|
On November 29 2016 22:45 KeksX wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 16:29 LSN wrote:On November 29 2016 15:59 alexanderzero wrote:
I will never forgive a single person that raised a stink about "dead game" bullshit at any point during this game's history. A LOT of people have skipped this game because they were given the impression that nobody plays it and that the online lobbies would be deserted. I have seen it first hand.
While dead game threads surely are not helpful they are in no way the reason for SC2 decline and cannot be blamed. They are more an equivalent or synonym for people who believe their actual reasons and arguments are neither being heared nor ever will be addressed. You mix up cause and effect here. The dead game meme definitely created a feedback loop. People say SC2 is dead -> other people pick that up and actually mean it because they didn't check -> more peple say SC2 is dead -> more people think SC2 is actually dead. Just go on /r/starcraft and search for threads "Is StarCraft really dead??", now that is just the number of people that bothered to ask. There are probably many more that simply thought "People say SC2 is dead, not gonna bother checking it out". The dead game meme, like many other things, had an impact on how people perceive StarCraft nowadays. I mean even StarCraft players are turned off by that meme.
That has only little truth in it imo. SC2 was in a bubble for a long time which now bursted. Representatives were rather uncritical with SC2 for all the years and put it on a podium where it could hardly be criticized and even constructive criticism was reflected back to the originator instead of taken serious.
The state of SC2 would be no different today if there were zero dead game threads. Most people have already left. I met several former masters, high masters and even some GM players in other games who told me not to have any reason to return. Just look at the german scene. Many players moved on to other things or other games already while there was still alot of hope for future expansions and changes and not due to dead game threads. You could also try and go to DOTA/LoL forums and start daily dead game threads with different accounts and it wouldn't cause anything.
In SC2 that hits on fertile grounds because there is substance in it. It might be a bit overly depressive these days, but this is a consequence of it being overly hyped and put in a bubble over the years, if at all. Now it is hitting the ground and this impact certainly lets break it through that a bit.
Not helpful in this manner is even a superficial statement and just short sighted. Cause it would have been helpful in fact if this happened earlier in mid and long term. And it is even beneficial that it is happening now so that further and deeper changes can be initiated now as they are onto it already.
Dead game threads have zero effect on the longevity of SC2 in the grand scheme of things when analysing it from the players side. They rather express overdue disappointment with the game that has been either hold back or was not correct to state about the game in public.
From a sponsors and organizers point of view this can have more effect on people with not so much insight. If the dead game mythos surivives long enough they might take that as a reason to lessen their support. Anyway and again that would just accelerate such developments and can not originate them.
And there is a chance for SC2 to do more things right in future than in the past still. I just don't see that incoming yet at all with the current major overhaul, unfortunately. It is another shift only which people who don't look behind or don't want to look behind (e. g. people who earn their money with SC2) do still not want to allow to happen.
Imo the only way of returning SC2 into a brighter light is to increase player satisfaction through enhancements of key game elements such as: more strategy, longer unit interactions in fights, less frustrating mechanics, less scaling of advantages and less terrible damage. This would spill over to everything else and let negative attitudes fall silent, not blaming them.
|
On December 01 2016 06:22 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2016 22:45 KeksX wrote:On November 29 2016 16:29 LSN wrote:On November 29 2016 15:59 alexanderzero wrote:
I will never forgive a single person that raised a stink about "dead game" bullshit at any point during this game's history. A LOT of people have skipped this game because they were given the impression that nobody plays it and that the online lobbies would be deserted. I have seen it first hand.
While dead game threads surely are not helpful they are in no way the reason for SC2 decline and cannot be blamed. They are more an equivalent or synonym for people who believe their actual reasons and arguments are neither being heared nor ever will be addressed. You mix up cause and effect here. The dead game meme definitely created a feedback loop. People say SC2 is dead -> other people pick that up and actually mean it because they didn't check -> more peple say SC2 is dead -> more people think SC2 is actually dead. Just go on /r/starcraft and search for threads "Is StarCraft really dead??", now that is just the number of people that bothered to ask. There are probably many more that simply thought "People say SC2 is dead, not gonna bother checking it out". The dead game meme, like many other things, had an impact on how people perceive StarCraft nowadays. I mean even StarCraft players are turned off by that meme. That has only little truth in it imo. SC2 was in a bubble for a long time which now bursted. Representatives were rather uncritical with SC2 for all the years and put it on a podium where it could hardly be criticized and even constructive criticism was reflected back to the originator instead of taken serious. The state of SC2 would be no different today if there were zero dead game threads. Most people have already left. I met several former masters, high masters and even some GM players in other games who told me not to have any reason to return. Just look at the german scene. Many players moved on to other things or other games already while there was still alot of hope for future expansions and changes and not due to dead game threads. You could also try and go to DOTA/LoL forums and start daily dead game threads with different names and it wouldn't cause anything. In SC2 that hits on fertile grounds because there is substance in it. It might be a bit overly depressive these days, but this is a consequence of it being overly hyped and put in a bubble over the years, if at all. Now it is hitting the ground and this impact certainly lets break it through that a bit. Not helpful in this manner is even a superficial statement. Cause it would have been helpful in fact if this happened earlier in mid and long term. And it is even beneficial that it is happening now so that further and deeper changes can be initiated now as they are onto it already. Dead game threads have zero effect on the longevity of SC2 in the grand scheme of things when analysing it from the players side. They rather express overdue disappointment with the game that has been either hold back or was not correct to state about the game in public. From a sponsors and organizers point of view this can have more effect on people with not so much insight. If the dead game mythos surivives long enough they might take that as a reason to lessen their support. Anyway and again that would just accelerate such developments and can not originate them. And there is a chance for SC2 to do more things right in future than in the past still. I just don't see that incoming yet at all with the current major overhaul, unfortunately. It is another shift only which people who don't look behind or don't want to look behind (e. g. people who earn their money with SC2). do still not want to allow to happen. Imo the only way of moving back SC2 into a brighter light is to increase player satisfaction through enhancements of key game elements such as: more strategy, longer unit interactions in fights, less frustrating mechanics, less scaling of advantages and less terrible damage. This would spill over to everything else and let negative attitudes fall silent.
There is zero changes that can be made in SC2 without people posting dedgame threads about it. Its what gives them joy and power, and does nothing but make sponsors leave a scene (not that dedgame posters pay for anything anyway and adblock non-stop) causing less money to come into the scene.
Unless you have a base that actually puts money into the scene, then you don't have a scene. Period. Dedgame threads merely scares off sponsors and does nothing but kill the scene.
|
On December 01 2016 06:19 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2016 02:54 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote:On December 01 2016 02:33 Furikawari wrote:On December 01 2016 02:25 Thieving Magpie wrote:
When I talk to people in person 100% of the SC2 players say that they love the game but don't have time to get good at it. 100% of the League players say that the game is alright, its nice that its free and that they don't need to put that much time into it.
And this spreads to all other games as well. For the most part, the main reason people don't play SC2 is that its too hard and takes too much dedication when they already have a tonne of options out there to improve and learn from. You want the truth? Coming from someone that did SC2 => dota2. Here's the difference, in MOBA and other team games, when u fail u can blame ur team. In SC2 u can't (well u blame balance, but u get the idea  ). While there are certainly a few players out there that can't accept blame, I honestly don't think that is the majority. Even when I play Overwatch, I don't get a lot of players blaming the team. Sure 1 in 10 games someone starts getting salty and thinks their team sucks, but that is 1 player out of 120. People don't need to yell *at you* to be blame you. Most people blame post game, usually when "casually" chatting about it with their friends.
Ah that is true. But whatever the case maybe, I like to think the best in fellow gamers and assume they aren't blaming me.
Although I am pretty horrible in OW, so perhaps they are blaming me 
|
On December 01 2016 06:28 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2016 06:22 LSN wrote:On November 29 2016 22:45 KeksX wrote:On November 29 2016 16:29 LSN wrote:On November 29 2016 15:59 alexanderzero wrote:
I will never forgive a single person that raised a stink about "dead game" bullshit at any point during this game's history. A LOT of people have skipped this game because they were given the impression that nobody plays it and that the online lobbies would be deserted. I have seen it first hand.
While dead game threads surely are not helpful they are in no way the reason for SC2 decline and cannot be blamed. They are more an equivalent or synonym for people who believe their actual reasons and arguments are neither being heared nor ever will be addressed. You mix up cause and effect here. The dead game meme definitely created a feedback loop. People say SC2 is dead -> other people pick that up and actually mean it because they didn't check -> more peple say SC2 is dead -> more people think SC2 is actually dead. Just go on /r/starcraft and search for threads "Is StarCraft really dead??", now that is just the number of people that bothered to ask. There are probably many more that simply thought "People say SC2 is dead, not gonna bother checking it out". The dead game meme, like many other things, had an impact on how people perceive StarCraft nowadays. I mean even StarCraft players are turned off by that meme. That has only little truth in it imo. SC2 was in a bubble for a long time which now bursted. Representatives were rather uncritical with SC2 for all the years and put it on a podium where it could hardly be criticized and even constructive criticism was reflected back to the originator instead of taken serious. The state of SC2 would be no different today if there were zero dead game threads. Most people have already left. I met several former masters, high masters and even some GM players in other games who told me not to have any reason to return. Just look at the german scene. Many players moved on to other things or other games already while there was still alot of hope for future expansions and changes and not due to dead game threads. You could also try and go to DOTA/LoL forums and start daily dead game threads with different names and it wouldn't cause anything. In SC2 that hits on fertile grounds because there is substance in it. It might be a bit overly depressive these days, but this is a consequence of it being overly hyped and put in a bubble over the years, if at all. Now it is hitting the ground and this impact certainly lets break it through that a bit. Not helpful in this manner is even a superficial statement. Cause it would have been helpful in fact if this happened earlier in mid and long term. And it is even beneficial that it is happening now so that further and deeper changes can be initiated now as they are onto it already. Dead game threads have zero effect on the longevity of SC2 in the grand scheme of things when analysing it from the players side. They rather express overdue disappointment with the game that has been either hold back or was not correct to state about the game in public. From a sponsors and organizers point of view this can have more effect on people with not so much insight. If the dead game mythos surivives long enough they might take that as a reason to lessen their support. Anyway and again that would just accelerate such developments and can not originate them. And there is a chance for SC2 to do more things right in future than in the past still. I just don't see that incoming yet at all with the current major overhaul, unfortunately. It is another shift only which people who don't look behind or don't want to look behind (e. g. people who earn their money with SC2). do still not want to allow to happen. Imo the only way of moving back SC2 into a brighter light is to increase player satisfaction through enhancements of key game elements such as: more strategy, longer unit interactions in fights, less frustrating mechanics, less scaling of advantages and less terrible damage. This would spill over to everything else and let negative attitudes fall silent. There is zero changes that can be made in SC2 without people posting dedgame threads about it. Its what gives them joy and power, and does nothing but make sponsors leave a scene (not that dedgame posters pay for anything anyway and adblock non-stop) causing less money to come into the scene. Unless you have a base that actually puts money into the scene, then you don't have a scene. Period. Dedgame threads merely scares off sponsors and does nothing but kill the scene.
No, I disagree.
These movements amongst sponsors and league/tournament organisators could have been observed already for a long time, if you didn't blindfold yourself. Just as firecake stated the sole and only reason for that is the active amount of players, which equals the active amount of potential watchers and fans. The drop of this number has nothing in common with dead game threads in forums. It is even the other way round: Alot of people who considered the game to be dead for
them as a player continued to watch it and support it that way, which I dare to assume is quite unique in e-sports.
What you actually say is that the SC2 bubble should have been maintained even longer and that would help in any way.
|
I have to agree with LSN. The SC2 bubble was slowly deflating before the 'dead game' meme started to spread. However, the meme certainly increased the rate of deflation as more and more people stopped playing.
Without the 'dead game' meme, SC2 might have had a longer window of popularity. But this decline was inevitable, with or without any memes to affect the gamer population.
But LSN, no need to accuse Magpie of intentionally 'blindfolding' himself. It adds a negative connotation to your reply, and doesn't help the discussion.
|
Well I guess everyone involved with SC2, dedicated players, casters, etc. was whitewashing SC2 to a certain extend, including myself.
But at this point, where it has become fairly clear that SC2 does not deliver what most of us hoped, it helps the most to dig for true reasons instead of finding excuses imo. That might not be the case from a business operator's POW however, which I agree on. Then let me speak as someone who doesn't run a business connected with SC2 and whose main concern is that the game becomes more enjoyable.
Questions like why almost every single korean SC2 player that came from SC:BW returned to it sooner or later have a deeper reason than those cosmetic ones.
|
i thought firecake was the one that killed sc2 by going 2 hr swarmhost games. IRONY!
|
On December 01 2016 07:09 LSN wrote:
Well I guess everyone involved with SC2, dedicated players, casters, etc. was whitewashing SC2 to a certain extend, including myself.
But at this point, where it has become fairly clear that SC2 does not deliver what most of us hoped, it helps the most to dig for true reasons instead of finding excuses imo. That might not be the case from a business operator's POW however, which I agree on. Then let me speak as someone who doesn't run a business connected with SC2 and whose main concern is that the game becomes more enjoyable.
Questions like why almost every single korean SC2 player that came from SC:BW returned to it sooner or later have a deeper reason than those cosmetic ones.
The problem is that if you wanna discuss these things usually people simply respond by either saying you are a bw elitist when you use it as an example (even if it isn't even true) or they call you "hobby game designer". Lots of rhetoric to never argue the actual topic and "win" by default.
At the same time i think it's mainly because most people think that if they enjoy the game to some extent that's good enough. I also enjoy the game, i play it regularly and watch it a lot. BUT i don't think it is nearly as good as it could be. Everytime someone tells me that he already enjoys the game as it is i can only assume that the person didn't think about all these things which were discussed over the years. I mean i will be honest, it seems clear that the game wouldn't be on the same lvl as lol/dota/csgo, no matter how you design it casual players wouldn't even notice a difference between sc2 v1/2/3/X for the most part. But for people who are into rts or rather starcraft style rts there would be a difference. Ofc there are still various opinions on every issue, but i am 100% sure that a lot of people would agree on certain key elements starcraft should follow, elements it doesn't follow very well atm.
|
On December 01 2016 07:09 LSN wrote:
Well I guess everyone involved with SC2, dedicated players, casters, etc. was whitewashing SC2 to a certain extend, including myself.
But at this point, where it has become fairly clear that SC2 does not deliver what most of us hoped, it helps the most to dig for true reasons instead of finding excuses imo. That might not be the case from a business operator's POW however, which I agree on. Then let me speak as someone who doesn't run a business connected with SC2 and whose main concern is that the game becomes more enjoyable.
Questions like why almost every single korean SC2 player that came from SC:BW returned to it sooner or later have a deeper reason than those cosmetic ones.
Because BW =/= SC2
Forcing players to play a different game and then seeing those players return to the original game is not weird.
If you forced CSGO players to play Gears of War for 6 years, will it be surprising to see them go back to CS even if they are both FPS games?
|
On December 01 2016 07:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2016 07:09 LSN wrote:
Well I guess everyone involved with SC2, dedicated players, casters, etc. was whitewashing SC2 to a certain extend, including myself.
But at this point, where it has become fairly clear that SC2 does not deliver what most of us hoped, it helps the most to dig for true reasons instead of finding excuses imo. That might not be the case from a business operator's POW however, which I agree on. Then let me speak as someone who doesn't run a business connected with SC2 and whose main concern is that the game becomes more enjoyable.
Questions like why almost every single korean SC2 player that came from SC:BW returned to it sooner or later have a deeper reason than those cosmetic ones. Because BW =/= SC2 Forcing players to play a different game and then seeing those players return to the original game is not weird. If you forced CSGO players to play Gears of War for 6 years, will it be surprising to see them go back to CS even if they are both FPS games?
That's a bad example, isn't it? Starcraft 2 is the successor to starcraft broodwar, it would be only natural to be very similar, so similar that the new game would have the same strengths for the most part.
The better example therefore would be csgo pros going back to 1.6. (the example is still not that good but better)
|
Ideally, you would want to keep all those millions of BW fans watching live OSL/MSL/PL.
So what's a sure way of keeping BW fans?
BW was/is still being played by primarily custom map casual players. Most of the custom maps consists of micro maps such as microing vulture vs dragoon maps, shuttle/reaver vs shuttle/reaver, mutalisk/scourge vs mutalisk/scourge battle, etc. And of course, huge scale battles that spans in multiple screens and lasts for more than 30 seconds which can only be achieved through the mechanics of maintaining battle formations and high ground advantages.
So if you want to keep people that like BW happy, you would most likely want to keep the core unit combinations/gameplay mechanics that made BW great and expand/improve upon those. But let's explore what went wrong.
Let's not just talk about gameplay, both Blizzard made a HUGE marketing blunder by going at it against Kespa in the lawsuit where Blizzard that all those pro-games being played are Blizzard's properties and that Kespa have been running on illegal tournaments.
Kespa doesn't need Blizzard, Kespa have LoL leagues. Blizzard's ego was way too big for its own good.
But going back to the gameplay issues, I remember there use to be plenty of posters here on the site explaining that SC2 should probably go back to BW model of gameplay for the game to succeed.
But those users were heavily punished by the mods which wasn't ideal.
Then you got plenty of troll users who would whitewash SC2 to death by giving execuses of giving "SC2 time" even though after HotS' releases, the scene have been constantly downsizing.
And then there were users that were saying that "downsizing is healthy".
|
KeSPA don't have LoL leagues. Riot have LoL leagues that KeSPA sort of gets to watch.
|
Keeping old players is not as important as drawing in new ones, unless you want the game to live forever on nostalgia
|
On December 01 2016 07:55 aQuaSC wrote:
Keeping old players is not as important as drawing in new ones, unless you want the game to live forever on nostalgia
You can have nostalgia + new aspects.
And from the result/data, not keeping old players/fans happy have been a HUGE mistake.
There is no way around it.
|
On December 01 2016 07:58 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2016 07:55 aQuaSC wrote:
Keeping old players is not as important as drawing in new ones, unless you want the game to live forever on nostalgia You can have nostalgia + new aspects. And from the result/data, not keeping old players/fans happy have been a HUGE mistake. There is no way around it.
For sure keeping established ones is important, I just personally think that from these two creating grounds for aspiring new players is slightly more important for the longevity of the scene
|
On December 01 2016 08:03 aQuaSC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2016 07:58 RealityIsKing wrote:On December 01 2016 07:55 aQuaSC wrote:
Keeping old players is not as important as drawing in new ones, unless you want the game to live forever on nostalgia You can have nostalgia + new aspects. And from the result/data, not keeping old players/fans happy have been a HUGE mistake. There is no way around it. For sure keeping established ones is important, I just personally think that from these two creating grounds for aspiring new players is slightly more important for the longevity of the scene
You are selling a product, you want to keep you preexisting customer happy above it all because that's your base.
There are no evidence that new players that haven't touched the original won't like keeping battle formations and high ground advantage and there are plenty of new players agree with multiple of articles/posts here at TL.net that prefer longer battles instead of shorter ones.
So by getting rid of old mechanics, not only you've ignored your base, the new customers aren't happy with it either.
|
On December 01 2016 07:09 SwiftRH wrote:
i thought firecake was the one that killed sc2 by going 2 hr swarmhost games. IRONY!
Highest viewed WCS Challenger game ever 
|
I think a lot of people simply don't pay attention to the fact that the pro teams are supported almost entirely by sponsors. The tourney wins aren't enough to support a living for the majority. When people mention the rosters of these teams, they ignore all the SUPPORT STAFF they have from coaches to media. You have upwards of 10 people on these teams and the tournament winnings are often less than 20k/year TEAM WIDE. SC2 has never had prize pools like LoL or DotA - but they also cheat, they crowdfund a massive chunk of those pools. DotA now competes with Poker World Series for highest prize pool
Blizzard wants to support a pro scene? They need to support the paychecks to keep these people playing - and to draw more people into it.Their plans with the Overwatch League could be put into SC2 just as easily. If anything, do what TB's done with tourneys - pay for them yourself if you want them. 50k viewers payign $1 to watch it makes for a nice pool for the players
|
On December 01 2016 07:39 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2016 07:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:On December 01 2016 07:09 LSN wrote:
Well I guess everyone involved with SC2, dedicated players, casters, etc. was whitewashing SC2 to a certain extend, including myself.
But at this point, where it has become fairly clear that SC2 does not deliver what most of us hoped, it helps the most to dig for true reasons instead of finding excuses imo. That might not be the case from a business operator's POW however, which I agree on. Then let me speak as someone who doesn't run a business connected with SC2 and whose main concern is that the game becomes more enjoyable.
Questions like why almost every single korean SC2 player that came from SC:BW returned to it sooner or later have a deeper reason than those cosmetic ones. Because BW =/= SC2 Forcing players to play a different game and then seeing those players return to the original game is not weird. If you forced CSGO players to play Gears of War for 6 years, will it be surprising to see them go back to CS even if they are both FPS games? That's a bad example, isn't it? Starcraft 2 is the successor to starcraft broodwar, it would be only natural to be very similar, so similar that the new game would have the same strengths for the most part. The better example therefore would be csgo pros going back to 1.6. (the example is still not that good but better)
No, its not.
For the same reason SC1 pros did not go back to Warcraft 1 despite SC1 being just Orcs in Space.
Different games are different, despite what older players project into it.
|
On December 01 2016 08:11 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2016 08:03 aQuaSC wrote:On December 01 2016 07:58 RealityIsKing wrote:On December 01 2016 07:55 aQuaSC wrote:
Keeping old players is not as important as drawing in new ones, unless you want the game to live forever on nostalgia You can have nostalgia + new aspects. And from the result/data, not keeping old players/fans happy have been a HUGE mistake. There is no way around it. For sure keeping established ones is important, I just personally think that from these two creating grounds for aspiring new players is slightly more important for the longevity of the scene You are selling a product, you want to keep you preexisting customer happy above it all because that's your base. There are no evidence that new players that haven't touched the original won't like keeping battle formations and high ground advantage and there are plenty of new players agree with multiple of articles/posts here at TL.net that prefer longer battles instead of shorter ones. So by getting rid of old mechanics, not only you've ignored your base, the new customers aren't happy with it either.
If the goal is longer battles they'd just watch Alpha Centauri.
If they just wanted battle formations they'd just watch Age of Empires
There are lots of games that do those aspects better than BW and none of them get watched because thinking its about a few primary aspects and not a global shift in what the community wants from its entertainment products is stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
