| Blogs > SaftKalasEmil |
|
intrudor
Canada446 Posts
On March 20 2010 12:32 omninmo wrote: dont worry, there will come a time when sc2 is no longer played and BW returns. Thats the thing that should worry us. As much as SC:BW is the best game ever made, we shouldnt hope that SC2 fails. | ||
|
Glider
United States1353 Posts
| ||
|
Ideas
United States8182 Posts
| ||
|
intrudor
Canada446 Posts
On March 20 2010 12:37 Glider wrote: very easy to play, all about unit composition, less about positioning. bw = good unit composition and positioning micro are both important, and positioning micro/control is very hard to master, which makes it sports-like. sc2 = pretty much only composition, and few easy clicks for spell casting war3 style. pretty much all popular sports require good strategy, but they require so much physical/technical skill just to stay in the game and perform strategies. Sc2 is mostly about what build order/ unit selection you make, and that's about it. then your blob of army fights opponent's blob of army. When one side wins, then it's pretty much game over. Well, that's the general impression, it is a fun game, but no where close to be a good e-sport game. have you played? btw its nice to see a chinese dude preferring SC over War3 China is apparently a bunch of War3 lovers which is pretty fucking weird nothing against war3 but i mean... SC:BW, common, its way better | ||
|
DyEnasTy
United States3721 Posts
On March 20 2010 12:37 Glider wrote: very easy to play, all about unit composition, less about positioning. bw = good unit composition and positioning micro are both important, and positioning micro/control is very hard to master, which makes it sports-like. sc2 = pretty much only composition, and few easy clicks for spell casting war3 style. pretty much all popular sports require good strategy, but they require so much physical/technical skill just to stay in the game and perform strategies. Sc2 is mostly about what build order/ unit selection you make, and that's about it. then your blob of army fights opponent's blob of army. When one side wins, then it's pretty much game over. Well, that's the general impression, it is a fun game, but no where close to be a good e-sport game. I still think its too early to tell with any certainty what kind of a game SC2 is or will become. Right now (as has been stated) the level of play is poor and very boring to watch (although check out Jump vs Jinro). Can you remember back to the early days of SC? The play was poor back then, and even kinda boring to viewers. SCBW started out as just a really fun game to play, now it has pro teams, a high level of play, and a great "cult" following. Once the kinks are worked out of SC2, solid builds are formed, and people become more and more familiar with it, I think it could be a pretty competitive game and a very fun game as well. Having said that, I will never fully let go of BW. Hmmm that gets me thinking, does anyone play just the original sc? | ||
|
NonFactor
Sweden698 Posts
BW is dead in the foreigner scene, the korean scene on the other hand might stay for a long time. BW will be reduced to a small, but a hardcore community of players, so you can still enjoy the game. But, don't expect a TSL for BW, or any other major foreigner tournament, also iCCup might close down their BW section too, but that remains to be seen. I personally think that what happened with CS 1.6 and CS: Source won't happen with SC1 and SC2. Mainly because CS: Source was literally just a graphics upgrade while SC2 is a totally new game with lots of new stuff in it, meaning people will move on, and more importantly, stay. Was nice knowing you, BW. | ||
|
Glider
United States1353 Posts
On March 20 2010 12:46 DyEnasTy wrote: I still think its too early to tell with any certainty what kind of a game SC2 is or will become. Right now (as has been stated) the level of play is poor and very boring to watch (although check out Jump vs Jinro). Can you remember back to the early days of SC? The play was poor back then, and even kinda boring to viewers. SCBW started out as just a really fun game to play, now it has pro teams, a high level of play, and a great "cult" following. Once the kinks are worked out of SC2, solid builds are formed, and people become more and more familiar with it, I think it could be a pretty competitive game and a very fun game as well. Having said that, I will never fully let go of BW. Hmmm that gets me thinking, does anyone play just the original sc? well yeah, thats why I said all that is a general impression. Who knows what the game is going to be like after beta/ patches/expansions. But I get the feeling that beta is only going to balance the game war3 style and there won't be any fundamental changes to game play. So it would be fairly balanced blobs fighting.. and simply balancing it won't make it better than bw. (yes , the goal should be to match or surpass bw) also players are much better at RTS going into starcraft2, and they learn much faster, so it won't be long before we see the true colors of sc2. it is really unfortunate that blizzard tries to make game play/unit micro easier thinking that by shifting more focus to strategy and BO, that they would make a better game... when bw has already proven that after years of playing, after most bo and strategies are figured out, technical skills and mechanics is what keeps the game going. Of course there are a lot of strategic variations, but nothing most haven't seen before, and all experienced player knows what build counters what, but why we still play the game? because despite both players going for optimal build/unit composition, the game can have vastly different outcomes depends on timing/microing/eco management. TvZ, one of the most common thing for z to do is 3 hatch muta/ lurker/expand/swarm, and T will FE, MM/tank, T knows what z is trying to do and what unit z is going for.. z knows what t is building and what timing he is trying to hit. Now their timing/unit positioning/harassing/microing defines the winner. But people still play the match over and over, because every match is like a tennis game, you know the opponent is trying to hit the ball over the net, but you still play because the technical skills involved. I don't see that happening for sc2. If a match up is as thoroughly figured out, will people still play it over and over again? Again, this is all impression, maybe the game will kick a lot of ass in the end, i hope so... | ||
|
meegrean
Thailand7699 Posts
| ||
|
mechanix
33 Posts
| ||
|
DyEnasTy
United States3721 Posts
On March 20 2010 13:11 Glider wrote: well yeah, thats why I said all that is a general impression. Who knows what the game is going to be like after beta/ patches/expansions. But I get the feeling that beta is only going to balance the game war3 style and there won't be any fundamental changes to game play. So it would be fairly balanced blobs fighting.. and simply balancing it won't make it better than bw. (yes , the goal should be to match or surpass bw) also players are much better at RTS going into starcraft2, and they learn much faster, so it won't be long before we see the true colors of sc2. it is really unfortunate that blizzard tries to make game play/unit micro easier thinking that by shifting more focus to strategy and BO, that they would make a better game... when bw has already proven that after years of playing, after most bo and strategies are figured out, technical skills and mechanics is what keeps the game going. Of course there are a lot of strategic variations, but nothing most haven't seen before, and all experienced player knows what build counters what, but why we still play the game? because despite both players going for optimal build/unit composition, the game can have vastly different outcomes depends on timing/microing/eco management. TvZ, one of the most common thing for z to do is 3 hatch muta/ lurker/expand/swarm, and T will FE, MM/tank, T knows what z is trying to do and what unit z is going for.. z knows what t is building and what timing he is trying to hit. Now their timing/unit positioning/harassing/microing defines the winner. But people still play the match over and over, because every match is like a tennis game, you know the opponent is trying to hit the ball over the net, but you still play because the technical skills involved. I don't see that happening for sc2. If a match up is as thoroughly figured out, will people still play it over and over again? I think that was well said. And I think the answer to your last question could be a yes only if Blizzard makes the proper adjustments in or when they release patches. SC2 is going to be very similar to BW (with the exception of mechanics), only if Blizzard avoids going completely rock/paper/scissor with the game, unfortunately it seems so far the game is leaning toward that. Once solid builds are formed like the ones in BW: 1 rax fe, 3 hatch muta, 2 gate goon, than we will see a whole new "can of worms" opened. I also agree with you on how much more quickly people will get better as opposed to BW. And I do love the intense micro sessions in BW, that imo, really define real SC players. I also feel strongly that Zerg and Protoss have kept their "identities" in SC2, but it seems Terran is very bland. | ||
|
Bosu
United States3247 Posts
| ||
|
Vedic
United States582 Posts
| ||
|
Glider
United States1353 Posts
On March 20 2010 13:33 DyEnasTy wrote: I think that was well said. And I think the answer to your last question could be a yes only if Blizzard makes the proper adjustments in or when they release patches. SC2 is going to be very similar to BW (with the exception of mechanics), only if Blizzard avoids going completely rock/paper/scissor with the game, unfortunately it seems so far the game is leaning toward that. Once solid builds are formed like the ones in BW: 1 rax fe, 3 hatch muta, 2 gate goon, than we will see a whole new "can of worms" opened. I also agree with you on how much more quickly people will get better as opposed to BW. And I do love the intense micro sessions in BW, that imo, really define real SC players. I also feel strongly that Zerg and Protoss have kept their "identities" in SC2, but it seems Terran is very bland. Blizzard said they want each race to be very different from each other, but they have only made them more similar in sc2 regarding battles, especially when it comes to Terran. Because the fundamental way the units fight, sc2 has armies that have similar mobilities. In bw, when you use 5 tanks and 10 vultures to fight 10 goons 5 zealots... this is a fundamentally different forces clashing. The way for each unit to achieve their maximum efficiency is vastly different from your opponents. Especially for Terran. Sc2.. the units will get in range of each other and start shooting or clawing away, with some easy casting.. both armies can retreat or chase at a similar rate, and winner is often the winner of the game. (this goes back to the unit composition is all important in sc2) I also question the role of resources/mobility/defender's position for each race in sc2. In bw, z needs more base vs t and p to fight on even ground, and p needs more base vs T to fight on even ground. And guess what, in every match up, the race that needs more resources also happens to be the race that is most mobile, but the race that is less mobile, happens to be able to do more with less income. The race that is less mobile/depends on less base, is also easily able set up a defender's position, where your opponent will not break unless he out macro you by a ton. Usually when the game goes normally, P will not attack's T's choke without a significant advantage and z will not try to break toss's cannon templar line. and if the less mobile side loses a battle, he retreats back to his defending position and not all is lost. With sc2, and the similar mobilities, the winner of a battle will immediately get map control and able to expand. The loser is not guaranteed to be able to do less with more resources, nor has the loser a strong defender's position to fall back on (compared to bw). So we end up getting mostly shorter and one sided games, without the more frequent back and forward fights that we see in bw. And of course this whole no high ground advantage crap, just makes a come back even more difficult and strategic diversity even less. | ||
|
Kyuukyuu
Canada6263 Posts
On March 20 2010 12:59 NonFactor wrote: I think this all doesen't really matter. BW is dead in the foreigner scene, the korean scene on the other hand might stay for a long time. BW will be reduced to a small, but a hardcore community of players, so you can still enjoy the game. But, don't expect a TSL for BW, or any other major foreigner tournament, also iCCup might close down their BW section too, but that remains to be seen. I personally think that what happened with CS 1.6 and CS: Source won't happen with SC1 and SC2. Mainly because CS: Source was literally just a graphics upgrade while SC2 is a totally new game with lots of new stuff in it, meaning people will move on, and more importantly, stay. Was nice knowing you, BW. Or it could go the way of competitive Smash Bros., where Melee died and for awhile there was only a small community of Melee players left, then everybody realized Brawl was shitty and went back | ||
|
PokePill
United States1048 Posts
On March 20 2010 13:11 Glider wrote: well yeah, thats why I said all that is a general impression. Who knows what the game is going to be like after beta/ patches/expansions. But I get the feeling that beta is only going to balance the game war3 style and there won't be any fundamental changes to game play. So it would be fairly balanced blobs fighting.. Did not forget the transition of ROC to TFT my friend. There is hope for this mess. | ||
|
omninmo
2349 Posts
On March 20 2010 12:36 intrudor wrote: Thats the thing that should worry us. As much as SC:BW is the best game ever made, we shouldnt hope that SC2 fails. im talking about the fact that BW will always outlive SC2 because it has LAN. One day, whether by force or by natural disaster Blizzard servers will power-down. On that day, SC2 ceases to exist. When sc2 goes retail one will require a BATTLENET account to play. "buying" sc2 means renting server time. | ||
|
d_so
Korea (South)3262 Posts
On March 20 2010 12:37 Glider wrote: TvZ, one of the most common thing for z to do is 3 hatch muta/ lurker/expand/swarm, and T will FE, MM/tank, T knows what z is trying to do and what unit z is going for.. z knows what t is building and what timing he is trying to hit. Now their timing/unit positioning/harassing/microing defines the winner. But people still play the match over and over, because every match is like a tennis game, you know the opponent is trying to hit the ball over the net, but you still play because the technical skills involved. I don't see that happening for sc2. If a match up is as thoroughly figured out, will people still play it over and over again? I really like this and i think it relates to how bw has transcended being a computer game and has become a sport. It's similar to poker in how a player will bet x amount before the flop which signals a certain reaction from other players which in turn triggers a reaction and so on. There's no "game rule" that says if you bet 4x pre flop in the early game you must have a premium, but all the pros know it and play based off that unwritten rule. Same in starcraft: the game mechanics don't force you to go a certain build older, but a consensus has been reached and everyone plays off that... and then it comes down to the control, macro, dealing with surprises, map understanding, personal style and player psyche. Not to mention BW rewards you for efforts, not only in-game but with $$$ through the korean scene and in beating other players through iccup. | ||
|
MaestroSC
United States2073 Posts
In my opinion the biggest difference in SC2 is in 99% of games, there is 1 big battle, that decides the game. There is no chance of recovery in SC2. In SC:BW it was "well i lost the battle, but by setting up at this choke, or on this hill, he cant finish me off!" In SC2 its "well i lost the battle, but i weaked his force a lot, let me set up here and..." "LAWLSMASH" (a-move from his opponent). I think a lot of this is just unit counters are WAY!!!!!!! too hard. If you built the wrong unit, even if you are the most gosu micro player ever, you will probably still lose (granting you were both at an equal skill level whn the big battle erupted). In SC:BW it was "omg im getting smashed, fallback!" in SC2 its "OMG i got smashed, gg!" Just my 2 cents tho. | ||
|
SkelA
Macedonia13092 Posts
If ppl trully desire money then get a fucking job or play poker or smth i never played SC because of some aspirations to get decent amount of money of it. I cant quit something that I enjoy doing even if some shiney (crappy) new version with the same name comes out where im 99% sure that i will lose interest over a few months. I will probably try SC2 and im sure will have tons of fun for a while but playing for like 5+ years will never happen for me. SC2 will never surprass SC in my eyes for many reasons that are already pointed out by Glider, mnofstl007 and tons of other ppl. So yea i guess SC2 will be really popular outside of Korea but will never be an "e-sport" because i only consider SC to be an e-sport in Korea with spectators on tv and stadiums full of ppl that scream like mad when something amazing happens. That will never happen with SC2 for obvious reasons. SC2 will replace SC outside of Korea and just all money tours will go from SC > SC2 there will be no other impact other than most RTS players will unite to play untill the next new shiney RTS game come out after a year or so. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
OSC
Yamato Cup
IPSL
Artosis vs RiceHat
Kyrie vs Sony
Map Test Tournament
WardiTV Weekly
Ultimate Battle
Rush vs BeSt
Replay Cast
Rogue vs Classic
Patches Events
PiGosaur Cup
Kung Fu Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
