also, how does a control point map not evolve? squad coordination is constantly in flux based on territorial control. Bosses are essentially resources that must be capped or controlled, which adds a really cool mechanic, in my opinion.
to the OP - did you actually explore this mechanic? have you tried swinging the outcome of the match by bringing the battle to the bosses, or maybe coordinating simultaneous downing of both for 100 points in Forest of Nif? what about taking out the treb in Battle of Khylo, and using/defending your own for area denial?
I have played the maximum play time of any open beta tester alive right now. I am not speaking without experience.
How does control point map not evolve? Because it does not evolve. Players move. But is the "player movement" any different at 100 points than it is 400? No. There's no evolution, and that is just one thing that can be added as an improvement TO FUTURE MAPS.
Listen, I need to add a disclaimer to the next video. I'm not attacking GW2, I'm simply talking about some areas of CONSIDERATION. I seriously feel like the passionate GW2 community is assuming I'm attacking their integrity, and that's so very far from the case.
For goodness sake, I've created a YT channel FOR GuildWars2. No one is more anticipative of the game than I am.
By evolve, you are refering to the MOBA mechanics of gaining levels and earning equipment, correct?
It does seem to work for MOBAs, but I just have to throw out my opinion here. I don't like MOBA gameplay. I don't like it for the very reason that it feels like farming instead of PvPing. Millions of people love that "progression within a match" gameplay. I am not one of those people and tend to find those mechanics annoying. So at least in my case, I believe it would be a detriment to my enjoyment.
My preference is planning before a match with some friends and going in with synergies that make sense and reacting to what the other team is trying to accomplish. I prefer to impose our gameplan on others (while trying to avoid allowing them to impose theirs). When you add mechanics where characters can gain levels and gear within a match, it tends to reinforce a more farming oriented mentality that takes away from the PvP experience in my opinion.
But I do understand where you are coming from and I do wish they would add more playstyles into the mix besides just capture point. MOBA mechanics work for a lot of people. But I don't think there is anything inherently amazing about them.
i think this is a really interesting discussion - dont start defending yourself where no one attacked. all this 'i am on your side'-stuff is not needed.
You're right, thanks for the sentiment. It's just easy to get lost in the flood of direct negative comments on our group rather than the dicussion at hand XD
For sure I'm not used to it, as our other videos got positive reviews. Definitely a lack of experience on my part seeing that flood
i dont think youre "attacking" GW2, im merely hinting that it may be just a tad too early to question the status quo, especially when most good pvp'ers barely have a grasp of the game's mechanics, and most people dont even understand all the combo fields and finishers... all good bro, enjoy the discussion.
If it's too early, then every top-tier guild right now (who've discussed these topics on forums everywhere) are also speaking too early. The discussions are already happening, and I'm just the person to consolidate and bring that content to you :] These top teir guilds have spent 100+ hours on a part of the game that is important to alot of people.
100 hours is enough time to justify helping ANet by telling them what the players think. Conquest, as an example, is here to stay and WE all love it! The point, to be clear, was that we want another map type which is MORE advanced and has more to it, and ergo, easier to cast. We're not saying they need to change much, we're saying they need to expand. That couldn't possibly be a bad thing.
no. please stop. do not tell Anet on my behalf what I want in a game. i'm sorry but you are not the voice of the majority of players. to me you are just some random guy with a youtube channel trying to ride on the coat-tails of gw2's success.
also, how does a control point map not evolve? squad coordination is constantly in flux based on territorial control. Bosses are essentially resources that must be capped or controlled, which adds a really cool mechanic, in my opinion.
to the OP - did you actually explore this mechanic? have you tried swinging the outcome of the match by bringing the battle to the bosses, or maybe coordinating simultaneous downing of both for 100 points in Forest of Nif? what about taking out the treb in Battle of Khylo, and using/defending your own for area denial?
I have played the maximum play time of any open beta tester alive right now. I am not speaking without experience.
How does control point map not evolve? Because it does not evolve. Players move. But is the "player movement" any different at 100 points than it is 400? No. There's no evolution, and that is just one thing that can be added as an improvement TO FUTURE MAPS.
Listen, I need to add a disclaimer to the next video. I'm not attacking GW2, I'm simply talking about some areas of CONSIDERATION. I seriously feel like the passionate GW2 community is assuming I'm attacking their integrity, and that's so very far from the case.
For goodness sake, I've created a YT channel FOR GuildWars2. No one is more anticipative of the game than I am.
By evolve, you are refering to the MOBA mechanics of gaining levels and earning equipment, correct?
It does seem to work for MOBAs, but I just have to throw out my opinion here. I don't like MOBA gameplay. I don't like it for the very reason that it feels like farming instead of PvPing. Millions of people love that "progression within a match" gameplay. I am not one of those people and tend to find those mechanics annoying. So at least in my case, I believe it would be a detriment to my enjoyment.
My preference is planning before a match with some friends and going in with synergies that make sense and reacting to what the other team is trying to accomplish. I prefer to impose our gameplan on others (while trying to avoid allowing them to impose theirs). When you add mechanics where characters can gain levels and gear within a match, it tends to reinforce a more farming oriented mentality that takes away from the PvP experience in my opinion.
But I do understand where you are coming from and I do wish they would add more playstyles into the mix besides just capture point. MOBA mechanics work for a lot of people. But I don't think there is anything inherently amazing about them.
Im a big MOBA fan but if there is one thing Ive grown tired of(even when wathing it) is all the time spent farming instead of pvping. That meta game inbetween all the battles I think is done better by SC2.
I'd rather it just be arena. Or at least an arena option "last man (team) standing" wins. As constituted the capture point maps are painfully bland. I love me some comepetitive PvP, but I can't see myself devoting the necessary time it requires to make a name for myself in sPvP, when at it's core it involves running those boring maps over and over and over.
Millions of people love that "progression within a match" gameplay. I am not one of those people and tend to find those mechanics annoying. So at least in my case, I believe it would be a detriment to my enjoyment.
My preference is planning before a match with some friends and going in with synergies that make sense and reacting to what the other team is trying to accomplish.
Yeah, you actually talk about a good point here. I didn't think of it that way, so I can see both being a good thing
I kind of agree with the conditions, i think they are too much of them and they are hard to read, but i guess it came from a game philosophy, probably from GW1? (i didn't play GW1) Combat is about applying conditions, so even if i understand where the chaos come from, i can agree with your point. They should be easier to read especially for you guys, and for the gamers to. Maybe we will have to learn to read the important ones? But in general i agree here.
The rest i'm not sure. Match length, i'm pretty sure you'll have tournaments. And if you want to make match more lengthy you'll need to make some serious tweak, or add score switching factors, could be something to try though. I'm not sure people like to watch lengthy match, 10 min is ok, i personally thing 20 is too much, fps match are in fact super fast they last few min but they repeat a lot, so GW2 seam better, way better here from the length point of view, match are better balanced from the "pull spectator interest" point of view imo. You guys seam to be a lot into dota, but GW2 seam to have more a fps structure, which make sense, both are about playing individual character, not playing a team rts took his structure from.
I don't understand your argument about capping points, if more people make capping faster won't it have the opposite effect you are looking for, it will kill diversity and reduce the number of tactical paths. Teams will just put more people to cap the points they want, and you also already have the number so why put a shorter timer too? I don't know it probably would need to be tested, did Anet tested such variant? sound silly they wouldn't have. In theory i don't think your argument make sense though.
Yeah conditions just seem "auto-pilot"-y right now. You can strategize and BUILD for a certain condition like bleeds, but that's a different topic than was brought up. That is about builds. When conditions are just "apply and forget", than it's just less of a mechanic and less interesting to both the players, casters, and viewers.
About point capping - Like I said I don't really think one way or the other. Maybe I need to be clearer about that in Part 2 (coming out today). I just wanted to bring it up and see what people thought. I think your logic is on-par that the current system promotes that people not waste their time on a point. The only argument for it was that it implements more "choice-play" when points take varying times to cap based on player count in the area, especially if it takes awhile to cap a point.
The one thing that GW2 needs if it wants to become an eSport, more than anything else, hands down, bar none...is a good replay tool and spectator mode.
Matches are not going to be that exciting to watch when you are always stuck in the viewpoint of one or two players that may be all the way across the map from where the action is happening.
Starcraft is a great spectator sport because the replay and spectator tools are great enough that the commentator can easily highlight the action wherever it is. GW2 needs this.
Actually, looking at a lot of your points, it feels like you guys have a MOBA background in general.
Match length. Street Fighter 2 also has, sometimes, very limited match length. Street Fighter 2 is also one of the most watched e-sports of all time. They often do multiple elimination. (Best 2/3 etc.)
In my opinion, match length for the viewer doesn't matter all that much. What matters is what happens within the matches themselves. If there are many "oh shit!" moments, then the viewer is kept happy and entertained and the e-sport does well. Actually, I would say longer matches (such as LoL matches) that just get drawn out are usually less watchable than short burst matches like in SF2.
It remains to be seen whether or not GW2 can deliver these "oh shit!" moments, but adding length to the matches might do more to hurt the watchability than help it.
Actually, looking at a lot of your points, it feels like you guys have a MOBA background in general.
Match length. Street Fighter 2 also has, sometimes, very limited match length. Street Fighter 2 is also one of the most watched e-sports of all time. They often do multiple elimination. (Best 2/3 etc.)
In my opinion, match length for the viewer doesn't matter all that much. What matters is what happens within the matches themselves. If there are many, "oh shit!" moments, then the viewer is kept happy and entertained and the e-sport does well. Actually, I would say longer matches (such as LoL matches) that just get drawn out are usually less watchable than short burst matches like in SF2.
It remains to be seen whether or not GW2 can deliver these, "oh shit!" moments, but adding length to the matches might do more to hurt the watchability than help it.
Agreed, there isnt a "sweet spot" for match length. Many fps games also have short burst matches with many rounds. MOBAs and SC2 have the bigger lenght matches.
Opposed to games like SC2 and LoL, GW2 has a very important pre-match setting, that goes beyond profession selection/hero/race.
That is why we don't see any evolution in the game, since opposed to SC/SC2 and MOBAs, the build is partially hidden.
GW2 like MtG requires previous knowledge by part of the casters/spectators of the complete builds, from not only weapons and profession but also equipment/utility skills and traits.
I'm not sure how that is going to coexist with live casting,
Currently playing: GW2 Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
Evolution in Gameplay: I disagree here. I think they have a limited view of Esports. FPS and Fighting Games for example have just as little evolution in gameplay as the match prolongs as GW2's Conquest match would. MOBA games and RTSes are the only games that have a strong sense of progression as the match goes on. Guild Wars 2 Conquest mode is neither. It's unnecessary to have.
Mass Conditions: Some builds are centered around putting up conditions fast. Others are centered around removing conditions fast. If they want a build that makes strategic use of conditions there are plenty, for example you can make Mesmer and Warrior builds that rely on putting up conditions at the exact right moment. On the other hand you can make a build that spams conditions on the opponent and other builds can counter it. There is a really good balance right now, I don't think they should change it.
Match Length: Totally irrelevant. Again, they seem to be only focused on the MOBA/RTS perspective. Compare that to say a Fighting Game where the matches last 3-4 minutes. Match Length doesn't matter at all as long as the game is fun to watch. Personally one thing I don't like about MOBAs is how long they take to start up, then how long the very passive boring laning phase takes, and how long players spend running around the map not engaged in PvP. Devoting an hour to watch a game can be a bit much.
Run Speed IC/CC: Fixing dropping in and out of combat to be more consistent is definitely something the devs should work on and probably can be filed under bugs. As for running faster out of combat I don't see the issue with it. They mention that players could just ignore each other to keep the passive bonus, but why would you want to do this? By engaging you put the other player in combat too, removing the move speed. There really shouldn't be a case where both players ignore each other. One of the benefits (which is especially nice for spectating matches) of having the faster rune speed out of combat is that players will engage in fights much quicker and there should be less time spent running around out of combat.
Node Neutralization: Probably should be tweaked. I could have sworn more players meant you capped faster, but it should definitely take a bit longer for one person to cap a point.
Opposed to games like SC2 and LoL, GW2 has a very important pre-match setting, that goes beyond profession selection/hero/race.
That is why we don't see any evolution in the game, since opposed to SC/SC2 and MOBAs, the build is partially hidden.
GW2 like MtG requires previous knowledge by part of the casters/spectators of the complete builds, from not only weapons and profession but also equipment/utility skills and traits.
I'm not sure how that is going to coexist with live casting,
Really good point here. The builds really does add that hidden element of gameplay, and the need to adapt to what you see from a given opponent.
And correct, it will be interesting to see how the design the spectator mode system to accomodate for live casting
Run Speed IC/CC: Fixing dropping in and out of combat to be more consistent is definitely something the devs should work on and probably can be filed under bugs. As for running faster out of combat I don't see the issue with it. They mention that players could just ignore each other to keep the passive bonus, but why would you want to do this? By engaging you put the other player in combat too, removing the move speed. There really shouldn't be a case where both players ignore each other. One of the benefits (which is especially nice for spectating matches) of having the faster rune speed out of combat is that players will engage in fights much quicker and there should be less time spent running around out of combat.
I'm pretty sure the timer is the same for everyone, there is no rng factor in the "out" or "in combat" mode timer. The random factor probably come from conditions applied to the character and their durations. And ye putting long duration conditions can be used as a tactical component, and this come from the counterpart that condition damage need more time to tick in and can be removed, contrary to direct damage that are both instant and not removable. In spvp especially condition damage should really be a bit op because of this to promote condition builds at the same level of efficiency as power or critical builds.
Also GW2 is not "only" a competitive pvp game, it's clear the out of combat speed buff is welcome in other aspects of the game since in spvp you don't really run that much. I don't think they should change that in the name of spvp, i don't see balance problems as i explained.
At first I thought we will finally get some meat regarding how sPvP will accomodate esport broadcasting.
Instead we get three inarticulate guys QQ-ing about a few game sPVP mechanics that are different from their previous PVP games.
A total waste of time, I wish I could get the time back.
At this point GW2 lacks some key technology required to make esport happen, like a spectating camera or split screen to follow more action in hotly contested matches.
Personally, when they do add spectator cam(s) access to matches for esport broadcasting, it would be totally awesome if the option to spectate was offered any time in game.
There could be a choice toggle for the teams to allow spectating of thier matches. If too few allow it, then Arenanet could offer some sort of enticement, i.e. do a match with spectating allowed, and get a something from the cash shop. Of course the spectator view could aslo be added as a cash shop. I know I would love to be able to spectate top notch groups/players doing some of the harder duneons or Dynamic Events.
Someone once said that if you have very little to say, and can't back it up with facts or convincing argument, do a video.
Opposed to games like SC2 and LoL, GW2 has a very important pre-match setting, that goes beyond profession selection/hero/race.
That is why we don't see any evolution in the game, since opposed to SC/SC2 and MOBAs, the build is partially hidden.
GW2 like MtG requires previous knowledge by part of the casters/spectators of the complete builds, from not only weapons and profession but also equipment/utility skills and traits.
I'm not sure how that is going to coexist with live casting,
These are very good points.
I suspect that livecasted tourny matches will have to be set up in a way such that the casters are told basically what each person is running. Given a little time with the trait system, I should be pretty easy for people to figure out what the builds do, and that is just one more thing that casters can talk about.
One that topic, it would probably be beneficial for casters (and everyone else) if traits were labled in a way that others could quickly recognize what traits people are running without having to mouse over each trait and read the text. Pictures for each of the traits would probably be helpful...Kind of like how MtG players can rapidly recognize cards based on art.
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
One that topic, it would probably be beneficial for casters (and everyone else) if traits were labled in a way that others could quickly recognize what traits people are running without having to mouse over each trait and read the text. Pictures for each of the traits would probably be helpful...Kind of like how MtG players can rapidly recognize cards based on art.
This is even good just for my own eyes for making my own builds. I hope they add some icons to these things so that I can quickly recognize their function without hovering over them every time.
Originally posted by ennymithAt first I thought we will finally get some meat regarding how sPvP will accomodate esport broadcasting.Instead we get three inarticulate guys QQ-ing about a few game sPVP mechanics that are different from their previous PVP games.A total waste of time, I wish I could get the time back.At this point GW2 lacks some key technology required to make esport happen, like a spectating camera or split screen to follow more action in hotly contested matches.Personally, when they do add spectator cam(s) access to matches for esport broadcasting, it would be totally awesome if the option to spectate was offered any time in game. There could be a choice toggle for the teams to allow spectating of thier matches. If too few allow it, then Arenanet could offer some sort of enticement, i.e. do a match with spectating allowed, and get a something from the cash shop. Of course the spectator view could aslo be added as a cash shop. I know I would love to be able to spectate top notch groups/players doing some of the harder duneons or Dynamic Events. Someone once said that if you have very little to say, and can't back it up with facts or convincing argument, do a video.
They already said many times they want to take the time to do it properly so they will make the spectator mode after launch. Also it seam like a pure waste to make such mode before being sure that aspect of the game lift off, maybe not the pro scene, but at least the competitive aspect. So ye they probably want to see how successful this aspect is before doing some real work. Don't forget that mmorpg are usually the anti competitive games in most people mind and for good reason.
One that topic, it would probably be beneficial for casters (and everyone else) if traits were labled in a way that others could quickly recognize what traits people are running without having to mouse over each trait and read the text. Pictures for each of the traits would probably be helpful...Kind of like how MtG players can rapidly recognize cards based on art.
This is even good just for my own eyes for making my own builds. I hope they add some icons to these things so that I can quickly recognize their function without hovering over them every time.
icons would be nice. i kind of like the roman numerals though. a lot easier to say my build is power 2, 6, 9 etc. vs. the sword icon trait, the cow trait, or whatever icon they slap on them.
One that topic, it would probably be beneficial for casters (and everyone else) if traits were labled in a way that others could quickly recognize what traits people are running without having to mouse over each trait and read the text. Pictures for each of the traits would probably be helpful...Kind of like how MtG players can rapidly recognize cards based on art.
This is even good just for my own eyes for making my own builds. I hope they add some icons to these things so that I can quickly recognize their function without hovering over them every time.
icons would be nice. i kind of like the roman numerals though. a lot easier to say my build is power 2, 6, 9 etc. vs. the sword icon trait, the cow trait, or whatever icon they slap on them.
You can have both.
But I agree with you that having them numbered makes it easier to describe and throw around builds at each other. I just feel like it would ease me into the trait overload that I go through. It's a quality of life upgrade imo.
I disagree with literally every single suggestion these folks make.
Let's talk about only the first point, evolution in combat. For what reason do you believe Conquest is currently a easily-castable easily-viewable exciting eSport foundation? Literally the viewers would be doomed to caster filler-content because the map is simple ring-around-the-rosy. It's almost impossible for someone to defend Conquest if they truly know what eSport means.
This is simply wrong.. Did you even play any matches with an organized 5 against other organized 5's? Our organized 5 met up with many different teams in the last BWE and one of those was Team Paradigm. Ring-around-the-rosy does not describe those matches at all, and I love how you try to define eSports as something that automatically can't entail conquest...
In those matches, there are many different splits, and many different persistent team fights. You see 1v1's with roamers fighting defenders, 1v2's, 1v3's, in some extreme cases somebody trying to stall 1v4/5, 2v2's, 2v3's, 2v4's, 3v3's, etc.. etc.. etc.. There isn't this ring around the rosy run and cap points/avoid combat type gameplay you try to paint. Good teams fight, and it is very entertaining to play, and I'm sure it will be entertaining to watch.
There is a lot for a caster to show also, just like there is always different action going on in different lanes of a MOBA, you will have multiple fights going on at different times in the GW2 match, and you simply choose which would be best for the spectators. Such as if there is a team fight going on you will usually go to the team fight over the 1v1, but fights aren't always happening simultaneously easier, so it will be easy to pan back and forth showing the many different fights.
also, how does a control point map not evolve? squad coordination is constantly in flux based on territorial control. Bosses are essentially resources that must be capped or controlled, which adds a really cool mechanic, in my opinion.
to the OP - did you actually explore this mechanic? have you tried swinging the outcome of the match by bringing the battle to the bosses, or maybe coordinating simultaneous downing of both for 100 points in Forest of Nif? what about taking out the treb in Battle of Khylo, and using/defending your own for area denial?
I have played the maximum play time of any open beta tester alive right now. I am not speaking without experience.
How does control point map not evolve? Because it does not evolve. Players move. But is the "player movement" any different at 100 points than it is 400? No. There's no evolution, and that is just one thing that can be added as an improvement TO FUTURE MAPS.
Listen, I need to add a disclaimer to the next video. I'm not attacking GW2, I'm simply talking about some areas of CONSIDERATION. I seriously feel like the passionate GW2 community is assuming I'm attacking their integrity, and that's so very far from the case.
For goodness sake, I've created a YT channel FOR GuildWars2. No one is more anticipative of the game than I am.
No, people are simply highly disagreeing with what you see as viable for an E-Sport and what isn't. I don't think a match needs to play out like a MOBA, or an RTS to make it a successful E-Sport. You don't need as much match evolution when a match isn't 30-40 minutes. A 30-40 minute game demands evolution or else it will be stale, yet a very short match really only needs the ebb and flow of the different splits according to the different situations and amount of points your team has vs. the other. Also, evolution of a match doesn't have to be a static mechanic placed by the developers, evolution can be made through choice making based on different situations and outcomes. Not every match plays out the same at the exact same times of the match.
Comments
By evolve, you are refering to the MOBA mechanics of gaining levels and earning equipment, correct?
It does seem to work for MOBAs, but I just have to throw out my opinion here. I don't like MOBA gameplay. I don't like it for the very reason that it feels like farming instead of PvPing. Millions of people love that "progression within a match" gameplay. I am not one of those people and tend to find those mechanics annoying. So at least in my case, I believe it would be a detriment to my enjoyment.
My preference is planning before a match with some friends and going in with synergies that make sense and reacting to what the other team is trying to accomplish. I prefer to impose our gameplan on others (while trying to avoid allowing them to impose theirs). When you add mechanics where characters can gain levels and gear within a match, it tends to reinforce a more farming oriented mentality that takes away from the PvP experience in my opinion.
But I do understand where you are coming from and I do wish they would add more playstyles into the mix besides just capture point. MOBA mechanics work for a lot of people. But I don't think there is anything inherently amazing about them.
You're right, thanks for the sentiment. It's just easy to get lost in the flood of direct negative comments on our group rather than the dicussion at hand XD
For sure I'm not used to it, as our other videos got positive reviews. Definitely a lack of experience on my part seeing that flood
no. please stop. do not tell Anet on my behalf what I want in a game. i'm sorry but you are not the voice of the majority of players. to me you are just some random guy with a youtube channel trying to ride on the coat-tails of gw2's success.
Im a big MOBA fan but if there is one thing Ive grown tired of(even when wathing it) is all the time spent farming instead of pvping. That meta game inbetween all the battles I think is done better by SC2.
I'd rather it just be arena. Or at least an arena option "last man (team) standing" wins. As constituted the capture point maps are painfully bland. I love me some comepetitive PvP, but I can't see myself devoting the necessary time it requires to make a name for myself in sPvP, when at it's core it involves running those boring maps over and over and over.
Yeah, you actually talk about a good point here. I didn't think of it that way, so I can see both being a good thing
I kind of agree with the conditions, i think they are too much of them and they are hard to read, but i guess it came from a game philosophy, probably from GW1? (i didn't play GW1) Combat is about applying conditions, so even if i understand where the chaos come from, i can agree with your point. They should be easier to read especially for you guys, and for the gamers to. Maybe we will have to learn to read the important ones? But in general i agree here.
The rest i'm not sure. Match length, i'm pretty sure you'll have tournaments. And if you want to make match more lengthy you'll need to make some serious tweak, or add score switching factors, could be something to try though. I'm not sure people like to watch lengthy match, 10 min is ok, i personally thing 20 is too much, fps match are in fact super fast they last few min but they repeat a lot, so GW2 seam better, way better here from the length point of view, match are better balanced from the "pull spectator interest" point of view imo. You guys seam to be a lot into dota, but GW2 seam to have more a fps structure, which make sense, both are about playing individual character, not playing a team rts took his structure from.
I don't understand your argument about capping points, if more people make capping faster won't it have the opposite effect you are looking for, it will kill diversity and reduce the number of tactical paths. Teams will just put more people to cap the points they want, and you also already have the number so why put a shorter timer too? I don't know it probably would need to be tested, did Anet tested such variant? sound silly they wouldn't have. In theory i don't think your argument make sense though.
Yeah conditions just seem "auto-pilot"-y right now. You can strategize and BUILD for a certain condition like bleeds, but that's a different topic than was brought up. That is about builds. When conditions are just "apply and forget", than it's just less of a mechanic and less interesting to both the players, casters, and viewers.
About point capping - Like I said I don't really think one way or the other. Maybe I need to be clearer about that in Part 2 (coming out today). I just wanted to bring it up and see what people thought. I think your logic is on-par that the current system promotes that people not waste their time on a point. The only argument for it was that it implements more "choice-play" when points take varying times to cap based on player count in the area, especially if it takes awhile to cap a point.
The one thing that GW2 needs if it wants to become an eSport, more than anything else, hands down, bar none...is a good replay tool and spectator mode.
Matches are not going to be that exciting to watch when you are always stuck in the viewpoint of one or two players that may be all the way across the map from where the action is happening.
Starcraft is a great spectator sport because the replay and spectator tools are great enough that the commentator can easily highlight the action wherever it is. GW2 needs this.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Actually, looking at a lot of your points, it feels like you guys have a MOBA background in general.
Match length. Street Fighter 2 also has, sometimes, very limited match length. Street Fighter 2 is also one of the most watched e-sports of all time. They often do multiple elimination. (Best 2/3 etc.)
In my opinion, match length for the viewer doesn't matter all that much. What matters is what happens within the matches themselves. If there are many "oh shit!" moments, then the viewer is kept happy and entertained and the e-sport does well. Actually, I would say longer matches (such as LoL matches) that just get drawn out are usually less watchable than short burst matches like in SF2.
It remains to be seen whether or not GW2 can deliver these "oh shit!" moments, but adding length to the matches might do more to hurt the watchability than help it.
Agreed, there isnt a "sweet spot" for match length. Many fps games also have short burst matches with many rounds. MOBAs and SC2 have the bigger lenght matches.
Opposed to games like SC2 and LoL, GW2 has a very important pre-match setting, that goes beyond profession selection/hero/race.
That is why we don't see any evolution in the game, since opposed to SC/SC2 and MOBAs, the build is partially hidden.
GW2 like MtG requires previous knowledge by part of the casters/spectators of the complete builds, from not only weapons and profession but also equipment/utility skills and traits.
I'm not sure how that is going to coexist with live casting,
Currently playing: GW2
Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders
Really good point here. The builds really does add that hidden element of gameplay, and the need to adapt to what you see from a given opponent.
And correct, it will be interesting to see how the design the spectator mode system to accomodate for live casting
So if i heard right he said that the match ended in 5 min and the other team dominate the map?
Which means constantly getting points from 3 captures + points from the kills?
So you want more time to stay and just getting farmed? So fun!
I'm pretty sure the timer is the same for everyone, there is no rng factor in the "out" or "in combat" mode timer. The random factor probably come from conditions applied to the character and their durations. And ye putting long duration conditions can be used as a tactical component, and this come from the counterpart that condition damage need more time to tick in and can be removed, contrary to direct damage that are both instant and not removable. In spvp especially condition damage should really be a bit op because of this to promote condition builds at the same level of efficiency as power or critical builds.
Also GW2 is not "only" a competitive pvp game, it's clear the out of combat speed buff is welcome in other aspects of the game since in spvp you don't really run that much. I don't think they should change that in the name of spvp, i don't see balance problems as i explained.
At first I thought we will finally get some meat regarding how sPvP will accomodate esport broadcasting.
Instead we get three inarticulate guys QQ-ing about a few game sPVP mechanics that are different from their previous PVP games.
A total waste of time, I wish I could get the time back.
At this point GW2 lacks some key technology required to make esport happen, like a spectating camera or split screen to follow more action in hotly contested matches.
Personally, when they do add spectator cam(s) access to matches for esport broadcasting, it would be totally awesome if the option to spectate was offered any time in game.
There could be a choice toggle for the teams to allow spectating of thier matches. If too few allow it, then Arenanet could offer some sort of enticement, i.e. do a match with spectating allowed, and get a something from the cash shop. Of course the spectator view could aslo be added as a cash shop. I know I would love to be able to spectate top notch groups/players doing some of the harder duneons or Dynamic Events.
Someone once said that if you have very little to say, and can't back it up with facts or convincing argument, do a video.
These are very good points.
I suspect that livecasted tourny matches will have to be set up in a way such that the casters are told basically what each person is running. Given a little time with the trait system, I should be pretty easy for people to figure out what the builds do, and that is just one more thing that casters can talk about.
One that topic, it would probably be beneficial for casters (and everyone else) if traits were labled in a way that others could quickly recognize what traits people are running without having to mouse over each trait and read the text. Pictures for each of the traits would probably be helpful...Kind of like how MtG players can rapidly recognize cards based on art.
I used to TL;DR, but then I took a bullet point to the footnote.
This is even good just for my own eyes for making my own builds. I hope they add some icons to these things so that I can quickly recognize their function without hovering over them every time.
They already said many times they want to take the time to do it properly so they will make the spectator mode after launch. Also it seam like a pure waste to make such mode before being sure that aspect of the game lift off, maybe not the pro scene, but at least the competitive aspect. So ye they probably want to see how successful this aspect is before doing some real work. Don't forget that mmorpg are usually the anti competitive games in most people mind and for good reason.
icons would be nice. i kind of like the roman numerals though. a lot easier to say my build is power 2, 6, 9 etc. vs. the sword icon trait, the cow trait, or whatever icon they slap on them.
You can have both.
But I agree with you that having them numbered makes it easier to describe and throw around builds at each other. I just feel like it would ease me into the trait overload that I go through. It's a quality of life upgrade imo.
This is simply wrong.. Did you even play any matches with an organized 5 against other organized 5's? Our organized 5 met up with many different teams in the last BWE and one of those was Team Paradigm. Ring-around-the-rosy does not describe those matches at all, and I love how you try to define eSports as something that automatically can't entail conquest...
In those matches, there are many different splits, and many different persistent team fights. You see 1v1's with roamers fighting defenders, 1v2's, 1v3's, in some extreme cases somebody trying to stall 1v4/5, 2v2's, 2v3's, 2v4's, 3v3's, etc.. etc.. etc.. There isn't this ring around the rosy run and cap points/avoid combat type gameplay you try to paint. Good teams fight, and it is very entertaining to play, and I'm sure it will be entertaining to watch.
There is a lot for a caster to show also, just like there is always different action going on in different lanes of a MOBA, you will have multiple fights going on at different times in the GW2 match, and you simply choose which would be best for the spectators. Such as if there is a team fight going on you will usually go to the team fight over the 1v1, but fights aren't always happening simultaneously easier, so it will be easy to pan back and forth showing the many different fights.
No, people are simply highly disagreeing with what you see as viable for an E-Sport and what isn't. I don't think a match needs to play out like a MOBA, or an RTS to make it a successful E-Sport. You don't need as much match evolution when a match isn't 30-40 minutes. A 30-40 minute game demands evolution or else it will be stale, yet a very short match really only needs the ebb and flow of the different splits according to the different situations and amount of points your team has vs. the other. Also, evolution of a match doesn't have to be a static mechanic placed by the developers, evolution can be made through choice making based on different situations and outcomes. Not every match plays out the same at the exact same times of the match.