[b]Spectator Tools: 4/10[/b] We now have a spectator mode, which is rich and versatile, but unfortunately it is just a standard

FPS flycam. Even if a follow cam mode was added this would not be a particularly strong showing, since I strongly believe to be a successful esport and FPS title needs to completely revolutionise its spectator functionality. Simply making a slick and effective version of what has existed for years is not enough. Do note that I'm sure HR will make continual efforts to improve their spectator mode and it's impressive enough that they have one in beta (It took LoL, what, 2 years after launch?), but they should be testing truly new concepts and systems to break the mold that has grown on FPS spectating. The current implementation of spectator mode also suffers from a lot of more minor problems such as the side bar data sheets that force the eye far off the action, where it seems more logical to mount them in the center bottom or top. Data is not presented in such a way as to be rapidly digestible (particularly player speed) and several strong features which suit spectating are available to players but not spectators, particularly the new MMO style scrolling damage. In summary: it's good that it's actually there, and that should be lauded, but it needs a tremendous amount of work and initiative before it's going to satisfy a general audience (IE people who are not hardcore FPS players). [b]Visual Simplicity: 8/10 > 9/10[/b] This has gone from strength to strength. Since I wrote the first iteration of this primer many improvements have been made to an already great looking and visually clean game. Ubiquitous Weapon tracers have added a fantastic spectacular element without adding much to visual chaos, scrolling damage makes it quick and easy to see hits and their effectiveness. The game is, artistically, approaching an ideal state as far as what can be achieved with the engine being used is concerned. There's always room for improvement of course, but it's hard to find something in the game to strongly criticise. One thing I will note is that the new out of game UI still uses ultra-simplified elements that have no place in a competitive game, particularly in relation to weapons. Health should not be said to be 'low' 'medium' or 'high', it should be 800, 1500 and 2800. Weapon range should not be '1 bar' or '2 bars', it should be either a numeric value, or a diagram showing the ranges of different trajectories. In particular, weapon DAMAGE should absolutely be stated numerically, even if it's a range (eg a pistol does 50-100 damage) >> In the latest patch the new class skins further help identify classes visually, though I must say that as a spectator there are several issues. Some skins like the Beagle technician are immediately recognizeable, however most are still somewhat difficult to distinguish between. A single large area of colouration would be a simple way of ensuring identification is easier- a white helmet for raider, a yellow shoulderguard for a tech etc.<< [b]Broad spectrum: 4/10 > 3/10[/b] There is still very little development of the background of the game and the personality of the classes. Perhaps the most I've seen is in the patch notes (goombaing is a word ^^). As before I expect we'll see more of this when skins and so forth start coming in, but we still have no idea who we are, what we're fighting for or why spinfusors spin clockwise (do they spin the other way in the southern hemisphere?) Chat and ingame community functionality remains woeful and community engagement through the forums and HiRez's website remains erratic and unpolished (albeit that which there is is enthusiastic,

enjoyable and heartening). I must again state that this is understandable, however the purpose of this evaluation is not to make excuses, but to evaluate the state of the game as it stands. Finally, While there have been more tutorials added, they're really just slight extensions of existing content and are still not integrated into the game effectively, they definitely have a tacked on and placeholder feel. That may be because they are in fact tacked on placeholders, but reaching out to a wide audience of new players, story gamers and socialisers seems to be quite low on Hi Rez's priority list, which is disheartening because succeeding in this area will be critical to game reaching beyond all expectations. At the moment Hi Rez seems strongly focused on satisfying competitive, play to win style gamers, perhaps understandably given how many of them there are around and speaking up. This is the only category that has gone down a point, a bit harsh perhaps but maybe it's simply that this is the next thing that will see the level of focus and polish that have been applied to the visual design, gameplay balance and class system so far. >>note: in the latest patch released after this was written the classes have been given some new skins which help a little to give the classes some personality, however this still remains an issue<< [b]Team Size: 3/10 > 7/10[/b] It's becoming increasingly apparent that Esport size teams are completely viable in the game. I was very skeptical at first based on my own play, but now we have some high level play to analyse it's clear that 6-9 players a team is completely adequate and that beyond this the game actually fouls up. The 5v5 TDM format tests proved reasonably successful and the potential for team rabbit 2 and arena modes to be tried in the future. I'd particularly like to see the former as a mode as 'flag football' is a concept that even non-gamers can understand and since it has a single focal point (1 flag as opposed to 2 in CTF) it is far more conducive to spectating. I'm now relatively convinced there will be no problem developing spectacular, competitive game types around small 5-7 man teams, but we need to see these potential modes implemented and tested before I can really give this category full marks. [b]Cultural Flexibility: 7/10 > 8/10[/b] This remains an area of inconsistency. On one hand many of the initiatives HiRez is employing are great and effective ways of engaging and developing community, however I still feel there are areas that are lacking- effective support and moderation of their forums, in house media releases (such as a devblog or podcast) and so forth. While HiRez is utilizing the 'new school' of community engagement very well, they aren't supporting their viral/grassroots support with more traditional support through a polished game website, competitions, forums, blogs etc. Thus they are garnering a lot of light attention, but without serious meat for interested parties to get their teeth into before committing to play, less of that attention will resolve into sweet, sweet moolah for our beloved overlords. On the good side, the whiners have largely shut up, and HiRez's continued demonstration that they listen to the community and are generally both smart and quick about acting on (even perceived) issues with the game has done a lot to get people focused on the task of a beta- making this game as incredible as it should be. Definitely on the right track overall, just need to keep an eye on consistency. (old)[i] I can't really fault HiRez here for much. Again, this is the sort of thing that will really only develop to seriously critiqueable levels after release when the developer's policies are applied outside of NDA issues. Appointing Esports staff this early in the piece is a positive sign, as is discussing some elements of design forthrightly, more than most developers at least. I'd personally like to see much more open and clear discussion of goals, methods and aims in design by the designers however, and I think there is some case for this objectively.

Communities are extremely valuable tools for gathering data, but they need to know what tasks to perform. Making vague statements like we want classes to be more specific to roles is well and good, but it doesn't help players frame critical discussion and give valuable feedback. A statement like We want the pathfinder to be a mobile flag chaser, using mobility to keep up with the capper, harass them with spinfusor and finish them with the shotgun or bump the flag with the impact nitron. We do not want it to be able to effectively control a base or hunt HoF (only an example. Because since there is no such specific talk, I have no idea what role the pathfinder is supposed to fulfill). Players can then make concrete critical statements based on this goal, eg: I find it impossible to hit a flag capper with the impact nitron due to the animation time. Cappers generally don't sit around. The radius could be increased or the animation time lowered. Specific problem with specific reasoning and specific potential solutions. This is the sort of feedback that can be acted on effectively and help HiRez realise their design. It will also demonstrate they are serious about involving feedback in their design process and engaging the community actively. You need to consider that the process of iterative game design is in itself kind of a game(sport even) for the community. Normally the community has very little information and little immediately visible effect, which if you think of it in terms of a challenge within a game, is a prime recipe for frustration and lack of fun. Give someone a challenge, some obstacles, a reasonably swift feedback system and a demonstrable effect if they put in the effort of solving it and they'll do good work and have fun doing it. This is the key from changing a community of pessimistic armchair critics into one of active problem solvers. Give them set goals and let them establish tasks within those goals, so long as they're vaguely related to big issues that a lot of people in the community hold dear, tell them what the goal is, give them your reasoning for why things are as they are and, when they come up with solutions, give them a fair hearing- implementation or an objective test. If they come up with solutions that aren't viable because they don't understand certain necessities, it's not because they don't get it, it's because they didn't know to factor that into the equation, so being forthright is key. If workload, fiscal, legal or even personal issues enter into the equation, they need to be discussed for ideal community engagement All of this is of course theoretical. There are many restrictions on companies, and many issues they need to deal with, the world is not perfect. Still, being able to engage the community in the game's development is absolutely key to not only producing a good game, but a good Esport, since this is the sort of creative, positive atmosphere that fosters a creative, positive and most importantly passionate audience who will spread the love and grow the game. (old) [/i] [size=150][b]Further reading: [/b][/size] [b]Starcraft from the stands:[/b] an academic paper on what makes SC a good spectator experience [url]http://jeffhuang.com/Final_StarcraftSpectator_CHI11.pdf[/url] [b]Pleasure, spectacle and reward in Capcom's street fighter: [/b]a book chapter on what makes street fighter gameplay 'spectacular' both for the player and the audience. an excellent read for understanding how to give a game good properties for 'hard fun' [url]http://independent.academia.edu/DavidSurman/Papers/77909/Pleasure_Spectacle_and_Reward_i n_Capcoms_Street_Fighter_Series[/url] [b]Hearts, Clubs, Diamonds and Spades: players who suit MUDs:[/b] Bartle's classic analysis of player types and their interactions. a definite read for the more hardcore tribers here who would like

to understand the necessity of introducing all those darn nooberizer functions. [url]http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm[/url] [b]Sean "Day[9]" Plott Talks Starcraft, eSports and Nerd Pride:[/b] day9 was one of the top broodwar players in america, as hardcore as they come. Now he acts as a sort of ambassador to the public for the Sc2 esport scene. His attitude, views and goals are a perfect example of positive and creative community engagement as opposed to armchair criticism. The article also sets the scene for modern Esports for people who are unfamiliar with the concept. [url]http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2011/09/06/sean-day9-plott-talks-starcraft-esports-andnerd-pride/[/url] [b]Playing to Win: Becoming the Champion: [/b] David Sirlin's cult internet classic on competitive videogaming. How to get good, what the consequences of being good are and an analysis of playstyles useful for referencing in design goals. Sirlin is both a competitive player and a veteran designer for Esport level titles. From the horse's mouth, in other words. [url]http://www.sirlin.net/ptw/[/url] [b]Saurus out See you on the battlefield[/b]