|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
On November 18 2008 02:41 Oliwoli wrote:
What may (or may not) be an problem, but is at least worth considering is it could change the balence in favour of macro, as opposed to the micro-favouring direction is currently is in. Having it so there is ALWAYS a bonus could encourage spending TOO MUCH time at the base, especially as you will not be able to order ALL your workers at once, this will mean there is ALWAYS A BONUS to be accrued from staying in the base, so rather than it being a plate that needs to be kept spinning while the excitement continues, it ends up being something that requires constant attention. Now, this could be a good thing, but i would personally rather see games won through exciting contol or pant-wettingly large armies, rather than through a slight economic advantage that added up.
Perhaps a better way of phrasing it would be to say that it could end up being a punishment rather than a reward, if "speedy workers" become expected, the player "loses out" from neglecting his SCVs, rather than being rewarded for having that lil' bit extra APM that he can use to boost workers.
I'd put in a vote for "workers wait for a bit when rallied but move instantly when ordered".
As an argument for, id also say that its easier for fans to get into, as waiting around for a bit is easier to understand than "a tempory boolean speedboost accrued for a limited time, and requiring individual attention for maximum efficiency". There is something to be said for simplicity in the engine.
i actually like this idea. like make the workers wait 5 seconds or something before they automatically mine.
|
On November 21 2008 08:27 Unentschieden wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2008 05:52 -orb- wrote:On November 21 2008 05:02 Unentschieden wrote:That´s why I´m not concerned when we are discussing suboptimal mechanics here - Blizzard DOES know what they want for SC2. Yeah, they want their moms and wives to play. Because THATS when e-sports are truly accepted socially. The really big sports are so big because so many people enjoy, play and follow them. I know you mean it negativly but that is what they went for with WOW and it´s the most successfull videogame ever. Competative play came almost automatically even though WOW is pretty much the exact opposite of competative. It was a LONG process for Blizzard to develop the PvP content as we know it now - people weren´t attracted by that, they demanded it. SC was the same btw. - they absolutely didn´t expect it to develop such a community (but how could they?) and it took about 7 years to reach a state where everyone was happy with it - it was always good though.
WoW is the worst competitive game ever. There's a difference between having a lot of people play a game and having it work as a competitive game or an esport. You can't argue with the Korean SC scene, there isn't a game in the world that can compare, except for possibly CS 1.6.
Another thing to note is that TL is looking at the esports aspect of Sc2, which Blizzard has stated they wanted. These suggestions are what TL feels will help Sc2 become successful as an esport. Also don't confuse a game being played 'competitively' with an esport. Very different things.
|
On November 21 2008 08:27 Unentschieden wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2008 05:52 -orb- wrote:On November 21 2008 05:02 Unentschieden wrote:That´s why I´m not concerned when we are discussing suboptimal mechanics here - Blizzard DOES know what they want for SC2. Yeah, they want their moms and wives to play. Because THATS when e-sports are truly accepted socially. The really big sports are so big because so many people enjoy, play and follow them. I know you mean it negativly but that is what they went for with WOW and it´s the most successfull videogame ever. Competative play came almost automatically even though WOW is pretty much the exact opposite of competative. It was a LONG process for Blizzard to develop the PvP content as we know it now - people weren´t attracted by that, they demanded it. SC was the same btw. - they absolutely didn´t expect it to develop such a community (but how could they?) and it took about 7 years to reach a state where everyone was happy with it - it was always good though.
WoW may be the most successful video game ever, but it's not competitive at all.
You can say what you want about the fact that there are wow arena tournaments, but they're not fun to watch, nor are they nearly as competitive as starcraft is.
So do you want a successful video game that 10 million people play, or do you want a game you actually enjoy being good at. I for one feel good when I own someone in starcraft, whereas in wow when I win an arena match it just feels like a waste of time, since I only had to press (not counting wasd obviously...) like 20 keys total for the match.
|
On November 21 2008 11:38 -orb- wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2008 08:27 Unentschieden wrote:On November 21 2008 05:52 -orb- wrote:On November 21 2008 05:02 Unentschieden wrote:That´s why I´m not concerned when we are discussing suboptimal mechanics here - Blizzard DOES know what they want for SC2. Yeah, they want their moms and wives to play. Because THATS when e-sports are truly accepted socially. The really big sports are so big because so many people enjoy, play and follow them. I know you mean it negativly but that is what they went for with WOW and it´s the most successfull videogame ever. Competative play came almost automatically even though WOW is pretty much the exact opposite of competative. It was a LONG process for Blizzard to develop the PvP content as we know it now - people weren´t attracted by that, they demanded it. SC was the same btw. - they absolutely didn´t expect it to develop such a community (but how could they?) and it took about 7 years to reach a state where everyone was happy with it - it was always good though. WoW may be the most successful video game ever, but it's not competitive at all. You can say what you want about the fact that there are wow arena tournaments, but they're not fun to watch, nor are they nearly as competitive as starcraft is. So do you want a successful video game that 10 million people play, or do you want a game you actually enjoy being good at. I for one feel good when I own someone in starcraft, whereas in wow when I win an arena match it just feels like a waste of time, since I only had to press (not counting wasd obviously...) like 20 keys total for the match.
1.5 second global cooldown for the win. Also for the record WoW, DOTA, etc. are considered jokes among the majority of the people involved with them, owners/managers/admins/etc.. They're there for free cash and that's about it.
|
On November 21 2008 11:48 vsrooks wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2008 11:38 -orb- wrote:On November 21 2008 08:27 Unentschieden wrote:On November 21 2008 05:52 -orb- wrote:On November 21 2008 05:02 Unentschieden wrote:That´s why I´m not concerned when we are discussing suboptimal mechanics here - Blizzard DOES know what they want for SC2. Yeah, they want their moms and wives to play. Because THATS when e-sports are truly accepted socially. The really big sports are so big because so many people enjoy, play and follow them. I know you mean it negativly but that is what they went for with WOW and it´s the most successfull videogame ever. Competative play came almost automatically even though WOW is pretty much the exact opposite of competative. It was a LONG process for Blizzard to develop the PvP content as we know it now - people weren´t attracted by that, they demanded it. SC was the same btw. - they absolutely didn´t expect it to develop such a community (but how could they?) and it took about 7 years to reach a state where everyone was happy with it - it was always good though. WoW may be the most successful video game ever, but it's not competitive at all. You can say what you want about the fact that there are wow arena tournaments, but they're not fun to watch, nor are they nearly as competitive as starcraft is. So do you want a successful video game that 10 million people play, or do you want a game you actually enjoy being good at. I for one feel good when I own someone in starcraft, whereas in wow when I win an arena match it just feels like a waste of time, since I only had to press (not counting wasd obviously...) like 20 keys total for the match. 1.5 second global cooldown for the win. Also for the record WoW, DOTA, etc. are considered jokes among the majority of the people involved with them, owners/managers/admins/etc.. They're there for free cash and that's about it.
Gah, listen to yourself. Reading comprehension could you two do that for me? Where did I say WOW was a good competative game? I actually stated the opposite, WOW is a game completely based around cooperation.
The question you have to ask yourselves is WHY are WOW and DOTA etc... being played competativly and attract such a big audience then when they are so "bad"?
It´s the "common people" that make the (e-)sport, not the professionals. Where is the e-sport that is only played by a hardcore competative community without "casuals?" They are there but you never heard of them.
|
On November 20 2008 05:59 Badjas wrote:
I have read most of the thread and I believe I have an idea that is not proposed yet. I am unsure how others will view it but I'll give it a shot at getting criticism.
Have auto-mine be an upgrade. Purchasable at the headquarters for a pretty sum.
This means:
- No auto-gathering at the start of the game means gosu worker splitting (especially with 6 workers).
- More work on worker management at the start is okay for everyone since there is less to do.
- At some point everyone can get auto-mining.
- Gosu players have the option to save on resources while doing manual mining, but also have the choice to go into easier-macro-mode for a price to gain an advantage over the opponent.
- Moms can get automining earlier for a more enjoyable playing experience when they can't focus on everything anymore some time into a game.
The cost of the auto-mining upgrade can be fine-tuned for the pro gaming side to make it a serious consideration which can seriously help, but which can also get one in trouble if the opponent stays low-econ and pressures at a bad time. Of course I am not sure if this is easily balanced for the moms to be affordable at the right time then. But for the sake of discussion this would be a separate issue.
The bad side, the only one that I personally see (hence this needs more input), is that this would be for every race the same thing which causes some none-uniqueness.
Quoting myself here, don't mean to be ego-centric, but it seemed to be a snowed under submission to the thread, and I am curious what you people think.
|
If you use the delay for workers rallied to minerals, it has to be more than 5 seconds. 5 seconds is less than a trip, so after you have more than one base, it wouldn't be ever worth sending them manually (you get what 3 or 4 more minerals for diverting your attention back to a nexus?). Even pros sometimes get 4 workers backed up after they get to 4 bases, which is a minute without coming back to that nexus (a probe takes about 15 seconds to build). If it's not worth diverting their attention at 400 apm back, then nobody would ever manually send workers at that point.
I think the time it takes to build a worker would be a better delay, so if you're queuing probes, the 1st one you made goes to mine right when the 2nd one comes out. I feel this would be an absolute minimum though, because with 5 minerals per trip, 15 seconds is still only about 8-9 minerals, and even fewer once you have more than 1.5 workers per patch.
It depends who you want this to affect, and how late in the game you want it to affect them. If it's only 5 seconds, it won't affect anyone after the 4 minute mark (no one would manually send after that). If it's 15 seconds, it'll affect pros for 10-12 minutes, but an iccup C user maybe only for 7-8 minutes. The longer the delay, the more users will be affected by it and benefit from manually moving workers. Even at a minute delay there will be points in long games when you and I decide it's not worth going back (at least if you're a terran user), as even NaDa has had 4 scvs idle at an expo in games. ANY delay is still more automation than Broodwar, so it will still close the skill gap to some degree. We can guess based on the approximate mineral advantage gained by manually sending what the delay should be, but we'd really have to wait for beta testing to see how it would play out (assuming they included this feature).
|
On November 21 2008 23:08 Badjas wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2008 05:59 Badjas wrote:
I have read most of the thread and I believe I have an idea that is not proposed yet. I am unsure how others will view it but I'll give it a shot at getting criticism.
Have auto-mine be an upgrade. Purchasable at the headquarters for a pretty sum.
This means:
- No auto-gathering at the start of the game means gosu worker splitting (especially with 6 workers).
- More work on worker management at the start is okay for everyone since there is less to do.
- At some point everyone can get auto-mining.
- Gosu players have the option to save on resources while doing manual mining, but also have the choice to go into easier-macro-mode for a price to gain an advantage over the opponent.
- Moms can get automining earlier for a more enjoyable playing experience when they can't focus on everything anymore some time into a game.
The cost of the auto-mining upgrade can be fine-tuned for the pro gaming side to make it a serious consideration which can seriously help, but which can also get one in trouble if the opponent stays low-econ and pressures at a bad time. Of course I am not sure if this is easily balanced for the moms to be affordable at the right time then. But for the sake of discussion this would be a separate issue.
The bad side, the only one that I personally see (hence this needs more input), is that this would be for every race the same thing which causes some none-uniqueness. Quoting myself here, don't mean to be ego-centric, but it seemed to be a snowed under submission to the thread, and I am curious what you people think.
I really don't think a UI automation research would fit into Starcraft. I can see other games where you're more directly a "commander" or "general" of an army and when you can research personal powers (UI features) or otherwise acquire them in the game, but not Starcraft. That would be akin to having to research to use attack rally (or rally at all), and would just lead to things like researching the ability to have unlimited zoom-out on the battle-field or an auto-casting psi storm. Unless you can somehow make it so it's a research for an ability for your units, it doesn't really fit with what minerals buy in starcraft.
EDIT: as for gameplay, it also really defeats the purpose of automine altogether. With automine, grandma learns to select nexus and right click on a patch at the beginning of the game, and that's how mining works. Without automine, grandma learns to send her workers manually when she sees them sitting around. With an automine upgrade, she has to learn to send them at the beginning of the game, research the ability, and then select nexus and right click on a mineral patch and forget about mining at some point after the research is done. In a way it's counterproductive to the target audience of the feature.
|
On November 21 2008 22:43 Unentschieden wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2008 11:48 vsrooks wrote:On November 21 2008 11:38 -orb- wrote:On November 21 2008 08:27 Unentschieden wrote:On November 21 2008 05:52 -orb- wrote:On November 21 2008 05:02 Unentschieden wrote:That´s why I´m not concerned when we are discussing suboptimal mechanics here - Blizzard DOES know what they want for SC2. Yeah, they want their moms and wives to play. Because THATS when e-sports are truly accepted socially. The really big sports are so big because so many people enjoy, play and follow them. I know you mean it negativly but that is what they went for with WOW and it´s the most successfull videogame ever. Competative play came almost automatically even though WOW is pretty much the exact opposite of competative. It was a LONG process for Blizzard to develop the PvP content as we know it now - people weren´t attracted by that, they demanded it. SC was the same btw. - they absolutely didn´t expect it to develop such a community (but how could they?) and it took about 7 years to reach a state where everyone was happy with it - it was always good though. WoW may be the most successful video game ever, but it's not competitive at all. You can say what you want about the fact that there are wow arena tournaments, but they're not fun to watch, nor are they nearly as competitive as starcraft is. So do you want a successful video game that 10 million people play, or do you want a game you actually enjoy being good at. I for one feel good when I own someone in starcraft, whereas in wow when I win an arena match it just feels like a waste of time, since I only had to press (not counting wasd obviously...) like 20 keys total for the match. 1.5 second global cooldown for the win. Also for the record WoW, DOTA, etc. are considered jokes among the majority of the people involved with them, owners/managers/admins/etc.. They're there for free cash and that's about it. Gah, listen to yourself. Reading comprehension could you two do that for me? Where did I say WOW was a good competative game? I actually stated the opposite, WOW is a game completely based around cooperation. The question you have to ask yourselves is WHY are WOW and DOTA etc... being played competativly and attract such a big audience then when they are so "bad"? It´s the "common people" that make the (e-)sport, not the professionals. Where is the e-sport that is only played by a hardcore competative community without "casuals?" They are there but you never heard of them.
The problem is virtually every game designed with heavy casuals in mind ends up as garbage for the competitive community. There are so many games out there that were good competitively, however once the makers decided to make a sequel geared towards casual gamers the game's competitive quality went down the drain as well. There are several game-sequels which follow this formula including Halo - Halo 3, CS1.6 - CSS, SSBM - SSBB etc. Starcraft is one of the games like Halo 3 which has a split community. Casuals tend to flock towards the money maps and UMS games, while the competitives are almost strictly low money maps, which can be narrowed further to what Koreans have in their map pool at a specific time. I honestly believe it's impossible to have one game satisfy both. Basically it' inversely proportional that the more casual a game is, the less quality the game has for e-sports. Casuals and Hardcores are simply polar opposites.
|
Manual vs Automine
Incorporate something like the warp gate mechanic (more work but with greater yield) into making workers. If you make them manually, they spawn faster, but do not automine (and perhaps cannot be queued). If you hotkey and rally, they take longer to make, but will start mining immediately. Mid/late game with several expansions, this would mean most people would make the switch to automine, leaving those who are good enough not to with an edge.
Restating: Harmful Gas Mechanic
This suggestion didn't get any discussion, but I think it may be a good idea. The workers going into the refinery take a small amount of damage each run, meaning the player has to keep track of his workers lest they eventually die. Worse players would notice too late that they have no workers collecting gas left, maybe even good players too in the chaotic late game.
|
United States47024 Posts
On November 21 2008 22:43 Unentschieden wrote:
The question you have to ask yourselves is WHY are WOW and DOTA etc... being played competativly and attract such a big audience then when they are so "bad"?
It´s the "common people" that make the (e-)sport, not the professionals. Where is the e-sport that is only played by a hardcore competative community without "casuals?" They are there but you never heard of them.
The answer is: they don't. There are virtually no offline tournaments for WoW, and the DotA competitive community is relatively small. Furthermore (I think the most crucial bit) very few people that don't play WoW or DotA actually watch those games. By contrast, Starcraft both in and outside of Korea draws fair groups of people that don't actually play the game. Even outside of Korea, the number of offline tournaments for Starcraft or Warcraft III are much greater than those for WoW.
You make the analogy to sports, and I think it's a good one. How many 40-year old men go out and play baseball on the weekends? Not many. How many 40-year old men follow professional baseball? Quite a good number.
A game doesn't have to be that easy to access to be successful as a e-sport. By contrast, a game that is difficult builds respect for the players and teams among audiences. Starcraft is already an example of this. It is pretty much without question the most successful e-sport there is.
If you look at WoW arena matches, its actually a pretty poor example of an e-sport, even from a spectator perspective. It's not NEARLY as big as you say it is, and certainly not as big as professional Starcraft (or arguably even Counter-Strike in its heyday). The number of offline tournaments is tiny, as is the number of people who watch them that don't play WoW. To be honest, I'm not even sure that it was demanded because people wanted organized competition. Its debatable that the reason they implemented arena PvP was because people whined that they wanted somewhere to funnel all the people that were ganking left and right in world PvP, and "ruining the experience" for others. Evidence of this is the absolutely abysmal state of balance. If Blizzard had actually implemented PvP for the sake of making a legitimate competitive e-sport, they would have made the effort to fix the class balance issues that plague the current arena meta-game.
IMO you're trying to pin a problem onto something that's unrelated. The lack of acceptance of e-sports in the West has far more to do with the stigma against pro-gamers as a profession and against video games as a legitimate pursuit, rather than how easily accessible they are to spectators.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 22 2008 01:38 Osmoses wrote:
Manual vs Automine
Incorporate something like the warp gate mechanic (more work but with greater yield) into making workers. If you make them manually, they spawn faster, but do not automine (and perhaps cannot be queued). If you hotkey and rally, they take longer to make, but will start mining immediately. Mid/late game with several expansions, this would mean most people would make the switch to automine, leaving those who are good enough not to with an edge.
Restating: Harmful Gas Mechanic
This suggestion didn't get any discussion, but I think it may be a good idea. The workers going into the refinery take a small amount of damage each run, meaning the player has to keep track of his workers lest they eventually die. Worse players would notice too late that they have no workers collecting gas left, maybe even good players too in the chaotic late game.
I would go aboslutely fucking insane if #2 was implemented. DO NOT WANT.
#1 is meh, it makes absolutely no sense why this would be the case and you are punishing people for using a game mechanic, which I don't think blizzard will do.
|
On November 22 2008 02:20 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2008 22:43 Unentschieden wrote:
The question you have to ask yourselves is WHY are WOW and DOTA etc... being played competativly and attract such a big audience then when they are so "bad"?
It´s the "common people" that make the (e-)sport, not the professionals. Where is the e-sport that is only played by a hardcore competative community without "casuals?" They are there but you never heard of them.
The answer is: they don't. There are virtually no offline tournaments for WoW, and the DotA competitive community is relatively small. Furthermore (I think the most crucial bit) very few people that don't play WoW or DotA actually watch those games. By contrast, Starcraft both in and outside of Korea draws fair groups of people that don't actually play the game. Even outside of Korea, the number of offline tournaments for Starcraft or Warcraft III are much greater than those for WoW.
Here in Germany the DOTA community is big enough for sponsored Tournaments which means for me it´s "big". The amazing thing about WOW competative play isn´t that it´s good but that it even exists at all since WOW is so countercompetative.
On November 22 2008 02:20 TheYango wrote:
You make the analogy to sports, and I think it's a good one. How many 40-year old men go out and play baseball on the weekends? Not many. How many 40-year old men follow professional baseball? Quite a good number.
A game doesn't have to be that easy to access to be successful as a e-sport. By contrast, a game that is difficult builds respect for the players and teams among audiences. Starcraft is already an example of this. It is pretty much without question the most successful e-sport there is.
Almost. A Proffessional matches "quality" relies on the competitors, not intherit difficulty in a Game. That is why everyone demands "skill scalability/distinction/whatever... , so that game difficulty is as closely related to your enemys skill. Even your 40-year old guy follows baseball because he played and enjoyed the game itself. Respect is given to a players/Teams skill, NOT their games difficulty.
Also, the very definition of proffessional means that the pro can live on it. That means he (or she) needs sponsors. Sponsors are only willing to spend money if they expect a large audience.
My argument the whole time is that a large fanbase leads to competition, NOT competition leads to a large fanbase.(Thats what I was playing at with my sports analogy) The fans are ALWAYS first and form the basis pros can exist on.
On November 22 2008 02:20 TheYango wrote:
If you look at WoW arena matches, its actually a pretty poor example of an e-sport, even from a spectator perspective. It's not NEARLY as big as you say it is, and certainly not as big as professional Starcraft (or arguably even Counter-Strike in its heyday). The number of offline tournaments is tiny, as is the number of people who watch them that don't play WoW. To be honest, I'm not even sure that it was demanded because people wanted organized competition. Its debatable that the reason they implemented arena PvP was because people whined that they wanted somewhere to funnel all the people that were ganking left and right in world PvP, and "ruining the experience" for others. Evidence of this is the absolutely abysmal state of balance. If Blizzard had actually implemented PvP for the sake of making a legitimate competitive e-sport, they would have made the effort to fix the class balance issues that plague the current arena meta-game.
Selfquote "The amazing thing about WOW competative play isn´t that it´s good but that it even exists at all since WOW is so countercompetative."
I NEVER said WOW PvP was big or even any good.
On November 22 2008 02:20 TheYango wrote:
IMO you're trying to pin a problem onto something that's unrelated. The lack of acceptance of e-sports in the West has far more to do with the stigma against pro-gamers as a profession and against video games as a legitimate pursuit, rather than how easily accessible they are to spectators.
If e-sports want acceptance by everyone they need to be accessable to everyone. It´s pretty much impossible to expect "moms and wives" to accept something they don´t understand. WOW made BIG steps into that direction.
It´s not like "older people" form some kind of Bastion of Ignorance. The much referred to "Casuals" didn´t exist 10 Years ago - you were hardcore simply by playing. It also helps that the kids from back then are the parents today.
Also, when did I ever say anything about spectators? I find it very hard to imagine anyone following competitions of a game (no matter what [e-]sport) they never played or don´t like.
Edit: Also something a bit more on Topic.
The core complaint against Automine is that it would equalize players. Proponents are accused of wanting this ("you want to win against better players..."). Players would be equal when they hit the "skill ceiling", when everyone is top in everything and has no nonrandom way of gaining an advantage.
For me there are generally 2 directions against equalization.
1. is the "old" way, by reducing player freedom. By reduction of freedom they would be restricted in "reaching the ceiling". Imagine it as attaching "weights" to a mountain climber so he would have a harder time reaching the top. That is done via distractions ("needs to go back to base") and limitations (one building at a time).
2. is by granting them more freedom. More freedom means a higher ceiling but more importantly more (and unexpected) ways of going "up". Our climber would go up a higher and wider mountain. That is done by adding "gameplaydepht" and reduction of distractions.
I´m in favour of direction 2.
|
On November 21 2008 22:43 Unentschieden wrote:
The question you have to ask yourselves is WHY are WOW and DOTA etc... being played competativly and attract such a big audience then when they are so "bad"?
It´s the "common people" that make the (e-)sport, not the professionals.
But WoW and DOTA are not esports, which makes your entire point irrelevant.
|
On November 22 2008 05:14 vsrooks wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2008 22:43 Unentschieden wrote:
The question you have to ask yourselves is WHY are WOW and DOTA etc... being played competativly and attract such a big audience then when they are so "bad"?
It´s the "common people" that make the (e-)sport, not the professionals.
But WoW and DOTA are not esports, which makes your entire point irrelevant.
They're considering them both as includes during the ESWC 2009 so I wouldn't make such hasty decisions about it (although I don't really see how WoW could be an e-sport of any kind).
|
On November 22 2008 05:14 vsrooks wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2008 22:43 Unentschieden wrote:
The question you have to ask yourselves is WHY are WOW and DOTA etc... being played competativly and attract such a big audience then when they are so "bad"?
It´s the "common people" that make the (e-)sport, not the professionals.
But WoW and DOTA are not esports, which makes your entire point irrelevant.
What is your definition of e-sports?
|
"1. is the "old" way, by reducing player freedom. By reduction of freedom they would be restricted in "reaching the ceiling". Imagine it as attaching "weights" to a mountain climber so he would have a harder time reaching the top. That is done via distractions ("needs to go back to base") and limitations (one building at a time)."
"2. is by granting them more freedom. More freedom means a higher ceiling but more importantly more (and unexpected) ways of going "up". Our climber would go up a higher and wider mountain. That is done by adding "gameplaydepht" and reduction of distractions"- Unentschieden
Im sorry i just copied and paste, i idnt want to quote.
Going back to the base and mine and only selecting one building at a time arent distractions or weight on the climber, they are called macro -_-.
The so called "more freedom" you speak about is only "lets focuse only in micro". Going back to base to mine and only selecting one building at a time are a very big part of one of the big aspects in the game, which is called macro. (the 3 being macro, micro, and strategy...at least the way i see the game)
Basicaly by more freedom you want to force the players to emphasize micro and strategy over macro, thus TAKING FREEDOM AWAY from the players, because in broodwar they had this so called freedom to decide if they wanted to focuse more on micro, or on macro. Now its forcing them -_-
|
United States47024 Posts
On November 22 2008 05:07 Unentschieden wrote:
Almost. A Proffessional matches "quality" relies on the competitors, not intherit difficulty in a Game. That is why everyone demands "skill scalability/distinction/whatever... , so that game difficulty is as closely related to your enemys skill. Even your 40-year old guy follows baseball because he played and enjoyed the game itself. Respect is given to a players/Teams skill, NOT their games difficulty.
Precisely. This means that more skillful tasks (microing with macroing in the background) should command more respect. A player won't have nearly as much respect for a pro if he thinks he's remotely capable of anything the pro does.
On November 22 2008 05:07 Unentschieden wrote:
My argument the whole time is that a large fanbase leads to competition, NOT competition leads to a large fanbase.(Thats what I was playing at with my sports analogy) The fans are ALWAYS first and form the basis pros can exist on.
No, your argument is that a large USERbase leads to competition. A userbase and a fanbase are two different things, and they aren't always directly correlated. You don't need to be a player to be a fan. Fans and players have different motivations for watching the game. Fans are watching because the game is genuinely fun to watch for them. Players are often motivated by other factors, such as wanting to improve. Because of this, IMO a better measure of e-sport success is when the fanbase is large AND many of them aren't players. In that sense, DotA is a very poor e-sport since its very hard for someone who has never played to pick up on the action (given the complex interactions between different heroes and items), and the number of people who watch actively but have never played the game are very few.
On November 22 2008 05:07 Unentschieden wrote:
If e-sports want acceptance by everyone they need to be accessable to everyone. It´s pretty much impossible to expect "moms and wives" to accept something they don´t understand. WOW made BIG steps into that direction.
It´s not like "older people" form some kind of Bastion of Ignorance. The much referred to "Casuals" didn´t exist 10 Years ago - you were hardcore simply by playing. It also helps that the kids from back then are the parents today.
You're making the assumption that playing the game well is necessary to understand the game, which is not true at all. At its core, Starcraft is a very simple game for spectators to understand, with some basic knowledge about the units. Making the game easier to PLAY is not correlated to making it easier to understand.
On November 22 2008 05:07 Unentschieden wrote:
Also, when did I ever say anything about spectators? I find it very hard to imagine anyone following competitions of a game (no matter what [e-]sport) they never played or don´t like.
Someone from Korea can confirm or deny this, but I'm told that there are plenty of older people in Korea that have never actually played Starcraft but follow professional play quite actively.
|
And here we go back again to SBS = pro, MBS = noob-friendly discussion etc.
I think it would be nice if some mod just run through this thread and removed/moved elsewhere all the offtopic posts (some of them being mine I guess).
Back on track:
Personally I think that no solution is really needed for automine, it doesn't change THAT much.
During the early stages of the game you still need to split your workers and you don't have so much on your hands that it would matter if they go automatically to mine or you manually send them there.
Sure mid-late game this makes a bit of a difference, with a couple of expansions, some heavy action etc. you might forget/not have time to send your workers to mine but usually at this point your economy should be pretty solid with most patches saturated and this 2-3 workers really won't make huge difference.
I agree however that what it along with mbs does is remove almost completely the need to go back to your base during the fights except for making new buildings.
What we get in return is more abilities on the units and this stupid gas mechanic to counter-balance it.
Myself, I have no problem with not needing to go back to my base periodically, I think however that the gas mechanic is worse than anything. I don't mean to play the game competetively like some of you but I think that all this automation won't lead to a significant skill gap reduction or anything like it (and if anyone will try to tell me again to look at WC3 and see for myself that the skill gap there is a lot smaller than in SCBW than I can assure you that the gap between a pro and pro-wannabe in WC3 is friggin HUGE).
|
On November 22 2008 07:02 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2008 05:07 Unentschieden wrote:
Almost. A Proffessional matches "quality" relies on the competitors, not intherit difficulty in a Game. That is why everyone demands "skill scalability/distinction/whatever... , so that game difficulty is as closely related to your enemys skill. Even your 40-year old guy follows baseball because he played and enjoyed the game itself. Respect is given to a players/Teams skill, NOT their games difficulty. Precisely. This means that more skillful tasks (microing with macroing in the background) should command more respect. A player won't have nearly as much respect for a pro if he thinks he's remotely capable of anything the pro does.
Yes. But it´s not the games duty to "demand" that, it´s the competitors. Players should be the ones to distract their enemys (feints...) not the game itself. And I doubt anything in the game can furthen bringing respect - it takes a lot more than "just" being good to earn respect.
On November 22 2008 07:02 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2008 05:07 Unentschieden wrote:
My argument the whole time is that a large fanbase leads to competition, NOT competition leads to a large fanbase.(Thats what I was playing at with my sports analogy) The fans are ALWAYS first and form the basis pros can exist on. No, your argument is that a large USERbase leads to competition. A userbase and a fanbase are two different things, and they aren't always directly correlated. You don't need to be a player to be a fan. Fans and players have different motivations for watching the game. Fans are watching because the game is genuinely fun to watch for them. Players are often motivated by other factors, such as wanting to improve. Because of this, IMO a better measure of e-sport success is when the fanbase is large AND many of them aren't players. In that sense, DotA is a very poor e-sport since its very hard for someone who has never played to pick up on the action (given the complex interactions between different heroes and items), and the number of people who watch actively but have never played the game are very few.
Semantics basically but fine. I just hope you don´t think I´m defending DOTA.
On November 22 2008 07:02 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2008 05:07 Unentschieden wrote:
If e-sports want acceptance by everyone they need to be accessable to everyone. It´s pretty much impossible to expect "moms and wives" to accept something they don´t understand. WOW made BIG steps into that direction.
It´s not like "older people" form some kind of Bastion of Ignorance. The much referred to "Casuals" didn´t exist 10 Years ago - you were hardcore simply by playing. It also helps that the kids from back then are the parents today. You're making the assumption that playing the game well is necessary to understand the game, which is not true at all. At its core, Starcraft is a very simple game for spectators to understand, with some basic knowledge about the units. Making the game easier to PLAY is not correlated to making it easier to understand.
Do you have a test person at hand to prove that thesis? In my experience just watching removes they key element from games that make them a unique medium: interactivity. Even if someone can understand a game by watching it, could he/she also apprechiate it?
It sounds a bit like you are trying for the "Casual and Competative are mutually exclusive" angle. Blizzard knows how to make good games that stay good over the whole skillspectrum. The criteria don´t change when you "get better" about what a good game is - but your POV.
Some games only start being good when you get better. I´d even say that SC:BW is such a game since many "annoyances" turn into mindless trivia when you train them. Manualmining is as challenging as riding a bike - frustrating at first, natural for the rest of your life.
On November 22 2008 07:02 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2008 05:07 Unentschieden wrote:
Also, when did I ever say anything about spectators? I find it very hard to imagine anyone following competitions of a game (no matter what [e-]sport) they never played or don´t like. Someone from Korea can confirm or deny this, but I'm told that there are plenty of older people in Korea that have never actually played Starcraft but follow professional play quite actively.
Would be interesting. Well If my theory is wrong I´d like your idea why (if that is true) these "older People" are attracted to SC, especially if they really never had any contact with it before - which makes me wonder how they learned of it in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
