EPTRant about gaming here in the U.S.A. - Page 4
| Blogs > TwilightStar |
|
Sadist
United States7322 Posts
| ||
|
EchOne
United States2906 Posts
The game industry is fine, though. | ||
|
Vivi57
United States6599 Posts
On September 23 2009 05:36 ShadowDrgn wrote: New games aren't just competing with old games, they are competing with the old games combined with all their associated nostalgia. Even if someone makes a better RTS than Starcraft, you'll never accept that it's better because of all the fond memories you have of playing SC. People have been complaining about declining quality in just about everything since humanity has existed because of this. Some of those cave drawings from 10,000 B.C. probably mean "they just don't make clay pots like they used to these days." And in 50 years, you'll be yelling at kids to get off your lawn and reminiscing about the good old days when children respected their parents and video games were fun. This is incredibly true, people should pay more attention to them. I always wonder whether new games are actually easier and not as good, or whether I'm just older and nostalgia is getting the best of me. I'm sure nostalgia plays a huge role, but after getting all the stars on super mario galaxy again and then trying to play mario 64, I realized just how much easier the newer game is. I also feel like rpg's didn't really go anywhere after the snes era, but maybe that's just because by then, almost every story was already used up. | ||
|
Musoeun
United States4324 Posts
I guess this makes me, what, a casual gamer? That always seemed a really weird label to me, because aren't games just for entertainment anyway? - I guess next time I go kick a ball around with some friends I'm just being a casual soccer player, and if I want to think good things about myself I should really go join a league and really learn to play the game properly. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On September 23 2009 12:16 Musoeun wrote: I guess this makes me, what, a casual gamer? That always seemed a really weird label to me, because aren't games just for entertainment anyway? - I guess next time I go kick a ball around with some friends I'm just being a casual soccer player, and if I want to think good things about myself I should really go join a league and really learn to play the game properly. The casual vs. hardcore gaming idea applies the same way it does to other entertainment media. People who just want a good 2 hour show vs. moviegoers who look for well-developed cinema. People who just listen to songs they like vs. people who look for "good" (by whatever arbitrary scholastic standard that's been instilled in them) music. People who read comic books for badass characters and explosions vs. people who look for deep literary and philosophical meaning in them. People who read dollar novels at the airport vs. people who've spent a lifetime studying literature. Despite the desire to compare a game like Starcraft to a sport, the gaming industry as a whole is far more analogous to other entertainment media like cinema or music. | ||
|
FranzF1
Chile1710 Posts
| ||
|
Nitrogen
United States5345 Posts
On September 23 2009 04:47 Chill wrote: I don't have much to add, but I want to say this: Starcraft players are some of the most closed-minded gamers on the planet. The majority of people are looking for something fun to pass the time, not a second job with no benefits. Starcraft players dismiss nearly every other genre. Have you ever noticed that WoW and WC3 players at live events can freely enjoy Starcraft and find it really interesting to watch? And conversely, when Starcraft players watch the other games, all they do is criticize them? This could mean that Starcraft is somehow an objectively better game, or, more likely, Starcraft players suffer a little too much from elitism. Starcraft has shitty graphics. There is no denying this. They are fucking terrible by today's standards. Graphics are a huge part of a game. Maybe you like the graphics because they are familiar, but that doesn't make them objectively good. Why is someone who perceives something as fun because of nice graphics any different than someone who bases it on the gameplay or multiplayer experience? Two men discuss their lives. One dates women mostly based on their personality. The other, mostly on looks. You can argue that former will have a deeper connection with his partners, and will learn almost everything about her. The latter may have a weaker connection, but will probably get bored and move onto something else. Yet they are both happy. Is one person objectively better in this case? Is one person "doing it right"? Does one person deserve to be looked down on? Your stupid sentence, proves my point. It is this baseless brush-stroking that upsets me. i agree with the first paragraph so much and parts of the other ones. but basically chill is 100% right about starcraft players being ridiculously elitist. the funny thing is that a lot of people here on teamliquid don't even play starcraft that often (i haven't played in a while myself) and yet feel they are part of this whole "zomg i'm awesome" thing that happens with starcraft players. then they dismiss other games without even knowing shit about them and complain about other people not knowing the depth of starcraft... | ||
|
eMbrace
United States1300 Posts
On September 23 2009 12:53 Nitrogen wrote: i agree with the first paragraph so much and parts of the other ones. but basically chill is 100% right about starcraft players being ridiculously elitist. the funny thing is that a lot of people here on teamliquid don't even play starcraft that often (i haven't played in a while myself) and yet feel they are part of this whole "zomg i'm awesome" thing that happens with starcraft players. then they dismiss other games without even knowing shit about them and complain about other people not knowing the depth of starcraft... yeah it's a pride thing, some people let it get to their head. i wear my WeMade fox shirt around like i own the world  -- I'm D+ | ||
|
meegrean
Thailand7699 Posts
| ||
|
Kenpachi
United States9908 Posts
I remember playing Runescape, the adventure of the fat clowns in armor. the graphics were "bad" so bad that it lowered the rating on many websites by 2-4. recently, i just heard they made this new hd graphics but seeing just literally burned my eyes. i had a headache for days x_x... just saying, im focused on gameplay (unless its so bad, you cant tell the difference between your Hero and Enemy.) I wasnt really impressed with SC2's graphics although they are pretty good. i just liked the mapping features and a chance to be good in a game at start :D... | ||
|
Samurai-
Slovenia2035 Posts
On September 23 2009 13:02 meegrean wrote: I don't bother with arguing with people who complain about Starcraft's shitty graphics. If kickass graphics make them happy, just let them play those games with kickass graphics and save your breath. For me, Starcraft is the best game ever and no amount of complaining from people I don't know is going to change that for me What the hell.. We dont complain, ITS A FACT.. Starcraft have SHITTY GRAPHICS BY TODAY STANDARS.. It doesnt mean its not a great game.. It doesnt mean anything else.. You cant go and say its a great nice beautiful graphic because its not.. Its ugly, shitty, but its fucking 10 years old.Its understandable, so get it in your head... There are people who dont play games because they have bad graphics, its understandable.. Some even go further, complaining about that bad graphics, not counting the fact that the game is old and it cant have nice beautiful graphic, so that is moronic. And just for reference, why Sc graphic is bad by today standards.. ![[image loading]](http://www.thezeal.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2006/04/starcraft.png) ![[image loading]](http://mysite.verizon.net/revelin/Crysis_2.jpg) | ||
|
Orlandu
China2450 Posts
That said, it's always cool to introduce new people to the game, but you gotta have an open-mind about it and not treat it like it's some religious conversion. Don't argue with people about the game and try to "prove them wrong" when they clearly don't know much about it, that just makes you seem like a douchebag. Instead, just look at things from their point of view and if they're interested, explain why you think the game is so cool. But don't sit there and tell people they're wrong or treat them like they're ignorant or unenlightened, that's not good for anyone. Basically, don't act like you're better or smarter than anyone for playing and/or knowing about StarCraft, because that definitely doesn't make you better than anyone. Just be cool about it and treat it like a fun, normal activity like you would other things. You'll get a lot more people to see things your way and try out the game that way. It's a great game for sure, but not everyone will understand that or agree with it. That's just the way life is, different people see things differently. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On September 23 2009 16:27 Samurai- wrote: What the hell.. We dont complain, ITS A FACT.. Starcraft have SHITTY GRAPHICS BY TODAY STANDARS.. It doesnt mean its not a great game.. It doesnt mean anything else.. You cant go and say its a great nice beautiful graphic because its not.. Its ugly, shitty, but its fucking 10 years old.Its understandable, so get it in your head... There are people who dont play games because they have bad graphics, its understandable.. Some even go further, complaining about that bad graphics, not counting the fact that the game is old and it cant have nice beautiful graphic, so that is moronic. And just for reference, why Sc graphic is bad by today standards.. Saying Starcraft has shitty graphics is like saying old music doesn't sound as good because people didn't have computers to edit the raw recordings. Limitations of technology don't prohibit good composition and design. "Good" graphics aren't just about taking advantage of every modern graphical feature. Starcraft had much better art direction that most modern games (definitely better than Crysis), and it's arguable that it has better art direction than any non-Blizzard game (based on the attention that Blizzard puts into their art). That's part of why its bothersome when people say Starcraft has bad graphics. It doesn't. Starcraft only has bad graphics if you're basing "good graphics" on meaningless numbers like poly count, or buzzword features like HDR lighting. Features like that don't tell you the quality of the artist's production, just like Autotune doesn't tell you anything about whether the music you're listening to is any good. | ||
|
Licmyobelisk
Philippines3682 Posts
CS has a degree of difficulty in which you have perfectly aim that fucking crosshair to the head without any thought what soever, so in order to do that, You really need to practice your headshooting skills like 3-4 hours a day in cs_deathmatch or cs_tankbeta. (I played CS from beta 3.4 to CS 1.4 only)  But that is not all, in CS you need an indepth knowledge of the maps, maps such as de_dust2, de_cobble, de_train need complete synchronized planning (everyone should be in the same page when in comes to attacking or defending a post) how can CS not be that deep? Same goes to starcraft, you really need the mechanical prowess of Bisu or JD to execute a plan that requires godlike multitasking, but in order to do that you really need to practice your brain in memorizing where the hotkeys are and shouldn't slack in making probes, zealots, buildings, expo. And besides, not everyone has the same talent in playing CS or SC. I know some players that really sucked at CS then I know some players (including me) that sucked in SC. My still stands that CS you really need in depth knowledge of a map and the mechanical prowess just like SC. But I know that it's a different genre so we can't really make any debate on that. | ||
|
TwilightStar
United States649 Posts
| ||
|
Probe.
United States877 Posts
| ||
|
DrTJEckleburg
United States1080 Posts
On September 24 2009 01:00 Licmyobelisk wrote: Anything that came out of 1998 like CS and SC are fucking epic games! that is all.. CS has a degree of difficulty in which you have perfectly aim that fucking crosshair to the head without any thought what soever, so in order to do that, You really need to practice your headshooting skills like 3-4 hours a day in cs_deathmatch or cs_tankbeta. (I played CS from beta 3.4 to CS 1.4 only) But that is not all, in CS you need an indepth knowledge of the maps, maps such as de_dust2, de_cobble, de_train need complete synchronized planning (everyone should be in the same page when in comes to attacking or defending a post) how can CS not be that deep? Same goes to starcraft, you really need the mechanical prowess of Bisu or JD to execute a plan that requires godlike multitasking, but in order to do that you really need to practice your brain in memorizing where the hotkeys are and shouldn't slack in making probes, zealots, buildings, expo. And besides, not everyone has the same talent in playing CS or SC. I know some players that really sucked at CS then I know some players (including me) that sucked in SC. My still stands that CS you really need in depth knowledge of a map and the mechanical prowess just like SC. But I know that it's a different genre so we can't really make any debate on that. As a member of the CS community since Beta 1 and having been around SC for a while now, I can safely say the two communities have incredibly similar mindsets surrounding our games, elitism as it were. It makes sense since both games have enormous replay value and so much creativity can be expressed throughout both games in different ways. Pub communities are pretty much exactly like US West, they play every now and then and get bored or whatever and may come back in a few months to play. League players and pros are just like ICCUP players and progamers(though sadly, the 1.6 community is much smaller than it used to be, the skill level has depreciated, there is not as many tournaments as there used to be, and CS:S was helpful in wrecking that[SC2 will most likely do the same]). On paper, both games like quite simple and bland, while in watching the games, we see awesome strategies play out, as well as brilliant individual plays. Not to mention that both games' styles have changed dramatically over the years. | ||
|
Kaniol
Poland5551 Posts
There is a LOT of similarities between these 2 games | ||
|
rusty23456
United States111 Posts
| ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On September 23 2009 04:47 Chill wrote: I don't have much to add, but I want to say this: Starcraft players are some of the most closed-minded gamers on the planet. Most Starcraft players, at least on TL, are closer to chess or poker players than they are to a typical video gamer. Video gamers move on from one game to the next, Starcraft players put most of their focus on one deep game. Didn't read the rest, looked like a boring anti-elitist rant. | ||
| ||
