|
Northern Ireland23671 Posts
I am currently thinking of a way to collate the various parts of the community's perspectives on core game design and display the often underlooked similarities that exist there.
I believe this is entirely beneficial as a process. In this instance, I have certain preconceptions about the underlying root causes of casual players, both in terms of why they play SC2 in the first place and also what annoys or frustrates them about the game.
I do not want to be proven wrong, or proven right, I want to actually know how you think!
The idea of my thread, is to try and show that a lot of the core problems we have with the game as a community, or the things we like about it are actually a lot more universal and linked across different sections of the playerbase than we consider.
The only way to attempt to 'prove' that is to actually get feedback and information from those groups themselves.
The only resource as such that I don't have access to, or know how to find are people who consider themselves casual players. I can find mapmakers, pro players, theorycraft/design people and all those other people because I know where to find them.
Casuals, if you're out there help me with feedback. Either post here, or PM me or post in my original thread idea which is at:
Preliminary Discussion Thread
|
I think this is a great idea and would be more than happy to help. I like this approach because it doesn't force the casual into being a game designer, just giving input on what does and does not work for them personally and on their level of play.
|
Northern Ireland23671 Posts
Thanks for the input in terms of it seems you at least appreciate the general hypothesis, we can PM back-and-forth later if you so desire!
|
As a design person in training I'm not really sure if I qualify for your demographic, unless you're speaking specifically for SC2 custom games, which I don't have much patience for... I'd be happy to help you Wombat. It is a bit of a concern, however, that many casual players (not all) don't actually play (or watch - if they ever did) the game anymore. This would of course cheapen their contribution, or mislead you unintentionally.
EDIT: I prefer to think of myself as a terrible (skill-wise) fanatic with wrist injury from a lifetime of extensive gaming.
|
Northern Ireland23671 Posts
See Roach, (I couldn't be bothered with the capitalising  ) I'm convinced Blizzard consider casuals from the wrong perspective. I.e they do things 'for' the casual, but without really actually asking them what they want, or what frustrates them. I can show this in action, logically if you so desire further explanation.
It's the last group I feel are neglected in that sense. All these groups should be considered, perhaps in different terms though.
Us design guys, know design or at least have good ideas about DESIGN
Casuals, know how casuals think.
Mapmakers know how to make and balance maps
Pro players know how the game functions close to optimal play
I think that makes sense if I explain it like that
|
On December 06 2012 03:16 dUTtrOACh wrote:
As a design person in training I'm not really sure if I qualify for your demographic, unless you're speaking specifically for SC2 custom games, which I don't have much patience for... I'd be happy to help you Wombat. It is a bit of a concern, however, that many casual players (not all) don't actually play (or watch - if they ever did) the game anymore. This would of course cheapen their contribution, or mislead you unintentionally.
EDIT: I prefer to think of myself as a terrible (skill-wise) fanatic with wrist injury from a lifetime of extensive gaming.
I think (I could be wrong) as long as they're reading TL and willing to volunteer to help with the project, they probably either watch or play frequently still. When I went on SC2 hiatus my browsing of TL was extremely minimal and I would have hardly considered helping with a research project. Slightly side-stepping the main topic, but I hadn't considered that either. Definitely something to keep an eye on.
|
United Kingdom20274 Posts
The vast majority of casual players dont read discussion threads, your data is invalid.
|
How do you define causel player? Someone who doesn't try hard to win and improve?
|
Northern Ireland23671 Posts
Consider it like this.
1. People always talk about casual players, even Blizzard reference them as being in their thoughts with game design.
2. Somebody has raised the problem of 'how do you define casual players'
3. Who better to define their actual concerns, than people who self-identify as casuals?
If there are no casuals, then they don't exist. If they don't exist why would anybody try to design their game around them?
|
On December 06 2012 03:30 Wombat_NI wrote:
Consider it like this.
1. People always talk about casual players, even Blizzard reference them as being in their thoughts with game design.
2. Somebody has raised the problem of 'how do you define casual players'
3. Who better to define their actual concerns, than people who self-identify as casuals?
If there are no casuals, then they don't exist. If they don't exist why would anybody try to design their game around them? Since people who defines themselves as casual are still too hardcore. To me at least, casual players are the ones who plays only campaign and customs and comp stomps, never visited TL, never watch tournaments, etc. Yes even the guys stuck in Bronze are still too hardcore. These people definitely exist, and you won't ever hear from them.
|
You know what casual gamers want? CUSTOM GAMES. That is the only way my friends will get back into starcraft.. Only reason why we played Starcraft:Brood War was because of the UMS. We didnt play SC:BW because of ladder we could care less, it was about playing games that we can continuing playing like choose your D
edit : even i dont even play starcraft anymore, i only just watch it mostly.. its pretty lonely if you are playing alone to be honest.
|
Northern Ireland23671 Posts
On December 06 2012 03:33 achan1058 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2012 03:30 Wombat_NI wrote:
Consider it like this.
1. People always talk about casual players, even Blizzard reference them as being in their thoughts with game design.
2. Somebody has raised the problem of 'how do you define casual players'
3. Who better to define their actual concerns, than people who self-identify as casuals?
If there are no casuals, then they don't exist. If they don't exist why would anybody try to design their game around them? Since people who defines themselves as casual are still too hardcore. To me at least, casual players are the ones who plays only campaign and customs and comp stomps, never visited TL, never watch tournaments, etc. Yes even the guys stuck in Bronze are still too hardcore. These people definitely exist, and you won't ever hear from them.
Well, I suppose you can't factor that very lowest of casual in. Not because they don't exist, but because we lack the ways of interfacing with them (I mean in this case, they aren't on TL). Short of enlisting the glorious Gheed to delve once more again into the horrors of the furthest depths of Bronze league and chat to players there, I'm not sure how we could do that.
Gheed's Glorious Quest
I link that because it's hilarious but also to illustrate an upcoming point.
Also, with reference to your listed 'archetypal casuals'. If they are THAT casual, surely stuff like game balance, or design issues, or 'patchzergs' wouldn't really bother them? With regards to the casuals that Gheed encountered on his journey, people who weren't necessarily stupid but who did things that were unfathomably stupid. There are ways of addressing them I guess, logically but in most cases their lack of skill isn't due to game design or anything like that.
There are ways of lateral thinking to help people who don't understand the game, understand the game.
|
If that's the level of "casual" you are looking for, pretty much you have to go to the B.net forums, in my opinion. I would want to define myself as casual, as in I only watch tournaments but not play, but I really can't knowing that there are many more casual people out there.
|
Northern Ireland23671 Posts
Those people are on Blizzard's own forums so at least Blizz can find them easily.
I'm trying to find people between the extremes of some of the retards on there, and the pro players that Blizz talk to. Those are guys who I feel fall through the cracks, at least in terms of how Blizzard interacts with them
|
I'm getting the feeling that some people just refuse to believe that people can get bored of playing a video game; that they can lose interest in it after a while and move on to another game. They always want to default to "oh well blizzard is doing this wrong" or "oh people are afraid of losing" or "omg look at the viewer count compared to these other games" or some combination of 15 other assumptions, most if not all of which are irrelevant, stupid, or uneducated guesses based on hype or drama.
Casual gamers. Just think about what that means. To me, it means someone who picks up a game, finds something in it they enjoy, plays it for 2 weeks, and then moves on to the next new release. That is what "casual" means. Competitive players tend to stick with the game for a longer period of time because they want to improve for the purpose of competing. Why would a casual player stick to playing sc2 for 2 years if all they are looking for is something to burn their relaxation time on? People want new games, shit they havent seen before, and unfortunately that kind of innovation is becoming more stagant recently.
As for sc2: the game has a competitive nature. Whether you are playing ladder on the bottom of bronze league, or you are playing a non-ranked game vs a friend. The very actions of playing the game itself lean towards a sense of competing; im trying to get the fastest mothership possible or, im going to expand 6 times and hope he doesnt notice, it's still competitive in at least one way, and that can burn people out. Everyone is different, some people just cant handle playing more than 2 games in an hour, others have no problem playing all day. That doesnt mean there is something "wrong" with the game, or the design, or blizzard as a company.
If you are someone who is getting bored with sc2, then just find a new game that you havent played, that you have some kind of interest in. You dont have to feel bad about leaving a game just because someone else wants to make you feel bad because you arent a competitive person. Also, if you are a competitive person, and you get depressed because you lose a lot of games, then just move on to something else; something better suited towards your skills, something you are more comfortable with, or just plain enjoy more than sc2.
To the OP: I'm not saying what you want people to do here is dumb, but it's been discussed to death already. People have expressed their opinions on what should and shouldnt be in this game, people have argued over balance, and it will continue until the game dies. You cant make everyone happy, and neither can Blizzard or any other game company.
Someone here said that Blizzard wants to design for casual players, but doesnt give them what they want. How can you make such an ignorant comment with a straight face when there is an expansion coming out in 4(?) months. I think that you, and almost everyone else lol, needs to understand that any and all negativity being expressed about sc2 or blizzard is just over exaggerated because this is the internet. Problems seem a whole lot bigger than they really are, and how people choose to express their opinions is uncontrollable.
Give blizzard your opinions on the game, and then wait until HoTS. If you still dont like the game, then either keep protesting and trolling them, or find a new game.
|
Northern Ireland23671 Posts
Nope, you're wrong. 
If they were just getting bored of the game, that's an unfixable problem and not at all one I would want to fix or ever advocate trying to.
If they were say, put off by the lack of social features that's fixable. For example the often, OFTEN described problems with Bnet 2.0 and how it feels 'lonely' put off many people.
The latter example, is the kind of misconception I wish to address. I've already got responses to that effect from a variety of sources. I had a central idea about certain problems, and the feedback I am getting directly validates my overarching hypothesis.
|
I think the races should "feel" more balanced, as in the fights between basic units should be more even. I have casual friends who get very frustrated because their losses amount to not force fielding well / in time, or get very confused because the expensive stalkers lose so badly to cheap roaches in a head on fight.
Things like that aren't intuitive at all, and I believe Blizzard wants things to be intuitive.
|
Northern Ireland23671 Posts
On December 06 2012 04:10 ultratorr wrote:
I think the races should "feel" more balanced, as in the fights between basic units should be more even. I have casual friends who get very frustrated because their losses amount to not force fielding well / in time, or get very confused because the expensive stalkers lose so badly to cheap roaches in a head on fight.
Things like that aren't intuitive at all, and I believe Blizzard wants things to be intuitive.
That kind of feedback is pretty useful.
Are you yourself a 'casual' or is it just your friends? If the latter, I like the way you're discussing actual things that concern them. If at all possible would you be at the very least able to relay my questions to them, and collect the answers and get them back to me?
Post here again or PM me regardless of whether you want to or not
|
On December 06 2012 04:09 Wombat_NI wrote:Nope, you're wrong. If they were just getting bored of the game, that's an unfixable problem and not at all one I would want to fix or ever advocate trying to. If they were say, put off by the lack of social features that's fixable. For example the often, OFTEN described problems with Bnet 2.0 and how it feels 'lonely' put off many people. The latter example, is the kind of misconception I wish to address. I've already got responses to that effect from a variety of sources. I had a central idea about certain problems, and the feedback I am getting directly validates my overarching hypothesis.
Most of these things you want though, will have nothing to do with actual game balance. People will always claim their own race is UP, even if it is terrans of the 2010 era.
I guess I would add what I want as a tournament watcher, if that's any value to you. Aggression. Watching turtling players are not fun, balanced or not. Seeing as I don't play, I hardly care if one race has better win rates than another unless it's something like 70-30. On the other hand, NR 15 is not the reason why I watch SC2.
|
Social features will keep casual players in the game but wont necessarily be a reason why they should come back after they've dropped the game. New campaign missions or really innovative custom games might draw them back to bnet and then upon seeing the new social features they may stick around.
Blizzard needs to wise up. SCII has one of the best communities among all video games despite it's recent performances. There are literally free things blizzard can do to improve the play ability of their game!
Balance designers don't really need to know much about the game. They can just listen to professional feedback! Feedback for casuals should only be used to determine the interface, not the balance of the game. This includes Bnet 2.0, custom map searching etc... maybe even hotkeys and in game mechanics.
The number 1 most underutilized tool blizzard has is the mapmaking community. They churn out quality maps for free even though most of them aren't even considered by blizzard or tournaments. If blizzard used community made maps (top votes win) and changed up the map pool every ladder season, the game would be a lot more refreshing for all of us. Also because mapmakers are rewarded for their work *in the form of their pieces actually influencing the game* they will be more willing to make better maps / there will be more people interested in mapmaking, which can translate to more custom maps down the road.
This can even be done at the professional level. Pro players get paid not because they are really fucking good at 3 base vs 3 base, but because they're good at STARCRAFT II. That includes all facets of the game including new maps that come out. As long as we don't have close spawn metalopolis or steppes of war again, new maps that have a different structure will force players to try new things to win and ERASE THIS BORING CURRENT METAGAME. I mean just look at the last time we changed the map paradigm. When it was first changed, things were cool because we were seeing 3 base plays and long macro games that were much rarer before. Now, I don't even feel a need to watch certain matchups until it's 3 base to 3 base because nothing happens in the first 10 minutes. The current map strategies have been played and figured out. It also doesn't help that the same strategy works on basically all the maps we have now +/- ohana, which I believe to be the best map in the pool currently.
Basically: New Maps = New Metagame = Renewed interest in watching/ playing SCII
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
