Where’s the future gonna take us? - Page 2

HyralGambit

2439 Posts

February 27 2016 19:26 GMT

#21

On February 27 2016 23:15 Endymion wrote:
But the fact is that, out of Asia the first sc seems be apreciated only by most nostalgic purist. That’s why it’s hard to imagine a global rebirth of BW.

ya, because only nostalgic purists and asians can enjoy scbw...

nice catch.

JimmyJRaynor

Canada17137 Posts

February 27 2016 20:28 GMT

#22

On February 28 2016 01:40 StarStruck wrote:
Ridiculous. RTS is not a dead genre nor will it ever be. It's called a niche genre and it is really no different than the FGC.

words like "niche" and "dead" are just used to add emotion and subjectivity to a narrative when cold hard facts will make things much more clear.

Dot-eating-maze-games and vertical-gallery-shooters are still being played as well. they are no longer the centre of the gaming universe or a cultural tour-de-force as they once were. RTS is going the same way. RTS has risen and now it is declining. People can still enjoy the games but let's not pretend that there are a dozen studios killing each other to make the next great RTS as was the case around the turn of the century.

part of any genre's rise and fall is due to improving technology. RTS rose when tech made it possible. as tech. improved and gave consumers more choice then consumers moved away from the genre. same thing has happened to dozens of video game genres and RTS is just another example.

Will RTS games keep being played? sure they will. People still play MsPacman, Space Invaders, Super Tecmo Bowl ( and Vanilla Tecmo Bowl) and NHL '94 Hockey.

But let's not pretend its 1995 and every one is dying to get NHL '94 and play it on their SNES so they can kick their friends' asses.

Spyridon

United States997 Posts

February 27 2016 20:32 GMT

#23

The question of this topic is the question that worries me most about SC2's future.

It doesn't seem like there's any big plans for improving the issues with LotV, or to change the direction of the game going in to the future.

I wouldn't say LotV is in a very good state right now. I want to see a vision of where they want to bring it, because this is not ideal. They are not showing me that, and that worries me. Do they even have a vision, or is this all we're ever going to get? Will they ever do anything that will try to improve SC2 in to a game that is actually receiving a positive reception? Or are they just going to give us community updates talking about how things are all sunshine and butterflies and everyone agrees with what their doing, when unanimously polls state otherwise.

Regarding Blizzard and future RTS? Someone mentioned the 10 year RTS thing. SC2 came out in 2010. If they announce a game this year Blizzcon it will probably be at least 2019 by the time we see it live. Close enough.

On February 28 2016 05:28 JimmyJRaynor wrote:

Show nested quote +

words like "niche" and "dead" are just used to add emotion and subjectivity to a narrative when cold hard facts will make things much more clear.

Dot-eating-maze-games and vertical-gallery-shooters are still being played as well. they are no longer the centre of the gaming universe or a cultural tour-de-force as they once were. RTS is going the same way. RTS has risen and now it is declining. People can still enjoy the games but let's not pretend that there are a dozen studios killing each other to make the next great RTS as was the case around the turn of the century.

part of any genre's rise and fall is due to improving technology. RTS rose when tech made it possible. as tech. improved and gave consumers more choice consumers moved away from the genre. same thing has happened to dozens of video game genres and RTS is just another example.

Will RTS games keep being played? sure they will. People still play MsPacman, Space Invaders, Super Tecmo Bowl ( and Vanilla Tecmo Bowl) and NHL '94 Hockey.

But let's not pretend its 1995 and every one is dying to get NHL '94 and play it on their SNES so they can kick their friends' asses.

RTS's still have a large fanbase and following, though. The problem is SC2 is the only one that's still popular, and it's been extremely polarizing ever since WoL, it hasn't shown over improvement on the others aside from expected graphic/control upgrades, and has become more polarizing each iteration. Their simply giving us an inferior product that's not what true RTS fans want. RTS's were built on strategy, and that aspect of the game has been dwindling. I think of SC2 more akin to those music games where it's focused on heavy mechanics races and trying to perfect your execution against yourself rather than rather than actual strategic gameplay and player vs player interaction against your opponent.

Jimmy Raynor

902 Posts

February 27 2016 20:55 GMT

#24

WC4 could be the game that proves RTS can still sell a lot of copies. There is hype for a new warcraft rts even without announcing it (just check any article related to blizzard and there are almost always wc4 comments). It can draw the whole blizzard rts crowd (wc+sc), old wc3 players who were not interested in playing mmo, blizzard fans as a whole (a lot of promotion between all their games these days) + rts players as a whole. Also, making something like the coop stuff that is currently in sc2 can be much more fitting for a game with more rpg elements like warcraft.

Also let's not forget about Jay Wilson, a guy that has a lot of rts experience, what has he been working on since leaving d3?

mammuluk

Italy94 Posts

February 27 2016 21:04 GMT

#25

On February 28 2016 05:55 Jimmy Raynor wrote:
WC4 could be the game that proves RTS can still sell a lot of copies. There is hype for a new warcraft rts even without announcing it (just check any article related to blizzard and there are almost always wc4 comments). It can draw the whole blizzard rts crowd (wc+sc), old wc3 players who were not interested in playing mmo, blizzard fans as a whole (a lot of promotion between all their games these days) + rts players as a whole. Also, making something like the coop stuff that is currently in sc2 can be much more fitting for a game with more rpg elements like warcraft.

Also let's not forget about Jay Wilson, a guy that has a lot of rts experience, what has he been working on since leaving d3?

I totally agree, WC4 could really move a big crowd of different players (and so move a big amount of money), how many of these players would become RTS fans is another question, but anyway this title could help the genre to regain a certain position (I can't stand seeing SC2 at the 20th position in twitch list!).

deacon.frost

Czech Republic12129 Posts

February 27 2016 21:24 GMT

#26

SC2 wasn't selling that badly, it has good numbers. The only problem is, that most of the people buy it for single players, multi player is a poor experience for them. And honestly, multi player of LotV is poor experience for me too

JimmyJRaynor

Canada17137 Posts

February 27 2016 21:28 GMT

#27

On February 28 2016 05:32 Spyridon wrote:
RTS's still have a large fanbase and following, though. The problem is SC2 is the only one that's still popular,.

you are contradicting yourself in 1 sentence. the genre is declining with the #1 franchise left standing and still in decline itself. Sigaty's comments reflect ATVI's stance on RTS games. They're done.

the player base does not spend money and has not spent money in a long time. no one will fund a AAA-level RTS project... and as far as post sales support goes... just check out AoA, GG, and Homeworld:DoK.

i bet everyone on TL.Net just can't wait for Halo Wars 2

Spyridon

United States997 Posts

February 27 2016 22:01 GMT

#28

On February 28 2016 06:28 JimmyJRaynor wrote:

Show nested quote +

How is that a contradiction? The only game that's still popular is the most polarizing RTS out there. All the RTS/SC fans want SC2 to succeed. The games sales are pretty high initially. But after the campaign, even many of the most avid RTS fans quit the game. Because the multiplayer simply isn't where most players want it to be. The games population has been dwindling each release. It's getting further from where players want it, rather than closer.

RTS has always been a Blizzard centric genre. C&C was popular but not nearly to the level Blizzards RTS were. Games like TA and Homeworld weren't even as popular as C&C was. Difference these days is Blizzard isn't delivering something players want. Even a few years back they made the big decision to completely change D3's direction. SC2 is suffering even more than D3 nowdays, and needs similar treatment. But they aren't doing it. Which means either they don't think they can turn things around, or it's not worth it because their funds are better spent working on a new RTS.

TL is filled with Blizzard fans too. I guarantee everyone on here would love for SC2 to be a successful, fun game. But what percentage of the community would you say is actually happy with the state of the game right now...? The problem isn't the genre, or the fans. It's the quality of the game directly. Look how many people are still on BW... That's a problem.

Ahli

Germany355 Posts

February 27 2016 22:03 GMT

#29

On February 28 2016 06:28 JimmyJRaynor wrote:

the genre is declining with the #1 franchise left standing and still in decline itself. Sigaty's comments reflect ATVI's stance on RTS games. They're done.

the player base does not spend money and has not spent money in a long time. no one will fund a AAA-level RTS project... and as far as post sales support goes... just check out AoA, GG, and Homeworld:DoK.

i bet everyone on TL.Net just can't wait for Halo Wars 2

That's why I think the next big RTS will be different from the classic RTS model with static races.

It could be extremely MOBA-inspired with a lot of variations in a single race (like coop-commanders) including bans and most likely games will be very short like ~ 15-20 minutes or even faster. It could feature micro-transactions and purchasable aspects (e.g. skins) to bind customers to the game because they invested something.

Actually, I imagine that this could work very well in a WarCraft setting where you draft a hero, special units replacing default ones and maybe some global trait. Heroes could be bought and you would have free heroes every week.
Even the focus could change from 1vs1 to a team-based setting, so pick and bans and team coordination are more important.

Spyridon

United States997 Posts

February 27 2016 22:06 GMT

#30

On February 28 2016 07:03 Ahli wrote:

Show nested quote +

Sounds a bit like you are explaining something similar to http://blog.artillery.com/2016/02/atlas-test-weekend-2.html

JimmyJRaynor

Canada17137 Posts

February 27 2016 22:14 GMT

#31

On February 28 2016 07:03 Ahli wrote:

Show nested quote +

i think RTS games have already been replaced by stuff like Mobile Strike, Clash of Clans and the game with commercials that has that giant hot blonde riding a horse... Kate whats-her-face.

when people want their "big army" fighting "big army" fix.. they reach for their tablets .. not their PCs.

mammuluk

Italy94 Posts

February 27 2016 22:24 GMT

#32

On February 28 2016 07:14 JimmyJRaynor wrote:

Show nested quote +

Please don't destroy my heart. Thinking that today's Age of Empires is Clash of Clans is just a metaphor of modern world's decline. Btw I have to say that this game genre had a clever and quite serious one: Ikariam.

Ahli

Germany355 Posts

February 27 2016 22:53 GMT

#33

On February 28 2016 07:06 Spyridon wrote:

Show nested quote +

Sounds a bit like you are explaining something similar to http://blog.artillery.com/2016/02/atlas-test-weekend-2.html

I googled rts with pick and bans and ended up on that page. I think Atlas will become a good game. Unfortunately, they are among the first exploring that kind of RTS, so they have the struggle with figuring out what will work and what won't... e.g. they removed build durations and bases?

ProMeTheus112

France2027 Posts

February 28 2016 00:37 GMT

#34

On February 28 2016 07:24 mammuluk wrote:

Show nested quote +

well its not the same population though, games in general are more mainstream nowadays because a lot of people who only want to game in a very casual way play games too now. But there are still large populations of more dedicated gamers interested in RTS. I think it's like Spyridon says, we're not going to see a very popular game unless the quality is up to par and there has been no such new game since BW and AoE2 pretty much (not that AoE2 has as much polish as BW). And WC3 but it's a bit different of course (not macro-oriented). Seriously none of the C&C, Dawn of War or Company of Heroes truly compete in depth with those games. I think Age of Mythology or rather Empire Earth were interesting possible successors in the style of AoE2, but they disappeared fast? Probably too imba and AoE2 is better in the end, dunno. Definitely not AoE3.

DSK

England1110 Posts

February 28 2016 01:07 GMT

#35

I'll be honest. I'm pretty hyped for the inevitable return of BW to the fore, at least for amateur tournaments and events. I missed the bus in 2005-2010 because I didn't - and couldn't - believe a game I played as a kid was ridiculously popular and competitive. Now that I've gotten over myself, and thanks in large part to getting into Starcraft via SC2 (only to find BW to be ridiculously draconian in it's complexity than I ever thought possible - and that it gives me a most divine errection) there's an opportunity for me to get into the BW scene too.

Though I do have to say, I find that the missing downtime from WoL and HotS matches makes things really difficult for me to understand what the fuck is going on at the moment in LotV. Before as a spectator/VOD watcher and recorder, I could figure out what a player was doing for an opener and what their options were after the fact. Maybe I'll get used to it, but it's affecting my enjoyment of LotV at the present time.

seemsgood

5527 Posts

February 28 2016 01:14 GMT

#36

WC4.
//fuck... i posted in wrong thread...

B-royal

Belgium1330 Posts

February 28 2016 05:28 GMT

#37

RTS isn't a dead genre. Sc2 just isn't fun enough, both as a game and as a platform. I remember the GLORIOUS times of sitting in the frozen throne's chat channels or playing footmen frenzies, dota or other fantastic custom maps. Sc2 did not deliver that same experience.

They screwed up majorly with bnet and arcade.

Jealous

10253 Posts

February 28 2016 05:40 GMT

#38

On February 28 2016 07:01 Spyridon wrote:
Look how many people are still on BW... That's a problem.

It's not a problem; it's a solution.

Kyir

United States1047 Posts

February 28 2016 09:07 GMT

#39

I don't want a new Warcraft game just because Blizzard has proven pretty definitively in Starcraft 2 (and expansions) and World of Warcraft that they don't have anyone left who can write anything worthwhile or interesting.

mammuluk

Italy94 Posts

February 28 2016 12:18 GMT

#40

On February 28 2016 07:06 Spyridon wrote:

Show nested quote +

Sounds a bit like you are explaining something similar to http://blog.artillery.com/2016/02/atlas-test-weekend-2.html

I'm reading something about the project and the game: it seems very interesting. Looking forward to put my hands on this stuff!