The thing you fail to realize is that is not always about what the game itself can and cannot do. Almost every format of custom mod in WarCraft 3 started life in StarCraft 1.
It not almost about how flashy or realistic you can make a unit. People kept enjoying games because of gameplay, not about what was possible or not in the game.
I mean there was of course many, many popular grand strategy maps. There were also many, many RPG's, one of my favorites, every today, being Space Pirate War.
Heck I'm sure you've heard what game the inspiration for DotA right? AoS.
So what if StarCraft 1's editor couldn't do as much as WarCraft 3 or StarCraft 1? People still made plenty of very good mods and plenty of people played them. Heck I went beck a little before StarCraft 2 Beta came out just so I could brush up on melee play. There were still a few new custom maps coming out even after a decade. Heck I checked back into WarCraft 2 and they still had one or two custom mods going.
Just because you have primitive mechanics doesn't mean you can't have creative and fun gameplay. For crying out lead even today one of the most popular games is Tetris. Pray tell me what is extremely complicated about that? Or what about Super Mario? Or the old Mortal Combat? Heck I still have a working N64. My favorite racing game of all time was Star Wars Episode 1: Podracer.
You cannot go around claiming that a gaming scene can't be active just because mechanics are out of date. I mean try these guys: Forged Alliance Forever.
Its a similar story to ours. They kept the old game alive because the new game, Supreme Commander 2, was seen as crap. Who's fault is that? The developing company.
You really need to read better. You're missing my point completely, again. It's ironic cause I'm actually claiming the exact opposite of what you're saying I am.
My point is that WarCraft 3 had games that offered a completely new playstyle, whereas StarCraft 2 games do not. I'm not talking about polish and I've yet to say anything about the possibilities of any of the three editors. My point is exactly that we're running out of those 'awesome old mechanics' you keep talking about. When Tetris came out, it was a completely new concept. When Super Mario came out, it was a completely new concept. When Mortal Combat came out, it was a completely new concept. When most WarCraft 3 maps came out, they were completely new concepts. StarCraft 2 maps are just rehashes of previously done stuff. Not because the editor sucks, but because everything has been done before. This wasn't the case during WarCraft 3. Main difference, main reason for the diminished interest in mapping scenes.
Now about how active the early StarCraft 2 scene really was. I agree plenty of people were leaving. Even then maps were still racking upwards of 30,000 hours. People started quitting from square one because of the popularity system. They couldn't play the maps they wanted to play. Its a design failure and the responsibility for creating and fixing it is Blizzard's.
We agree on what happened, but we disagree on the reasoning. Let me put it like this. I'll give you a stack of cards and tell you to invent a completely new card game for me to play. Meanwhile I'll wait around for you to come up with something with nine palls who are really into card games. I assure you that you won't be able to come up with anything without one of my nine palls saying "that game exists already, it's known as French Poker/Blackjack/Hearts/Indonesian Remi/WhatHaveYou". When my palls get tired of waiting and take off, who do I blame for the failure? You? The fact that you brought a really ugly set of cards? Or perhaps the fact that it's incredibly hard to come up with new card games considering how many have been thought up over the ages?
Why in the hell was StarCraft 1 able to produce so many "classics"?
I just answered that question in the top half of my post. Are you going to answer mine, or are you going to dodge it further? Does that mean I'm right in that you were never a part of the SC1 and WC3 mapping scenes and don't even know what you're talking about?
As for your numbers... did you even look at your own graphs?
People wanted StarCraft 2 to succeed. Many of them still do. Most have given up hope. And after nearly 3 years of neglect, who can rightly blame them? But for a short time. A very short time, there were a lot of players. Google trends for SC2mapster supports this (hey, you wanted numbers right?). And then Google Trends shows another spike for SC2mapster around 1.3.5.
Errr, no. The spike for SC2Mapster (note that this is ONE search term you've come up with, and the fact that you've ignored the FOUR I gave you) occurs in April 2011; more than FOUR months before 1.3.5 hit. At that point the whole patch hadn't even been announced. And a huge decline had been taking place for SEVEN full months prior to that bump. I'm not sure what the bump did represent off the top of my head, but it's definitely not 'people checking back in for 1.3.5'.
You can clearly see from the numbers (now you've seen some accurate ones) What happened to the activity of the mod scene.
What is this supposed to mean? You're saying the four google trend pages I supplied weren't accurate but somehow searches for Sc2Mapster specifically are? What?
This is what I base my argument on and you cannot say it isn't a credible and concrete source. In fact, its probably the most accurate data outside of Blizzard's own internal data. It's the best anyone can go on.
Great, I'm glad we agree on that. Now if you'll just stop misinterpreting your sources, your conclusions should change...
Nah, I mean that the system in WarCraft 3 was far more free StarCraft II's is far more strict. All kinds of stuff happened in WarCraft 3.
For example, there was stuff like that in WC3 whilst a map in SC2 gets taken down and the user possibly banned for having words like 'dike'. And when a map gets taken down, all its' popularity disappears. So people probably fear doing anything out of the ordinary.
I don't think warcraft 3 excelled in the modding scene because of 'weird stuff' people try. the popular maps in wc3 as I recall did not get popular because they had swear words and the likes. Blizzard being strict with its map policy should be good if anything, I mean if you're talking about using copyright material for example, we shouldn't have been using them in the first place. And porn maps? (since you mentioned them a couple posts back) I think we all could live without them.
"Quote from FockeWulf: Go
Now about how active the early StarCraft 2 scene really was. I agree plenty of people were leaving. Even then maps were still racking upwards of 30,000 hours. People started quitting from square one because of the popularity system. They couldn't play the maps they wanted to play. Its a design failure and the responsibility for creating and fixing it is Blizzard's.
We agree on what happened, but we disagree on the reasoning. Let me put it like this. I'll give you a stack of cards and tell you to invent a completely new card game for me to play. Meanwhile I'll wait around for you to come up with something with nine palls who are really into card games. I assure you that you won't be able to come up with anything without one of my nine palls saying "that game exists already, it's known as French Poker/Blackjack/Hearts/Indonesian Remi/WhatHaveYou". When my palls get tired of waiting and take off, who do I blame for the failure? You? The fact that you brought a really ugly set of cards? Or perhaps the fact that it's incredibly hard to come up with new card games considering how many have been thought up over the ages?"
If this argument were valid, then there wouldn't be any poker tournaments today. You are completely missing the point that not everything has to be new. In fact almost nothing that we call "new" is in fact new. The new thing, when it comes out, always looks like the old one that it replaces after all. Fundamental rule of selling any invention.
So can I come up with a new card game? No. And I don't need to. The old stuff, usually with a twist works just fine. Nearly all RTS games follow the same general flow, the same general gameplay, the same general concepts.
It really sounds like you are saying that each time a mod comes out it has to create a new genre. You are expecting another DotA. DotA was not in any major way not original (several other similar games came before it). DotA had some interesting new twists but that's all.
If you seriously think novelty is all that matters then why do you stick around? You really can't have that kind of novelty in a mod without a complete total conversion. In fact why are games like Nexus was and Desert Strike the most popular after all this time?
Now what's the pattern? Oh that's right they are familiar. There is hardly, if any novelty involved. But wait a second. What about all those shooters and such that Bounty came up with? You know he eventually got very close? But wait... the concept was too novel. I mean trying to make a 3d parody of Tron?
The popularity data tells the tale. Players didn't want novelty. They didn't want a completely new game type. They wanted the familiar stuff. Maybe with some new twists, but nothing completely out of the blue. All those shooters and other games failed not only because of Blizzard (thank you Battle.net for unnecessary imposed delay), but because they were too far out of the norm of StarCraft 2.
What about DotA? If you were there then you would have known that most of the DotA players started out as melee. In fact the key to it's success was that half of it was copied directly from WarCraft 3 melee. It was familiar and therefore an attractive game.
You seem to think that game design evolution is a fast process. That every new game must be completely new. It doesn't work that way. It doesn't in industry and it doesn't here. Completely new and unfamiliar concepts always fail in favor of the old methods unless they are similar to the old method.
I mean look at the most recent Microsoft blunder, Windows 8. Uses an almost completely different interface layout from Windows... 95 through 7. And guess what? Microsoft got to change the GUI back to the old version and release it as Windows 8.1. Its no different here. You cannot win against human nature. You just have to cope with it.
Ok so it was in April that the jump occurred. That is another jump right after it that that indicates the patch. Lets see in April there was... oh school was starting to come out for the summer. College first probably (my semesters end in April), then later primary. So my point still stands. People did in fact check back. Except that 1.3.5 wasn't out yet. Instead they were presented the same popularity system. By the time 1.3.5 came out they had all already written it off. Thank you for pointing that out. My overall point is even stronger than it was before.
So the correct read again reinforces my main point.
Was I a part of the SC1 and WC3 mod scenes? No not in any major way. But I did play customs throughout much of both games life spans.
And it is you who does not know what you are talking about. Not only did WarCraft 3 not bring more than a little bit to the table. And nearly every other successful game borrowed at least a good share of its components directly from melee play.
Your whole argument is based around a false concept. That people always want something new. To a tiny degree you are right. People want it to feel new. But in reality its mostly the same as before. A little bit changes each time. So happens in each mod. So happens in each game. People prefer familiarity to a completely new concept. Nearly all of the successful mods in any game were successful because they were familiar. Just a slight twist here and there.
Now another hole to punch in your argument.
This is the... what'th thread that has broken out about what happened? The same arguments are run over and over again?
And lets be realistic. What is going to have to change for the arcade to truly recover? I don't buy the idea that nothing can be done. If you do, then Curse would be smart to close this enterprise because it's clearly become a waste of money and resources. The server capacity would be better spent elsewhere.
So instead how about you come up with a list of what will make the scene recover? I doesn't matter if they are practical, although it helps. If you seriously think the players are at fault then obviously you think that the solution is to change the players right? Change normal human behavior right?
I'll get the ball rolling. Here is my list.
Blizzard needs to fundamentally shift their policy to allocate sufficient resources to the arcade scene.
Blizzard needs to higher a good-sized group of map makers and offer cash prizes to others to remake a those classis maps people want to see.
Blizzard needs to implement a responsive shooter system into native StarCraft 2 to support further map development in that arena.
Blizzard needs to hire art interns (because they are cheaper and they get experience this way) to make models that the arcade mod makers want for their maps.
Blizzard needs to actually release the art tools.
Blizzard needs to hire some prominent mod maker from the current scene (my 2 votes are DrSuperGood and OneTwoSC) to over see and run the scene. This is because any current Blizzard employee both doesn't know what they are doing when it comes to arcade and such an current employee wouldn't get much credibility in light of what Blizzard has pulled so far.
Blizzard needs to redesign the arcade and the entirety of Battle.net 2.0. One major flaw that has been pointed out is that playing the game in any way is still too isolated. Chat needs to be prominent on the player's screen.
Blizzard needs to fix a multitude of bugs and errors in the editor and arcade.
Blizzard needs to bring StarCraft 2 to the level of capability of WarCraft 3. A true naval system needs to be added (boat games are reviving in general) and he path-finding engine needs to be made more flexible to compensate for large groups of units (Like Desert Strike).
Blizzard needs to issue a formal and public apology to all it's customers for what it has pulled with Diablo 3 and StarCraft 2.
Blizzard needs to set a great deal of account issues right.
Blizzard needs to make the spawning system, as it was during the event (not after) a permanent feature of StarCraft 2.
Blizzard needs to implement a Star Wars: Empire a War style galactic campaign map for casual melee players along with splitting gameplay for the casuals into space and land elements.
I've got more but I'm going to stop here. The last 2 were especially good.
DarkRev's first map (before mafia) with a full physics system?
Anything that uses a 3rd or first person camera (take you rpick).
Oh and don't forget loads of hybrid units.
First of all, this. Alot of the featured maps on the Arcade also offer completely new playstyles, for examples the Battleship and Warship maps that werent possible in WC3, to a lesser extend maps like Trail of Zeal and TOFU. And lets not forget all those small funmaps that are made only possible by the capabilites of the SC2 editor.
All your arguments seem to be based on premature hate on the Arcade. As it stands now, I think the Arcade is a great system: You can get every map played that you want, seeing how alot of people actually use the open lobby system and thats all that matters. Its probably better than WC3 map system.
First of all, this. Alot of the featured maps on the Arcade also offer completely new playstyles, for examples the Battleship and Warship maps that werent possible in WC3, to a lesser extend maps like Trail of Zeal and TOFU. And lets not forget all those small funmaps that are made only possible by the capabilites of the SC2 editor.
All your arguments seem to be based on premature hate on the Arcade. As it stands now, I think the Arcade is a great system: You can get every map played that you want, seeing how alot of people actually use the open lobby system and thats all that matters. Its probably better than WC3 map system.
As it is right now, it is probably over-all better than what Battle.net 1.0 and the stock WarCraft 3 editor offered. I hear the 3rd party editors were better than Galaxy Editor.
The trouble is the required fix came 2 years too late. In that Moz and so many of us are not wrong. At this point Blizzard is going to have to do every more if they want the arcade to have any real chance. Its the usual price for putting stuff off.
Blizzard needs to issue a formal and public apology to all it's customers for what it has pulled with Diablo 3 and StarCraft 2.
I can't afford reading every post anymore, so I can't really participate on anything else, but this is unrealistic. Blizzard, even after their "arcade overhaul", never supported the view that they were wrong to begin with. They still don't. With so many people ranting about SC2 and D3 they still keep the same tone in everything they say, and they won't change it.
With so many ladder players hating David Kim for the path SC2 ladder has taken, they still act like nothing is happening. Seriously, just check the post on any balance update thread. A good part of them isn't about the exact changes at all but the way the game plays. So if we consider they focus their attention on esports we should at least see a different reaction from what we have seen for the arcade complaints.
I could go on with suggestions on how to improve, but we all had these same suggestions years ago. The damage has been done, Greedyvision/Blizzard is what it is. You could ask me why I'm still around, and my answer is: I never modded to get popular, I mod because I like to see the result. I modded SC1 and never released what I created except for a single custom unit sprite. So the size of the player base doesn't matter to me.
I can't afford reading every post anymore, so I can't really participate on anything else, but this is unrealistic. Blizzard, even after their "arcade overhaul", never supported the view that they were wrong to begin with. They still don't. With so many people ranting about SC2 and D3 they still keep the same tone in everything they say, and they won't change it.
With so many ladder players hating David Kim for the path SC2 ladder has taken, they still act like nothing is happening. Seriously, just check the post on any balance update thread. A good part of them isn't about the exact changes at all but the way the game plays. So if we consider they focus their attention on esports we should at least see a different reaction from what we have seen for the arcade complaints.
I could go on with suggestions on how to improve, but we all had these same suggestions years ago. The damage has been done, Greedyvision/Blizzard is what it is. You could ask me why I'm still around, and my answer is: I never modded to get popular, I mod because I like to see the result. I modded SC1 and never released what I created except for a single custom unit sprite. So the size of the player base doesn't matter to me.
You assume that players know what they want. They don't. I'd say 99% of players have no fucking clue about game design, and if you let the balance a game, you'd end up with every race/unit/class being nearly identical.
Hating the "guy" (I doubt any game has anything less than a team) for balance is just a normal part of how people vent because people refuse to blame themselves for their own inadequacies. Guy kicked my ass in WoW? Lol ghostcrawler. My map is on page 50? Lol popularity system.
I like StarCraft.
I like the popularity system.
I think bnet2.0 is in a good state now.
I think the lack of good player-designed maps is because the maps currently designed by players, are terrible. Will the mappers admit that? No.
The maps of mine that are on page 50, deserve to be there because they're bad.
Lastly, Blizzard clearly admitted they were wrong when they redesigned the ENTIRE bnet interface. I literally think your post could not be farther from reality.
@Eiviyn: Go I'm not saying we should allow players to balance the game. You assumed that. The fact is, there are serious complaints on how the game is played. Terrans relying too much on drops, Protoss relying too much on deathball... and so on. And on the general idea that each race has a very limited array of builds that work, and everybody worse than masters is basically crawling to learn these builds. How do you expect that a good deal of new players actually decide to face the steep learning slope, that could be called a wall? That's one of the problems. And as Fockewulf said over and over, the campaign and the arcade are the options to players that like the game, but can't compete in ladder. Could they change ladder? Would they? Everything points to the idea they never will. And many players and spectators complain about that. Do they know what they want? You say they don't, but keep things unchanged and they may decide to play or watch other things, as they have been doing.
"I like StarCraft": so do I, so what?
"I like the popularity system": Thanks for pointing out you're part of the minority aorund here. Would the author of Nexus Wars hate the popularity system? I doubt so, why should he?
"I think Bnet 2.0 is in a good state now": Yes it may be, but "now" seems to be too late, "now" should have been 2010.
Yes, they admitted that, but have they changed their tone? No. Have they become more open to discussing it? I don't see it. Fun or Not... Then arcade, then HotS changes... They slowly change it, because the player base keeps shrinking and people still complain. Have they changed the way decisions are made? I don't play Diablo, but I know Diablo players, players that have been playing since the first Diablo, and they report the same. Blizzard will push an expansion to add things that should have been in D3 from the start. Sales fell too fast? Make D3 for console in an attempt to grab money they should have earned from PC version. The way they run business is clear for everyone to see, you can like StarCraft, as do I, but business is business.
I can't afford reading every post anymore, so I can't really participate on anything else, but this is unrealistic. Blizzard, even after their "arcade overhaul", never supported the view that they were wrong to begin with. They still don't. With so many people ranting about SC2 and D3 they still keep the same tone in everything they say, and they won't change it.
With so many ladder players hating David Kim for the path SC2 ladder has taken, they still act like nothing is happening. Seriously, just check the post on any balance update thread. A good part of them isn't about the exact changes at all but the way the game plays. So if we consider they focus their attention on esports we should at least see a different reaction from what we have seen for the arcade complaints.
I could go on with suggestions on how to improve, but we all had these same suggestions years ago. The damage has been done, Greedyvision/Blizzard is what it is. You could ask me why I'm still around, and my answer is: I never modded to get popular, I mod because I like to see the result. I modded SC1 and never released what I created except for a single custom unit sprite. So the size of the player base doesn't matter to me.
Realism wasn't a requirement I put in there. I was just saying what I think would do some good. Whether Blizzard will do it or not... Well since their activity over the last 3 years on this matter is something along the lines of "jack " whether a suggestion is realistic or not makes absolutely no difference.
What are all these debates accomplishing? Nothing right? Because you are dead on with one of you points. Blizzard still doesn't think it's their fault.
We've seen how many business in this recession go bankrupt and more than a few have said it wasn't "their fault". Well their competition faced the same problems, any many of them are still around and even growing.
So Blizzard doesn't think it's their fault? Great! They, like so many others, can go bankrupt believing that. Now I'm not saying Blizzard is going to go bankrupt. After all it isn't even Blizzard by itself any more. Odds are Activision-Blizzard (the parent company) will probably just shut them down if they start losing too much money.
Business is a harsh world of sharks. Blizzard is still stuck in the 90's in their minds. Whether or not the player base became worse is obviously being contested. What cannot be contested is that they have refused to adapt to the situation. If you think the arcade can still recover somehow, more power to you. If you think it cannot, then get a petition started with curse to shut down this website.
ty for a nice thread to read... (skipped some walls of text for laters :^P)
1/ games blizz players .. meh.. i always said it :
games need players HOSTING them
showing the ropes and fun for beginners
2/pop is pop (it always has been .. always will be.. "stuck in a rut" somehow somewhere , with someone) if the "community was "strong" .. then great maps would be "better off" (if they aren't now ..)
blizz's pop or another makes no diference .. only word of mouth matters
3/too many maps kill maps .. too much sc kills sc ... safety is in numbers (players take the ez route and mapmakers never unite) .. no proper tuto channelism ... no blizz <3 .. i could go on and on ...
4/ you are the spoon ... u fool'
ps: thanks again for nice thread... nostalgia for the win
I was lurking silently this thread and after seeing all these different opinions I decided to open a poll on hiveworkshop to ask directly to wc3 modders... why didn't you move to sc2?
This is the mother of all questions, the lack of great maps or players in SC2 is related to the low amount of modders!
Is this thread about Arcade or about esports? Cause esports is going pretty well... the games are dynamic too.
Quote:
Terrans relying too much on drops
That's exactly what makes it more interesting, no need for the stale, 1 attack gg games that we saw in WoL. Lots left WoL as it was getting a little boring, many BW players admitted the game became more fast paced and dynamic with these new changes in HotS. However, I agree David Kim did lots of wrong moves in balance previously.
@Bibendus: Go
Why ask a community that is pretty die hard about War3, is too lazy to learn something new (and instead prefers to chit chat and troll in offttopic forums), biased towards SC2 - not taking the time to see all the changes that happened recently, and also lots of Asians and we know that for many countries in Asia, not just China - Warcraft are the games (WoW and Warcraft III), Starcraft - not really popular there.
It's not like you will get an objective opinion.
And honestly - the editor too difficult, hello? Not really, it takes more time to create things but with being able to do better effects, more systems and things, comes more parameters, more fields, so I don't see the problem there? P.S I am not good with the editor at all and I still think it's not hard, I don't have time to work with it as much as others, plus I am a gamer more than a mapmaker. I have done lots with War3 editor, I was with War3 for 7-8 years (2003-2010) in both melee and the editor also with SC1 Campaign Editor for a year or two in 1998-99.
The problems are as Mozared stated - in the lack of ideas, if you had ideas as Fockewulf said - you would be able to create something good even without the complexity of the editor. Fockewulf says that editor prevent people from doing good things due to being too hard - I am saying - no one asks you to use the most advanced things of the editor but narrow it to the simpler ones - what is the problem? Again the lack of ideas for decent maps, has nothing to do with the editor.
I mean it's the Arcade and Bnet plus the lack of ideas that caused it, not the editor.
The poll there is so biased as well, I will just point out the wrong statemenets:
Quote:
Low amount of assets in SC2 (models, icons, sounds)
Why compare a 10 year old database of models to a 3 year one, where the new one is with models much more complex to make? Also have you seen the Assets here before making that statement?
Quote:
Bad popularity system on the SC2 Arcade
This was changed a long time ago with Open Games, is the year currently 2010?
Quote:
Bad rating/reviews system on the SC2 Arcade
What's wrong in there? Isn't it up to the reviewers?
-So why some ppl don't map in sc2?
-They say editor is needlessly complicated.
-They don't map cause editor is too hard? Pfft, suckers, that opinion is invalid because I disagree!
Lack of ideas comes from lack of people trying different stuff. There were/are things in place that can discourage people, if more folks tried, more things would be made, more things would be iterated/inspired, people and their visions compensating for each others flaws and missteps would spawn more awesome. We would rely on mass, not on the individuals. But making things takes time, so much time that majority of projects die off and mappers leave. I never disliked complexity of editor, but I can see how it is a valid argument to the issue.
Btw, I completely don't get the whole originality problem. Am I the only one who doesn't really care for innovation and originality and wants to just play something cool/solid. I'm tired of copies, but you don't need to be original to change your maps systems from WC3skillpoint based spell systems to something else to add more freshness to your map.
Why do you complain about the possible answers, they are not my opinions but things that people think.
I just wanted to know why wc3 editors decided to not move to sc2, even if the new editor is a lot more powerful, that's why I posted it there.
The complexity of the data editor (yes it's more complex compared to wc3 where you could just copy paste single objects and edit them) makes it harder to newcomers that will probably give up
BTW please stop confusing the causes with the effects, the lack of good ideas/maps is related to the lack of modders.
Low amount of assets
Count the amount of unit models and icons in wc3 and sc2 and you'll know why I wrote this. I'm not talking about the lack of user made content because it depends directly on the amount of people interested in the editor (it's a consequence and not a cause)
Bad popularity system on the SC2 Arcade
Sorry when did it change? The small changes they did in the past sure didn't fix that the most played maps are not the one that deserve it
Bad rating/reviews system on the SC2 Arcade
No ability to give feedback to the editor without making a rating, toxic voting with no filters to 1 star rating, dumb people that votes 5 stars stupid maps, etc. Sure it's the reviewer fault but a good rating system tries to filter the toxicity by giving more importance to clever ratings. Direct feedback for the editor is still lacking.
Bad rating/reviews system on the SC2 Arcade
No ability to give feedback to the editor without making a rating, toxic voting with no filters to 1 star rating, dumb people that votes 5 stars stupid maps, etc. Sure it's the reviewer fault but a good rating system tries to filter the toxicity by giving more importance to clever ratings. Direct feedback for the editor is still lacking.
I think ratings should be cut out and only show reviews, or have something like reviews and ratings being private to the author for feedback only.
Bad rating/reviews system on the SC2 Arcade
No ability to give feedback to the editor without making a rating, toxic voting with no filters to 1 star rating, dumb people that votes 5 stars stupid maps, etc. Sure it's the reviewer fault but a good rating system tries to filter the toxicity by giving more importance to clever ratings. Direct feedback for the editor is still lacking.
I think ratings should be cut out and only show reviews, or have something like reviews and ratings being private to the author for feedback only.
Erm, why?
The star rating is great at highlighting unfinished or unplayable maps, something that you had no way of knowing without actually wasting your time trying the map out.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You really need to read better. You're missing my point completely, again. It's ironic cause I'm actually claiming the exact opposite of what you're saying I am.
My point is that WarCraft 3 had games that offered a completely new playstyle, whereas StarCraft 2 games do not. I'm not talking about polish and I've yet to say anything about the possibilities of any of the three editors. My point is exactly that we're running out of those 'awesome old mechanics' you keep talking about. When Tetris came out, it was a completely new concept. When Super Mario came out, it was a completely new concept. When Mortal Combat came out, it was a completely new concept. When most WarCraft 3 maps came out, they were completely new concepts. StarCraft 2 maps are just rehashes of previously done stuff. Not because the editor sucks, but because everything has been done before. This wasn't the case during WarCraft 3. Main difference, main reason for the diminished interest in mapping scenes.
We agree on what happened, but we disagree on the reasoning. Let me put it like this. I'll give you a stack of cards and tell you to invent a completely new card game for me to play. Meanwhile I'll wait around for you to come up with something with nine palls who are really into card games. I assure you that you won't be able to come up with anything without one of my nine palls saying "that game exists already, it's known as French Poker/Blackjack/Hearts/Indonesian Remi/WhatHaveYou". When my palls get tired of waiting and take off, who do I blame for the failure? You? The fact that you brought a really ugly set of cards? Or perhaps the fact that it's incredibly hard to come up with new card games considering how many have been thought up over the ages?
I just answered that question in the top half of my post. Are you going to answer mine, or are you going to dodge it further? Does that mean I'm right in that you were never a part of the SC1 and WC3 mapping scenes and don't even know what you're talking about?
As for your numbers... did you even look at your own graphs?
Errr, no. The spike for SC2Mapster (note that this is ONE search term you've come up with, and the fact that you've ignored the FOUR I gave you) occurs in April 2011; more than FOUR months before 1.3.5 hit. At that point the whole patch hadn't even been announced. And a huge decline had been taking place for SEVEN full months prior to that bump. I'm not sure what the bump did represent off the top of my head, but it's definitely not 'people checking back in for 1.3.5'.
What is this supposed to mean? You're saying the four google trend pages I supplied weren't accurate but somehow searches for Sc2Mapster specifically are? What?
Both of these argue in my favour? Two strong modding scenes that existed and kept going for longer period of time, contrary to SC2's scene?
Great, I'm glad we agree on that. Now if you'll just stop misinterpreting your sources, your conclusions should change...
I don't think warcraft 3 excelled in the modding scene because of 'weird stuff' people try. the popular maps in wc3 as I recall did not get popular because they had swear words and the likes. Blizzard being strict with its map policy should be good if anything, I mean if you're talking about using copyright material for example, we shouldn't have been using them in the first place. And porn maps? (since you mentioned them a couple posts back) I think we all could live without them.
And you completely blew past my points:
"Quote from FockeWulf: Go Now about how active the early StarCraft 2 scene really was. I agree plenty of people were leaving. Even then maps were still racking upwards of 30,000 hours. People started quitting from square one because of the popularity system. They couldn't play the maps they wanted to play. Its a design failure and the responsibility for creating and fixing it is Blizzard's.
We agree on what happened, but we disagree on the reasoning. Let me put it like this. I'll give you a stack of cards and tell you to invent a completely new card game for me to play. Meanwhile I'll wait around for you to come up with something with nine palls who are really into card games. I assure you that you won't be able to come up with anything without one of my nine palls saying "that game exists already, it's known as French Poker/Blackjack/Hearts/Indonesian Remi/WhatHaveYou". When my palls get tired of waiting and take off, who do I blame for the failure? You? The fact that you brought a really ugly set of cards? Or perhaps the fact that it's incredibly hard to come up with new card games considering how many have been thought up over the ages?"
If this argument were valid, then there wouldn't be any poker tournaments today. You are completely missing the point that not everything has to be new. In fact almost nothing that we call "new" is in fact new. The new thing, when it comes out, always looks like the old one that it replaces after all. Fundamental rule of selling any invention.
So can I come up with a new card game? No. And I don't need to. The old stuff, usually with a twist works just fine. Nearly all RTS games follow the same general flow, the same general gameplay, the same general concepts.
It really sounds like you are saying that each time a mod comes out it has to create a new genre. You are expecting another DotA. DotA was not in any major way not original (several other similar games came before it). DotA had some interesting new twists but that's all.
If you seriously think novelty is all that matters then why do you stick around? You really can't have that kind of novelty in a mod without a complete total conversion. In fact why are games like Nexus was and Desert Strike the most popular after all this time?
Lets see: Desert Strike replaces Desert Strike Nexus Wars replaces Castle Fight.
Now what's the pattern? Oh that's right they are familiar. There is hardly, if any novelty involved. But wait a second. What about all those shooters and such that Bounty came up with? You know he eventually got very close? But wait... the concept was too novel. I mean trying to make a 3d parody of Tron?
The popularity data tells the tale. Players didn't want novelty. They didn't want a completely new game type. They wanted the familiar stuff. Maybe with some new twists, but nothing completely out of the blue. All those shooters and other games failed not only because of Blizzard (thank you Battle.net for unnecessary imposed delay), but because they were too far out of the norm of StarCraft 2.
What about DotA? If you were there then you would have known that most of the DotA players started out as melee. In fact the key to it's success was that half of it was copied directly from WarCraft 3 melee. It was familiar and therefore an attractive game.
You seem to think that game design evolution is a fast process. That every new game must be completely new. It doesn't work that way. It doesn't in industry and it doesn't here. Completely new and unfamiliar concepts always fail in favor of the old methods unless they are similar to the old method.
I mean look at the most recent Microsoft blunder, Windows 8. Uses an almost completely different interface layout from Windows... 95 through 7. And guess what? Microsoft got to change the GUI back to the old version and release it as Windows 8.1. Its no different here. You cannot win against human nature. You just have to cope with it.
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/2983579
Ok so it was in April that the jump occurred. That is another jump right after it that that indicates the patch. Lets see in April there was... oh school was starting to come out for the summer. College first probably (my semesters end in April), then later primary. So my point still stands. People did in fact check back. Except that 1.3.5 wasn't out yet. Instead they were presented the same popularity system. By the time 1.3.5 came out they had all already written it off. Thank you for pointing that out. My overall point is even stronger than it was before.
So the correct read again reinforces my main point.
Was I a part of the SC1 and WC3 mod scenes? No not in any major way. But I did play customs throughout much of both games life spans.
And it is you who does not know what you are talking about. Not only did WarCraft 3 not bring more than a little bit to the table. And nearly every other successful game borrowed at least a good share of its components directly from melee play.
Your whole argument is based around a false concept. That people always want something new. To a tiny degree you are right. People want it to feel new. But in reality its mostly the same as before. A little bit changes each time. So happens in each mod. So happens in each game. People prefer familiarity to a completely new concept. Nearly all of the successful mods in any game were successful because they were familiar. Just a slight twist here and there.
Now another hole to punch in your argument.
This is the... what'th thread that has broken out about what happened? The same arguments are run over and over again?
And lets be realistic. What is going to have to change for the arcade to truly recover? I don't buy the idea that nothing can be done. If you do, then Curse would be smart to close this enterprise because it's clearly become a waste of money and resources. The server capacity would be better spent elsewhere.
So instead how about you come up with a list of what will make the scene recover? I doesn't matter if they are practical, although it helps. If you seriously think the players are at fault then obviously you think that the solution is to change the players right? Change normal human behavior right?
I'll get the ball rolling. Here is my list.
Blizzard needs to fundamentally shift their policy to allocate sufficient resources to the arcade scene. Blizzard needs to higher a good-sized group of map makers and offer cash prizes to others to remake a those classis maps people want to see. Blizzard needs to implement a responsive shooter system into native StarCraft 2 to support further map development in that arena. Blizzard needs to hire art interns (because they are cheaper and they get experience this way) to make models that the arcade mod makers want for their maps. Blizzard needs to actually release the art tools. Blizzard needs to hire some prominent mod maker from the current scene (my 2 votes are DrSuperGood and OneTwoSC) to over see and run the scene. This is because any current Blizzard employee both doesn't know what they are doing when it comes to arcade and such an current employee wouldn't get much credibility in light of what Blizzard has pulled so far. Blizzard needs to redesign the arcade and the entirety of Battle.net 2.0. One major flaw that has been pointed out is that playing the game in any way is still too isolated. Chat needs to be prominent on the player's screen. Blizzard needs to fix a multitude of bugs and errors in the editor and arcade. Blizzard needs to bring StarCraft 2 to the level of capability of WarCraft 3. A true naval system needs to be added (boat games are reviving in general) and he path-finding engine needs to be made more flexible to compensate for large groups of units (Like Desert Strike). Blizzard needs to issue a formal and public apology to all it's customers for what it has pulled with Diablo 3 and StarCraft 2. Blizzard needs to set a great deal of account issues right. Blizzard needs to make the spawning system, as it was during the event (not after) a permanent feature of StarCraft 2. Blizzard needs to implement a Star Wars: Empire a War style galactic campaign map for casual melee players along with splitting gameplay for the casuals into space and land elements.
I've got more but I'm going to stop here. The last 2 were especially good.
Yes they do.
Examples plz and dont mention any of my map:)
Any number of Bounty's maps?
DarkRev's first map (before mafia) with a full physics system?
Anything that uses a 3rd or first person camera (take you rpick).
Oh and don't forget loads of hybrid units.
First of all, this. Alot of the featured maps on the Arcade also offer completely new playstyles, for examples the Battleship and Warship maps that werent possible in WC3, to a lesser extend maps like Trail of Zeal and TOFU. And lets not forget all those small funmaps that are made only possible by the capabilites of the SC2 editor.
All your arguments seem to be based on premature hate on the Arcade. As it stands now, I think the Arcade is a great system: You can get every map played that you want, seeing how alot of people actually use the open lobby system and thats all that matters. Its probably better than WC3 map system.
As it is right now, it is probably over-all better than what Battle.net 1.0 and the stock WarCraft 3 editor offered. I hear the 3rd party editors were better than Galaxy Editor.
The trouble is the required fix came 2 years too late. In that Moz and so many of us are not wrong. At this point Blizzard is going to have to do every more if they want the arcade to have any real chance. Its the usual price for putting stuff off.
I can't afford reading every post anymore, so I can't really participate on anything else, but this is unrealistic. Blizzard, even after their "arcade overhaul", never supported the view that they were wrong to begin with. They still don't. With so many people ranting about SC2 and D3 they still keep the same tone in everything they say, and they won't change it.
With so many ladder players hating David Kim for the path SC2 ladder has taken, they still act like nothing is happening. Seriously, just check the post on any balance update thread. A good part of them isn't about the exact changes at all but the way the game plays. So if we consider they focus their attention on esports we should at least see a different reaction from what we have seen for the arcade complaints.
I could go on with suggestions on how to improve, but we all had these same suggestions years ago. The damage has been done, Greedyvision/Blizzard is what it is. You could ask me why I'm still around, and my answer is: I never modded to get popular, I mod because I like to see the result. I modded SC1 and never released what I created except for a single custom unit sprite. So the size of the player base doesn't matter to me.
You assume that players know what they want. They don't. I'd say 99% of players have no fucking clue about game design, and if you let the balance a game, you'd end up with every race/unit/class being nearly identical.
Hating the "guy" (I doubt any game has anything less than a team) for balance is just a normal part of how people vent because people refuse to blame themselves for their own inadequacies. Guy kicked my ass in WoW? Lol ghostcrawler. My map is on page 50? Lol popularity system.
I like StarCraft.
I like the popularity system.
I think bnet2.0 is in a good state now.
I think the lack of good player-designed maps is because the maps currently designed by players, are terrible. Will the mappers admit that? No.
The maps of mine that are on page 50, deserve to be there because they're bad.
Lastly, Blizzard clearly admitted they were wrong when they redesigned the ENTIRE bnet interface. I literally think your post could not be farther from reality.
@Eiviyn: Go I'm not saying we should allow players to balance the game. You assumed that. The fact is, there are serious complaints on how the game is played. Terrans relying too much on drops, Protoss relying too much on deathball... and so on. And on the general idea that each race has a very limited array of builds that work, and everybody worse than masters is basically crawling to learn these builds. How do you expect that a good deal of new players actually decide to face the steep learning slope, that could be called a wall? That's one of the problems. And as Fockewulf said over and over, the campaign and the arcade are the options to players that like the game, but can't compete in ladder. Could they change ladder? Would they? Everything points to the idea they never will. And many players and spectators complain about that. Do they know what they want? You say they don't, but keep things unchanged and they may decide to play or watch other things, as they have been doing.
"I like StarCraft": so do I, so what?
"I like the popularity system": Thanks for pointing out you're part of the minority aorund here. Would the author of Nexus Wars hate the popularity system? I doubt so, why should he?
"I think Bnet 2.0 is in a good state now": Yes it may be, but "now" seems to be too late, "now" should have been 2010.
Yes, they admitted that, but have they changed their tone? No. Have they become more open to discussing it? I don't see it. Fun or Not... Then arcade, then HotS changes... They slowly change it, because the player base keeps shrinking and people still complain. Have they changed the way decisions are made? I don't play Diablo, but I know Diablo players, players that have been playing since the first Diablo, and they report the same. Blizzard will push an expansion to add things that should have been in D3 from the start. Sales fell too fast? Make D3 for console in an attempt to grab money they should have earned from PC version. The way they run business is clear for everyone to see, you can like StarCraft, as do I, but business is business.
Realism wasn't a requirement I put in there. I was just saying what I think would do some good. Whether Blizzard will do it or not... Well since their activity over the last 3 years on this matter is something along the lines of "jack " whether a suggestion is realistic or not makes absolutely no difference.
What are all these debates accomplishing? Nothing right? Because you are dead on with one of you points. Blizzard still doesn't think it's their fault.
We've seen how many business in this recession go bankrupt and more than a few have said it wasn't "their fault". Well their competition faced the same problems, any many of them are still around and even growing.
So Blizzard doesn't think it's their fault? Great! They, like so many others, can go bankrupt believing that. Now I'm not saying Blizzard is going to go bankrupt. After all it isn't even Blizzard by itself any more. Odds are Activision-Blizzard (the parent company) will probably just shut them down if they start losing too much money.
Business is a harsh world of sharks. Blizzard is still stuck in the 90's in their minds. Whether or not the player base became worse is obviously being contested. What cannot be contested is that they have refused to adapt to the situation. If you think the arcade can still recover somehow, more power to you. If you think it cannot, then get a petition started with curse to shut down this website.
ty for a nice thread to read... (skipped some walls of text for laters :^P)
1/ games blizz players .. meh.. i always said it :
games need players HOSTING them
showing the ropes and fun for beginners
2/pop is pop (it always has been .. always will be.. "stuck in a rut" somehow somewhere , with someone) if the "community was "strong" .. then great maps would be "better off" (if they aren't now ..)
blizz's pop or another makes no diference .. only word of mouth matters
3/too many maps kill maps .. too much sc kills sc ... safety is in numbers (players take the ez route and mapmakers never unite) .. no proper tuto channelism ... no blizz <3 .. i could go on and on ...
4/ you are the spoon ... u fool'
ps: thanks again for nice thread... nostalgia for the win
I was lurking silently this thread and after seeing all these different opinions I decided to open a poll on hiveworkshop to ask directly to wc3 modders... why didn't you move to sc2?
This is the mother of all questions, the lack of great maps or players in SC2 is related to the low amount of modders!
Here is the link (please don't vote if you are a SC2 modder):
http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/map-development-202/starcraft-2-vs-warcraft-3-modding-why-did-you-choose-warcraft-237894/
@Bibendus: Go
That poll was a really good idea!
Is this thread about Arcade or about esports? Cause esports is going pretty well... the games are dynamic too.
That's exactly what makes it more interesting, no need for the stale, 1 attack gg games that we saw in WoL. Lots left WoL as it was getting a little boring, many BW players admitted the game became more fast paced and dynamic with these new changes in HotS. However, I agree David Kim did lots of wrong moves in balance previously.
@Bibendus: Go
Why ask a community that is pretty die hard about War3, is too lazy to learn something new (and instead prefers to chit chat and troll in offttopic forums), biased towards SC2 - not taking the time to see all the changes that happened recently, and also lots of Asians and we know that for many countries in Asia, not just China - Warcraft are the games (WoW and Warcraft III), Starcraft - not really popular there.
It's not like you will get an objective opinion.
And honestly - the editor too difficult, hello? Not really, it takes more time to create things but with being able to do better effects, more systems and things, comes more parameters, more fields, so I don't see the problem there? P.S I am not good with the editor at all and I still think it's not hard, I don't have time to work with it as much as others, plus I am a gamer more than a mapmaker. I have done lots with War3 editor, I was with War3 for 7-8 years (2003-2010) in both melee and the editor also with SC1 Campaign Editor for a year or two in 1998-99.
The problems are as Mozared stated - in the lack of ideas, if you had ideas as Fockewulf said - you would be able to create something good even without the complexity of the editor. Fockewulf says that editor prevent people from doing good things due to being too hard - I am saying - no one asks you to use the most advanced things of the editor but narrow it to the simpler ones - what is the problem? Again the lack of ideas for decent maps, has nothing to do with the editor.
I mean it's the Arcade and Bnet plus the lack of ideas that caused it, not the editor.
The poll there is so biased as well, I will just point out the wrong statemenets:
Why compare a 10 year old database of models to a 3 year one, where the new one is with models much more complex to make? Also have you seen the Assets here before making that statement?
This was changed a long time ago with Open Games, is the year currently 2010?
What's wrong in there? Isn't it up to the reviewers?
@Eimtr: Go
-So why some ppl don't map in sc2?
-They say editor is needlessly complicated.
-They don't map cause editor is too hard? Pfft, suckers, that opinion is invalid because I disagree!
Lack of ideas comes from lack of people trying different stuff. There were/are things in place that can discourage people, if more folks tried, more things would be made, more things would be iterated/inspired, people and their visions compensating for each others flaws and missteps would spawn more awesome. We would rely on mass, not on the individuals. But making things takes time, so much time that majority of projects die off and mappers leave. I never disliked complexity of editor, but I can see how it is a valid argument to the issue.
Btw, I completely don't get the whole originality problem. Am I the only one who doesn't really care for innovation and originality and wants to just play something cool/solid. I'm tired of copies, but you don't need to be original to change your maps systems from WC3skillpoint based spell systems to something else to add more freshness to your map.
@Eimtr: Go
Why do you complain about the possible answers, they are not my opinions but things that people think.
I just wanted to know why wc3 editors decided to not move to sc2, even if the new editor is a lot more powerful, that's why I posted it there.
The complexity of the data editor (yes it's more complex compared to wc3 where you could just copy paste single objects and edit them) makes it harder to newcomers that will probably give up
BTW please stop confusing the causes with the effects, the lack of good ideas/maps is related to the lack of modders.
Low amount of assets
Count the amount of unit models and icons in wc3 and sc2 and you'll know why I wrote this. I'm not talking about the lack of user made content because it depends directly on the amount of people interested in the editor (it's a consequence and not a cause)
Bad popularity system on the SC2 Arcade
Sorry when did it change? The small changes they did in the past sure didn't fix that the most played maps are not the one that deserve it
Bad rating/reviews system on the SC2 Arcade
No ability to give feedback to the editor without making a rating, toxic voting with no filters to 1 star rating, dumb people that votes 5 stars stupid maps, etc. Sure it's the reviewer fault but a good rating system tries to filter the toxicity by giving more importance to clever ratings. Direct feedback for the editor is still lacking.
I think ratings should be cut out and only show reviews, or have something like reviews and ratings being private to the author for feedback only.
Erm, why?
The star rating is great at highlighting unfinished or unplayable maps, something that you had no way of knowing without actually wasting your time trying the map out.