So I've noticed a lot of really odd suggestions cropping up here and there concerning esports. I know people get very enthusiastic when it comes to a new game announcing esport interest, but it's important to stop and analyze what makes a good esport (and it's also important that those players who aren't interested so much in esports realize that it's not going to ruin the game (See: the Firefall forums)
 )
)To do this, what we need to try to do is think about this game from two different perspectives, and try to make those meet up as amicably as possible, while ultimately favouring one over the other
First off, the game needs to be something worth competing in. Player skill needs to determine output, and while it's good to have a reasonably accessible game, it should be expansive enough that even the best players have room to grow
This isn't exactly easy, and many games succeed through sheer dumb luck (read: bugs that make the game amazing) but it's important for developers to be conscious of what makes their game different, special, and competitive (and I think Hawken's devs have done a good job of this so far)
You shouldn't just have a game dependent on aiming skill. There should be other ways in which players can grow. Movement skill is extremely important, whether it boils down to timing and positioning or agility and speed
Similarly, map control should be emphasized. Having a game in which the maps have no real objectives means that players have no reason to engage on anything but the best terms. Firefall currently suffers from this. Since TDM is currently the closest-to-comp gamemode, teams play against each other in that mode, on surprisingly open maps, with powerups that aren't very important. Both teams clump up on either side of the map (often around a health powerup, because why not?) and fling bullets at each other until one side is weak enough for a push
It's slow and boring. It takes ages for anyone to actually do anything remotely skillful and/or exciting
The OTHER thing that an E Sport needs (and this is the priority thing) is entertaining for spectators
I'm somewhat worried about Hawken in this regard, though I think to an extent the current maximum mobility values, as well as some more comp-centric maps, could solve this somewhat
The game should be easy to follow. Many tournaments actually include commentators explaining the game to newcomers (about one or two lines to explain the gamemode, and maybe a few points about the most important details)
Not only that, but it needs to be easy to follow the action. 1v1's work well for this, and the previously mentioned map centralization mechanics also assist in making it easier for a spectator to follow a match.
The game should also make it clear just how skilled the participants are. Tribes: Ascend failed somewhat in this regard when it failed to properly convey speed, and the effort put into gaining it. The viewer shouldn't feel as though what they're watching is something they could easily pull off themselves. The players in the match should be capable of tremendous feats of skill and "hero moments"
In a 1v1 these are your sudden comebacks, your quick and brutal fights and the like
In a team game, these are your killstreaks, aces and clutch saves
Now, to tie in the previous thread's deviation with this thread's subject, I'm going to use Quake as an example of how this works in action. Before anyone goes on about how SC and LoL have more players, I'd like to point out that
1. I'm using an FPS to illustrate FPS Esports in action. I'm also much more familiar with Quake than I am with CS
2. SC's status is ultimately the ideal, but I don't think it's something you can just build up. LoL hasn't really lasted very long, so I can't speak to the longevity of its model. Quake 3/Live lasted until 2010 in E Sports circuits. which is pretty good for a 1999 title

I'm also not really here to argue which is the E-Sportiest E-Sport. It's all about what works and what doesn't
In terms of skill:
Quake puts the onus on the player when it comes to performance. The LG, Plasma, Shotgun, Rocket Launcher, GL and Rail are all completely 100% consistent. Any deviation from pixel perfect straight line aim is up to the player to mitigate. The only weapon with any sort of COF is the CG
Quake has a robust movement system based on what was previously a physics bug. Quake Live and CPM further embrace this system of movement, which works with aiming skill to create a much higher skill ceiling, while having its own fairly intimidating learning curve
Quake centralizes conflict. Players are encouraged to fight over the Red Armour and Mega Health powerups in order to gain a distinct advantage in any fights that occur shortly after obtaining either. Players in control of those powerups are encouraged to harass their opponent and force them away from later drops, as well as keep them from building a stack off of lesser powerups. Weapon drops and limited ammo force extra movement to keep combat versatility, and in the case of some weapons, a good amount of area denial and harassment
In terms of spectating:
While Quake is not the most accessible game for players, comp Quake is easy to follow. All the weapons are very simple and obvious in their implementation
Comp Quake is played in 1v1 duels. It's easy to follow the action because there's only 2 sources of conflict to follow. Following either player guarantees that you see every fight
In addition, the powerups on the map almost guarantee fights at regular intervals. Sometimes players will decide against fighting over one to grab the other, but most of the time someone will try to gain control of the map and push for both
It's also very clear to the viewer that the players involved are highly skilled. Strafe jumping looks impressive, as does rocket jumping
In addition, the almost machine-like precision with which players shoot each other, and blast explosives into various hallways to keep their opponent trapped shows the hours of practice that the participants put into getting to the point they're at
Agree? Disagree? Have your own concerns? How do you feel Hawken measures up from a spectator's standpoint? Do you feel like the skill ceiling is high enough, and that there's enough areas to improve in?

 

 4
 4 


 
				
				
			
 
				
				
			
 
				
				
			 
				
				
			
 
					
					 
				
				
			
 
				
				
			
 
				
				
			
 
				
				
			 
				
				
			 
				
				
			 
				
				
			










 
								




