Live data from Hacker News

Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

massivelyop.com

511–520 of 557 posts

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like, how incredibly tightly units clumped together should've been picked out as an obvious flaw immediately Pretty much everyone who used air-units in SC1 abused the "tight" formations of Muta-stacks (or other SC:BW air units). In most fights: tight formations are incredibly superior to loose formations. (Obviously Corsairs / Valkyries changed that, but typical hit-and-run tactics are better when stacked) Automati…

Are there no widely used flak/AoE weapons that heavily punish tight formations?

In Starcraft: Broodwar... Muta-harass isn't about winning, its about forcing your opponent to make more clicks than you.

In the ZvT metagame, Zerg can deploy Mutalisks many minutes before the Terrain have access to Valkyries (AoE anti-air). Terrain's only response at that stage in the game is Marines.

Marines (who shoot one-vs-one) need to group up tightly to have a chance vs Mutalisks. However, a Marine only has 40 HP, and can be KO'd by a group of 11 Mutalisks taking one shot simultaneously.

This forces the enemy Terrain player to group up their Marines before approaching Mutalisks: the Mutalisks are flying however, so they just run away when they see the opponent grouping up. By forcing the opponent to group up, respond, and deploy, you win the "APM / Clicks" war. You're just trying to force the opponent to "waste their clicks" and eat up their mental capacity.

If the opponent fails to respond, you just run into their economy and destroy their workers. If you break the opponent's economy, you pretty much instantly win. Because you have flying units, you always have access to the opponent's backline / economy. (IE: most Terrain players "wall off" their economy so that ground units must destroy a 500HP defensive structure before reaching the backline. But you can get around those walls by using flying units, like Mutalisks)

Otherwise, you take advantage of map features: high-ground makes your creatures invisible (even air creatures are invisible on the high ground in Starcraft: Brood War). So you swing in from the cliffs / retreat into the cliffs repeatedly.

A missile turret has 200 HP, and is a bit harder to deal with. However, a Muta-stack with of 11 can KO the missile turret before it even takes a 2nd shot. It takes much practice: you need to learn the timing of the Mutalisk, carefully watch their animation and positioning (they only take a "instant shot" if they're flying in the same direction that the shot will take place), and Mutalisks can instantly turn-around (you need to move-click 180-degrees offset from the direction of their current movement).

With accurate timing, you can move-click, attack the missile turret, move-click away (causing an instant turnaround, leaving the missile turret range, preventing the 2nd shot), then move-click attack the missile turret a 2nd time and KO the defensive structure. This is the "muscle memory" practice that made Starcraft: Brood War famous. Only those who dedicate many hours of practice to memorizing this strict timing will even reach the barebone basics of the game.

-------

Eventually, Terrain can go Valkyries and with a large enough group, can AoE kill the entire Mutalisk stack. However, that's later in the game. By that point, the Zerg player has moved onto their main strategy (probably mass ground-forces, like Hydralisks). Valkyries are useless against that, and its well known that Mutalisks are otherwise an inefficient unit in combat. So its unlikely for the Zerg player to heavily invest into Mutalisks.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#512
post #36
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WoW also just got boring for me a long time ago. Sure, they keep adding new things, but it's still riding in very deep treads they dug long ago. It's still fundamentally the same game, and in my eyes showing its age. I'd love to play a new MMO that explores new ideas. WoW explores WoW.

given the graphics horsepower of many modern computers, I've been hoping for a "world of diablo" that focuses more on the gothic horror imagery and the backdrop of the much more exciting world that diablo is set in. Make it dark, atmospheric, and pack it with random dungeons, sorcery, and doom-style jump scares. Maybe as a bonus, put it in VR and innovate controls for attacking and spell casting. I can dream, right?

Honestly BloodBorne might scratch that itch if you're willing to work through SoulsBorne difficulty.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#513

A popular esports caster said the following a few days ago, and it really got stuck in my head: > "We can't have new games like Brood War anymore, because devs would patch out everything that's fun about it in a few days." Please get the designers away from the spreadsheets and in a game. Trade some of that polish away for a soul. Delegate more responsibility to junior people, instead of forging them into (strictly i…

Data analysis/science has its place in a game imo. Balance is important (but equality of all strategies and classes should NEVER be the goal in a game, it's a recipe for staleness). In general though, people are terrible at using data properly. You can look at a spreadsheet and see that a particular faction is underperforming at high ELO, but a blind buff to damage or economy will often not be the correct move. Similar to how single player campaign difficulty settings will sometimes just be a glorified multiplier on enemy attack/health. A proper difficulty setting changes enemy behavior. There is a story everywhere that there is data, but people tend to be way better at sorting a column in Excel and sending an email about it than they are at investigating (and effectively communicating) the underlying story. Games (and businesses) need less analysts, and more scientists.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#514
post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Diablo 3 was a disappointment at release due to the always online requirement (which was rare back then), the ultra boring campaign, real-money auction house, and no end game. Diablo 3's expansion though fixed all of those mistakes set a solid foundation. It was very good for several years. But then they stopped developing it, presumably (hopefully) because they started to pour all their resources into Diablo 4... wh…

Fully agree. Bought D3 at launch, played a bit. Meh. Came back after the real-money AH was gone, then played the expansion - have sunk many hours into it since then, coming back again and again for a week of play in a fresh season. It's a good game now. And I like it a lot more than D2, that always felt too grindy and I hated that there were no talent resets. (AFAIK they added them at some point, but not when it was…

The auction house was just a terrible, awful idea. It became pretty obvious that they broke the entire premise of the game loop: do farming runs, try to get good gear that aligns with your targeted build, get real excited when that thing you were chasing suddenly falls into your lap, update build and go for more loot to realize it further. Instead you would just grind hoping for general "good" things, flip them on the AH for gold, then use that money to buy the exact thing you wanted from said AH for your build. Completely killed the little human spark from the loot roulette that basically underpins why people play it.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#515
post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blaming Activision is too convenient. Activision is pretty hands off of its studios creatively. The truth is a lot of the good developers left, their new mmo Titan was a massive flop that was rolled into Overwatch, HotS wasn't very compelling, and Diablo 3 never had a compelling endgame to be a "forever game" with constant revenue, Hearthstone was a creative grass roots effort that has since been hit with heavy compe…

I don't see any new IP development at all. All I see is dev of existing IP.

Activision Blizzard merged in 2008 while Overwatch was 2016. They were supposedly working on that game for a long time I would say with 8 years it has to count.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me it just looks like they aren't trying very hard. SC2 did something very smart with its last expansion with the coop mode, and it became very popular despite being only sort of fleshed out. I could easily see that kind of game mode making for a hit RTS if it was the central focus, and had the standard MMO-lite stuff like loot and missions and raids and story and customizable units/armies and support for other gr…

Immortal is being built with competitive 2v2 and 3v3 play specifically in mind in addition to 1v1 duels. It should be interesting to see how a pro-scene around that would play out. More combos, more team play, more personality clashes might all make for better eSports engagement. I'm sure PvE modes will be available too.

Yeah should be cool, I backed it for the alpha.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very similar thing plays out in MOBAs. CC is always powerful because it removes agency. Getting killed with no counter isn’t fun. Playing against a ton of healers isn’t fun. Yet for all those things in combination it’s a lot better than a counterstrike-like experience of whoever sees the pixel first wins. Having a mechanic that forces fights during inopportune times helps, that’s why I tend to like Mobas with creeps…

CS as a pixel hunter is very shallow view of the game, its like saying that Starcraft is just click per minute competition or football just kicking a ball. CS is about reading opponent, creating opportunities and reacting to what is happening. Pixel hunting is very last step. That said, DotA is by far the best esport to watch if and only if you played it before and can follow what's happening.

It’s an absolutely gross oversimplification of course, and my intention wasn’t to disparage it. Your description could of course be applied to any pvp game :p

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

people don't want "fair" though, they want to win about 2/3rds of the time of course the numbers don't work when you're exclusively playing against other people this is why smurfing is so popular

"people don't want "fair" though, they want to win about 2/3rds of the time" This is why I think PvE is more sustainable for a player base and more conservatively solid as a business plan. WoW for instance. But then by definition it isn't PvP and isn't going to get the same player base.

[deleted]

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I the only person who really liked Diablo 3? I introduced my wife to it as her first game in the genre, and we’ve spent a lot of hours making team runs through hard dungeons. For sheer “let’s kill 300 things at once” endorphin hits, it’s great.

D3 is really, really fun. It started out at launch ok at best. Pretty grindy, and slow. One or two playthroughs was enough for most people. Nowadays though the endgame is definitely on my top 10 list. Once you hit level 70 and get an armor set finished with some Kanai's Cube and start leveling up your legendary gems... Oh man

That’s how I saw it. My wife and I each have hundreds of paragon points, so that new characters are born ridiculously OP. But IMHO that’s fun, too! I collected all the speed runs, like “beat Act I in 1 hour” and that was challenging. Going for the ludicrous achievements like “kill 400 enemies consecutively” was fun. Running through a ridiculously hard timed dungeon, getting an electric charge, and watching all these uber-powerful demons explode as I sprint past them was way satisfying. Coming up with equipment sets where every piece doubles my damage points was engaging.

At launch, it was alright. Now that I’m a wildly powerful godlike thing that can kill Diablo by looking at him sideways, it’s an awful lot of fun in a completely different way.

Re: Blizzard has lost almost 29% of its overall active playerbase in three years

#520
post #251
post #86

It's worth noting that this is specific to Blizzard . They have: - an MMO (not a growth area compared to other genres) - a FPS that tried to create a unique twist - a card game that essentially created a new genre (with a commercial ceiling) - remastered classics Compared to the rest of the market that is growing in the following areas: - large mobile presence - MOBA (HotS has been discontinued) - battle Royale

counterpoints: - HS is strong on mobile - OW is arguably a MOBA/FPS hybrid - CoD/warzone is the most streamed battle royale on twitch

> CoD/warzone is the most streamed battle royale on twitch

And is an Activision title.

> HS is strong on mobile

The category is still niche compared to other big titles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-played_mobile_gam...

> OW is arguably a MOBA/FPS hybrid

Fair, but isn't doing well. Will be interesting to see how Valorant does.

Post reply on HN