1v1obs does the job and iCJug doesn't bring enough to the table to warrant the wait time. Both these maps are basically tools, and they both work.
Umm, this simply supports most of the arguments that have been made here. You just admitted that ICJug is better, but not enough to warrant the wait time. Where in another system, iCJug would be more popular b/c it's better and wait time wouldn't be a factor. I'm done feeding you.
That isn't the same. Comparong DotA to a melee match observation map is silly.
Take Night Special Forces. It was superseded basically overnight by Protoss Special Forces. Why? Because it was a significant step forward in it's respective genre, and appealed more to it's target audience than the original.
Just played Star Battle. Flagship Battle is MUCH better IMO. Adds more to the genera, easier to pick up, easier to play.
As I said it is rising in popularity. Well see if your theory holds true and it takes Star Battle's place. Unfortunately, if it doesn't you'll just be able to hide behind, "It's not as good."
When I load up War3 after a long day of work, and I want to play a quick custom map, I can create a random map, have it fill up within the next 15 minutes, and go. In SC2, 15 minutes would be the bare minimum of wait for just one person to join, and the chance of them leaving because there's no one else in the lobby would be very high. You can't fill up any games because no one knows you're in the lobby. There is no way of getting exposure, no way of contacting others to make them join. The only way people would join is if you're in a map that has exposure (on the first 5 pages).
It's as simple as that to a casual custom map player like me. I can't play the maps I want to play because there's no one else playing them. Time is a precious thing to me, and if I'm spending more time in a lobby than I am in the actual map I want to play, then that's a huge problem. You could have 9/10 friends waiting in a lobby for a map that is on page 65, and no one would even regard that the map or lobby even exists.
I think the main issue is that the "popular" page is the first page you
see. If they implemented a "currently hosted" cyclic list that was the
first page, and another tab that was "popular", then everyone would be
happy. Proponents of the current system would just go to the "popular"
tab, while the sheep that never do anything but look at page 1 games
would be given a large expanse of games to look at. Oh, and most of the
tabs we currently have should be moved to the game creation page,
instead of the game joining page, to clear things up.
And when I say "currently hosted", I don't mean naming lobbies, I mean
just any map that has at least one public lobby waiting to start (to
remove the drivel that no one is playing).
Notice how that was an extremely easy to implement, extremely simple
solution that keeps things almost completely the same while changing
everything? Yeah.
And please stop bashing the WC3 system as being covered with DOTA, that
happened YEARS after release (I admit DOTA was more popular than most
maps, but it didn't take up more than a quarter of the page for the
years I played). The main issue was that you couldn't host without port
forwarding (meaning if you had a fucking confusing firewall you just had
to wait for someone to host a game for you).
At last, someone understands my idea :).
Just add lobbies that exist from more than 1 min ago to ensure popular maps don't get in (those get full house in seconds).
Also, adding this never implied removing any of the existing lists.
When I load up War3 after a long day of work, and I want to play a quick
custom map, I can create a random map, have it fill up within the next
15 minutes, and go. In SC2, 15 minutes would be the bare minimum of wait
for just one person to join, and the chance of them leaving because
there's no one else in the lobby would be very high. You can't fill up
any games because no one knows you're in the lobby. There is no way of
getting exposure, no way of contacting others to make them join. The
only way people would join is if you're in a map that has exposure (on
the first 5 pages).
It's as simple as that to a casual custom map player like me. I can't
play the maps I want to play because there's no one else playing them.
Time is a precious thing to me, and if I'm spending more time in a lobby
than I am in the actual map I want to play, then that's a huge problem.
You could have 9/10 friends waiting in a lobby for a map that is on page
65, and no one would even regard that the map or lobby even exists.
Another post that deserves to be quote for truth .
I don't see why you need to remove popular maps. If it is a cyclic list and they only take up one spot (because we aren't switching to named lobbies), it doesn't matter.
Filter out empty lobbies. Sort maps by how long host is waiting in lobby. Alert msg when bookmarked map is hosted. By doing this, everyone plays what everyone wants, with no more than 5 minutes waiting in lobby. Blizzard knows that, they just don't want to implement.
Why? Because it's a socialist idea. Every mapper gets some players. That won't make anyone rich! They want some mappers to have hundreds of thousands of players to actually get some money through map making. That will be news! It will bring thousands of mappers who wants money trying the same luck! But, if everyone is getting a few dollars, nobody will want to map make for money.
Rodrigo is right though. I've been saying this for a long time now. Blizzard is no longer a video game company, they are a corporation. They have consistently supported this notion with the path they have taken in releasing SC2 in 3 parts and the map marketplace, pushing WoW to have 1 expansion a year while completely ignoring the "polish" that Blizzard is known for and now with the D3 real money AH they are blatantly positioning themselves to support a residual income so they can focus on cranking out less and less spectacular games.
Even saying that, Blizzard games are still some of the best out there and I enjoy them or I wouldn't be here. But it's easy to see their pattern and the direction they are headed.
They'be been saying the "one expansion a year" thing for two years. It has yet to happen specifically because they take the time to ensure their work is polished. Diablo 3 was announced what, 3 years ago? With a clearly playable demo even then? And they still held off.
To this day, they've held to their promise of "we don't release it 'til it's done".
They clearly explained sc2 was in 3 parts because they wanted to give us 3x the story - or are you saying Brood War was a "corporate cash grab" too?
But vortexx is right, blizzard is trending toward a money grabbing company. It is not necessary bad, I don't care if they can milk more money so long as it doesn't affect my gameplay. I even support the 3 part expansion because it does improve the campaign aspect of the game. And I don't see how diablo3 AH can affect me, there are always people with farmed gear better than mine. So if they got it off AH by paying $, good for them.
It will have to suffice to say that I have a different perspective. Unfortunately, I cannot elaborate.
Mysterious :)
Anyway, this "money-grab" argument is not only wrong, but it's getting way more attention than it deserves-
Over 6 years have gone by, and the monthly sub for WoW has not gone up.
"Oh noes, Blizzard charges $3-25 for convenient optional services!" - Who doesn't? Warhammer offers various premium crap for $5-20. League of Legends charges about $10 to be able to save extra "rune pages" (basically a minor time-saver between games). I've bought stuff like this from various games and never once felt cheated. If you don't like it, you don't have to buy it.
Old school Warcraft, Starcraft, and Diablo Bnet servers are still up after a decade or more - how long has it been since those games were profitable? How many other companies maintain servers for 10 year old games?
Customer support is free, and doesn't suck. You ever notice that most game companies don't even offer a phone number? The few account issues I've had, I could call up and talk to a real person who speaks plain english and get help. God only knows how much they must spend to pay people who aren't in India to put up with us. Try contacting EA for help sometime...*shudder*
Seriously, I really think there's a lot of room for debate on the merits of the current popularity system (or the D3 AH, or similar hot-button issues). I'd love to have a nice, adult conversation about stuff like this where people lay out logical points and concerns. "Will this make the game better or worse? Why or why not?"
Unfortunately, it's impossible for us to have a constructive discussion because half the posts are speculative drivel about how "Blizzard's clearly going down hill".
EDIT: Formatting and removal of unnecessary reiteration.
The cash grab issue doesn't matter here. There is no need to discuss it because it's irrelevant to the topic. The popularity system that's in place right now isn't a result of a money-making scheme, they aren't generating any more revenue from people playing page 1 maps over and over again.
The popularity system that's in place right now isn't a result of a money-making scheme, they aren't generating any more revenue from people playing page 1 maps over and over again.
But they will. And less choices to play, more a few custom map become mega famous, and more people will pay to play it.
A select few maps being mega famous has nothing to do with the inability to join a less popular map, which is the core problem. Even with Warcraft 3's system, there was a handful of popular maps that people bought Warcraft 3 to play, but it didn't inhibit others from creating and joining more niche custom games. You can't join a game you don't know exists, and that has nothing to do with the popularity of any map.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
For Lordaeron!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I have no desire for you to change you opinions. Idle threats aren't made to be taken seriously, just like trolls.
Umm, this simply supports most of the arguments that have been made here. You just admitted that ICJug is better, but not enough to warrant the wait time. Where in another system, iCJug would be more popular b/c it's better and wait time wouldn't be a factor. I'm done feeding you.
Popularity in Seconds = Seconds played + abs((Seconds Spent in non-full, public lobby-3)^2)
Hell Ya.
iCJug has a thousand more features than 1v1Obs. "does the job" explain every unpopular map.
"WHY IS THIS AWESOME NEXT DOTA MAP NOT POPULAR?"
"Because the popular maps do the job."
That isn't the same. Comparong DotA to a melee match observation map is silly.
Take Night Special Forces. It was superseded basically overnight by Protoss Special Forces. Why? Because it was a significant step forward in it's respective genre, and appealed more to it's target audience than the original.
Nexus Wars -> Desert Strike and so on.
Just played Star Battle. Flagship Battle is MUCH better IMO. Adds more to the genera, easier to pick up, easier to play.
As I said it is rising in popularity. Well see if your theory holds true and it takes Star Battle's place. Unfortunately, if it doesn't you'll just be able to hide behind, "It's not as good."
When I load up War3 after a long day of work, and I want to play a quick custom map, I can create a random map, have it fill up within the next 15 minutes, and go. In SC2, 15 minutes would be the bare minimum of wait for just one person to join, and the chance of them leaving because there's no one else in the lobby would be very high. You can't fill up any games because no one knows you're in the lobby. There is no way of getting exposure, no way of contacting others to make them join. The only way people would join is if you're in a map that has exposure (on the first 5 pages).
It's as simple as that to a casual custom map player like me. I can't play the maps I want to play because there's no one else playing them. Time is a precious thing to me, and if I'm spending more time in a lobby than I am in the actual map I want to play, then that's a huge problem. You could have 9/10 friends waiting in a lobby for a map that is on page 65, and no one would even regard that the map or lobby even exists.
At last, someone understands my idea :).
Just add lobbies that exist from more than 1 min ago to ensure popular maps don't get in (those get full house in seconds).
Also, adding this never implied removing any of the existing lists.
Another post that deserves to be quote for truth .
Most of the arguments can be summed up to the following:
The popularity system as it stands now doesn't measure what people WANT to play, it measures what people CAN play.
@ProzaicMuze: Go
Truth. Now we need a solution.
@Lonami: Go
I don't see why you need to remove popular maps. If it is a cyclic list and they only take up one spot (because we aren't switching to named lobbies), it doesn't matter.
Filter out empty lobbies. Sort maps by how long host is waiting in lobby. Alert msg when bookmarked map is hosted. By doing this, everyone plays what everyone wants, with no more than 5 minutes waiting in lobby. Blizzard knows that, they just don't want to implement.
Why? Because it's a socialist idea. Every mapper gets some players. That won't make anyone rich! They want some mappers to have hundreds of thousands of players to actually get some money through map making. That will be news! It will bring thousands of mappers who wants money trying the same luck! But, if everyone is getting a few dollars, nobody will want to map make for money.
'Alert message when bookmarked map is hosted'. That is a good idea.
I stopped reading your post right after that so I could remember it on a good note.
This could be amazing if implemented right. I gotta say the conspiracy theory is pretty baseless, though.
Rodrigo is right though. I've been saying this for a long time now. Blizzard is no longer a video game company, they are a corporation. They have consistently supported this notion with the path they have taken in releasing SC2 in 3 parts and the map marketplace, pushing WoW to have 1 expansion a year while completely ignoring the "polish" that Blizzard is known for and now with the D3 real money AH they are blatantly positioning themselves to support a residual income so they can focus on cranking out less and less spectacular games.
Even saying that, Blizzard games are still some of the best out there and I enjoy them or I wouldn't be here. But it's easy to see their pattern and the direction they are headed.
@Vortexx2010: Go
They'be been saying the "one expansion a year" thing for two years. It has yet to happen specifically because they take the time to ensure their work is polished. Diablo 3 was announced what, 3 years ago? With a clearly playable demo even then? And they still held off.
To this day, they've held to their promise of "we don't release it 'til it's done".
They clearly explained sc2 was in 3 parts because they wanted to give us 3x the story - or are you saying Brood War was a "corporate cash grab" too?
@Chiquihuite: Go
It will have to suffice to say that I have a different perspective. Unfortunately, I cannot elaborate.
@Chiquihuite: Go
But vortexx is right, blizzard is trending toward a money grabbing company. It is not necessary bad, I don't care if they can milk more money so long as it doesn't affect my gameplay. I even support the 3 part expansion because it does improve the campaign aspect of the game. And I don't see how diablo3 AH can affect me, there are always people with farmed gear better than mine. So if they got it off AH by paying $, good for them.
Mysterious :)
Anyway, this "money-grab" argument is not only wrong, but it's getting way more attention than it deserves-
Seriously, I really think there's a lot of room for debate on the merits of the current popularity system (or the D3 AH, or similar hot-button issues). I'd love to have a nice, adult conversation about stuff like this where people lay out logical points and concerns. "Will this make the game better or worse? Why or why not?"
Unfortunately, it's impossible for us to have a constructive discussion because half the posts are speculative drivel about how "Blizzard's clearly going down hill".
EDIT: Formatting and removal of unnecessary reiteration.
The cash grab issue doesn't matter here. There is no need to discuss it because it's irrelevant to the topic. The popularity system that's in place right now isn't a result of a money-making scheme, they aren't generating any more revenue from people playing page 1 maps over and over again.
But they will. And less choices to play, more a few custom map become mega famous, and more people will pay to play it.
A select few maps being mega famous has nothing to do with the inability to join a less popular map, which is the core problem. Even with Warcraft 3's system, there was a handful of popular maps that people bought Warcraft 3 to play, but it didn't inhibit others from creating and joining more niche custom games. You can't join a game you don't know exists, and that has nothing to do with the popularity of any map.