92 replies to this topic

[Roundlay]

Personally, I have no issue watching long form content, and don't see many reasons to think that relaxed, non-competitive players would be completely turned off by thirty or forty minute matches. The degree to which Adhesive facilitates commentator and spectator features will help bridge the gap between short and long form content. In this way, a combination of skilled players, entertaining commentary and readable footage will play a large role in the game's viability as an eSport.

[Beemann]

Roundlay, on November 01 2012 - 10:02 PM, said:

Almost certainly. I think it's safe to assume that any sufficiently large population will be composed of multiple interest groups; relaxed, unconcerned players are no doubt represented here.

Unless you consider how much you have to know to understand what's going on in a Dota-like

Honestly I'm somewhat hesitant to try to follow the lead of those sorts of games. LoL is successful largely because it's got such a massive playerbase, due in part to the lack of appropriate rival titles in the genre when it came out. RIOT STILL had to throw boatloads of money at competition to get things going and the game has only lasted 3 years so far
Dota2 is another example of this. Valve instantly threw a massive tournament for the game, and while it has a pretty high population of very active players, it's lasted a fraction of the time that other esports and prospective esports titles have

So we've got a few titles during the fad period for the genre they're part of with a HUGE amount of cash thrown at their competitive scene outside of normal development... and THOSE are the games you think Adhesive is okay to follow with their small indie team and mech-themed FPS game_

I mean.. if you look at games like Tribes Ascend, you'll see a game where people just weren't very impressed by it on a spectator level... which was in part due to a lack of knowledge concerning the skill it took to move around at the speeds people were travelling at
And this was all from the perspective of a new or non player

Right now the best examples of esports from where I stand are games like Starcraft, CS and Quake
All three of those are titles that have made it as esports and lasted for over 10 years
And none of them are hard to understand as a new or non-player

[Roundlay]

Beemann, on November 02 2012 - 10:31 AM, said:

So we've got a few titles during the fad period for the genre they're part of with a HUGE amount of cash thrown at their competitive scene outside of normal development... and THOSE are the games you think Adhesive is okay to follow with their small indie team and mech-themed FPS game_

No. I was specifically addressing the question regarding whether or not "casual" players would stick through a 40 minute match of Hawken. I wasn't suggesting that Adhesive follow these alternate approaches to eSports.

Beemann, on November 02 2012 - 10:31 AM, said:

Right now the best examples of esports from where I stand are games like Starcraft, CS and Quake
All three of those are titles that have made it as esports and lasted for over 10 years
And none of them are hard to understand as a new or non-player

I would disagree that Starcraft is easy to understand as a new or non-player. Instead, Starcraft is easy watch, and is easily readable, which makes it interesting to relaxed spectators; I think this partly explains why you rarely see competitive first person shooters at the top of Twitch's directory, for example. eSport specific features that put Hawken's goal based game modes in a broader context will go a ways to facilitating this kind of readability.

Edited by Roundlay, November 02 2012 - 11:03 AM.

[Beemann]

Roundlay, on November 02 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

Beemann, on November 02 2012 - 10:31 AM, said:

So we've got a few titles during the fad period for the genre they're part of with a HUGE amount of cash thrown at their competitive scene outside of normal development... and THOSE are the games you think Adhesive is okay to follow with their small indie team and mech-themed FPS game_

No. I was specifically addressing the question regarding whether or not "casual" players would stick through a 40 minute match of Hawken. I wasn't suggesting that Adhesive follow these alternate approaches to eSports.

Beemann, on November 02 2012 - 10:31 AM, said:

Right now the best examples of esports from where I stand are games like Starcraft, CS and Quake
All three of those are titles that have made it as esports and lasted for over 10 years
And none of them are hard to understand as a new or non-player

I would disagree that Starcraft is easy to understand as a new or non-player. Instead, Starcraft is easy watch, and is easily readable, which makes it interesting to relaxed spectators; I think this partly explains why you rarely see competitive first person shooters at the top of Twitch's directory, for example. eSport specific features that put Hawken's goal based game modes in a broader context will go a ways to facilitating this kind of readability.

I was referring to just the general theme of some of these LoL and Dota referencing posts, not your posts on time. I see a lot of people instantly reference LoL and Dota.. Concerning time per match though I don't really think most people will sit through a 40 minute FPS match. Many smaller matches_ Sure... just not the sort of 40 minutes to an hour siege matches we've been seeing

As for understanding SC
While you wont understand all the nuances of gameplay (same goes for Quake or CS) until you learn more about it or play it, it's pretty easy to tell what's happening in a broader sense. Blizzard did a great job of promoting clarity and visibility when it came to fights, and while you might not know exactly what something does, the way it looks can give you a pretty good idea
With LoL and Dota, it just looks like a tiny rave in the middle of a RTS match between two newbies, and listening to commentary feels like you're at an auction or something
It's like trying to explain Chess as opposed to trying to explain Warhammer
In Chess, you can quickly and rather efficiently explain what most of your pieces do
In Warhammer, you have to be a Warhammer player to know what's going on. There's just too many little rules to follow

[NotKjell]

I find that chess vs. warhammer analogy funny. Cause while it's true, it's much easier to get the point of a SC2 match looking at it(That big thing shoots lasers and that is a tank. Those marine dudes are melting) it's so much more complex/difficult to play than a DOTA or LoL.

But while we may praise SC2 for good design choices, Blizzards attempts to embrace the casual and even e-sports community have been less than stellar. Especially compared to LoL. This I hope Hawken really does, as a huge player base that keeps playing the actual game is what sustains everything else. I'd love to see mod community support to, like tf2. That games still going amazingly 5 years later with one of the greatest communities in gaming. Constant support from valve, mod communities free to run wild however they want etc.

This is getting off topic from the thread I know. I still feel 20 minutes games are far more accessible, and it would be best if what the every-day player plays is what the pros play to. No special gametypes, I feel that always creates some distant from players being able to really relate.

[Beemann]

NotKjell, on November 02 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

I find that chess vs. warhammer analogy funny. Cause while it's true, it's much easier to get the point of a SC2 match looking at it(That big thing shoots lasers and that is a tank. Those marine dudes are melting) it's so much more complex/difficult to play than a DOTA or LoL.

But while we may praise SC2 for good design choices, Blizzards attempts to embrace the casual and even e-sports community have been less than stellar. Especially compared to LoL. This I hope Hawken really does, as a huge player base that keeps playing the actual game is what sustains everything else. I'd love to see mod community support to, like tf2. That games still going amazingly 5 years later with one of the greatest communities in gaming. Constant support from valve, mod communities free to run wild however they want etc.

I'd consider the same to be true of Chess vs Warhammer quite frankly. Warhammer takes quite a bit of learning to understand what goes on in a single match on a basic level, but it falls prey to a lot of cheese and FOTM army building, and a lot of armies lean towards singular basic strategies (like the melee centric armies whose effectiveness is determined by how many people die before you get within choppin' range)

And I'm talking about the Starcraft franchise as a whole. I feel as though SC2 was handled quite poorly in some areas, but it still managed to make a pretty big impact. Brood War is a much better example though
And I do think that a certain level of modding would be nice. It would need to be restricted somewhat to prevent some of the abuse that comes with allowing people to muck around with the game, but I agree with you on the longevity it brings to a title. I've been playing Q3 DeFraG and CPM more than I've played some modern titles

NotKjell, on November 02 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

20 minutes games are far more accessible, and it would be best if what the every-day player plays is what the pros play to. No special gametypes, I feel that always creates some distant from players being able to really relate.

I absolutely agree with this as well

Edited by Beemann, November 02 2012 - 01:39 PM.

[Roundlay]

Beemann, on November 02 2012 - 12:47 PM, said:

Roundlay, on November 02 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

Beemann, on November 02 2012 - 10:31 AM, said:

So we've got a few titles during the fad period for the genre they're part of with a HUGE amount of cash thrown at their competitive scene outside of normal development... and THOSE are the games you think Adhesive is okay to follow with their small indie team and mech-themed FPS game_

No. I was specifically addressing the question regarding whether or not "casual" players would stick through a 40 minute match of Hawken. I wasn't suggesting that Adhesive follow these alternate approaches to eSports.

I was referring to just the general theme of some of these LoL and Dota referencing posts, not your posts on time. I see a lot of people instantly reference LoL and Dota.. Concerning time per match though I don't really think most people will sit through a 40 minute FPS match. Many smaller matches_ Sure... just not the sort of 40 minutes to an hour siege matches we've been seeing

Weird moment to bring this up, then, considering that I specifically directed all my comments at the question relating to viewer retention.

Beemann, on November 02 2012 - 12:47 PM, said:

As for understanding SC
While you won't understand all the nuances of gameplay (same goes for Quake or CS) until you learn more about it or play it, it's pretty easy to tell what's happening in a broader sense. Blizzard did a great job of promoting clarity and visibility when it came to fights, and while you might not know exactly what something does, the way it looks can give you a pretty good idea

Exactly. I touched on this in my previous post.

Essentially, the readability of a game’s systems is contingent on the player or viewer being able to internalise and build a working metaphor for each of a game’s systems by understanding the relationship between the feedback and cues the game is delivering within the environment. This is why the success of Hakwen as an eSport is largely dependent on the degree to which Adhesive facilitate spectator specific functionality into the game.

But again, this says nothing to the attention spans of “casual” players.

[noten]

Realistically, if hawken was able to reach e-sports potential, I would assume there would also be commentators/casters to detail what is going on and also explain the game mechanics to newer viewers.

Roundlay, on November 02 2012 - 10:30 PM, said:

But again, this says nothing to the attention spans of “casual” players.

This is how I feel when I hear viewers say they lose interest when the game is any more complicated than kill to win, which implies they don't have much interest in the game anyways or they have ADHD.

To add on, I think if the game were to go in an e-sports direction, it should stay true to itself and not be simplified to attract a bigger viewer base especially if you have to shy away from the original vision of the game to achieve a broader fanbase.

Edited by noten, November 02 2012 - 11:03 PM.

[AsianJoyKiller]

Roundlay, on November 02 2012 - 10:30 PM, said:

But again, this says nothing to the attention spans of “casual” players.

Understanding what's going on doesn't affect attention span_

[noten]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 02 2012 - 10:58 PM, said:

Roundlay, on November 02 2012 - 10:30 PM, said:

But again, this says nothing to the attention spans of “casual” players.

Understanding what's going on doesn't affect attention span_

Attention span in this case would be the willingness to understand what is going on before the viewer loses interest.

[Beemann]

noten, on November 02 2012 - 10:56 PM, said:

Realistically, if hawken was able to reach e-sports potential, I would assume there would also be commentators/casters to detail what is going on and also explain the game mechanics to newer viewers.

Listening to commentary on LoL and Dota matches doesn't really help too much
It generally works out a little better if your game is easy to describe.
I've actually heard people summarize gamemodes and make a few comments about the map in question while watching ESL matches
That sorta thing doesn't work so much if your gamemode takes more than a few sentences to describe

Roundlay, on November 02 2012 - 10:30 PM, said:

Weird moment to bring this up, then, considering that I specifically directed all my comments at the question relating to viewer retention.

Was off the forums for a little while. Figured I could get away with not quoting anyone and just making a general post
I figured wrong

[Roundlay]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 02 2012 - 10:58 PM, said:

Roundlay, on November 02 2012 - 10:30 PM, said:

But again, this says nothing to the attention spans of “casual” players.

Understanding what's going on doesn't affect attention span_

My hunch is that an understanding of a particular stimulus would have an affect on one’s attention span—in which direction, I'm not sure—but best to keep things in context. In my reply, "this" is referring to those factors that are intrinsically linked to a game's readability. These factors say nothing to the attention spans of “casual” players, which was the focus of my replies here.

[Archimedes]

I would have to disagree with some of the comments stating that viewing a match of Dota or LoL isn't that benificial to understanding the game. Having a basic understanding to push towers and destroy an objective is an easy concept, but watching the strategies of those treating the game professionally add a whole new level of understanding to the game.

Before I started playing EvE Online I would watch the tournaments which I found quite entertaining yet I knew very little about most of the game mechanics. So I guess what I'm trying to say is that it comes down to presentation.  One doesn't have to fully understand a multi-layered, and complex game in order to enjoy watching competitions.  In fact its the unknown that makes it more entertaining, and adds that: "Oh I didn't even realize one could do that!" surprise aspect.

I think the Hawken team should take a look at the structure of the MoBa play and design a game mode with a similar structure. I think it would also be awesome if the Mechs could have a loadout system similar to EvE Online.