Arena Moderator
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2008
- Messages
- 9,501
I'm pretty sure most people would agree that the excellent balance of OG StarCraft is *indeed* one of the biggest reasons for it's staying power.
-
🏆 Texturing Contest #33 is OPEN! Contestants must re-texture a SD unit model found in-game (Warcraft 3 Classic), recreating the unit into a peaceful NPC version. 🔗Click here to enter!
-
It's time for the first HD Modeling Contest of 2024. Join the theme discussion for Hive's HD Modeling Contest #6! Click here to post your idea!
[Altered Melee] If WC3 Had A Second Expansion?
- Status
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2008
- Messages
- 176
jup, but there's also something to say for perfect imbalance where some picks become better due to be popularity to something else which in turn increases the value of something a bit more niche.
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2018
- Messages
- 342
Maybe, but it clearly wasn't what caught the people's eye back in the day, back when all RTSs were perfectly balanced anyway. It were new ideas. And Starcraft is more of an exception. Look at popular games - WoW wasn't balanced for a single day in its history, ditto for LoL, ditto for Heroes III, ditto... you get the point.
New ideas and juice are what catches people's eyes, new ideas and juice in general ensure that a game or map remains relevant. There are exceptions, but there's only one South Korea and its already taken.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2017
- Messages
- 248
Right now companies (including potential sponsors) have the Esports literal dream on their radar. It's just too profitable. Whatever that is.
One would think that you could insert yourself on it by making more competitive and/or perfectly balanced games so your product could incline more to the skill based side instead of the simple luck based side. You know, as the differentiation between a simple game (a simulation of reality on which luck is very important, and marginally skill and preparation) and a sport (a simulation of reality on which skill and preparation is more important and/or determinant than luck/chance, i.e. our beloved chess) could dictate (this was my subjective appreciation, but i think is valid enough).
But right now this Esports thing is just plain irrational and biased speculation (like most enterprises), so game companies will simply do what they have been doing all their lifetime, and if they could force the Esports trend unto their luck or skill based games (this doesn't matter in fact) and get away with it then they will do it without hesitation (is that you Hearthstone?). Already established companies have even more incentives to do whatever they've been doing anyways.
So yeah, i think the formula, even with this Esport trend that should've changed things a bit, is still lots of aesthetics, lots of bullshit lore (it amazes me how Blizzard justified a particular lore for HOTS, a game that is simply too amorphous to have one), lots of particles, lightnings, good ol' camera shakes, lots of resource recycling to trigger the "feel-good" nostalgia, hell...even re-recycling if you want (atleast companies are ecological). Give me fireworks, lots of fireworks.
Internet navigation with 10-37 tabs per session, youtube videos, and others (use your imagination regarding what could be the other things), already have our brains flooding with dopamine. So a game to be good must surely trigger the reward system with a fury.
One would think that you could insert yourself on it by making more competitive and/or perfectly balanced games so your product could incline more to the skill based side instead of the simple luck based side. You know, as the differentiation between a simple game (a simulation of reality on which luck is very important, and marginally skill and preparation) and a sport (a simulation of reality on which skill and preparation is more important and/or determinant than luck/chance, i.e. our beloved chess) could dictate (this was my subjective appreciation, but i think is valid enough).
But right now this Esports thing is just plain irrational and biased speculation (like most enterprises), so game companies will simply do what they have been doing all their lifetime, and if they could force the Esports trend unto their luck or skill based games (this doesn't matter in fact) and get away with it then they will do it without hesitation (is that you Hearthstone?). Already established companies have even more incentives to do whatever they've been doing anyways.
So yeah, i think the formula, even with this Esport trend that should've changed things a bit, is still lots of aesthetics, lots of bullshit lore (it amazes me how Blizzard justified a particular lore for HOTS, a game that is simply too amorphous to have one), lots of particles, lightnings, good ol' camera shakes, lots of resource recycling to trigger the "feel-good" nostalgia, hell...even re-recycling if you want (atleast companies are ecological). Give me fireworks, lots of fireworks.
Internet navigation with 10-37 tabs per session, youtube videos, and others (use your imagination regarding what could be the other things), already have our brains flooding with dopamine. So a game to be good must surely trigger the reward system with a fury.
- Status
