|
To be honest, I do not view StarCraft II`s release as the death of the StarCraft proscene, but a natural continuation/evolution of it.
The thing is, you cannot view SC2 as "just another RTS" and not just beacuse it is the sequel to StarCraft and is being developed by Blizzard. It is the first RTS to actually try and emulate StarCraft`s gameplay. All other RTS`s before it, including WarCraft III, did not attempt to do so, but instead tried to be different (for example, by deemphasising macro and emphasising micro). Simply put, StarCraft II is in actuality the first game to actually try and cover the niché that StarCraft covers....which makes sense, since it has always been SCII`s goal to remain true to the legacy of the original.
As for StarCraft dying, I agree that that is not the case. However, it is not thriving or growing stronger either. Television ratings have gone down. E-Sports channels have gone off the basic cabel packages. There are less people visiting the studios, even during big name matches. KeSPA is restricting fan service, forcing fans to seek it elsewhere. And StarCraft is not seeing any growth as a mainstream e-sport outside Korea. Overall, while the progaming scene is not dying, there are still reasons to be concerned for it`s future.
The games are still entertaining and there is still some innovation left. But that does not mean that Artosis is incorrect in his statement. While StarCraft is a game with incredible depth, that depth has mostly been explored by now. The innovations are becoming increasingly fewer and more subtle in nature. Furthermore, the most recent innovations have more been toying with already existing concepts rather then completely new inventions, the "mech revolution" being the prime example of this (and even that "revolution" was short-lived, as Terrans have switched back to the traditional SK Terran since). As much as we hate to admit it, the game`s age is starting to show.
Will StarCraft II replace the original? Nobody knows for certain at this point. But if it does....why is that necessarilly a bad thing? As much as we like to think otherwise, all things come to an end eventually and StarCraft is no exception. One day, it will be over, regardless of what might happen to StarCraft II. But while the end of the original StarCraft will be tragic for all of us, will it not be even more tragic if it does not have a worthy heir to replace it and continue it`s legacy? Will it not be even worse if there is no successor that would attempt to make e-Sports an international phenomenon and not just an isolated Korean case? Will we not regret it even more if we do not help SC2 become a true sequel? The point I am trying to make is that while the release of StarCraft II may seem like a horrible thing for the original StarCraft, it would be best in the longterm if SC2 succeeded in replacing the original.
One more thing. Your comment that "StarCraft II is WarCraft III in space" is completely unfounded. At least the original StarCraft initially used the same engine as WarCraft II and had similar gameplay to prompt such comments. StarCraft II does not use the same engine. It does not have heroes, it does not have creeps, it does not have upkeep, it does not have the 5 worker limit. Even it`s art, which was initially a bit similar to WC3`s due to the fact that the artists had previously worked on WarCraft, has since then evolved and have gained a much more StarCraft feel. Furthermore, people that actually played the game have attested to the fact that it feels like StarCraft. On top of that, former WC3 progamer Rotterdam has claimed that SC2, in it`s alpha stages, is already better then WC3. Overall, it`s not "WarCraft III in space"...which is no suprise, since Blizzard intentionally wanted to make it different.
|
Tom Phoenix is the voice of reason here, completely agree
|
I don't think you guys get my point.
Without new blood, a game slowly dies. No random noob will pickup BW once SC2 comes out (well, there WILL be some, but it's gonna be a ridiculously low amount, nothing that can really matter). What are you gonna do then? Everytime a player quits, the community shrinks.
There are many examples from the past when this happen, maybe some of you have heard of games like Quake, CS and CoD. 1.6 is (almost) dead, older CoDs are dead, older Quake games are dead.
WHY? BUT THEYRE SO AMAZINGF AND I LUV EM
Yeah, sure. But sponsors dont give a fuck. Glitter and shine > Gameplay
The smart people who want competition (like the TL userbase) are a smallllllll minority, and once the entry level noob disappears, how do you bring new blood in? You don't. The game dies.
Honestly, looking back, I'm pretty sure most CSers would switch to Source, just to keep the scene alive. Yeah it's a VASTLY inferior game, like SC2 might be in comparison to SC:BW, but it doesnt matter. To have a pro scene, you need sponsors. Sponsors aren't gamers. They're fat old execs from businesses that have nothing to do with gaming 75% of the time.
|
On January 01 2010 20:53 reit wrote:
I hope you guys are ready for your community to slowly die off, if this is how you think.
If SC2 does not replace SC:BW as THE competitive game, both will die. Doesn't matter which one is better or requires more skill.
Ask the Counter-Strike players what they think about sequels and split communities.
You're aware of CS being the best example why the OP is probably right? And I think it's one possibility he forgot in his post, the way CS and CS:S went.
When CS:S was released every sponsor would jump on it and the community split. Everyone would predict the death of CS within the next few months, some even predicted it to die right when CS:S would be released.
Now, what does it look like today? Sponsors and players both realized CS:S is shit compared to CS, it's not even close as professional as CS, it's the way SC2 most likely will be: Enhanced interface everywhere, easier to access, a much more close skill level without those extreme gaps both CS and SC have.
CS, despite being fucked up by Valve with 1.6, is still the most popular FPS ever to exist. It is not getting old, like SC isn't getting old despite having countless of naysayers with their need for flashy graphics and games which play theirselves more than the actual player does.
The thing why games like CS and SC are able to surpass every new game and even their own heirs, developed by the same company (tho the team changed) is just because they're versatile on a much higher level than most other games and therefore being able to keep their professional scene alive for this long. We can't even tell how long they can because CS as SC both are still big and at least SC seems to be even growing compared to last years.
Would any of the guys who started playing SC because of SC2 being announced still play it if there wasn't something like a big professional scene? If there wasn't something like ICCup, like TL and countless other sites with progaming news/forums, livestreams, writeups? These games have a own history, something just a few games can provide. You can read up what happened 10, 8, 5, or 3 years before. You can watch how the game was played back then, how it evolved.
I call SC2 becoming the same CS:S is now, a burnt out, flashier looking copy of its predecessor. It will drag away a huge part of the community. Some will stay playing the sequel, some will come back. Progaming will take a huge dent in the first 1 or 2 years. But then slowly, when it becomes clear that SC2 isn't as good as the original, the lucky coincidence of creating one of those games who become and are history, can't be forced to repeat itself, the scene will get strong again.
And in all honesty, I do even think the community split isn't as bad as it may sound at first. From my experience a big part of the CS:S community are players who never played CS before starting with CS:S. And if they happen to have played CS before, they were quite bad at it. So those 2 kinds of players will stay with SC2 and I'd be perfectly fine with it. Call me an elitist asshole now.
|
On January 01 2010 20:36 besiger wrote:
I keep arguing with a friend who is a casual RTS gamer over things like selecting multiple buildings and as much units as you want, he keeps saying why not put it in, why do things have to be made harder with handicaps like limited unit selection and individual building macro, and i think that most new players that will come to sc2 don't understand that in order to have good competition there have to be goals you can work towards, something that will separate you from the other guy based on how much effort you put in, if everyone can macro perfectly after playing the game for a month it wont be the same game anymore.
This stuff always makes me lol. How about having the gameplay have depth and require skill instead of macro being the be end all end all over the actual game.
When you people say this it makes me lol cuz you're essentailly calling SC:BW a shallow game thta would be very boring and easy to play at the pro gamer level just if MBS was implemented. This is not the case at all.
On January 02 2010 03:11 [DUF]MethodMan wrote:Show nested quote +On January 01 2010 20:53 reit wrote:
I hope you guys are ready for your community to slowly die off, if this is how you think.
More text about CS
CS 1.6 has like 20x the userbase of Starcraft. Starcraft is not large at all outside of Korea compared to CS. CS:S is literally an update of CS. SC2 is a completely different game. Your analogy is extremely flawed, and if it is correct it would only pertain to Koreans.
|
United States4796 Posts
Hell yeah Chef! I agree.
SC2 won't change anything until the Spawning Pool costs 500 minerals!
Kidding, kidding.
|
I hope SC2 clean sweeps BW and every progamer + dog switches to it.
Everyone in the korean e-sport industry is saying how korean BW is losing popularity there. Unless they're overdramatizing or lying do you think sponsors will continue paying for new MSLs and OSLs and PLs and keep the proscene as good as it is now until 2020? And from a spectator standpoint - my standpoint - what's the use of BW being a perfect game if the proscene sucks?
Unless those people are wrong and the current money-hungry korean BW scene can indeed keep going strong for another 10 years, the whole "BW forever" attitude just looks like wishful thinking that won't happen regardless of what happens with SC2. So really I see absolutely no reason NOT to hope for SC2 to completely replace BW and be decent enough to get us started on a new progaming ride with an insanely high-level scene fueled by new fans, new players, new sponsors, new tournaments, and probably internationalization too this time.
|
Chef I always liked the way you write. You just write, you don't try and thesaurus every fucking word like some pretentious asshole.
Thanks for the great blog sir.
|
It was a 7rax by flash, but I totally agree with you. It's so hard to get into the finals for osl and msl that players are bringing their A game. It's tough on them, but it makes it so good for the fans. Proleague is supposed to be more important, but people want to win so they seem to not want to take as many chances as they would if they're trying to advance in a boX and want to get a mental advantage over their opponents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
