|
Can we please post balance threads in the balance forum? Is that too much to ask? |
|
It was my first time. It'll also be my last. On the bright side, it was a nice little diversion during downtime at work today. |
|
You just kinda talk, eh? And when someone challenges your position you ignore them or change the subject, or go on a completely irrelevant tangent. Oh well, such is life I suppose. |
Incentive is required inorder to motivate participation.
Glory and bragging rights only go so far, and only to some.
Cash amd real prizes is a language just about everyone speaks.
The coh2.org Alienware tourney was roaring success far as I am concerned.
No ESL tourney however has even registered to me.
I camt even imagine who would organize/promote/stream/host/commentate it.
I come up completely empty at even the thought of it. No idea how it could practically even happen.
Consider this, if someone offers 1 million for winning a coh2 tournament, would it not suddenly become extremely "competetive"?
Some people are confusing the term "competetive" to mean things which it does not.
If the game is interesting to play competitively, people are going to play it competitively regardless of incentives. Western Brood War, early DotA, and even CoH1 had more vibrant and dynamic competitive scenes than CoH2 does with essentially zero meaningful financial incentives beyond maybe the top handful of players.
You keep saying people are confusing competitive play with professional play, yet here you are saying financial incentives are key to making a game competitive. They're not. They're key to making a game professional, sure, but all a game needs to be competitive is for its competition to be compelling to play and watch. And for the vast majority of RTS fans out there (not just the few thousand who visit these forums), CoH2's gameplay just isn't as compelling to play or watch as Starcraft's is, and Relic has done essentially nothing since release to target that audience. |
RNG is competetive.
It cuts both ways.
Makes for far more interesting viewing and playing, than automatic SC2.
As an example, in Super Bowl 49, did you expect that fnal throw rather than muscling the last yard? Hell no. Did you expect the interception? Fuck no. Did anyone see the probability of that impssible fumble that took Seahawks to the line? Absolutely not.
That was RNG in action, at its best.
Nobody saw it coming. Completely unpredictable. But it made for a fantastic game.
Wait what? This isn't responding to me is it? Because I haven't said a word about RNG this entire conversation. Did you even read my post? |
Ive been watching CoH2 for years, and seen plenty of extremely competetive, exciting and engaging play, including in SNF.
SC2 bores the hell out of me.
You are confusing competitiveness, with "i can earn money from this".
Nope.
The game doesn't offer much to competitive players, especially not competitive RTS players. Little developer support, paid DLC that affects gameplay, poor performance on many machines, tiny playerbase, limited ways to stand out as a player, etc.
It wasn't designed to be a competitive game.
In comparison, SC2 has good developer support with major tournament series sponsored by them and patches aimed at actively improving the quality of competitive play, no paid DLC that affects multiplayer, great performance on nearly any machine, a large playerbase, and a vast range of ways to differentiate yourself as a player thanks to the game's combination of deep macro and deep micro gameplay, cheese strategies, and the viability of a vast range of playstyles.
By a wide variety of criteria, SC2 is in fact a superior competitive game, and it's no doubt more attractive to players interested in competitive RTS play.
I haven't once referenced professional play, just competitive play.
I like CoH1 more than SC2, but that doesn't mean I think it's a better competitive game, because objectively it isn't. |
|
Not one person here said CoH2 games aren't competitive. There's just no real reason for your average competitive-minded RTS player to choose CoH2 over a game like SC2. |
Lets be real here.
Is SC2 a "real" competitive game?
No.
Its a perpetual mish-mash of balance problems.
Its just marketed and presented better.
It offers nothing more to "competitive players" except the fact that it has managed (through marketing) to attract more viewers, and generate a wider scene of players on that premise.
You are confusing "competitiveness" with simply being more popular, due to better marketing.
The two are not the same.
"Competitive players" flood to it, because there is more money on offer, due to better promotion/marketing, and hence, a wider viewership, which inturn supports that better promotion/marketing, and thereby the "competitive players" interests.
Has nothing to do with being competitive, in and of itself, as a game, which it is not, in any ways that matter over CoH2.
The game doesn't offer much to competitive players, especially not competitive RTS players. Little developer support, paid DLC that affects gameplay, poor performance on many machines, tiny playerbase, limited ways to stand out as a player, etc.
It wasn't designed to be a competitive game.
In comparison, SC2 has good developer support with major tournament series sponsored by them and patches aimed at actively improving the quality of competitive play, no paid DLC that affects multiplayer, great performance on nearly any machine, a large playerbase, and a vast range of ways to differentiate yourself as a player thanks to the game's combination of deep macro and deep micro gameplay, cheese strategies, and the viability of a vast range of playstyles.
By a wide variety of criteria, SC2 is in fact a superior competitive game, and it's no doubt more attractive to players interested in competitive RTS play. |
|
Nothing, because I never said RNG had anything to do with it. |
Exactly, CoH2 is a game that is inextricably tied to competition, yet that competition is not very attractive to outsiders because
The game doesn't offer much to competitive players, especially not competitive RTS players. Little developer support, paid DLC that affects gameplay, poor performance on many machines, tiny playerbase, limited ways to stand out as a player, etc.
It wasn't designed to be a competitive game. |
3
Canada
Inverse
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
