EPT
Steven 'Destiny' Bonnell II's Blog Article - Page 9
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Parcelleus
Australia1662 Posts
| ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
On December 17 2014 17:47 deacon.frost wrote: And still - we are late. Ignoring the 1st part of the post doesn't change it. The game is done, now starts testing phase. Unless they built in the support for this, we cannot get this at launch and anything later is way too late(because money invested into supporting the current version & changing it to allow this) First of, it's not our job to do the numbers. At all. Thats Blizzard's job. You're focusing too much on the "guys think of a way if you want it!". People aren't saying "Do it our way", but they're saying "figure out a way to do X so that we can have Y". People are just poinitng out ideas and concepts, to show Blizzard WHY they want it. (We want skin systems so we can throw money at you, here's how other companies do it.) About the quoted part: LotV has not even been in Alpha. They specifically said that at best, it's a technical alpha. So how is it done? We've seen features like extension mods being added post-development, or the GameHeart stuff, so it's definitely possible to see such things added right now. | ||
|
ROOTdrewbie
Canada1392 Posts
| ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On December 17 2014 02:32 fruity. wrote: In game option: ENABLE ADDITIONAL SKINS? Enabling this may cause FPS issues on older hardware. How does this help? It still makes a big part of the audience not use these features and as such not give money to get them. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On December 17 2014 04:33 dAPhREAk wrote: has any rts tested microtransactions and been successful? dont really like the assumption that sc2 is not doing well because its not a f2p game. its more likely that it doesnt attract as many players/viewers because of the type of game. None that we know of. C&C Generals 2 was planning to but by selling access to units or something like that but it was shut down by EA way before (while still in Alpha). Exact reasons were not given, I read some people say that the gameplay was crap and others that the dev team was not good enough for EA standards. | ||
|
JCoto
Spain574 Posts
On December 17 2014 21:15 -Archangel- wrote: How does this help? It still makes a big part of the audience not use these features and as such not give money to get them. Mobas prove that this is not true. And I've said it before, skins don't need to have an impact on performance. Models can have the same exact level of detail. They only need to adjust it to quality levels as they are in-game (we have different models for lower quality). Creativity is the key here. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On December 17 2014 06:37 maartendq wrote: It's funny when you think about it. People spend hundreds on dollars on gaming peripherals (i.e. overpriced mice, keyboards and headsets) but don't want to pay for their games anymore. Honestly, what is €40 for a game you'll get to enjoy for years to come? Depends on what part of the world you are. I cannot afford 40$ games or new computer components. Rich EU countries, USA, Japan and South Korea are a small part of the whole world. Many more gamers live in other parts. | ||
|
Otolia
France5805 Posts
On December 17 2014 21:38 -Archangel- wrote: Depends on what part of the world you are. I cannot afford 40$ games or new computer components. Rich EU countries, USA, Japan and South Korea are a small part of the whole world. Many more gamers live in other parts. Yet the bigger consummers of DotA2 skins are in CIS. | ||
|
plgElwood
Germany518 Posts
Protoss fucks maps with warpgate, Forcefield and Blink. Idea: Warpgate only allows to warp in Zealots. Or Gateway has 1 Minute + Cooldown. Or make the warp in duration 15 seconds + 40 secs cooldown. Gateway works as usual. Why? If you lose a fight as Terran in TvP, and even if it is close, you get overrun by the warp in. All Protoss units are expensive and strong, but they are also able to SPAWN at the right place right time, no travel distance. A Protoss Army of 150 Supply can deal with any Zerg and Terran army of higher Supply, and even with better upgrades, thanks to the cost efficient units, no need to have 10-20 Gateways (doubling at Chronoboost lol) with ability to instant replace 40 Supply. Fix that pls. I dont want to have a terrans see 1A Deathball swing in and get no 2nd chance as the protoss does. For terran it is Moms Spaghetti.... Mothershipcore: Can "recall" to every owned nexus on cooldown (doesn't teleport units) Sticks to Nexi until becoming the mothership (with all ability), uses his base attack at a higher range, can "overcharge" for energy cost. Maybe you can have Mothership Core (recall and overcharge) and a second unit Mothership Hull (nexi made, with fleet bacon) (timewarp/vortex and Cloak) the 2nd could move freely, combined they make the mothership Why: Kills the blink shit thats not even all in, and carefree Protoss recall adventures. | ||
|
AbouSV
Germany1278 Posts
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. | ||
|
klup
France612 Posts
This is why monetization schemes are so absolutely crucial for StarCraft 2, and it is beyond frustrating that Blizzard refuses to implement any of these into the game. There are so many people who want to spend more money on StarCraft 2 but simply can’t because there’s nothing to buy. I play Dota 2 and SC2 now , I played LoL for a few years and bought stuff to support games I like. In SC2 the lack of shop has only one positive thing is that we throw money at crowfunded tournament like the big success of Nation Wars 2. If SC2 would release skins or anything fun related to SC2 that you want to use in the game like mules that are doing cool animation to "manner mule" or whatever shit like that I would support that 100%. The idea of personalized advisors is amazing. It has a huge support of the community. Why not even making it personalized. You can plug your custom advisor setting and enjoy voices you like. The "dicey" Nathanias or Day9 , Abathur or even GladOS possibility are infinite. The dreampool was one of a cool idea to respond to casual gaming issues but was really insufficient and was misguided, leading to angry pros or veterans. SC2 need to have moving things that motivates people. The fact that the only interesting news about Starcraft is one time in 2-3 month we have a new set of maps (hell only 3-4 maps released) that makes the game feel alive for a week but that's it. And also the teamgame is for me essential. Lotv archon mode should have been done in Hots ! It's the last chance to do something funny that revitalize the game. Promote Archon mode , make it fun ! It's seems to be the last trick they have out their sleeves make it damn good. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
On December 17 2014 21:31 JCoto wrote: Mobas prove that this is not true. And I've said it before, skins don't need to have an impact on performance. Models can have the same exact level of detail. They only need to adjust it to quality levels as they are in-game (we have different models for lower quality). Creativity is the key here. I agree that you can make skins that will not change much but as I said earlier that will take more time that slapping some weapons skins for CS:GO that only one player ever sees on one weapon. Can you imagine ZvZ with lots of lings and stuff where both sides have all kinds of unoptimized skins for most of the units. It would kill any games. And then 2v2 or 4v4.... any skins made for Sc2 would need to go through some quality QA before being released to everyone. | ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
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. | ||
|
Kronen
United States732 Posts
| ||
|
boxerfred
Germany8360 Posts
On December 17 2014 23:12 Kronen wrote: I shamefully admit that I would buy a Smix voice pack.... doyoubelieveinathingcalledroach whenever a certain unit hatches. | ||
|
TheoMikkelsen
Denmark196 Posts
I agree with most of destinys points if not all, and I definitely think, mostly, that longevity features will provide with the most as well as "computer assistance" to newer players just as you would see on console games or FIFA games etc. I definitely think the release of LOTV alongisde these features could jumpstart the game. First of all, I really don't like to use games that are 10-20 years old in order to support your thesis that RTS games can be casualf-friendly. The industry was very different back then. Rather, it makes sense to look at how the overall popularity of the genre has developed with Blizzard almost being the only active game-developer. Secondly, were these games ever that popular in the west as you make them out to be? I believe that sales-numbers of Wc3 was lower than sales of SC2, and I am not sure that Wc3 ladder numbers were that big. Custom games is ofc a different story, but today you have steam and lots of F2P-games that makes it easy for a lot of casual gamers to find accessible free games. The demand for custom-games/arcade is much lower today. If your argument is that Blizzard failed when they designed Bnet 2.0/the arcade, I agree. But I actually don't believe the mistake was to not make it similar to how it was in BW/Wc3. Instead, they messed up by not properly understanding how the industry would develop over the next couple of years. While the activity is low, a lot of players has tried starcraft 2 in one way or the other, either the arcade or a few games of 1v1. The problem is not trying the game, the problem is motivation to play more as a casual gamer. Destiny´s point is that the only reason to play sc2 is to go for grandmaster league and being professional. The "fun" and "excitement" beyond that simply does not exist. If you ask me, 250.000 or 400.000 (more or less) active players going for professional play is actually A LOT of players, considering that the vast majority of for example lol players only play for fun and the excitement of the longevity in the gmae. Since Starcraft is in the top tiers of esports representation - alongside the fact that it is a blizzard game - people would always try it and experience these features naturally as they will be implemented, and if they suit the things Destiny has mentioned, it´s almost inevitable a profitable scenario for the game, even if it does not make it relaticely more popular than other games. 3 potential reasons: (1) As a general of thumb, a business model should be designed to fit with the target audience. The learning barrier to Sc2 is quite high, which makes it not very casual-friendly. An upfront fee cost is more likely to target the segment who are very dedicated. On the other hand - a game that is very accessible (e.g. Heatstone) fits perfectly with the F2P model. (2) You feel less attached to your units in an RTS than heroes in a MOBA. (3) You will need an enable-off skins button for the RTS which probably everyone will use since it can be too confusing to look at skins for lots of units. I believe that will take the point away from investing into the skins in the first place. This doesn't mean that Blizzard can't make money out of skins. Instead, it implies that they are less likely to earn the same amout of money as in MOBA's. While you say good things in point 1, the two others are simply untrue. I believe especially point two is your subjective opinion. Who are you to judge that heroes are more prestigious or personal than units in RTS? Also, I think the ABSOLUTE ONLY reason there are casuals playing sc2 casually today is because of the "war-commander" aspect of the game. I believe the Ultralisk collector´s edition design with various effects and themes would be very interesting to most players. As long as skins and models are enabled per default, most players will not care. I don´t even think jaedong will care. Those would takes aesthethics seriously when it comes to their game should obviously be granted the ability to use default models only, but when these models are used in tournaments that´s when it becomes interesting, since you can STILL have the models and skins you use to play in tournaments for example, but only you can not see them whereas all the specators can. If you can design your whole army aesthethically and display it at WCS, would that not be a fun thing for both a casual and a professional gamer to strive for? So yes, hearthstone is a more easily accessible game than starcraft, but there aren´t any goals of generating 20.000 viewer user streams here. SC2 lives on it´s viewership from tournaments and not from personal streams, and if we count the tournament viewers for starters, your first point becomes rather irrelevant as the improvement to the game would please the viewers without necessarily cuasing any confusion. Both MOBA and FPS viewers from other esports genres would understand the game and "skins" enough to not be confused. When analysts - in the stock indsutry - claim that "X company makes Y amount of money", they do not have all the data either. But they still make estimates by looking at comparable data. E.g. ARPU from comparable games. Perhaps one could look at case-studies to see what happens to playernumbers when a business-model changes. Then you make an argument for why the data you use are valid. Based on that you can make some type of argument for whether a certain decision would be finanically viable or not. Now obviously this is a lot to demand from an Sc2-streamer (I don't mean this in a demaning way to be clear), but you make a strong claim that you are convinced Blizzard could make more money, right? You don't just say, "I think it could work". If you said, the latter, I would be less demanding of the amount of research you put in, but when you make this out to be Blizzard being ignorant, you need to back it up with much more research. Now I don´t want to claim I know anything about stockmarketing or w/e but to me it´s extremely obvious that longevity features such as models and especially skins which can be purchaed similarily as to how we see in CSGO (especially if we allow for example carriers and battle cruisers or broodlords to have their own, user-designed logos for a fee - (such as JIN AIR or KT ROLSTER logo) this would generate CASH, it´s not even close. To make it a step further, people could make their own skins for units using specific themes and geometrics similar to battlefield 4 to further improve creativity and interest to pay for these features. Lastly, I think there are other ways to make the game F2P rather than just make it definitively free. For example, you could get the campaigns for the three games by paying but still play arcade and 1v1-2v2-3v3-4v4 thrugh F2P. Buying the games or various deals could give you skins or other features such as infinite name changing or w/e. There are so many things people are willing to pay for that honestly is just indeniably weird that blizzard has not implemented yet. | ||
|
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
That Blizz post pisses me off so bad, with listening I don't mean "reading" what we are writing but actually bloody take action based on it. I can read anything I can discuss it with anyone, that does not mean I listened to what was really being said. Destiny is doing a very good job at bringing up a discussion that needs to be highlighted in the interest of SC2, this is the last chance Blizz. Don't fuck it up this time, please. | ||
|
Swift118
United Kingdom335 Posts
| ||
|
seraki
5 Posts
| ||
|
seraki
5 Posts
| ||
| ||
