|
On August 10 2013 01:55 vidium wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 01:47 SolidMustard wrote: when will they understand they need to switch to a f2p model to be able to compete? They didnt make WoW f2p, which has like 8mil ppl playing so they are not going to make sc2 wich has 300k ppl. Which is 200K less than Dota 2 at any given time, FYI.
|
12 pages later this thread is still whining about balance and that's why sc2 is "dying"
did i get it right?
|
On August 10 2013 01:56 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 01:55 vidium wrote:On August 10 2013 01:47 SolidMustard wrote: when will they understand they need to switch to a f2p model to be able to compete? They didnt make WoW f2p, which has like 8mil ppl playing so they are not going to make sc2 wich has 300k ppl. Which is 200K less than Dota 2 at any given time, FYI.
Monthly subscription: 8 million One time payment: 300 thousand
Do you really think those types of numbers will convince a board approval of free to play when the cheaper option has less people in it?
|
On August 09 2013 19:59 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2013 19:54 Gonzo103 wrote:On August 09 2013 19:42 Snowbear wrote: SC2 is actually pretty good. The problem is that people prefer these MOBA games which 1) are played in team, 2) are easier, 3) are free (LoL at least). Imagine these MOBA games weren't there. There would be much more sc2 players. as stated in the MLG thread by many's already ... the 4.) problem is that Sc2 is not that good of an spectator sport! You kidding right? SC2 is perfect as a spectator sport. It's amazing to see the top sc2 players play. Watching good micro, multitasking, sick strategies etc... On the other hand LoL is boring as fuck to spectate: first you see some laning, then you see some teamfights where you think "wtf is happening", then the teamfight is over. SC2 > LoL as spectator sport IMO.
SC2 is no where near perfect as a spectator sport, while an accomplished SC2 player is way more rare than a LoL player as the game is way more mechanically challenging and awe inspiring due to the control needed to play.
The problem is that most SC2 games follow a timeline of
a) Oh he got all-inned game is over in 5-8 minutes
b) Oh they are both macroing up! This is going to be crrrrazzz--- one big 3 second battle and its GG.
SC2 should be the better spectator sport but the game design is stopping that from happening.
Where as the moba games are really not that exciting to watch, but when you compare them to the current SC2 they are way more exciting.
Even in the character selection start there is so much damn depth its crazy, and most importantly each Moba game has TONS of key battles all over the place, and you know what happens most of the time they win a key fight? They go back and slowly build that advantage by farming more and growing it.
Imagine how bad these MOBA games would be if it was like SC2. OH THEY ACED THE TEAM OH MAN Oh gg what a great 15 minute fight!
o.0
|
On August 10 2013 01:59 renaissanceMAN wrote: 12 pages later this thread is still whining about balance and that's why sc2 is "dying"
did i get it right? That's pretty damn on the spot. I also see it's inspired by Strelok not having any major wins in the last idk how many months since HotS. I'm not one for picking in pros, but in this case, the frustration at a lack of total results seems to be pretty obvious here; some of these critiques seem to be so tied more personal issues than widespread blizz issues, such as the "Why are there so few terrans QQ."
|
Lol is just way too popular for any other game to compete with unfortunately.
|
On August 10 2013 01:59 renaissanceMAN wrote: 12 pages later this thread is still whining about balance and that's why sc2 is "dying"
did i get it right?
No. You got it way wrong
Its about design, not balance.
|
On August 10 2013 02:09 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 01:59 renaissanceMAN wrote: 12 pages later this thread is still whining about balance and that's why sc2 is "dying"
did i get it right? No. You got it way wrong Its about design, not balance. So its a way more useless discussion that will change little, like all design threads?
|
As expected, Blizz dont talk to progamers, only to some who are a very influenced variable (most loved) by the community (Grubby & Incontrol).
|
On August 10 2013 02:12 Dingodile wrote: As expected, Blizz dont talk to progamers, only to some who are a very influenced variable (most loved) by the community (Grubby & Incontrol).
i don't think this is the case...
|
On August 10 2013 02:10 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 02:09 Foxxan wrote:On August 10 2013 01:59 renaissanceMAN wrote: 12 pages later this thread is still whining about balance and that's why sc2 is "dying"
did i get it right? No. You got it way wrong Its about design, not balance. So its a way more useless discussion that will change little, like all design threads?
and how should i know that?
|
On August 10 2013 02:13 renaissanceMAN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 02:12 Dingodile wrote: As expected, Blizz dont talk to progamers, only to some who are a very influenced variable (most loved) by the community (Grubby & Incontrol). i don't think this is the case... It isn't. They talked to progamers and Blizzard said that all of them were super bias towards their own race, which was not helpful.
|
What I've never really understood about Battle net is how difficult it is to find people on there. Most of the chat channels are always empty and the ones to talk to people about learning the game or playing at lower leagues are non existent.
|
On August 10 2013 02:16 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 02:13 renaissanceMAN wrote:On August 10 2013 02:12 Dingodile wrote: As expected, Blizz dont talk to progamers, only to some who are a very influenced variable (most loved) by the community (Grubby & Incontrol). i don't think this is the case... It isn't. They talked to progamers and Blizzard said that all of them were super bias towards their own race, which was not helpful.
I would have said this anyway, Blizzard can't rely solely on programers to keep SC2 going, then you'll end up with a gutted game like cod4
|
imo what they should work on is: less workers with same income = bigger army unranked play: since it's practice, let them choose opposing race
|
On August 10 2013 02:16 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 02:13 renaissanceMAN wrote:On August 10 2013 02:12 Dingodile wrote: As expected, Blizz dont talk to progamers, only to some who are a very influenced variable (most loved) by the community (Grubby & Incontrol). i don't think this is the case... It isn't. They talked to progamers and Blizzard said that all of them were super bias towards their own race, which was not helpful. This result came from the korean progamers.
|
On August 10 2013 01:38 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 00:45 drgoats wrote:On August 09 2013 22:44 LaLuSh wrote: Unfortunately changes at this stage will have no effect anyway.
I never thought infestor or whatever was the balance whine of the "current period" was ever the biggest problem with SC2 -- it was just something people focus their whine on because they think it's the main problem of gameplay. The gameplay's biggest problmes are definitely things you can't ever change with a simple balance patch, so the result is that nobody whines about them.
You max much faster. You reach max number bases faster. Your economy develops faster (...so you hit all caps faster). The game is faster (but defender's advantage is paradoxically... weaker).
So Blizz put in more and more changes so nobody has to die early game to compensate for no defender's advantage... Queen range, Mothership core, Mines, Spores with no evo, ... (not to mention that everything early/mid game has been havily nerfed since WoL to compensate for no defender advantage, game being faster and reaching max quicker: stim research time, blink research time, zealot build time increased, supply before barracks and barracks build time increased, siege tank damage decrease, khaydarian removed, ghost snipe nerf, ghost EMP nerf, reaper build time increase, nexus life and zerg building life increase, warp gate research time increase). All necessary because units are produced in a different way in SC2, and because the game is faster and hits all artificial caps (supply, max bases economy) earlier. If I counted all changes in beta as well to make the point...
Even more matches now go to max supply, max economy, max bases. When SC2 games go to max supply and 3 bases, they are no longer Starcraft games... they become Warcraft 3 games. Nobody wants to attack. Just babysit army like it's a hero.
More likely reason why every non top level Terran quits is because Terran is the only race that still produces units like Brood War. So you have to have some brains and huge amounts of aggression to be succesful. If I remember hearing correctly, Blizzard designed the game to be played on a lower speed setting. First battle report for reference: Battle Report # 1I agree with all of your statements and think that the easy fix is to slow the speed down. This will encourage early/mid game play (players will have more real time in these phases of the game), it will alleviate some of the dps issues (by definition, dps will go down), and it will take some of the randomness out of the game (players will have more time to scout and react). The last and probably the most important change that slowing the game down would bring is it will make the game much more accessible and less stressful to newcomers. The best life vs parting game was on a slower speed setting. It was AMAZING! With micro from both sides that seemed ridiculous and awe inspiring.
Making the game fast is a popular demand during WOL alpha. Especially TL had a strong attitude on this back then. So Blizzard listened and increased the game speed during WOL alpha. It turned out, it's too fast...
How ironic.
|
On August 10 2013 02:21 Dingodile wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 02:16 Plansix wrote:On August 10 2013 02:13 renaissanceMAN wrote:On August 10 2013 02:12 Dingodile wrote: As expected, Blizz dont talk to progamers, only to some who are a very influenced variable (most loved) by the community (Grubby & Incontrol). i don't think this is the case... It isn't. They talked to progamers and Blizzard said that all of them were super bias towards their own race, which was not helpful. This result came from the korean progamers. i thought this was by chineese progamers
|
On August 10 2013 02:34 sabas123 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 02:21 Dingodile wrote:On August 10 2013 02:16 Plansix wrote:On August 10 2013 02:13 renaissanceMAN wrote:On August 10 2013 02:12 Dingodile wrote: As expected, Blizz dont talk to progamers, only to some who are a very influenced variable (most loved) by the community (Grubby & Incontrol). i don't think this is the case... It isn't. They talked to progamers and Blizzard said that all of them were super bias towards their own race, which was not helpful. This result came from the korean progamers. i thought this was by chineese progamers
i thought this was by african progamers
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On August 10 2013 02:21 Dingodile wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 02:16 Plansix wrote:On August 10 2013 02:13 renaissanceMAN wrote:On August 10 2013 02:12 Dingodile wrote: As expected, Blizz dont talk to progamers, only to some who are a very influenced variable (most loved) by the community (Grubby & Incontrol). i don't think this is the case... It isn't. They talked to progamers and Blizzard said that all of them were super bias towards their own race, which was not helpful. This result came from the korean progamers. This came from Blizzard in several interviews on the subject. They said talking to progamers is not as helpful as people would think. They find it better to discuss balance with other folks in the community who are more objective, aka Artosis, Day 9 and others.
|
|
|
|