"Mom-Friendly" StarCraft II

MTV Multiplayer has a quote they picked up at BlizzCon 2008 from StarCraft II producer Chris Sigaty that's sure to attract attention, as he says: "We’ve trying to make sure that it’s perfectly balanced for e-sport, but look — I’m going to try to get my mom to play this game. I mean, I know she can’t [micromanage] at the level that these pro gamers can, so we’re actually experimenting back in the opposite direction… so that even the layman can come in and get a grasp of these cool things in the game." He describes how the frenetic pace of many RTS games can be off-putting to newcomers, and their efforts to counteract that.
View : : :
36 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older
36.
 
Re:
Oct 31, 2008, 01:18
Kxmode
 
36.
Re: Oct 31, 2008, 01:18
Oct 31, 2008, 01:18
 Kxmode
 
We need some real innovation and Blizzard could well be the ones to deliver it.

Mom is not conducive to real innovation.

That's what she said when took away the cookie. Crying

This comment was edited on Oct 31, 2008, 01:19.
"What is the most resilient parasite? Bacteria? A virus? An intestinal worm? An idea. Resilient... highly contagious. Once an idea has taken hold of the brain it is almost impossible to eradicate."
Avatar 18786
35.
 
Re: Easy
Oct 31, 2008, 01:09
Kxmode
 
35.
Re: Easy Oct 31, 2008, 01:09
Oct 31, 2008, 01:09
 Kxmode
 
I hate rushing/swarming too, I've always felt bad when I did it, and pissed when it was done to me.

Simple solution. Zergs are organic beings who are born, live, and die. Bliz should change the dynamic so that zergs are weak when they're born and stronger the longer they live. In principle if some idiot decides to blitz with a bunch of newborn zergs, as oppose to waiting for those zergs to mature, all their units will die. On the opposite end Zerg cannons could be "born" stronger to provide greater protection for the hive.

There, zerging problems fixed.
"What is the most resilient parasite? Bacteria? A virus? An intestinal worm? An idea. Resilient... highly contagious. Once an idea has taken hold of the brain it is almost impossible to eradicate."
Avatar 18786
34.
 
Re:
Oct 31, 2008, 00:33
34.
Re: Oct 31, 2008, 00:33
Oct 31, 2008, 00:33
 
We need some real innovation and Blizzard could well be the ones to deliver it.

Mom is not conducive to real innovation.
Avatar 22350
33.
 
Easy
Oct 30, 2008, 23:12
33.
Easy Oct 30, 2008, 23:12
Oct 30, 2008, 23:12
 
I hate rushing/swarming too, I've always felt bad when I did it, and pissed when it was done to me. CARRIERS AWAY. Not sure how you could fix that without making the frustratingly obstinate.

The solution to that is fairly easy, setup some type of guard system between players, the guard system becomes weaker and weaker over time and can even be destroyed by someone willing to go out of their way, but it fairly powerful and destructive against an early rush unit.

This could be in the form of some type of NPCs scattered in no man lands. Bet a creative balance could be found between being silly and useful.
32.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 22:46
32.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 22:46
Oct 30, 2008, 22:46
 
I infrequently play RTS games online because it seems most players want to win at the expense of having fun. Clicking all over the goddamn place and leading an uber-rush within three minutes is a deadly-effective strategy, but that's not very much fun.

But I really enjoy RTS games against friends; we mostly come up with creative and insulting ways to destroy each other.
+1

It gets pretty fucking tedious when people announce artificial rules (wait 10mins; ally with me) only to betray you. If it wasn't for rushes then that wouldn't really be an issue. Better defensive capabilities would help, though then you risk turtling. We need some real innovation and Blizzard could well be the ones to deliver it.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
31.
 
...
Oct 30, 2008, 22:40
31.
... Oct 30, 2008, 22:40
Oct 30, 2008, 22:40
 
I disagree. RTS is an inherently inaccessible genre. It's not something you can just pick up and play.
Which is exactly the problem. Even though I've played dozens of RTS games it's usually a real mission to pick up a new one, largely because not enough focus is placed upon introducing players to the core concepts. It's also annoying having to micro-manage troops when some basic AI routines would improve things dramatically. You need to hook gamers early on so that they want to stay and learn - if the initial hurdle is too high then you lose a lot of your audience.

It's not about dumbing down the game but about better progressing people from not knowing anything to being proficient. The biggest problem is that skills learned in one RTS game are of little use when it comes to another, so you have to win over people that are already fans of the genre. World In Conflict was just too much for me, whereas Dawn Of War and Age Of Empires were much easier to grasp.

FarCry 2 was able to effectively implement new ideas to the genre - like tracking diamonds, answering your mobile, changing positions in vehicles, dealing with health, unjamming weapons - very effectively by simply introducing them gradually and making common sense decisions. Team Fortress 2 used movies to introduce players to Control Point and Payload, as well as to the individual maps - that didn't diminish the game for more experienced people but gave new users a better idea of what's going on so it doesn't simply go over their head. Obviously that's more difficult for RTS games but that's why it's all the more important to tackle it.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
30.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 22:14
30.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 22:14
Oct 30, 2008, 22:14
 
I didn't find Star Craft multiplayer to be all that much fun. People go out to sites, learn ready-made builds and then micro the crap out of the units on maps they have memorized a thousand times over. It's like playing against an AI. Yeah, you can beat me - but my goal was to have fun, not get schooled in how to be the next generation Star Craft clicker.

If Blizzard can bring the fun back to multiplayer that'd be a boon. Not everybody is out to wave their internet peen. Some people just want a couple hours of fun.
Avatar 18037
29.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 21:29
RP
29.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 21:29
Oct 30, 2008, 21:29
RP
 
Well said, Pigeon. I infrequently play RTS games online because it seems most players want to win at the expense of having fun. Clicking all over the goddamn place and leading an uber-rush within three minutes is a deadly-effective strategy, but that's not very much fun.

But I really enjoy RTS games against friends; we mostly come up with creative and insulting ways to destroy each other.

Comp stomps are also fun, since you can spend time creating elaborate attacks the against the AI (player one leads air units while player two launches an amphibious invasion).
28.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 21:17
Kxmode
 
28.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 21:17
Oct 30, 2008, 21:17
 Kxmode
 
OMG MOM SWARM!

Palin would call them Soccer Moms
"What is the most resilient parasite? Bacteria? A virus? An intestinal worm? An idea. Resilient... highly contagious. Once an idea has taken hold of the brain it is almost impossible to eradicate."
Avatar 18786
27.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 21:13
27.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 21:13
Oct 30, 2008, 21:13
 
So long as they don't exclude the ability to micro manage I don't foresee a lot of people being too annoyed. It'd be kind of cool to have some auto strategies like feign attack/draw off enemies etc etc. It'd certainly allow for the less than hardcore RTSers to put together multiple simultaneous attacks.

I hate rushing/swarming too, I've always felt bad when I did it, and pissed when it was done to me. CARRIERS AWAY. Not sure how you could fix that without making the frustratingly obstinate. I guess I have a love hate relationship with the genre, I'll always be annoyed at it, yet want to play.

This comment was edited on Oct 30, 2008, 21:13.
26.
 
my mom.
Oct 30, 2008, 20:57
dan
26.
my mom. Oct 30, 2008, 20:57
Oct 30, 2008, 20:57
dan
 
My mom plays Doom...
25.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 20:44
25.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 20:44
Oct 30, 2008, 20:44
 
Accessibility is very important for an RTS.

I disagree. RTS is an inherently inaccessible genre. It's not something you can just pick up and play. You have to learn what all the units and structures do before you can even begin to play effectively. Then you have to figure out the resource system, unit balance, etc. It's not like an FPS where you just point and shoot.

Reducing redundancy and unnecessary complexity is fine. But when you remove complexity that added to a game, that's a problem.
Avatar 20715
24.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 20:43
24.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 20:43
Oct 30, 2008, 20:43
 
Starcraft is fundamentally a hard-core gamer's game. There's nothing casual about it, beside the singleplayer stuff. Hopefully this Mom Friendly stuff won't be taken too far..

Honestly, the game isn't even DAD friendly, since the game ladder is totally dominated by younger males, from what I've seen / heard.
Adventures of a video game mercenary
http://virtualmerc.blogspot.com
23.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 20:42
23.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 20:42
Oct 30, 2008, 20:42
 
ehh? I see it completely different. To me the baby sitting is very important in COH, very vital. People are always talking about how important it is to micromanage your tanks' every movement, too.

I'm constantly twirling tanks around, flanking units, setting up firing angles. It's pretty hectic
Adventures of a video game mercenary
http://virtualmerc.blogspot.com
22.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 19:57
22.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 19:57
Oct 30, 2008, 19:57
 
Aaaaand a whoosh. Whole idea just went right over your head.
You make money by getting people who don't play your series to play it.

Some people, especially gamers and the engineer/programmer type mindsets, tend to be overly literal. This won't be the last we hear of out of touch responses about Starcraft and moms.
21.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 19:53
21.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 19:53
Oct 30, 2008, 19:53
 
How many Moms play Starcraft 1?

I thought so.
Aaaaand a whoosh. Whole idea just went right over your head.
You make money by getting people who don't play your series to play it.

This comment was edited on Oct 30, 2008, 19:53.
20.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 19:45
Kxmode
 
20.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 19:45
Oct 30, 2008, 19:45
 Kxmode
 
South Korea just put out a contract on Mr. Sigaty.

They'll get to that contract after a few rounds of StarCraft.
"What is the most resilient parasite? Bacteria? A virus? An intestinal worm? An idea. Resilient... highly contagious. Once an idea has taken hold of the brain it is almost impossible to eradicate."
Avatar 18786
19.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 19:39
19.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 19:39
Oct 30, 2008, 19:39
 
Ugh, they are going to TF2 this game.
If that's the case then that's great news. TF2 increased the appeal of the game, added depth and made the game more accessible to novice users, while stripping out unnecessary aspects (grenade spam, etc). It's a vastly superior game because of the changes.

Accessibility is very important for an RTS. Just as long as they don't diminish the depth, which is different to reducing complexity, then that's fine. Everything I've heard so far sounds positive.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
Avatar 22891
18.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 19:28
18.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 19:28
Oct 30, 2008, 19:28
 
South Korea just put out a contract on Mr. Sigaty.
17.
 
Re:
Oct 30, 2008, 19:28
17.
Re: Oct 30, 2008, 19:28
Oct 30, 2008, 19:28
 
How many Moms play Starcraft 1?

I thought so.
36 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older