I have really high hopes for this game, I think it could be an excellent addition to the MOBA genre, what remains to be seen is whether it can do MOBA in a way that's better than its competition, something Blizzard has traditionally been able to do with WCI and Diablo.
It's a high hurdle to be sure, and any way you slice it the champion pool will need to be expanded if it's going to compete with DOTA 2 and LOL. Or else it will have to win with sheer map awesomeness.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to say: the biggest thing Heroes of the Storm will bring to the table is a variety of battlegrounds and battle experiences. Most MOBAs rely on the original DotA triple-lane setup. But none of the maps previewed so far strictly follow that line of thinking, and it'll throw most veterans for a loop when they start playing.
Also, the focus on gameplay over item combinations will be refreshing, since most MOBAs have relied on "builds" and "recipes" in order to create complexity.
And really--who doesn't want to see Starcraft, Warcraft, and Diablo figureheads smash each other into the ground? It's the same appeal as SSB. Cross-genre mashups are a thing.
Posts: 292 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
So I've managed to play quite a bit on my friends account. Some initial impressions.
1: I don't miss earning money or buying items at all.
2: I don't miss last hitting minions.
3: While not perfect in execution, I think the talent system is more interesting for customizing your character based on the opposing team.
4: Every map has been a blast, MOBAs are already formulated on,
Map Objectives > Killing Another Player.
So having maps that make that dynamic obvious and fun is the right way to go. Also, bonus points for having pretty maps.
5: Deeper bases are also a better idea.
6: I also like that games are designed to only last about 15-20 minutes or so. I don't miss hour long games.
7: HotS has quite a few champions already, but it will need a lot more.
8: Blizzard could have released this game years ago. They would have then been poised to dominate the genre *their* games created but now they've got to face very stiff competition. They have a ton of work ahead of them if they are going to unseat Dota 2, let alone Leagues.
posted
That sounds a lot more appealing to me than Dota 2 or LoL. Both of those games take way too long for what I get out of it.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Word. I no longer have between 20 minutes - 1 hour of uninterrupted time these days. The only reason I play Leagues typically is to play ARAM. Though I do watch tons of professional play, typically while I am eating. But in those instances I'll watch highlight reels for the games I don't care about, and for the ones that I do, I can watch an hour long game because I can stop anytime.
Spawn timers can be pretty brutal especially post 10 minutes. You are out for a very long time, and if it happens right after a major objective has been taken by the other team, they are going to plow through your base.
It sucks sitting there waiting to respawn, but it also forces the game to end, and it makes you be a better player.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it's taking me too long to earn enough gold to buy my first character. I've enjoyed trying out all the free characters this week. I also think it's a great idea that you can free play any character in the game in a single player map where you can toggle minions, reset cooldowns, and just play around. But having found a character I want, and it's one of the cheaper ones, I still can't really tell what the fastest way to earn gold is.
I feel like I've played enough games where I should be able to get something. Also the game is still in alpha, but I think the game needs to clearly state not just when a character is killed and whether they are an ally or enemy, I think it needs to indicate who killed who. It feels good to have the game tell everybody you accomplished an objective or achieved a player kill.
I do like the statistics they give me in the kill screen. How long I lived this time, how much damage I did to enemies or structures, how many takedowns, and it even gives me various levels of praise, which lets me know how good something I did was. I still miss having a screen tell me who did damage to me and how much.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh snap. I don't typically like Protoss but Zeratul and Tassadar are by far my favorite two characters so far. Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I played Blizzard DOTA at Blizzcon when it was first announced, and while it borrowed a lot from League and Dota, it was very enjoyable.
Then they rebranded the game "Heroes of the Storm." While I like that they are breaking the mold of the "3 lane, kill the other base" mode that LoL and DoTA are based on, some of the other changes to make the game more casual are frustrating.
No items, team level ups, etc just take too much of the strategy out of the game for me. While it makes balancing easier, it takes out a lot of the fun.
I'm sure the game is different than the one I played at Blizzcon last year, I just think dumbing down the MOBA genre even more than LoL already has makes me think Blizzard is just calling games in at this point.
I can appreciate Blizzard releasing standalone, f2p games such as this and Hearthstone. I'm sure they will make a ton of money on them. I just wish Blizzard would focus more on quality games that their core fan base would enjoy. StarCraft 2 is the only game in the past 7 years that I feel really does that.
I'm sure going casual makes them more money, but in my opinion Blizzard is no longer that "God of Developers" that they used to be. The company that defined the RTS and MMO genres are now making casual games that are essentially copycats of currently existing games. That's fine if they define the genre like Warcraft, StarCraft, and WoW did. But what they did with Hearthstone (there are other games like Magic Online out as well as the infinitely more interesting Hex TCGMMO coming out) and Heroes of the Storm (LoL is the standard, with DoTA 2 right up there as well) make me think that Blizzard is content with putting out casual games just to make money.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
But what is their core fan base? Is it the "hardcore" gamer fans that argued, in the past, in favor of frustrating UI just to prove that they were more capable than other players? Or is it the casual player that tires easily from defeat, trolls, name-calling, and hyper-competitiveness?
In my recent experiences with Blizzard--especially with Starcraft II--I've realized that they cater mostly to the hardcore gamers. Most of their reward mechanisms are built around ladder competitions. But while that may be their target audience, more and more of their players are casual.
The entire market, probably thanks to smartphone culture, thrives on the casual, the noncommittal. There are times when I want an hour-long romp. There are other times when I really don't, and I don't have time for it. So look at Hearthstone. It's really a step in that direction, what with the free-to-play model, the quick matches, the simplified but brilliant gameplay. I'm sure Heroes of the Storm is aiming in that direction as well.
I mean, what determines "quality"? Is it gameplay experience, game playability, game difficulty... What is it that you're looking for?
Posts: 292 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
