom maps but I think none of them played more then 10 1v1 games in their whole life. Exactly. I think we're all on TL and have stuck around here for a reason, and I think that's cause we play this game cause we're naturally competitive, and the most competitive mode is the 1v1 mode. If the people on here are the only ones we talk to about SC2, we're gonna think that 1's is the mode that everyone wants to play and fix. But I really just don't think that's true. Yeah and I think there are conflicting interest as well. Most here on TL like that SC is fast and stressful and hectic and we love it when we see we have broken 250 APM in the last game etc. Most of my gamer friends really don't like stressful games, they play after work/university to relax with a beer or some weed on the side. I think it is impossible to balance this. You slow the gameplay down and maybe more casual people would play 1v1 but the esports fans will hate it.
I think its possible to have both. Sc2 is designed in mind that if you look 3 sec away from your armee, that whole armee could be dead.
Compare to broodwar, fights last longer there. Not as penalised for looking away. More micro overall involved in battles.
Not saying broodwar is the best example, its possible to do even better obviously but iam pretty sure its possible to have it fun as hell for pros/hardcore and for casuals.
|
On December 18 2014 02:00 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 01:36 Chaggi wrote:On December 18 2014 01:31 Big J wrote:On December 18 2014 01:23 Chaggi wrote:Those are a great list of changes that should be made, but would changing that really bring people back / bring in new players? That's the big issue with SC2 now is that the audience has shrunk, the future is bleak cause no one trusts Blizzard to do the right thing, we're getting PR talk from them in spades, and all we can do is sit on TL and brainstorm ideas that will never be used with no indication of why. Well, but all those talks about skins and custom maps marketplace and Interface improvements are nothing but marketing gags either. They don't change the reason why people don't play SC2, which is that the game itself. Not necessarily. The focus SC2 has had the last few years has been 1v1 I can get pretty passionate about 1v1 but I'm in the vast minority. If they improve the UI, custom games, and introduce a market place as another source for revenue - aka, take the focus off of the 1v1 mode, it's not that hard to see SC2 gain a greater audience. Well, but marketing mods/arcade/Custom Games has little impact on Stracraft itself. That's just other games on the same client.
The more people we have using the client, the more we can expand on "Starcraft", because my definition of SC is probably different than yours. I personally don't give a rats ass if more people are playing 1's, I personally want to see a more vibrant casual community that focuses on custom and team games, and 1's are left to pros and more competitive players. To me, that's what Starcraft is.
My thought is
If we can start off with a strong arcade/marketplace/team games, it provides Blizzard with the incentive of developing improvements for the client and possibly the 1v1 mode.
If there are developments that are made, we can probably begin to cross off that giant list of problems that was just posted.
From there, depending if you have a sustainable economy (aka is this game starting to get popular and what's the growth of it?), we can look at how can we contribute this to an overall eSports. BW used to have 2v2 tournaments, is that something we could bring back?
If so, then how about making it so that we can contribute money to an overall prize pool, with 2v2/3v3/4v4 players? Could we do Arcade game tournaments? Once Blizzard can get people hooked on "Starcraft" as a whole again, they can start promoting the 1v1 side, from either a viewer or player PoV. If you've stuck around watching these team games and arcade games, why not watch the guys that are playing 1v1? Why not watch how the game in it's simplest form is played?
I'm all for the one of, if you're playing the game, no matter what form it's in, you can have a respect and idea for other forms. If I'm just watching say LoL (and I've never played it before) and I see someone pull off a really hard move, I have no understanding of it, no idea that it's actually difficult or why people are getting excited and cheering. But if I'm actually in the game itself, I know how the inputs work and how the units naturally move, I suddenly can have a respect for what they're doing and that would get me excited to watch more.
ofc all of this is incredible conjecture but I think it's not that unreasonable of a path for Blizzard to think about.
|
On December 18 2014 02:13 Chaggi wrote:
BW used to have 2v2 tournaments, is that something we could bring back?
I wonder if this was blizzards intentions with archon mode in lotv. Enabling (a sort of) 2v2 without having to address potential balance issues that might arise from a pure format 2v2.
EDIT: Isn't this mode blizzards thoughts on trying to get casuals into sc2? You could play with your friend who might not understand SC2.. But still get them involved. The vertical learning curve wont be there. Maybe they'd end up sticking about.
|
On December 18 2014 02:13 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2014 01:58 REDBLUEGREEN wrote:On December 18 2014 01:47 Chaggi wrote:On December 18 2014 01:44 REDBLUEGREEN wrote:On December 18 2014 00:40 Chaggi wrote:
IMO Focus on Customs and Team Games as the main game modes. If you look at the way BW and WC3 has gained success, that's traditionally the game modes that are the most popular. Hell, I used to play a lot of team games in BW just 2-3 years ago with some coworkers in Korea. When I asked them if they played 1v1 or Fish server at all, they just laughed at me and told me they weren't serious gamers. Yup for sure. Was the same when I had small LANs with buddies. They all had a copy of WC3 and we would play 3-4 hours custom maps but I think none of them played more then 10 1v1 games in their whole life. Exactly. I think we're all on TL and have stuck around here for a reason, and I think that's cause we play this game cause we're naturally competitive, and the most competitive mode is the 1v1 mode. If the people on here are the only ones we talk to about SC2, we're gonna think that 1's is the mode that everyone wants to play and fix. But I really just don't think that's true. Yeah and I think there are conflicting interest as well. Most here on TL like that SC is fast and stressful and hectic and we love it when we see we have broken 250 APM in the last game etc. Most of my gamer friends really don't like stressful games, they play after work/university to relax with a beer or some weed on the side. I think it is impossible to balance this. You slow the gameplay down and maybe more casual people would play 1v1 but the esports fans will hate it. I think its possible to have both. Sc2 is designed in mind that if you look 3 sec away from your armee, that whole armee could be dead. Compare to broodwar, fights last longer there. Not as penalised for looking away. More micro overall involved in battles. Not saying broodwar is the best example, its possible to do even better obviously but iam pretty sure its possible to have it fun as hell for pros/hardcore and for casuals.
Actually, your armee can still die in three seconds in StarCraft: Brood War if you aren't paying attention. I don't know if you knew that or not, so I thought I'd just let you know.
|
I don't really like Destiny but this was an excellent article.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
