Fair chance for hard work is socialism. In this system quality is not being supported and going down until everything is a complete crap.
As opposite, competition where only good stuff has chance (and good stuff is usually < 10% of all stuff) - supports quality, and this is the principle our civilization is built on.
Err, the problem is that I AM talking about supporting quality games. At the moment the competition seems to give an advantage towards those that either already has a good solid fan base going or those that can provide a strong INITIAL impact.
Err, the problem is that I AM talking about supporting quality games. At the moment the competition seems to give an advantage towards those that either already has a good solid fan base going or those that can provide a strong INITIAL impact.
Implying that a strong initial impact cant be a sign of a quality game.
Implying that a strong initial impact cant be a sign of a quality game.
I wasn't implying that and you know it(if you didn't, please read my statement again. CAREFULLY). I'm just saying that the competition is stacked in their favour, overshadowing games that don't have a good initial impact but are great games in the long run.
It's possible for quality games to have a strong initial impact but it's also possible to have games that are terrible but have a strong initial impact (with good graphics, advertising, or something). I agree with Kildare that the problem needs to be addressed. Just so we don't get another Nexus Wars or Top Played first page where alot of people are very biased to a very particular game type.
To play devil's advocate, why don't you want another Nexus Wars-style map? The community interest is clearly there.
The arcade is the only platform that does tug of war style games really well. You just don't find high quality content of this style of gameplay outside the arcade.
@TyaStarcraft: Go He didn't say "Nexus wars-style", he said another Nexus Wars. And by that I believe Crainy isn't agaisnt the Tug-of-War genre, but agaisnt the execution of the map itself.
I wasn't implying that and you know it(if you didn't, please read my statement again. CAREFULLY). I'm just saying that the competition is stacked in their favour, overshadowing games that don't have a good initial impact but are great games in the long run.
It's possible for quality games to have a strong initial impact but it's also possible to have games that are terrible but have a strong initial impact (with good graphics, advertising, or something). I agree with Kildare that the problem needs to be addressed. Just so we don't get another Nexus Wars or Top Played first page where alot of people are very biased to a very particular game type.
EDIT: As a good start to fixing this problem I suggest the only people who can vote in the contest are those who've participated in sc2mapster's map night at least once. I love how they provide very detailed and useful feedback and try to see the strengths of the map.
How bad can a map really be if it has a strong initial impact? Thats an accomplishment in itself. If maps with a strong initial impact are favored because thats what people want, then so be it, no need to artifically control the results of the contest based on what a few people on mapsters considere to be "great maps".
It's like one of the oldest lesson in business is it not?
An individual with an amazing product but not a clue how to sell it will fail. An invidiual with an average product but skillful at presenting and selling it will do well.
It's like one of the oldest lesson in business is it not?
An individual with an amazing product but not a clue how to sell it will fail. An invidiual with an average product but skillful at presenting and selling it will do well.
This example falls flat though if the "presentation", as in, the strong initial impact, is a part of the product itself and as such needs to be considered when evaluating the complete product.
We don't have to do much selling. The arcade system works takes time but works. Those that think it doesn't just don't want to admit that their game just isn't that good.
We don't have to do much selling. The arcade system works takes time but works. Those that think it doesn't just don't want to admit that their game just isn't that good.
We don't have to do much selling. The arcade system works takes time but works. Those that think it doesn't just don't want to admit that their game just isn't that good.
Oh, that's why everyone thinks the open games and default popularity lists are garbage. I thought it was because titled lobbies made it easier to find like minded players and popularity lists kill diversity.
It probably has nothing to do with the lack of kick and ban features for hosts either. I mean, sure, playing with a jerk sucks but the game would totally die otherwise. At least the map editor is highly approachable to its computer science illiterate user base.
Oh, that's why everyone thinks the open games and default popularity lists are garbage. I thought it was because titled lobbies made it easier to find like minded players and popularity lists kill diversity.
I think you're vastly overestimating how many people dislike the arcade. It's definitely not "everyone". It takes seconds to fill a lobby for some top maps.
It probably has nothing to do with the lack of kick and ban features for hosts either. I mean, sure, playing with a jerk sucks but the game would totally die otherwise. At least the map editor is highly approachable to its computer science illiterate user base.
Or maybe you're ignoring that kick/ban features don't work all that well. What if the host is a jerk?
Thats a lot of work man gl :) . How do you think guys is it possible to make indirect control map with 6 heroes and lots of ai for 6 players considering this deadlines? Any chance that it will not lag like hell ( every unit has AI?).
The ability to captivate players is a mark of quality. I see no "tradeoff" in this regard (except time constraints). Excuses won't serve you. Just do it!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Err, the problem is that I AM talking about supporting quality games. At the moment the competition seems to give an advantage towards those that either already has a good solid fan base going or those that can provide a strong INITIAL impact.
Implying that a strong initial impact cant be a sign of a quality game.
I wasn't implying that and you know it(if you didn't, please read my statement again. CAREFULLY). I'm just saying that the competition is stacked in their favour, overshadowing games that don't have a good initial impact but are great games in the long run.
So who will participate in this and with what genre?
@abvdzh: Go
I will. Had a mapmaking dream this summer, gave me a map idea. Will implement it. Genre is near casual/logical. Maybe something else, if have time.
nais. i have some idea with hearthstone / starcraft 2 mix but doubt that i will handle it.
To play devil's advocate, why don't you want another Nexus Wars-style map? The community interest is clearly there.
The arcade is the only platform that does tug of war style games really well. You just don't find high quality content of this style of gameplay outside the arcade.
@TyaStarcraft: Go He didn't say "Nexus wars-style", he said another Nexus Wars. And by that I believe Crainy isn't agaisnt the Tug-of-War genre, but agaisnt the execution of the map itself.
How bad can a map really be if it has a strong initial impact? Thats an accomplishment in itself. If maps with a strong initial impact are favored because thats what people want, then so be it, no need to artifically control the results of the contest based on what a few people on mapsters considere to be "great maps".
It's like one of the oldest lesson in business is it not?
An individual with an amazing product but not a clue how to sell it will fail. An invidiual with an average product but skillful at presenting and selling it will do well.
This example falls flat though if the "presentation", as in, the strong initial impact, is a part of the product itself and as such needs to be considered when evaluating the complete product.
We don't have to do much selling. The arcade system works takes time but works. Those that think it doesn't just don't want to admit that their game just isn't that good.
This man speaks the truth.
Oh, that's why everyone thinks the open games and default popularity lists are garbage. I thought it was because titled lobbies made it easier to find like minded players and popularity lists kill diversity.
It probably has nothing to do with the lack of kick and ban features for hosts either. I mean, sure, playing with a jerk sucks but the game would totally die otherwise. At least the map editor is highly approachable to its computer science illiterate user base.
I think you're vastly overestimating how many people dislike the arcade. It's definitely not "everyone". It takes seconds to fill a lobby for some top maps.
Or maybe you're ignoring that kick/ban features don't work all that well. What if the host is a jerk?
This is definately a thing.
Yeah, Arcade system works, its great, beautiful and sexy and now we can all enjoy our flappy bird games.
I'll be doing 3 games total with their genres being Third Person Arcade Shooter, Racing and Rhythm game.
Thats a lot of work man gl :) . How do you think guys is it possible to make indirect control map with 6 heroes and lots of ai for 6 players considering this deadlines? Any chance that it will not lag like hell ( every unit has AI?).
The ability to captivate players is a mark of quality. I see no "tradeoff" in this regard (except time constraints). Excuses won't serve you. Just do it!