|
On December 19 2014 08:17 Bastinian wrote:
Starcraft should be learning from Dota 2, in terms of microtransactions, that would keep game alive for much time! If Blizzard wants to make some money, they should add some things like skins and stuff to be bought in game. Everyone knows how attractive Collector Editions are...
Here is the problem though. We can't assume SC2 would be viable as a micro transaction game. Many of us doubt it could be viable because they are very dissimilar games.
As well, there is no evidence that it would flourish on purely micro transactions.
Plus others believe it wouldn't even help SC2, because they believe it isn't the cost that deters people from playing SC2. They believe its the difficulty of the game that prevents it, and no amount of skins/voicepacks will bring in the crowd.
|
On December 20 2014 00:40 fruity. wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2014 08:45 Totorosc2 wrote:On December 18 2014 05:28 DuckDuckDuck wrote:
I´d like better Profiles with things like favourite unit, playstyle, little replay clips for your showcase (some great engagement ur proud of) etc.
I would love to customize my In-game Profile page. Currently, it is completely generic. I can imagine having a profile looking like a cockpit with a lot of features to add/modify. Being able to choose different backgrounds, show my favorite units/maps, being able to pin pictures of my favourite players/teams/tournaments/community members, write a message for people who watch my profile, having a news feed/calendar reminding me of the next WCS games my favourite players will play,... (I would even pay for new background, picture/logo of players/teams/community members to add on the profile page) or display a customizable "quest list" (play X number of games as terran, play this new arcade mode,...) Unlike new unit skins, Profiles customization does not impact the game performance at all. It's an easy way to make the game more attractive for everyone. I feel there are plenty of way to personalise and monetize the game, even without modifying in-game skins of the units. This is really a nice idea. And another good point like many others in this thread. Maybe skins for units wouldn't be viable (but I really don't see how.. So long as options to turn them on or off, have opponents show as default if you wished etc, I can't see the harm it would do). The thing that really grinds my gears about all this, is how blizzard just wont get off their high horse and just comment. How long would it take for them to take this article and answer specific questions? Or upload a vod, or skype chat with destiny and upload that?If you don't think it's viable blizzard, OK! No problem.. Just get us involved, expolain why you think this is the case. If you were to explain why X or Y or Z was being done, then all this shit would go away. I think it's fair to say after reading every post in this thread to date.. That I'm not alone in this thinking. Just engage us blizzard, tell us why.. Other game developers do it, why can't you?
What makes you think Destiny is someone that's on Blizzard's radar? What makes you think Blizzard think high enough of Destiny that he's worth directly responding to about a blog post?
|
On December 20 2014 01:23 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
You can't deny the free to play garners way more gamers than single price. If Blizzard could reduce the cost of the game but incorporate micro transaction, it would help get new gamers to give SC2 a try.
To be honest, none of us knows what model fits best for SC2, and only Blizzard can decide that. I just have to agree with Destiny. Blizzard needs to do something to encourage new players to buy LotV. SC2 needs fresh blood, and LotV will be the opportunity for it. Questions still remain. How much blood will we get?
How many fresh faces join the community will depend on Blizzard, and we can only speculate and suggest.
I think archon mode is blizzards (I may have to start referring to them as bliztard from now on..) Way of trying to get more casual gamers involved. Though even in this I'm not sure how successful it'll be as it relies on someone knowing a friend who can play sc2 in the first place, 2 new players in archon mode will still get slapped down hard and fast.
But at least it's something! The real barrier to entry here is just the vertical learning curve and the niche market appeal RTS has in the current gaming climate.
I fired up DOTA2 for the first time last night and played the first 4 trainer missions, it's so much more together than the trainer missions in SC2. Like how interface elements are sparse to begin with and slowly more get added over the course of a mission. It makes it a lot simpler to understand, learn one thing move on to the next etc. A few hours of DOTA2 and I'm already left with the feeling of how everything is much more polished that SC2, and this from a long term sc fan.
|
On December 20 2014 01:52 dabom88 wrote:
What makes you think Destiny is someone that's on Blizzard's radar? What makes you think Blizzard think high enough of Destiny that he's worth directly responding to about a blog post?
They dont engage ANYONE, about ANY of their choices.
Valve do. A tiny developer can when replying to TotalBiscuits review
+ Show Spoiler +
And bliztard can't?
|
As always, Destiny is correct. I 100% agree with him that in order for SC2 to be a top game again, it needs skins so casual players can feel cool.
|
On December 20 2014 01:59 swag_bro wrote:
As always, Destiny is correct. I 100% agree with him that in order for SC2 to be a top game again, it needs skins so casual players can feel cool.
And now go and read the article first, then come back and comment. You've got this part reversed.
|
On December 20 2014 01:45 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2014 08:17 Bastinian wrote:
Starcraft should be learning from Dota 2, in terms of microtransactions, that would keep game alive for much time! If Blizzard wants to make some money, they should add some things like skins and stuff to be bought in game. Everyone knows how attractive Collector Editions are... Here is the problem though. We can't assume SC2 would be viable as a micro transaction game. Many of us doubt it could be viable because they are very dissimilar games. As well, there is no evidence that it would flourish on purely micro transactions. Plus others believe it wouldn't even help SC2, because they believe it isn't the cost that deters people from playing SC2. They believe its the difficulty of the game that prevents it, and no amount of skins/voicepacks will bring in the crowd.
I agree. When SC2 first came out, ALL of my friends bought it and were into it. I now have a single friend who still plays it casually. All the others quit because the game is simply too difficult. But I think it goes beyond that. The demanding nature of the game is not equal to the rewards for perservering. What do you get for grinding ladder games? Or for playing team games? Or for doing Customs? You get - like Destiny said - a portrait that is seen by the other player(s) for about 10 seconds.
My friends have all gone on to other games like D3, WoW, Destiny, CS:GO, League. Why? Because there are clear indicators of progress in all those games that are compelling and rewarding (and above all, atainable without practicing and grinding and honing skills for hours on end). I honestly hate being pessemistic but I think it might be too little too late for SC2. It has already earned itself the reputation as being "too hard," "too time consuming," and without a doubt, too unrewarding for the sheer demanding nature of the game. SC2 had its massive fanbase back in WoL, and lost it to games and companies that better understood effort and reward. Blizzard knows the SC2 bubble popped, and now they'll continue to invest the majority of their resources into more profitable games.
|
On December 20 2014 01:52 fruity. wrote:
I think archon mode is blizzards (I may have to start referring to them as bliztard from now on..) Way of trying to get more casual gamers involved. Though even in this I'm not sure how successful it'll be as it relies on someone knowing a friend who can play sc2 in the first place, 2 new players in archon mode will still get slapped down hard and fast.
But at least it's something! The real barrier to entry here is just the vertical learning curve and the niche market appeal RTS has in the current gaming climate.
I fired up DOTA2 for the first time last night and played the first 4 trainer missions, it's so much more together than the trainer missions in SC2. Like how interface elements are sparse to begin with and slowly more get added over the course of a mission. It makes it a lot simpler to understand, learn one thing move on to the next etc. A few hours of DOTA2 and I'm already left with the feeling of how everything is much more polished that SC2, and this from a long term sc fan.
The learning curve makes this game a niche market, and I think thats because Blizzard never taught casuals about 1v1. The only way to learn 1v1 SC2 is to watch the pros play; google some keywords and find TL or other sites; and find some mods/custom to help practice build orders and micro
Blizzard completely failed when it comes to training casuals to play 1v1 ladder. They relied solely on the community to teach others 1v1 SC2, and that made it even harder. They should have develop a build order tutorial to teach noobs and casuals a simple one base build for each race. This will at least arm them with one weapon to wield.
Nope though, what does Blizzard do? They develop micro training tutorials that gets the noobs and casuals into the fun part, but doesn't prepare them for the painful part. They go into a match eager to lay down storms, perform MarineKing splits, or smash banelings into a wall. What happens? They get killed in 6 minutes because they were horribly underprepared. What an experience!
I really like what you said about Dota2, fruity. I wish Blizzard did something to help ease into the 1v1 ladder experience.
|
On December 20 2014 02:14 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
The learning curve makes this game a niche market, and I think thats because Blizzard never taught casuals about 1v1. The only way to learn 1v1 SC2 is to watch the pros play; google some keywords and find TL or other sites; and find some mods/custom to help practice build orders and micro
Blizzard completely failed when it comes to training casuals to play 1v1 ladder. They relied solely on the community to teach others 1v1 SC2, and that made it even harder. They should have develop a build order tutorial to teach noobs and casuals a simple one base build for each race. This will at least arm them with one weapon to wield.
Nope though, what does Blizzard do? They develop micro training tutorials that gets the noobs and casuals into the fun part, but doesn't prepare them for the painful part. They go into a match eager to lay down storms, perform MarineKing splits, or smash banelings into a wall. What happens? They get killed in 6 minutes because they were horribly underprepared.
I really like what you said about Dota2, fruity. I wish Blizzard did something to help ease into the 1v1 ladder experience.
This can be done so so so much better though! Like Destiny mentioned earlier.. Why not have workers auto produced for you in bronze? Or gas made auto on X supply.
Or a pop up appears ingame, with Day9 or Smix's voice !!!!
Hey there USER_NAME! We're 10 minutes into the game now! As Zerg you should try and have your expansion down already! Do this by selecting a drone and then.....etc etc
Stuff like this, you know? Make it easy for casuals. Or auto produce lings zealots or marines (within certain preset parameters clearly..). Let new players or casuals focus on the cool elements like trying to blow stuff up
|
On December 20 2014 02:23 fruity. wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2014 02:14 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
The learning curve makes this game a niche market, and I think thats because Blizzard never taught casuals about 1v1. The only way to learn 1v1 SC2 is to watch the pros play; google some keywords and find TL or other sites; and find some mods/custom to help practice build orders and micro
Blizzard completely failed when it comes to training casuals to play 1v1 ladder. They relied solely on the community to teach others 1v1 SC2, and that made it even harder. They should have develop a build order tutorial to teach noobs and casuals a simple one base build for each race. This will at least arm them with one weapon to wield.
Nope though, what does Blizzard do? They develop micro training tutorials that gets the noobs and casuals into the fun part, but doesn't prepare them for the painful part. They go into a match eager to lay down storms, perform MarineKing splits, or smash banelings into a wall. What happens? They get killed in 6 minutes because they were horribly underprepared.
I really like what you said about Dota2, fruity. I wish Blizzard did something to help ease into the 1v1 ladder experience. This can be done so so so much better though! Like Destiny mentioned earlier.. Why not have workers auto produced for you in bronze? Or gas made auto on X supply. Or a pop up appears ingame, with Day9 or Smix's voice !!!! Hey there USER_NAME! We're 10 minutes into the game now! As Zerg you should try and have your expansion down already! Do this by selecting a drone and then.....etc etcStuff like this, you know? Make it easy for casuals. Or auto produce lings zealots or marines (within certain preset parameters clearly..). Let new players or casuals focus on the cool elements like trying to blow stuff up
Here's the problem with making things easier, it doesn't prepare them for the harder stuff. Auto worker production will only harm them when that feature is removed in later leagues.
When you try to train someone, you don't start by making things easier. This hurts later when the difficult stuff happens.
I think just a simple tutorial to teach one build for each race would go farther than making the game easier for lower leagues.
|
On December 20 2014 02:37 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
See here is the problem with making things easier, it doesn't prepare them for the harder stuff. Auto worker production will only harm them when that feature is removed in later leagues.
When you try to train someone, you don't start by making things easier. This hurts later when the difficult stuff happens.
I think just a simple tutorial to teach one build for each race would go farther than making the game easier for lower leagues.
Fair point, and you're right. Solid build orders would be a nice way to go. Smix's cute voice..
Your low on workers, try to balance army and worker production more! Produce more workers! (version 2 of the auto produce idea!  ).
Maybe some would find that annoying. But equally some would find it of great benefit I think. And well if you have a toggle to turn the easy-new-player-tips off..
Sections dedicated to Gouda or Parmesan.. What it means to be cheesed, the advantages and disadvantages. The importance of scouting around your base.. etc etc
|
On December 20 2014 02:23 fruity. wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2014 02:14 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
The learning curve makes this game a niche market, and I think thats because Blizzard never taught casuals about 1v1. The only way to learn 1v1 SC2 is to watch the pros play; google some keywords and find TL or other sites; and find some mods/custom to help practice build orders and micro
Blizzard completely failed when it comes to training casuals to play 1v1 ladder. They relied solely on the community to teach others 1v1 SC2, and that made it even harder. They should have develop a build order tutorial to teach noobs and casuals a simple one base build for each race. This will at least arm them with one weapon to wield.
Nope though, what does Blizzard do? They develop micro training tutorials that gets the noobs and casuals into the fun part, but doesn't prepare them for the painful part. They go into a match eager to lay down storms, perform MarineKing splits, or smash banelings into a wall. What happens? They get killed in 6 minutes because they were horribly underprepared.
I really like what you said about Dota2, fruity. I wish Blizzard did something to help ease into the 1v1 ladder experience. This can be done so so so much better though! Like Destiny mentioned earlier.. Why not have workers auto produced for you in bronze? Or gas made auto on X supply. Or a pop up appears ingame, with Day9 or Smix's voice !!!! Hey there USER_NAME! We're 10 minutes into the game now! As Zerg you should try and have your expansion down already! Do this by selecting a drone and then.....etc etcStuff like this, you know? Make it easy for casuals. Or auto produce lings zealots or marines (within certain preset parameters clearly..). Let new players or casuals focus on the cool elements like trying to blow stuff up
But would this really attract new players? I think largely the people who are going to be buying LotV are people who already own the other two games. After that, unless Blizzard plans on doing subsequent expansions (which isn't looking likely) there isn't going to be much incentive for new players to pick up this game.
Don't get me wrong, I think Legacy has some cool features for existing players. But the market has shown that team oriented, goal attianable, and mechanically simplistic games are more desirable for players. Simply adding better tutorials and skins (while this would be exciting for existing players) will not be enough to attract someone who has never played the game before and has only seen godly koreans spamming eight billion APM, especially when they get into the Legacy of the (Social) Void and find out that ladder is the least rewarding game environment ever created.
|
On December 20 2014 02:44 Noro wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2014 02:23 fruity. wrote:On December 20 2014 02:14 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:
The learning curve makes this game a niche market, and I think thats because Blizzard never taught casuals about 1v1. The only way to learn 1v1 SC2 is to watch the pros play; google some keywords and find TL or other sites; and find some mods/custom to help practice build orders and micro
Blizzard completely failed when it comes to training casuals to play 1v1 ladder. They relied solely on the community to teach others 1v1 SC2, and that made it even harder. They should have develop a build order tutorial to teach noobs and casuals a simple one base build for each race. This will at least arm them with one weapon to wield.
Nope though, what does Blizzard do? They develop micro training tutorials that gets the noobs and casuals into the fun part, but doesn't prepare them for the painful part. They go into a match eager to lay down storms, perform MarineKing splits, or smash banelings into a wall. What happens? They get killed in 6 minutes because they were horribly underprepared.
I really like what you said about Dota2, fruity. I wish Blizzard did something to help ease into the 1v1 ladder experience. This can be done so so so much better though! Like Destiny mentioned earlier.. Why not have workers auto produced for you in bronze? Or gas made auto on X supply. Or a pop up appears ingame, with Day9 or Smix's voice !!!! Hey there USER_NAME! We're 10 minutes into the game now! As Zerg you should try and have your expansion down already! Do this by selecting a drone and then.....etc etcStuff like this, you know? Make it easy for casuals. Or auto produce lings zealots or marines (within certain preset parameters clearly..). Let new players or casuals focus on the cool elements like trying to blow stuff up But would this really attract new players? I think largely the people who are going to be buying LotV are people who already own the other two games. After that, unless Blizzard plans on doing subsequent expansions (which isn't looking likely) there isn't going to be much incentive for new players to pick up this game. Don't get me wrong, I think Legacy has some cool features for existing players. But the market has shown that team oriented, goal attianable, and mechanically simplistic games are more desirable for players. Simply adding better tutorials and skins (while this would be exciting for existing players) will not be enough to attract someone who has never played the game before and has only seen godly koreans spamming eight billion APM, especially when they get into the Legacy of the (Social) Void and find out that ladder is the least rewarding game environment ever created.
I don't know about attract new players, but better tutorials might convert casuals into a ladder warrior.
You are right about teams, specific goals, and simple mechanics. Its too bad SC2 is none of that lol.
|
On December 20 2014 02:44 Noro wrote:
But would this really attract new players? I think largely the people who are going to be buying LotV are people who already own the other two games. After that, unless Blizzard plans on doing subsequent expansions (which isn't looking likely) there isn't going to be much incentive for new players to pick up this game.
Don't get me wrong, I think Legacy has some cool features for existing players. But the market has shown that team oriented, goal attianable, and mechanically simplistic games are more desirable for players. Simply adding better tutorials and skins (while this would be exciting for existing players) will not be enough to attract someone who has never played the game before and has only seen godly koreans spamming eight billion APM, especially when they get into the Legacy of the (Social) Void and find out that ladder is the least rewarding game environment ever created.
You're right. I don't feel it would attract new players - after all they're either going to want to try out RTS or their not. But I do feel that bliztard could do a lot more to hold the hand of new players and make it a lot easier for them to understand the mechanics of the game. Make it easier for them to see where they went wrong, or how do do XYZ better.
This part of what you said i think is important But the market has shown that team oriented, goal attianable, 1v1 is hard! When you loose, it's you losing Only you! Clearly.. But in a team game it's a lot easier to not take the loss to heart. We lost.
But so many amazing ideas from people here, goals like you mention, they just aren't there.. A reason to stay beyond the campaign isn't there.
|
How about blizzard trying to actually care about things like teamgames and the arcade. Next season their are going to be no map changes for the teamgame ladder pool. really blizzard? there are 4v4 maps that have less bases then 1v1 maps. If sc2 wants to attract a more casual audience it needs to step back from trying to get casuals into 1v1 and start promoting things like teamgames more. Or even better, start promoting the arcade which has been praised since release for beinig an amazing place where you can basically just play other actual games.
|
On December 20 2014 02:03 Noro wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2014 01:45 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On December 19 2014 08:17 Bastinian wrote:
Starcraft should be learning from Dota 2, in terms of microtransactions, that would keep game alive for much time! If Blizzard wants to make some money, they should add some things like skins and stuff to be bought in game. Everyone knows how attractive Collector Editions are... Here is the problem though. We can't assume SC2 would be viable as a micro transaction game. Many of us doubt it could be viable because they are very dissimilar games. As well, there is no evidence that it would flourish on purely micro transactions. Plus others believe it wouldn't even help SC2, because they believe it isn't the cost that deters people from playing SC2. They believe its the difficulty of the game that prevents it, and no amount of skins/voicepacks will bring in the crowd. I agree. When SC2 first came out, ALL of my friends bought it and were into it. I now have a single friend who still plays it casually. All the others quit because the game is simply too difficult. But I think it goes beyond that. The demanding nature of the game is not equal to the rewards for perservering. What do you get for grinding ladder games? Or for playing team games? Or for doing Customs? You get - like Destiny said - a portrait that is seen by the other player(s) for about 10 seconds. My friends have all gone on to other games like D3, WoW, Destiny, CS:GO, League. Why? Because there are clear indicators of progress in all those games that are compelling and rewarding (and above all, atainable without practicing and grinding and honing skills for hours on end). I honestly hate being pessemistic but I think it might be too little too late for SC2. It has already earned itself the reputation as being "too hard," "too time consuming," and without a doubt, too unrewarding for the sheer demanding nature of the game. SC2 had its massive fanbase back in WoL, and lost it to games and companies that better understood effort and reward. Blizzard knows the SC2 bubble popped, and now they'll continue to invest the majority of their resources into more profitable games.
This is my opinion as well. I don't think you can just make it F2P, add in skins and then expect the multiplayer-playerbase to increase hugely. Sure, there will be some players who try it out and - ceteris paribus - it will increase. But it's closer to a 100% increase than a 1000% increase in the amount of players.
With the standard upfront-fee model, Blizzard can probably sell 1.5M copies of LOTV at $40 --> $60M in revenue. If the active multiplayer playerbase increases from 400K to - let's say - 800K due to F2P, and each player spends the same amount on skins as the average DOTA 2 player (which I find optimistic- but ok).
That is equal to: $1.6 * 0.8 = $1.36M (roughly) on an annual basis.
Assuming 1M campain copies sold at a price of $30 --> That's an additional $30M to the $1.36M, which - given these assumptions - makes F2P model a lot less attractive. Thus, if the playerbase only doubles under a F2P scenario, it's not anywhere close to being enough.
Therefore my recommendation is to think of Sc2 as a cash-cow. Minimize cost and generate what ever earnings there is left in the franchise. Probably not what the community wants to hear, but from a financial perspective, it makes the most sense.
Source: http://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/mmo-arpu/
|
It's so sad that this thread is filled with great suggestions but you just know 110% Blizzard won't implement any of it.
|
On December 20 2014 03:58 SCguineapig wrote:
How about blizzard trying to actually care about things like teamgames and the arcade. Next season their are going to be no map changes for the teamgame ladder pool. really blizzard? there are 4v4 maps that have less bases then 1v1 maps. If sc2 wants to attract a more casual audience it needs to step back from trying to get casuals into 1v1 and start promoting things like teamgames more. Or even better, start promoting the arcade which has been praised since release for beinig an amazing place where you can basically just play other actual games.
What they should have done was implement Heroes of the Storm as a SC2 arcade game (with full blizzard support and patches of course). Just look at what the original Dota did for WC3. Personally I never would have played anything other than campaign if it weren't for the Dota mod, which eventually led me to play around on ladder. Heroes would have brought in a lot of players. But I think the very fact that they didn't do this, shows that they're losing/have lost faith in SC2, and are putting more stock into F2P games like HS and HotS.
People are wrong in criticizing Blizzard for not being able to emulate and implement F2P/Microtransaction models. They simply don't want to for SC2. They know those models work because they're using them on games that they see actually having a monetary future. Blizzard can put out as many PR statements they want about how much they care about this game but really its just white noise. Actions speak louder than words, and what they're saying is SC2 is not worth the investment of resources because the market favours more simplistic/funsie games like HotS and Hearth Stone. Those are the games they will focus on now, regardless of their promises to continually "improve" SC2.
|
warcraft 4 hype! maybe f2p and microtransaction.
|
On December 20 2014 05:09 JimSocks wrote:
warcraft 4 hype! maybe f2p and microtransaction.
I wouldn't be surprised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
