|
On October 20 2012 07:01 VanGarde wrote:
Why isn't anyone realizing that you have to divide LoL price pools by five in order to be able to compare the value to sc2 price pools? If it is 100k in price pool for sc2 first place, and 1 million for LoL that is 200k per player on the LoL team. If it is 100k and 1 million in pool for the top 3 places in the tournament, then that is an average of 33k per sc2 player and 66k per LoL player. Considering there are also more sc2 tournaments and the LoL pricepools likely being inflated way beyond sustainability right now because they are trying to push the game into the market. Suddenly things don't look half as bad.
If you want to actually compare prize pools why would you divide by 5?
Why not compare the TOTAL prize pools for ALL players?
I.E
2012 LoL World Championships -> $2 million total prize pool
2012 Battle.net World Championship -> $250,000 total prize pool
|
How can anyone think that Destiny wants one versus one to be dumbed down for casuals? Please stop posting about one versus one... No one is debating that the game's faults are from one versus one. The game's faults are mostly because the viewership is decreasing because less and less people care about Starcraft2 as a whole. The game overall is not casual friendly.
How are big tournaments going to get a prize pool when sponsors pull their money and go to different games? How are teams going to send players anywhere when sponsors are non-existent? Sponsors would leave because the viewers will no longer be there to purchase stuff from them. What happens when sponsors don't make money? They leave. The logic is so simple, yet so many people miss the point.
Before anyone says "this is not how you should be going about changing the game", wrong! This is exactly what needs to happen. Like the old saying "the squeaky wheel gets the grease" (Meaning the loudest voices are likely to get the most attention). And it does work as seen in everything. Blizzard is changing their interface for Starcraft2, Blizzard is changing everything about Diablo3, Blizzard is making Starcraft2 more casual friendly, and so much more cool stuff is happening because of these voices! And, it is all thanks to people like Destiny and Artosis, and quite possibly some of you had posts that were heard by Blizzard.
|
I tried playing LoL at one point because it was free and found it incredibly boring, one-dimensional, and repetitive. Even if Blizzard fails to overhaul Bnet's UI (and a rehaul is desparately needed as many pointed out -- we need LAN, we need better custom game options, etc) I don't think LoL will steal all of SC2's popularity simply because it's not the same kind of game.
LoL is for people who like MMOs, building characters, etc. SC2 is military strategy game for players who appreciate strategic depth. Totally different markets and I can tell you that many of the strategy-oriented players like me will not ever be playing LoL with the same gusto we play SC2. It's that lack of depth that makes LoL more viewer and casual friendly. They each have their niche.
|
On October 20 2012 04:23 zazen42 wrote:
People will continue playing Starcraft 2 no matter what the prize money for tournaments or the number of viewers is compared to League of Legends, because the two are completely different games. Hell, even if there were no streams/tournaments/people playing SC2 anymore I still wouldn't switch to LoL because I enjoy games with more strategic depth. If SC2 died I would switch back to Broodwar or just playing chess full time.
Also, I think that HotS will appeal more to casual players with the inclusion of unranked 1v1 quick-match.
I really cannot agree with you here. you enjoy games with "strategic depth"? to be honest LoL has a lot of strategy. I think what you like is more mechanical complexity and execution of that strategy using superior ability. LoL is simple to pick up and play, yes, but to coordinate a team of 5 with 100 champions to choose from, different skill builds and item builds, different laning setups, different approaches to ganks and teamfights, and to work out the best composition and best approach to winning is incredibly deep strategically.
tl:dr, yes lol is easy to learn since u have 1 hero to control, but it is a strategically deep game
On October 20 2012 08:07 zazen42 wrote:
I tried playing LoL at one point because it was free and found it incredibly boring, one-dimensional, and repetitive. Even if Blizzard fails to overhaul Bnet's UI (and a rehaul is desparately needed as many pointed out -- we need LAN, we need better custom game options, etc) I don't think LoL will steal all of SC2's popularity simply because it's not the same kind of game.
LoL is for people who like MMOs, building characters, etc. SC2 is military strategy game for players who appreciate strategic depth. Totally different markets and I can tell you that many of the strategy-oriented players like me will not ever be playing LoL with the same gusto we play SC2. It's that lack of depth that makes LoL more viewer and casual friendly. They each have their niche.
it took me about 25-30 full games of LoL to get into it and to even BEGIN to develop strategy. Have you played lol with friends on voice chat? It is incredibly fun and we are constantly coordinating, calling out missing opponents, calling for ganks and plays to stop the opposition, saving teammates or helping teammates out of sticky situations etc. It's NOT for people that like MMOs. you simply haven't seen the strategical aspects of LoL and you have for starcraft, therefore you assume there's no strategic depth.
|
I question if people who post comments ever even played LoL. The chat system is just the same in LoL, if anything it is worse. The custom game system in LoL is way worse too, so great you can create a customized name for your game? Joining a custom game involves scrolling through an infinite list of games with terrible names or descriptions, trying to figure out which is which, only to join and realize when the lobby is full that the host went afk 10 minutes ago and isn't coming back.
The only way that LoL is "better" at focusing the casual market is because it is way way easier. The very thing people seem to be united in NOT wanting starcraft 2 to be. If anything the major complaint of most sc2 fans and players is that Blizzard is making the game too easy. If you want sc2 to compete with LoL on it's terms you need to severely dumb the game down. They are different game, they cater to different fans and they should. Having the widest most casual market does in no way ensure e-sports success. All of these discussions would be fine if people did not make it out to be about e-sports. If you are just asking, how can sc2 get more casual players? Then that is one thing, but getting more casual players will not make a good e-sports game. If that were the case then many games would had been successful e-sports games before sc2.
The only thing you need to know to end all of these arguments about popularity and casual market is that WoW arena FAILED terribly as an e-sport. If a game with 9-10 million players can't run a successful e-sports scene that is the nail in the coffin for the argument that numbers = success. The key to a successful e-sport is without a doubt it's ability to attract viewers that don't play the game. Regular sports would never have gotten anywhere if you had to play hockey to enjoy watching it. This is the reason sc2 has grown so big, because there are so many people who watch it WITHOUT playing it. That is the key to success and if you want to ensure e-sports success you should not worry too much about which game has the most players but by how we can make the game even more viewable for non players. LoL has a lot of players, most of LoL's viewer base is also the people who play the game. That is a recipe for an e-sports scene that can not survive the eventual decline in player base.
Because ALL games will drop in player base. Really did we honestly expect sc2 player base to just keep rising? Or to stay stable? Ofcourse not, you will have a surge in players when a game is new, especially in casual players. Then as time goes on the less competitive players will drop off and switch to whatever is new, then the player base will plateau again when you only have the players who enjoy the game long term left. This is true for sc2 and for LoL. Losing players is natural, it is only a problem if you lose the vast majority of players.
The problem of e-sports has always been that it was never enjoyable to those who did not play the games, this is why there never was a real e-sport before sc2 in the west. Out of all of the people I know personally who got sc2 when it first came out, most of them don't play anymore because most of them are not competitive players. Most of those people also played LoL for a while. They got sc2 for the campaign, for ums and for team games and eventually they got tired of it. They got tired of LoL too obviously. But then if 70% of the people I know who first played sc2 stopped playing it, isn't that terrible? Well, you have to contrast that with the fact that out of those people 90% watch sc2 e-sports regularly. All of the people I know who stopped playing over a year ago subscribe to every gsl season.
|
On October 20 2012 08:00 Mouzone wrote:
That's not entirely true. The premise was that Blizzard would dumb the game itself down for all that to happen, let's say to a... LoL state. That's not something i'd want, ever.
Actually, the premise was that they'd use the custom game and UMS system to make the game more friendly to casuals. Remember, Brood War is what Destiny pointed to as an example of how to do this better, and you can't say that that game was "dumbed down" in relation to SC2.
|
I am not as fan of lol
Hoover you have to admit because the game is free it draws a lot of eyes and ears ... which makes it ripe for the really long term sponsorship profit.
am fairly sure valve will crush it in time though.
As for the player base inevitably dropping that is simply not a necessity.
Look at chess or go.
The problem with games is that their graphics engines get dated or their ui gets dated. That is an engineering problem.
|
Dota kicked wc3 ass, it's just that SC2 is in a smaller genre and B2P x F2P, the problem is more related to SC2 being a RTS game than SC2 being a "bad" game.
anyway, there is a lack of competition in the RTS genre, so Blizzard don't need to work hard on SC2 to dominate.
all the others RTS games are in far deeper shit than SC2.
|
On October 20 2012 08:15 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2012 08:00 Mouzone wrote:
That's not entirely true. The premise was that Blizzard would dumb the game itself down for all that to happen, let's say to a... LoL state. That's not something i'd want, ever. Actually, the premise was that they'd use the custom game and UMS system to make the game more friendly to casuals. Remember, Brood War is what Destiny pointed to as an example of how to do this better, and you can't say that that game was "dumbed down" in relation to SC2.
That is all fine but no one has ever actually articulated any evidence for why that would translate into more e-sports fans and viewers. That just means more ums players, why is it so self evident to people that someone who plays ums in sc2 follows the gsl? There is no evidence of that at all.
|
On October 20 2012 08:18 rpgalon wrote:
Dota kicked wc3 ass
Yes and no, considering that it requires a copy of WC3 to play DOTA.
|
On October 20 2012 08:13 VanGarde wrote:
The key to a successful e-sport is without a doubt it's ability to attract viewers that don't play the game.
Wrong. The key to a successful e-sport is its ability to attract viewers period. There are multiple ways of attracting viewers.
League does it by having a huge player base first and foremost but League also does many other things. For example, SPECTATOR mode, the ability to jump into any game as it is going on and watch it live.
Blizzard does not have to do exactly what RIOT is doing with league. They can attack it from another angle. The problem is that they have no strategy for growing the viewer base.
|
On October 20 2012 08:23 mindspike wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2012 08:13 VanGarde wrote:
The key to a successful e-sport is without a doubt it's ability to attract viewers that don't play the game. Wrong. The key to a successful e-sport is its ability to attract viewers period. There are multiple ways of attracting viewers. League does it by having a huge player base first and foremost but League also does many other things. For example, SPECTATOR mode, the ability to jump into any game as it is going on and watch it live. Blizzard does not have to do exactly what RIOT is doing with league. They can attack it from another angle. The problem is that they have no strategy for growing the viewer base.
No the reason I say that you need to attract viewers that don't play is because every game inevitably loses players. I don't understand how people have missed out on the past 10 years of attempted e-sports history. This has been the problem with EVERY game, only people who play the game and really understand it enjoy watching it and then when a new game in that genre comes out the players move on.
People kept watching bw even when new rts games came out because there were a lot of people who enjoyed it as a spectator sport. If a game builds its entire viewer base on active players watching then that e-sport inevitably dies because the player base will shrink. You can't maintain a player base and keep growing it indefinitely. You will have too small of a market eventually to run an e-sport, you need people to watch without playing.
|
What people do not seem to be considering is that just because people are playing the game dose not mean they are going to watch tournaments and streams. In fact there is a chance that they will just play the game more and watch less.
However I will say that bliz could and should do a better job of marketing sc2 esports with an in game stream client for tournaments. Also I would definitely agree that sc2 as a whole would benefit from a big general chat channel on the front page of the menu screen because as newbies get into the game and start reading the chat and see a bunch of people talking about TL or some tournament that is going on they will be more likly to check it out especially since they probably would have never even heard about it before that or just been sceptical about e-sports and now that they can see a bunch off people are enjoying it they will feel more comfortable also they will have someone to talk to about it instead off just sitting alone in their room.
|
the interest in sc2 is declining is because sc2's 1v1 isn't nearly as interesting as brood war's. ZvP do I need to say more?
And the fact that the arcade and the map editor (+ support for map makers and the ease to release new maps and get them well known) are incredibly shitty.
|
On October 20 2012 07:23 Mouzone wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2012 07:04 VanGarde wrote:
Although at some level I really hope that Blizzard overreacts and falls for all of this hysteria and does exactly what people want, focus on pandering to the casual player all in and make sc2 into a new LoL, a ridiculously dumbed down game that you can play half asleep. That is apparently what people want. It would be worth it just to be able to say I told you so. Well, it's what Destiny wants. But then again he seems to be in it mainly for the money which is probably the underlying catalyst for him bringing this up. His only source of income is from the stream, so naturally he wants the casuals to flock to it to increase his profit. Who can blame him, right? He's streaming for a living seeing as he has no sponsors nor is he winning tournaments.
lol his motivations doesn't matter, his points were valid
god I miss old battle.net
|
On October 20 2012 08:19 VanGarde wrote:
That is all fine but no one has ever actually articulated any evidence for why that would translate into more e-sports fans and viewers. That just means more ums players, why is it so self evident to people that someone who plays ums in sc2 follows the gsl? There is no evidence of that at all.
Well UMS games are only half of what I was talking about. A better custom game system would also cover games of straight-up SC2 but with different, possibly more casual-friendly maps (like for example a BGH style map) or let people browse custom games in a way that would let them pick which one they wanted to join. The auto-joining a random custom game feature is part of what Destiny was complaining about.
As for UMS games, they do two things that help the SC2 community in a secondary way -- they can potentially sell more SC2 licenses (as DOTA sold WC3 licenses) and they can get eyes on the SC2 splash screens to help direct people to what's going on in the pro community. More SC2 licenses means a better business case for team and event sponsors, and more eyes on the splash screens potentially might mean more viewers for the events.
|
On October 20 2012 05:30 NexRex wrote:
The only point I have to somewhat challenge is the "100k" vs "1mil." The prize is divided five ways, so it'd be $200k per person. However, this brings another point: there should be less tournaments so that more money could go to those fewer tournaments. Just a thought.
I really like Destiny's thoughts here, though. He usually has well thought out arguments. A lot this week.
why would you challenge that, I don't get this mentality, you get 5 people winning 200k each... it's still a FUCKTON more than only 1 player winning 100k
|
On October 20 2012 08:42 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2012 08:19 VanGarde wrote:
That is all fine but no one has ever actually articulated any evidence for why that would translate into more e-sports fans and viewers. That just means more ums players, why is it so self evident to people that someone who plays ums in sc2 follows the gsl? There is no evidence of that at all. Well UMS games are only half of what I was talking about. A better custom game system would also cover games of straight-up SC2 but with different, possibly more casual-friendly maps (like for example a BGH style map) or let people browse custom games in a way that would let them pick which one they wanted to join. The auto-joining a random custom game feature is part of what Destiny was complaining about. As for UMS games, they do two things that help the SC2 community in a secondary way -- they can potentially sell more SC2 licenses (as DOTA sold WC3 licenses) and they can get eyes on the SC2 splash screens to help direct people to what's going on in the pro community. More SC2 licenses means a better business case for team and event sponsors, and more eyes on the splash screens potentially might mean more viewers for the events.
I repeat, getting more players is not the best way to secure e-sports success. Once again look at World of Warcraft, the game should focus on improving the viewer experience first.
|
On October 20 2012 08:07 zazen42 wrote:
I tried playing LoL at one point because it was free and found it incredibly boring, one-dimensional, and repetitive. Even if Blizzard fails to overhaul Bnet's UI (and a rehaul is desparately needed as many pointed out -- we need LAN, we need better custom game options, etc) I don't think LoL will steal all of SC2's popularity simply because it's not the same kind of game.
LoL is for people who like MMOs, building characters, etc. SC2 is military strategy game for players who appreciate strategic depth. Totally different markets and I can tell you that many of the strategy-oriented players like me will not ever be playing LoL with the same gusto we play SC2. It's that lack of depth that makes LoL more viewer and casual friendly. They each have their niche.
There's nothing to steal. LoL is more popular than SC2 already, and has been for months, you just don't realize it because you're completely focused on SC2 and don't catch anything else that's going on regarding esports, of which this "community" is the self-proclaimed savior despite doing nothing that's really helping, except for ridiculously stupid threads on TL every fucking day.
|
On October 20 2012 08:45 VanGarde wrote:
I repeat, getting more players is not the best way to secure e-sports success. Once again look at World of Warcraft, the game should focus on improving the viewer experience first.
Edit: Sure, viewer experience is an important component, but it's only one piece. As for which is more important, well, LoL's high stream numbers speak to putting streams and information about tournaments in the game interface having a good effect on event numbers, if you have the player volume to see that stuff.
Ideally, they'd do both.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
