You misunderstand me. The question isn't how many people bought Starcraft for the Arcade (and therefore how much it earned). The Arcade is presently going nowhere because it no longer earns Blizzard any money and they hardly support it. It may even be the case that this little bit of communication is little more than PR designed to keep us happy until we move on to the next Blizzard game. I'm not saying that's the case, it's just a possibility.
What I would prefer is for Blizzard to start looking at the Arcade from a business point of view and actually take it somewhere. If I was Blizzard I would be saying "what is the Arcade going to earn me now? Sell a few more copies of Legacy of the Void (at best)? Why support it?". The solution is, in my opinion, to allow map-makers to sell their games, such that Blizzard actually has a reason to support the Arcade.
The bit about making it a separate platform was more of a long-term idea. After Legacy of the Void is released, the Arcade will eventually die out, because it will be on a game that is no longer supported and eventually replaced by something new. If, at that point, they made the Arcade a separate platform with access to a wider range of Blizzard assets... Well, it would be quite profitable, I think. They would want to develop and support it. And the platform itself could be free... They would just take a cut of all sales.
I see. This does make sense and it would be so much more helpful for us map makers if Blizzard would support the Arcade more. I guess We will just have to wait and see what they do, and try our best to suggest things for them.
+1 to that. I don't really see why they made it un-copyable.. Also, as an editor from KR server I can tell you this, language is a huge, HUGE barrier. Just having map title in english drops like half of your audience. It's kinda social thing, but people *have* to study english here so they don't really wanna see it when they are relaxing and having fun playing games.
and..
about the server-side bank, if Blizz is ever going to do map marketplace I think this is just essential. There are lots of maps out there and while some of them would suit a paid map some of them are better with F2P model. Well, I'm sure they're putting more thoughts than I could.
Hmm yeah that is right I forgot I could do this with actors. Still a more straightforward method would be convenient.
My list in case anyone is curious. Already submitted to Blizzard so no need to include it.
Quote:
Feature: Relax the terms of use for arcade maps
Priority: 1
Use: Money is a great incentive. Allowing (tasteful) adverts or sponsorships for arcade maps would generate revenue for developers, increasing this incentive. Arcade maps that over-use adverts or sponsorship will be filtered down by the popularity system.
This would take the standard route of platforms that rely on user content, such as youtube or twitch.tv. StarCraft tournaments make great use of adverts and sponsors. Allowing the arcade to utilise the same rules would allow the arcade scene to grow.
I would use this to generate revenue and justify the time spent on my arcade content monetarily, allowing me to spend more time creating arcade content.
-
Feature: Map file protection
Priority: 2
Use: Currently it is very easy for someone to steal your arcade map file and host it as their own work. I've been the victim of this, as have a few others. It is demoralizing to see your work stolen and rehosted under someone else's name.
I would use this to have piece of mind that my user-created content is not being used without my consent.
-
Feature: All region inclusive map URL links
Priority: 3
Use: The ability to link a StarCraft map with just a text link is amazing, but having to make sure that people select the correct link adds a needless layer of complexity.
Which combines all of the above. The client would pick the user's currently active region, and open the proper map link.
I would use this to create a simple "PLAY NOW" button for my arcade content on external sites.
-
Feature: Improved space management of arcade interface
Priority: 4
Use: Page 1 is what the arcade is. Anything not on page 1 seems to be "out of sight, out of mind". Maximizing the number of visible maps on each page would, in my opinion, improve this situation.
By removing or minimizing some of the graphics in the arcade interface, it should be possible to increase the number of maps per page from 16 (4x4) to 25 (5x5).
Certain elements of the UI just aren't needed, such as the star rating for each map which generally means little compared to a map's ranking.
-
Feature: Multiple map files in the same arcade game
Priority: 5
Use: Imagine uploading 4-5 different map files and linking each to a single arcade game. Upon starting the game, a random map file is chosen from the linked map pool. This would allow random or mode-specific map terrain for arcade games
This functionality is already somewhat present with the tutorial function, which is able to link a second map file to the "main" file.
I would use this to have multiple terrain variations for a single arcade map, without sacrificing the map's popularity. Playing on the same terrain for months gets old.
Obviously enough, microtransactions and player-side banks can't go together.
Regarding the map-stealing issue, I think some sort of automated similarity scanning feature would be great.
It's basically the same method used in soundhound or youtube, only it's maps instead of audio data.
This system will take care of any map being republished without author's consent.
I will repeat what was said in the very first post of this thread.
Be nice, concise and be professional, this is your chance :)
On that note I might as well throw in 1 or 2 suggestions,
Feature: Map pools for arcade games.
Priority: 1
This would be amazing for replay value of some maps. Instead of akwardly cramming 4 or 5 sub par maps on one terrain, there could be multiple maps that could be either randomly chosen or chosen by the host of the game. could then have different maps for 1v1 or 2v2, and such.
Feature: Multiplayer support for transferring over to another map / mod.
Priority: 1
RPGS would greatly benefit from this feature, and it would allow for multiple maps to be easily linked together seamlessly instead of exiting game and having to host the next map with the same party. This could also go with the map pool were players could choose the map that they are going to go to. This would also allow for maps to be much smaller and experience less latency / load time all at once.
Feature: copy and paste pitch and roll.
Priority: 2
The support for the pitch and roll being supported in copying and pasting would increase work flow greatly.
Feature: 512x512 map sizes.
Priority: 2
There are simply some modders who want this feature, and it would be nice to have more realistic terrains in terms of scale.
Feature: Multiple levels of pathing
Priority: 1
Multiple levels of pathing would also give an interesting dynamic for players to fool around with, it could also be an interesting feature to play around with in the melle map scene, benefiting both the modders whom want to make buildings and bridges, and giving a bit more variety to the map pools in ladder as well as GSL, WCS, Dreamhack, etc... Also, it only makes sense (at least in my mind) that there would be 3D pathing within a 3D game :)
Feature: Support for additional textures.
Priority: 2
More than 8 textures, it is surprising how limiting this can feel at times. This would allow for much more freedom when making a terrain.
The editor is an extraordinary tool, but ever since I got my hands on the editor in WOL beta, I wised that these features would be implemented (with exception to the pitch and roll copy paste support of course).
Let me try to clarify the over-all point I am trying to make:
The problem has 2 major components:
1. The technical and usability issues in the Map Editor and how it interacts with Battle.net. This also includes any plugins (like the art tools). In addition there is the lack of sufficient support on Blizzard's end for new map makers and map projects which can border on a full Half Life 2 conversion.
2. The consumer aspect. All the technical fixes in the world won't make a difference if there are no players. And to do anything effective about this means you have to be able to see it from their perspective. After having worked retail, I have learned that consumers are emotionally driven semi-human creatures who are cruel enough to wave their money in your face and demand the impossible for next to free. Some of them can indeed be human, but I've found that (in Vegas) to be rare.
Almost all of the suggestions in this thread are about component 1 only. None of them will matter unless component 2 is also fixed.
Unfortunately component 2 is the harder issue to fix. As I have been trying to say: StarCraft 2 has been written off and un-installed by a majority of the players who wanted to primarily play the custom mods.
Why do I make a point of saying "un-installed"? This has nothing to do with technical aspects and everything to do with human nature. The StarCraft 2 download borders on 20GB. Installing from a disk - which often involves getting out of a chair to retrieve said disk - isn't much better considering the sheer amount of patches you have to download.
The almost impossible issue to overcome with people who has un-installed is simple human laziness. People would rather play a game they are content with - content doesn't always mean they are having fun - than try out a new game. To install and then try out a game that has already "let them down" a second or third time is almost impossible, especially considering how large of a download StarCraft 2 is.
So Blizzard has been acting like a headless chicken. So what would a competently management company do?
1. Realize that this would probably be their last chance.
2. Realize that the death of the StarCraft 2 arcade also mean sacrificing a key sales edge Blizzard has had over all other RTS games for over a decade. Between the melee and the user made mods, A Blizzard RTS simply got you more for your money than any other game. WarCraft 3 will not be able to maintain the custom mod scene forever.
So lets say that Blizzard does decide to make an attempt to repair the arcade (other than the more likely scenario that this is just a cheap PR move just like the developers suddenly showing up on the custom mod forums - several old hands pointed out that Blizzard has been doing that for years).
What should they do?
Well the one component they have absolutely no power to directly control is the consumer.
However one major factor that actually works in Blizzard's favor is that StarCraft 2 is the most viable RTS released since 2010. Company of Heroes 2 was terrible design and balance and WarGame's developers can't get away from niche "card deck" based RTS games.
So people are indeed still looking for a good RTS. Blizzard has one chance (before Planetary Annihilation can offer a serious challenge) to recover the player base.
By one chance I mean a period of no more than two weeks (maybe as little as 12 hours) to "sell" the Arcade's new features.
So when should this be tried? There are only 2 general dates that can apply. And they are both when school gets out. Christmas or summer are the only 2 potentially successful targets. Everything has to be ready and working (and I mean no major bugs unlike what usually happens with major content patches) by the time the first "lost player" checks out the game.
So what is the over-all goal? Well to make more money of course. But how?
Here is where the target consumer needs to be understood. There are 2 major factors:
1. They are biased against the game.
2. They most likely don't own HotS.
So a map market could be implemented. But player saturation is lacking and will most likely doom it to failure unless enough players have become consistently active to make it profitable. Remember in any F2P game only a small fraction of the players actually spend money so the bigger the player base the more players who will spend money.
The other option is to sell more copies of HotS. However if HotS's current features (campaign and melee) haven't already sold the game then it won't do any better now.
So HotS needs more features. And they need to be cheap to add.
Now in my specific case I have a problem. Of the players who play my maps, only roughly half actually own HotS. However with full spawning there is a possible lure here.
Lets say by some insanely impossible event Blizzard pays any more attention to me than they did back in WoL Beta (when I only made like 3 posts during the entire Beta). I cannot go to the players who play my maps and say "you need to buy HotS to play what was already in the WoL version". That would be the best way to fail terribly.
But I think I could say: "If you have HotS, all of the models get swapped out to accurate World War 2 models made by Blizzard". Now what I have is something that is not forced but very, very much wanted because of increased immersion and therefore improved experience. But they have to buy HotS.
With my map by itself they might be willing to pass on that. But with a bunch of maps with similar situation it is a very potent sales pitch.
But all that costs money right? Well yes, but who are you paying? An experienced professional? Or a college intern willing to work for minimum wage with no benefits?
Because something like a World of WarCraft model port project that is done by college interns isn't nearly as expensive paying for a full industry professional.
And reaching out in the direction of the college students is the right thing to do with the Arcade scene. It takes a college-level Computer Science student to be able to full use the editor and a college-level Computer Graphics student to make a passable model (although lots of free-lancers are available) for StarCraft 2.
So here would be my verdict. Christmas 2013 isn't a realistic target. Extreme polish will be as important as the content itself. So the summer of 2014 is the ideal target for any serious recovery project. It allows time for content to be well-made and polished as well as making sure Battle.net is as polished as it can be. Even if it means stalling LotV's release. It also allows time for "leaks", "anticipation" and "hope" to build.
Get the organization put together end development started now. Help people get teams together and maps made. This should all be possible through the web and Battle.net interface.
But there is one thing I continuously warned about that could shoot all of that in the butt. It played a major role in shooting down all community attempts. Money. Its very hard for a college student to justify spending time on a frustrating map editor to make a map which they have no idea if it will actually "take off" - especially if they have been burned before (which most of the people who know how to really use the editor have by now). Since you are talking a college student or higher, Blizzard will need to pay for their time. Back in 2011 they might have not had to do this but by 2012 the scene was too far gone.
So really what it amounts to is Blizzard doing a massive internship program to develop the content aspect (component 1 from the top) and also a very good public relations campaign (component 2) to slowly make players start looking at StarCraft 2 again.
Will this be done? I highly doubt it. Both components require a huge adjustment in ATVI's business model and it would be a rather bitter pill for some of their management to swallow.
LotV will be 1 of 2 things:
1. Either a last attempt to milk as much money from StarCraft 2 for as little investment as possible (the most likely situation).
2. A real attempt to recover StarCraft 2's arcade scene. This will reduce the over-all profit of StarCraft 2 (something investors won't like) in the short run but would have long-lasting benefits in WarCraft 4/StarCraft 3. If Blizzard fails to recover and maintain the custom mod community in StarCraft 2 then their future RTS sales will suffer and it will be even more expensive to build a new community from scratch.
One last question. What can the arcade do? How can the arcade fit into the long-term plans of ATVI? It isn't a decision Blizzard will ultimately make. Dustin Browder isn't the one who needs to be convinced. Robert Kotick does.
He does seem to have a sore spot (actually all of the large game development/publishing companies seem to). Valve. Specifically Steam. More specifically Steam mods and indie games.
Because one of the major flaws with Steam is that rewards and products are not interconnected with each other. They try, I mean one of the bonuses that came with EU 4 was TF2 hats. And it can make quite a bit of money. But its still not interconnected. Battle.net on the other hand, that can be interconnected.
Try to follow me here. Lets say we have Tofu, SCU, Subsistence and maybe a few other projects that are professional level indie games made on the StarCraft 2 RTS engine. What's wrong with selling content packs that cross over multiple games? That way you get a little bit of everything and everyone's map gets promoted and everyone gets a little bit of the income.
Anyone interest about translation? Making better translation circumstances is important too. (but it might have a pretty lower priority than others :$)
Use: Enables the modding of grand strategy games of a caliber like Azeroth Wars. Enables large scale RPGs. Enables so much more
Feature: A working and easy-to-implement naval system
Priority: 1
Use: A simple naval system allows mapmakers to create maps with more strategic depth without much hassle or flawed workarounds with pathing blockers or what not. The Frozen Throne had it and it was considered a clear improvement and a new dimension back then by both Blizzard and the Community, one of its most important features. Bring it back!
Feature: Server side banks
Priority: 2
Use: Allows true in-game achievements for the Arcade, allows rewarding players and more competitive arcade play
Use: Enables the modding of grand strategy games of a caliber like Azeroth Wars. Enables large scale RPGs. Enables so much more
Feature: A working and easy-to-implement naval system
Priority: 1
Use: A simple naval system allows mapmakers to create maps with more strategic depth without much hassle or flawed workarounds with pathing blockers or what not. The Frozen Throne had it and it was considered a clear improvement and a new dimension back then by both Blizzard and the Community, one of its most important features. Bring it back!
Feature: Server side banks
512x512 maps will not be happening. If the path finding engine has trouble with 256x256 maps (as my experiments and solutions has pretty much proven) 512x512 will tax the path finding engine far too much.
What can work is subdividing the build grid. That is 1 square becomes 4. That allows us to make things smaller.
Also an addition to the graphics engine: Terrain texture UV count (that is that console command that allows you to increase terrain texture resolution) that can be changed to by zoom level. This allows a Supreme Commander/War Game effect that is ideal for large scale RTS maps. The basic concept is used all the way to Paradox games. It would also be an ideal supplement to the melee scene as well. It is far quicker to zoom out, move the mouse and zoom back in then it is to click on the minimap and it would help casuals keep up with events. It would be a feature that would also help sell LotV which is going to have an up-hill if only because a 3rd non stand-alone RTS expansion is something that is not going over well.
Would be nice if then you launch the map within the editor to test it you get a small screen ahead of time that allows you to setup something kinda a lobby. Make it so that you can set what player you are so you can test from each one's perspective.
I'd like to Request something Add a Modify Behavior to Triggers in Editor
Feature: Set or Modify Behavior
Priority: 1
Use: For Custom Heros with Stats like Strength, Intelligence ect (called Attributes in the Editor) it would be nice to modify them with Triggers (not just in the Data). That way you can Test out having 9999 Strength by typing -set strength 9999, with triggers I can already set my Hero Level or Health, Shields, Armor, with Triggers but no Support for Modifying Attributes except for in the Data.
Example: Set Life Trigger
[Events]
Unit - Any Unit Enters (Triggering region)
[Local Variables]
[Conditions]
[Actions]
Unit - Set (Triggering unit) Maximum Life to 8765.0
with the above Trigger Code I can set my Life to anything within StarCraft II Life Limit. I'd like the same for Attributes Thanks.
My Projects:
Sorted Multiplayer Leader Board
Card Shuffle Dialog Demo
Air Wars Mass
Blizzard Fan since Starcraft. The Single Player story is AMAZING IMO, I can't wait for the Expansions. In Warcraft 3 I only enjoy the Custom Maps scene (& Blizzards...
Use: Allow players to choose the UI icons for Resources in the Race data. Despite being a minor change in the context of the game, this change will greatly ease a person's ability in putting the finishing touches on making a new race.
Please ffs give us an option to disable Arcade games from your BNet Profile History of played games. Lately I've not played any games and have been observing and it's stupid to see Loss Loss Loss for qutting Obs games - and to spam your history of games.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
@fishy77: Go
You misunderstand me. The question isn't how many people bought Starcraft for the Arcade (and therefore how much it earned). The Arcade is presently going nowhere because it no longer earns Blizzard any money and they hardly support it. It may even be the case that this little bit of communication is little more than PR designed to keep us happy until we move on to the next Blizzard game. I'm not saying that's the case, it's just a possibility.
What I would prefer is for Blizzard to start looking at the Arcade from a business point of view and actually take it somewhere. If I was Blizzard I would be saying "what is the Arcade going to earn me now? Sell a few more copies of Legacy of the Void (at best)? Why support it?". The solution is, in my opinion, to allow map-makers to sell their games, such that Blizzard actually has a reason to support the Arcade.
The bit about making it a separate platform was more of a long-term idea. After Legacy of the Void is released, the Arcade will eventually die out, because it will be on a game that is no longer supported and eventually replaced by something new. If, at that point, they made the Arcade a separate platform with access to a wider range of Blizzard assets... Well, it would be quite profitable, I think. They would want to develop and support it. And the platform itself could be free... They would just take a cut of all sales.
@MasterWrath: Go
I see. This does make sense and it would be so much more helpful for us map makers if Blizzard would support the Arcade more. I guess We will just have to wait and see what they do, and try our best to suggest things for them.
New to the Editor? Need a tutorial? Click Here
Want data assets? Click Here
Priority 1: Statistics for the Arcade Map.
This is really straight forward. Says how many people played, hours played, players playing per day/hour/week, etc.
Priority 2: 512 X 512 Maps
This is very straight forward, not gonna explain
Priority 3: Allow map makers reply to reviews (or just add in another section that allows that).
Many players who play the map end up not going to the website, therefore not allowing the Developer to reply to anyone who needs something.
Priority 4: Server-side banks
I am sure many already explained this
Hmm yeah that is right I forgot I could do this with actors. Still a more straightforward method would be convenient.
My list in case anyone is curious. Already submitted to Blizzard so no need to include it.
Obviously enough, microtransactions and player-side banks can't go together.
Regarding the map-stealing issue, I think some sort of automated similarity scanning feature would be great. It's basically the same method used in soundhound or youtube, only it's maps instead of audio data.
This system will take care of any map being republished without author's consent.
I got a GODDAMN MESSAGE FOR BLIZZARD:
WHY CANT I COPY AND PASTE TILTED DOODADS YOU BASTARDS
MY CREATIVITY, STIFLED.
I will repeat what was said in the very first post of this thread.
Be nice, concise and be professional, this is your chance :)
On that note I might as well throw in 1 or 2 suggestions,
Feature: Map pools for arcade games.
Priority: 1
Feature: Multiplayer support for transferring over to another map / mod.
Priority: 1
Feature: copy and paste pitch and roll.
Priority: 2
Feature: 512x512 map sizes.
Priority: 2
Feature: Multiple levels of pathing
Priority: 1
Feature: Support for additional textures.
Priority: 2
The editor is an extraordinary tool, but ever since I got my hands on the editor in WOL beta, I wised that these features would be implemented (with exception to the pitch and roll copy paste support of course).
I've got another one:
Double the 10.000 doodad limit.
Let me try to clarify the over-all point I am trying to make:
The problem has 2 major components:
1. The technical and usability issues in the Map Editor and how it interacts with Battle.net. This also includes any plugins (like the art tools). In addition there is the lack of sufficient support on Blizzard's end for new map makers and map projects which can border on a full Half Life 2 conversion.
2. The consumer aspect. All the technical fixes in the world won't make a difference if there are no players. And to do anything effective about this means you have to be able to see it from their perspective. After having worked retail, I have learned that consumers are emotionally driven semi-human creatures who are cruel enough to wave their money in your face and demand the impossible for next to free. Some of them can indeed be human, but I've found that (in Vegas) to be rare.
Almost all of the suggestions in this thread are about component 1 only. None of them will matter unless component 2 is also fixed.
Unfortunately component 2 is the harder issue to fix. As I have been trying to say: StarCraft 2 has been written off and un-installed by a majority of the players who wanted to primarily play the custom mods.
Why do I make a point of saying "un-installed"? This has nothing to do with technical aspects and everything to do with human nature. The StarCraft 2 download borders on 20GB. Installing from a disk - which often involves getting out of a chair to retrieve said disk - isn't much better considering the sheer amount of patches you have to download.
The almost impossible issue to overcome with people who has un-installed is simple human laziness. People would rather play a game they are content with - content doesn't always mean they are having fun - than try out a new game. To install and then try out a game that has already "let them down" a second or third time is almost impossible, especially considering how large of a download StarCraft 2 is.
So Blizzard has been acting like a headless chicken. So what would a competently management company do?
1. Realize that this would probably be their last chance.
2. Realize that the death of the StarCraft 2 arcade also mean sacrificing a key sales edge Blizzard has had over all other RTS games for over a decade. Between the melee and the user made mods, A Blizzard RTS simply got you more for your money than any other game. WarCraft 3 will not be able to maintain the custom mod scene forever.
So lets say that Blizzard does decide to make an attempt to repair the arcade (other than the more likely scenario that this is just a cheap PR move just like the developers suddenly showing up on the custom mod forums - several old hands pointed out that Blizzard has been doing that for years).
What should they do?
Well the one component they have absolutely no power to directly control is the consumer.
However one major factor that actually works in Blizzard's favor is that StarCraft 2 is the most viable RTS released since 2010. Company of Heroes 2 was terrible design and balance and WarGame's developers can't get away from niche "card deck" based RTS games.
So people are indeed still looking for a good RTS. Blizzard has one chance (before Planetary Annihilation can offer a serious challenge) to recover the player base.
By one chance I mean a period of no more than two weeks (maybe as little as 12 hours) to "sell" the Arcade's new features.
So when should this be tried? There are only 2 general dates that can apply. And they are both when school gets out. Christmas or summer are the only 2 potentially successful targets. Everything has to be ready and working (and I mean no major bugs unlike what usually happens with major content patches) by the time the first "lost player" checks out the game.
So what is the over-all goal? Well to make more money of course. But how?
Here is where the target consumer needs to be understood. There are 2 major factors:
1. They are biased against the game.
2. They most likely don't own HotS.
So a map market could be implemented. But player saturation is lacking and will most likely doom it to failure unless enough players have become consistently active to make it profitable. Remember in any F2P game only a small fraction of the players actually spend money so the bigger the player base the more players who will spend money.
The other option is to sell more copies of HotS. However if HotS's current features (campaign and melee) haven't already sold the game then it won't do any better now.
So HotS needs more features. And they need to be cheap to add.
Now in my specific case I have a problem. Of the players who play my maps, only roughly half actually own HotS. However with full spawning there is a possible lure here.
Lets say by some insanely impossible event Blizzard pays any more attention to me than they did back in WoL Beta (when I only made like 3 posts during the entire Beta). I cannot go to the players who play my maps and say "you need to buy HotS to play what was already in the WoL version". That would be the best way to fail terribly.
But I think I could say: "If you have HotS, all of the models get swapped out to accurate World War 2 models made by Blizzard". Now what I have is something that is not forced but very, very much wanted because of increased immersion and therefore improved experience. But they have to buy HotS.
With my map by itself they might be willing to pass on that. But with a bunch of maps with similar situation it is a very potent sales pitch.
But all that costs money right? Well yes, but who are you paying? An experienced professional? Or a college intern willing to work for minimum wage with no benefits?
Because something like a World of WarCraft model port project that is done by college interns isn't nearly as expensive paying for a full industry professional.
And reaching out in the direction of the college students is the right thing to do with the Arcade scene. It takes a college-level Computer Science student to be able to full use the editor and a college-level Computer Graphics student to make a passable model (although lots of free-lancers are available) for StarCraft 2.
So here would be my verdict. Christmas 2013 isn't a realistic target. Extreme polish will be as important as the content itself. So the summer of 2014 is the ideal target for any serious recovery project. It allows time for content to be well-made and polished as well as making sure Battle.net is as polished as it can be. Even if it means stalling LotV's release. It also allows time for "leaks", "anticipation" and "hope" to build.
Get the organization put together end development started now. Help people get teams together and maps made. This should all be possible through the web and Battle.net interface.
But there is one thing I continuously warned about that could shoot all of that in the butt. It played a major role in shooting down all community attempts. Money. Its very hard for a college student to justify spending time on a frustrating map editor to make a map which they have no idea if it will actually "take off" - especially if they have been burned before (which most of the people who know how to really use the editor have by now). Since you are talking a college student or higher, Blizzard will need to pay for their time. Back in 2011 they might have not had to do this but by 2012 the scene was too far gone.
So really what it amounts to is Blizzard doing a massive internship program to develop the content aspect (component 1 from the top) and also a very good public relations campaign (component 2) to slowly make players start looking at StarCraft 2 again.
Will this be done? I highly doubt it. Both components require a huge adjustment in ATVI's business model and it would be a rather bitter pill for some of their management to swallow.
LotV will be 1 of 2 things:
1. Either a last attempt to milk as much money from StarCraft 2 for as little investment as possible (the most likely situation). 2. A real attempt to recover StarCraft 2's arcade scene. This will reduce the over-all profit of StarCraft 2 (something investors won't like) in the short run but would have long-lasting benefits in WarCraft 4/StarCraft 3. If Blizzard fails to recover and maintain the custom mod community in StarCraft 2 then their future RTS sales will suffer and it will be even more expensive to build a new community from scratch.
One last question. What can the arcade do? How can the arcade fit into the long-term plans of ATVI? It isn't a decision Blizzard will ultimately make. Dustin Browder isn't the one who needs to be convinced. Robert Kotick does.
He does seem to have a sore spot (actually all of the large game development/publishing companies seem to). Valve. Specifically Steam. More specifically Steam mods and indie games.
Because one of the major flaws with Steam is that rewards and products are not interconnected with each other. They try, I mean one of the bonuses that came with EU 4 was TF2 hats. And it can make quite a bit of money. But its still not interconnected. Battle.net on the other hand, that can be interconnected.
Try to follow me here. Lets say we have Tofu, SCU, Subsistence and maybe a few other projects that are professional level indie games made on the StarCraft 2 RTS engine. What's wrong with selling content packs that cross over multiple games? That way you get a little bit of everything and everyone's map gets promoted and everyone gets a little bit of the income.
Anyone interest about translation? Making better translation circumstances is important too. (but it might have a pretty lower priority than others :$)
My suggestion:
Link this thread to blizzard when you reply.D
Also, dont know if anyone one mentioned this:
Match making system or at least possibility to somehow mark your lobby like in W3, when people named the lobby with "pros only" or "beginners only".
FTFY =P
Feature: 512x512 maps
Priority: 1
Use: Enables the modding of grand strategy games of a caliber like Azeroth Wars. Enables large scale RPGs. Enables so much more
Feature: A working and easy-to-implement naval system
Priority: 1
Use: A simple naval system allows mapmakers to create maps with more strategic depth without much hassle or flawed workarounds with pathing blockers or what not. The Frozen Throne had it and it was considered a clear improvement and a new dimension back then by both Blizzard and the Community, one of its most important features. Bring it back!
Feature: Server side banks
Priority: 2
Use: Allows true in-game achievements for the Arcade, allows rewarding players and more competitive arcade play
512x512 maps will not be happening. If the path finding engine has trouble with 256x256 maps (as my experiments and solutions has pretty much proven) 512x512 will tax the path finding engine far too much.
What can work is subdividing the build grid. That is 1 square becomes 4. That allows us to make things smaller.
Also an addition to the graphics engine: Terrain texture UV count (that is that console command that allows you to increase terrain texture resolution) that can be changed to by zoom level. This allows a Supreme Commander/War Game effect that is ideal for large scale RTS maps. The basic concept is used all the way to Paradox games. It would also be an ideal supplement to the melee scene as well. It is far quicker to zoom out, move the mouse and zoom back in then it is to click on the minimap and it would help casuals keep up with events. It would be a feature that would also help sell LotV which is going to have an up-hill if only because a 3rd non stand-alone RTS expansion is something that is not going over well.
Feature: Player POV editor testing
Priority: 2
Would be nice if then you launch the map within the editor to test it you get a small screen ahead of time that allows you to setup something kinda a lobby. Make it so that you can set what player you are so you can test from each one's perspective.
I'd like to Request something Add a Modify Behavior to Triggers in Editor
Feature: Set or Modify Behavior
Priority: 1
Use: For Custom Heros with Stats like Strength, Intelligence ect (called Attributes in the Editor) it would be nice to modify them with Triggers (not just in the Data). That way you can Test out having 9999 Strength by typing -set strength 9999, with triggers I can already set my Hero Level or Health, Shields, Armor, with Triggers but no Support for Modifying Attributes except for in the Data.
Example: Set Life Trigger [Events] Unit - Any Unit Enters (Triggering region) [Local Variables] [Conditions] [Actions] Unit - Set (Triggering unit) Maximum Life to 8765.0 with the above Trigger Code I can set my Life to anything within StarCraft II Life Limit. I'd like the same for Attributes Thanks.
Feature: Race resource icon Customization
Priority: 2
Use: Allow players to choose the UI icons for Resources in the Race data. Despite being a minor change in the context of the game, this change will greatly ease a person's ability in putting the finishing touches on making a new race.
@Metalking1417: Go Its possible if you add the entries to Assets.txt I think.
Oh yes this:
Please ffs give us an option to disable Arcade games from your BNet Profile History of played games. Lately I've not played any games and have been observing and it's stupid to see Loss Loss Loss for qutting Obs games - and to spam your history of games.