|
An Opinion Piece #1![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/userfiles/17318.jpg?1254589689) Gather 'round children while uncle Chef rambles to himself
StarCraft II
What the hell? WHY does everyone think that StarCraft II is the end of progaming in StarCraft I? Does that really make sense to anyone? It's the sequel in the franchise, not the progaming circuit. There have been tonnes and tonnes and tonnes of new games with better graphics and competitive elements and none of them have anywhere near the success that StarCraft I has.
Do you know what will make StarCraft I take a backseat to StarCraft II? Us. If we start believing StarCraft II is the sequel in the progaming circuit, or rather, if the Koreans do, then that's what's going to happen. The market will go where the fans go. But that's not going to happen. There's too many of us expressing regret over the idea of StarCraft II replacing StarCraft I in the proscene. Too much nostalgia, too much rooting in our minds. Sure, we'll all give StarCraft II a chance. We'll play it a bit, wait a year for people to get good while they air a few gimmicky T.V. spots, but there's not even going to be a proper league for the game for at least a few months. There might not be one ever.
Remember when we all said StarCraft I was a complete fluke? That getting three races, so completely diverse and interesting, so generally easy to understand, and then turning them into a completely balanced and strategically diverse game is virtually unrepeatable? I still believe that. We have an entire industry of ESPORTS to prove it. If there were a superior race to choose in StarCraft, by God they'd have have found out, and they wouldn't be playing anything else.
StarCraft II is WarCraft III in space. I can't be the only person who wants to keep watching StarCraft I long after Blizzard's newest RTS. And the next one. And the next one. And the next one.
What would happen to the proscene if every time Blizzard made a new RTS, the old one was kicked out the door? Games would become more gimmicky and less professional. StarCraft I has evolved so much since its early days, and has become such a well thought out and interesting sport. We lose all that when we switch games. We also lose motivation to climb all the way back up, if we know it's only going to last until the next commercial release.
But you know what? I'm not even worried. People said this every year since StarCraft I first came out. That somehow the game is going to leave us, no one is going to care, and it's going to be replaced. People even said that when WarCraft III came out, and look where that is. They even got their own proscene, and it's absolute crap compared to StarCraft I. People say things like 'the game has been figured out, people are going to start getting bored' every year too. Bitter people who are trying to find reasons to quit StarCraft I and move on with their lives. But you know what, they always come back. You don't move on from StarCraft I. StarCraft I is immortal.
StarCraft is Getting Old
But it's not getting repetitive. Or boring. Or too mechanical.
Lots of people look nostalgically at the old days of StarCraft. That era when anything went, and players were supposedly more 'creative' in their strategies. This is bullshit. I know every BoxeR interview you'll ever read has him lamenting the invention of the replay, and lamenting the supposed death of innovation, but you can't take every word he says as absolute truth. Replays are the best thing that ever happened to StarCraft. Replays are what made people get really good, really fast. BoxeR is looking for excuses as to why he's losing these days. BoxeR is looking back to those days when he was just some random dude owning people in small tourneys. I love watching his games, but replays aren't the reason he's losing these days. He's losing these days because he couldn't cope with the evolution of StarCraft, because he's just plain slow compared to other players, and because he's giving himself huge mental blocks.
The fear of replays BoxeR expresses is the same thing people claim is present in the scene today. That the game has been totally mapped out, where any creativity is immediately copied or scribbled out after players have seen it once. We all read Artosis' guide to TvZ "how to get good really fast." He said these same things. StarCraft is not going to change, every player who's any good does this virtually every game, and everyone knows it's the best way to play StarCraft. It didn't take that long to find out he was wrong though. We saw mech make a comeback against Zergs for a long time, and save Terrans from maps where they would have otherwise been very weak if they didn't evolve. Even now that the mech age is ending, Terran is not the same as it was before. The builds Terran has to use are changing because Zerg have evolved too. Games are not some static cookie cutter rutine of actions, but a constantly changing and improving lifeform that is fun to watch. What was acceptable last year gets run over this year.
There is also a lot of regret for old progamers retiring or no longer succeeding in the scene. While I admit I like watching old pros trying to slug it out one more time (JulyZerg's Golden mouse run was so incredible), I don't think there's any reason to think the golden age of heros has ended. These days we have plenty to cheer for, all you need to do is choose someone. So what if they aren't winning league after league after league anymore. They are showing AMAZING games. They are changing StarCraft. They are still exciting. Don't stick yourself in some hole where you cry about Reach not qualifying for any leagues. If you do that StarCraft will start to get boring because you won't be on the edge of your seat cheering in any of the games that are happening right now. You have to care about who wins, and you have to care about someone who actually has a damn chance in hell.
It's not even hard to choose a player. There are so many interesting players in the scene right now to choose from, who all have completely different styles and incredible skill. It's mind boggling how so many different paths of focus can all be viable in such a competetive environment. You can choose Jaedong, for that ultra stylish attacking micro, or you can choose Flash, for his stoic push-until-I'm-dead rigor. You can follow the underdogs, Calm who's strategy is much, much better than his multitasking, or TurN who's all or nothing attitude leads to incredible climaxes in games. Anyone really, as long as they're not some has been pro who only gets a televised match once every 2 months.
StarCraft has been so good lately
Seriously. Every OSL and MSL game has been fantastic, there's been tonnes of memorable games in the proleague, and really incredible innovation recently. I can't believe how awesome every game gets after ro16, and they only get better and better. [obviously there's going to be spoilers in this section]
Take Zero for example. When Pimpest Plays first came out, its goal was to find moves that were at once innovative, but also practical and emulatable. What Zero has done with queens in ZvZ is remarkably obvious, yet completely new. It's so basic to understand that late game ZvZ means huge muta balls where every individual muta makes less and less of a difference on its own. What's another 9 damage when you're already doing 300 a volley? Ensnare works on the same principal as upgrades. It's better to have +1 damage each for 24 marines than it is to have another 6 damage total that one extra marine could provide. It's better to make your enemy 25% (or whatever it is) less efficient than it is to make your army 1% more powerful. It's going to be essential in midgame ZvZ from now on, and Zero has proved it by coming from behind against a player who didn't grasp that basic idea. You know why else I like Zero? He reminds me of NaDa. Ever since I heard he has ridiculously high apm, I've always wanted to watch his games, thinking he was destined for at least part of the greatness NaDa was. I don't know if he's exactly the trooper NaDa is, but I sure do like his multitasking. Clean, and efficient. That's what Zero is.
Shine is another player who's impressed me suddenly. Everyone who says he didn't deserve to knock Stork out is a fool. Did you even see Shine after set 2? He was sweating like crazy, and totally exhausted. That's what I like to see. I want someone playing their hardest, getting desperate, and really really wanting to win. If it weren't for those glasses and that awful haircut, he might even look half decent. In any case, his play in set 2 was great. Sniping reavers and observers even after 30 minutes of gameplay... Great use of burrow (so it's not totally innovative, he still did magic with it)... Overall just very intense while Stork did his boring old thing and slowly took the map. Don't get me wrong, Stork has his appeal, but he wasn't who I was watching in those games. When he got rolled in set 3 I was glad. Stork didn't deserve either of those last two games, and I'm glad Shine made it through.
Calm's lair before hatch timing attack, Flash's 7rax overlord snipe, Movie's mother fucking thx2theshield battery 2gate zealot rush. If you haven't been loving StarCraft lately you haven't been watching it.
The only bad thing about StarCraft recently is these split BO5's. I'm not saying anything novel here when I tell you they're awful. The finals aren't done this way, and neither should the semi's. I don't care if a player has a bad day... That's not what makes StarCraft exciting. How am I supposed to care about a series when I watch the first game one day, and then 10 days later when the result is a vague memory I see the last two, or four? Where's the excitement of metagame where you get to imagine the stress a player is under from a tough loss, or a long game? Where's the sweat running down their faces from being exhausted by a totally epic nerd war? What's the point even? It's not lengthen the tournament, since they just do everyone's set1 on the same day.
+ Show Spoiler +Sorry that was pretty long and disjointed. I was really inspired when I started writing it, got a few points in and then you can probably tell where my train of thought is completely lost, because I was interrupted for 12 hours and I still wanted to write it for some reason.
 
|
Aww my little chefy's growing up! LOL  Excellent post. I agree with 100% of it.
|
All these points are so damn good that you have changed my perspective on watching Brood War.
|
The distaste for replays has been echoed by many more older players. I don't think it's very nice to accuse them of trying to find excuses for losing. I remember an interview with Grrr.. where he mentioned a time when there were only a few who knew the strategies that worked (or something to that effect). Being one of the people to create those strategies without the aid of a pair of shoulders below you must be pretty rewarding.
I think it's possible to differentiate between the kind of creativity exhibited by the earliest players, who were in completely uncharted territory, and the kind exhibited by modern players. I think there is value in both kinds, but the first is assuredly more appealing to me.
Also, even if Boxer was trying to excuse his losses, I'm not sure how you can establish that his relatively poor performance has nothing to do with replays. Sure - he failed to keep up with the evolution of starcraft, but it seems not unlikely to me that the evolution and the rise of generation after generation of players had a lot to do with the existence of replays.
Of course, if no one had replays to leech off of, maybe starcraft wouldn't have become so popular and professionally successful.
However, I agree that starcraft is still very interesting, and that there is a lot of innovation going on (in spite of the fact that I do cry about Reach not qualifying) - I just think discussion as to the inclusion of replays in future games is worthwhile.
|
Starcraft 2 will never replace Starcraft 1. Not by a long shot.
|
|
|
FUCK EVERYONE WHO SAYS STARCRAFT IS DYING.
If anything StarCraft is way more fucking popular than it was just a couple years ago. StarCraft 2 will also not be the death of Starcraft 1 nor will it split the community in a terrible way.
Good read.
|
I agree with you! omg... 5/5 n stuff.
|
Totally agree, good thing to know I'm not the only one who thinks that Starcraft 2 will not be the end of the Original. I got beta so I'll (hopefully) see soon.
|
You have changed my outlook on things O_O
|
Mostly all your points are fine, but I don't think you could honestly say you are sure SC1 will stay ahead of SC2 in terms of progaming. Maybe SC2 will turn out to be awesome, maybe it will suck, it's pretty tough to call it right now. It's all very speculative right now and even though you bring up good points your post comes off as just a little too confident about such big unknowns.
On January 01 2010 18:22 Chef wrote:StarCraft II is WarCraft III in space. I can't be the only person who wants to keep watching StarCraft I long after Blizzard's newest RTS. And the next one. And the next one. And the next one.
I think this part is a little bit silly, though it could turn out to be true in the end. Right now saying SC2 is WC3 in space seems pretty arrogant and/or ignorant.
Sure you and a lot of other people will want to continue watching SC1 but ultimately whichever turns out to have the larger fan base (for whatever reason) will flourish. There will be a lot of new people brought into pro gaming that have no nostalgia towards SC1 that could sway things. There's also the possibility (though unlikely) that SC1 and SC2 can co-exist in pro gaming. In any case, yes you probably will be able to continue watching SC1 games, but if SC2 becomes large you may find yourself in a similar situation to current WC3 watchers. Pro games and a community will exist for you, it will just be smaller.
|
I believe SC2 wont have anything on SC1 in terms of quality, but it will get flooded by a bunch of new kids that want fancy 3d graphics and all that new shiny stuff, the new generations that have grown up with better looking games, so to say, and probably think that sc1 looks like crap and is too hard to get good at, unlike sc2 that will have features to make playing easier. 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.
But im starting to vent my own frustration, in the end i think sc2 will have a much larger fan base due to all the new kids that will come in, and of course a ton of sponsors are gonna wanna get in on the action and throw money their way, how will this affect us ? It probably wont all that much, our scene has lived for years now without much major sponsoring, most tournaments are sponsored by the community itself, but with all that new money flowing in i find it hard that the Koreans will stay on sc1, and that might affect us a lot.
good read.
|
|
|
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.
|
Other then the Boxer part, this was great
though I still feel that Boxer has a very good point about replays basically exposing every 'innovative' build too quickly..oh well
|
|
|
Totaly agree with you ! Ive saying SC2 is like Warcraft 3 in space from the first time i saw it haha .
SC2 will never surpass SC in entertaiment , balance , strategy and just overall awesomness.. SC2 can get maybe alot more players and probably more competition worldwide ( i seriosly doubt this but who knows ) but only for a few years. I still think its western world fault for not making SC as it is in korea and this will happen to SC2 and will slowly die ( probably? ) after 2-3 years like all crappy new games that are coming out.
I think SC2 will not became so popular in korea only because the the KESPA vs blizzard rivalrly and bilzzard will probably not alow for broadcasting SC2 because of the no LAN policy. But they cant touch SC so it will still go strong if there are still fans that enjoy watching,
And after ppl realising how awesome was and still is SC will became ever more popular !!!
|
i lol at the amount of cluelessness in this blog (and I mean responses, OP was alright)
Dont take your dreams for reality. If SC2 does not become the standard, both games are dead.
|
On January 01 2010 23:08 reit wrote:
i lol at the amount of cluelessness in this blog (and I mean responses, OP was alright)
Dont take your dreams for reality. If SC2 does not become the standard, both games are dead.
Why is that? As long there are games broadcasted in Korea and even SC is not played anywhere else in the world im still happy. I enjoy watching more than actually playing the game lately.
|
On January 01 2010 23:08 reit wrote:
i lol at the amount of cluelessness in this blog (and I mean responses, OP was alright)
Dont take your dreams for reality. If SC2 does not become the standard, both games are dead.
As long as there are fans, there will be sponsors. As long as there are sponsors, SC will live.
So assuming the fans don't immediately abandon SC the moment SC2 is released, I think SC will be alive for quite a while. Unless SC2 really is good enough to replace SC.
|
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
