You probably don't know me. You probably don't care, but I'll be sticking to Brood War.
Overall, it's just the better game. Sure, Starcraft 2 has minor stuff like flanking and expanding patterns, and yes, it has micro and strategy, but you can't compare that to Brood War.
Brood War was just perfect. You can't recreate a lurker contain in Z v P in Starcraft 2. The moment of insane micro when a Protoss tries to break out, the Zerg tries to snipe the observer and the Protoss in turn, tries to storm the **** out of every living Zerg unit while trying to save his observer at the same time. There's no Starcraft 2 equivalent.
Same with a moment where you break a Terran push. Sure, you can blink stalkers up to siege tanks, but chargelots running up to tanks doesn't compare to shuttles dropping zealots that drag mines into the largest cluster of Terran units you can find, while vultures try to snipe the zealots before being exploded themselves.
Zerg vs Terran, how the hell do you recreate 2 lurkers defending a ramp or science vessel vs defiler micro in Starcraft 2? Blargh! You can't. Not to mention the recent introduction of bio early game into mech late game. There's no real SC2 equivalent.
I will be playing SC2 every now and then once I pick up the game, because yes, it's not a bad game by any means, and its fun, but it doesn't compare to the awesomeness that is Brood War and progaming scene. Brood War Iccup ladder ftw.
lol hi neo at first reading your post I couldn't help but feel disgusted by what I was sure was another newb guy who went onto iccup and got smashed. But I see its you neo! come on now man, you gotta be better then that. You gotta understand you can't expect epic moments like that, and you can have other scenarios where its intense, for example holding off a baneling push with just 2 sentries can be very nerve wrecking because 1 FF fuck up and its over thats all she wrote. Things like this will come naturally as we evolve as players and find out new combos and tricks.
On July 22 2010 00:41 ramen247 wrote: go ahead but broodwar at first did not have this insane micro either.
yes but we no better now, we are actively looking for it and can't find it. you sound just like ssbb players. At first they all said that, now everyone knows that braw is just a shit game and all of the hard core melee players predictions have come true- brawl and sc2 is for noobs.
On July 22 2010 00:41 ramen247 wrote: go ahead but broodwar at first did not have this insane micro either.
yes but we no better now, we are actively looking for it and can't find it. you sound just like ssbb players. At first they all said that, now everyone knows that braw is just a shit game and all of the hard core melee players predictions have come true- brawl and sc2 is for noobs.
...you do realize that you don't "Actively" look for it, you instead are awed by a player going above and beyond the call, don't expect freaking pro gamer level micro beyond the basic strategies we have carved out. For gods sake its not even released and you're bitching like a baby, give it 6 months and especially now that there are korean pro gamers in it, let them figure it out for us.
I'm mainly quitting BW cuz there's no more competition anymore. If there were still tournies and Clan leagues with active people i'd still play till im like 30 XD.
But right now i plan to focus much more attention on korean BW scene, that i never did before.
I agree with ella - your reasons suck, but the conclusion is good.
BW went through a bunch of patches, evolution of players, and over ten years of development. You can't expect SC2 to pick of where BW left off. It's a new game and will grow. Time is the only thing that can validate your claims, and there simply hasn't been enough it.
On July 22 2010 00:52 YPang wrote: I'm mainly quitting BW cuz there's no more competition anymore. If there were still tournies and Clan leagues with active people i'd still play till im like 30 XD.
ICCUP in itself is still extremely competitive though. Sure, no money prize or even trips or anything like that, but still, practicing hard and managing to move up the ranks is still extremely challenging and rewarding.
On July 22 2010 00:41 ramen247 wrote: go ahead but broodwar at first did not have this insane micro either.
yes but we no better now, we are actively looking for it and can't find it. you sound just like ssbb players. At first they all said that, now everyone knows that braw is just a shit game and all of the hard core melee players predictions have come true- brawl and sc2 is for noobs.
brawl was designed to be a shit game. it was designed not to be competitive. sakuri even said so. that's a false analogy
and looking for it is really irrelevant. nobody looked for wavedashing. hell, the developers even knew about wavedashing but it took years for anybody else to come up with it. it was discovered by accident. nobody was looking for certain micro tricks/gimmicks etc. these things are discovered, not invented. it takes time, and dedication, but they happen. the impatience among the community is profoundly misplaced, and it hurts the game when people don't even give it a chance when they expect the game to be as developed as bw right out of the gate.
On July 22 2010 00:41 ramen247 wrote: go ahead but broodwar at first did not have this insane micro either.
yes but we no better now, we are actively looking for it and can't find it. you sound just like ssbb players. At first they all said that, now everyone knows that braw is just a shit game and all of the hard core melee players predictions have come true- brawl and sc2 is for noobs.
Oh my goodness! I'm a noob? Whatever shall I do!? lol Btw, ssbb isn't like sc2 since sc2 will constantly be patched. Unless you count brawl plus.... or brawl minus haha
Anyways, I hope you're wrong Mr. OP. I really hope that SC2 will get better as time goes on.
On July 22 2010 00:41 ramen247 wrote: go ahead but broodwar at first did not have this insane micro either.
yes but we no better now, we are actively looking for it and can't find it. you sound just like ssbb players. At first they all said that, now everyone knows that braw is just a shit game and all of the hard core melee players predictions have come true- brawl and sc2 is for noobs.
but sf4 is popular when its inferior to its predecessors...I hope sc2 becomes popular, even if i dont like sc2.
bw isnt going to get more popular with time. So watching a starcraft 2 will be better than watching no sc.
Maybe it feels bad because I came up with it while I was bored and trying to waste time. Those weren't the only reasons I have, just so everyone understands. I haven't even gone into the high ground mechanics, how much harder macro is and the motivation factor in it.
On July 22 2010 00:41 ramen247 wrote: go ahead but broodwar at first did not have this insane micro either.
yes but we no better now, we are actively looking for it and can't find it. you sound just like ssbb players. At first they all said that, now everyone knows that braw is just a shit game and all of the hard core melee players predictions have come true- brawl and sc2 is for noobs.
brawl was designed to be a shit game. it was designed not to be competitive. sakuri even said so. that's a false analogy
and looking for it is really irrelevant. nobody looked for wavedashing. hell, the developers even knew about wavedashing but it took years for anybody else to come up with it. it was discovered by accident. nobody was looking for certain micro tricks/gimmicks etc. these things are discovered, not invented. it takes time, and dedication, but they happen. the impatience among the community is profoundly misplaced, and it hurts the game when people don't even give it a chance when they expect the game to be as developed as bw right out of the gate.
Wavedashing didn't take years. It took like a year before people found it. People even implemented it a few months after its discovery. Also, people didn't look for wavedashing because it didn't exist in smash64 (and people hardly played that). Compare it to L-canceling which was in both, and I'm pretty sure Isai knew about it and looked for it.
And the tricks and gimmicks part actually applies to both games because regardless of the intent behind the creation of the games, the glitches/tricks/gimmicks will exist anyway. Even if Sakurai wanted Melee to be a shit game, if he didn't stop the glitches, it would be competitive. Speaking of which, when was it stated that the developers knew of wavedashing already? I mean, they probably knew of L-canceling because it was in both 64 and melee, and then auto-canceling in brawl, but wavedashing?
i agree with OP. so far SC2 just doesnt have nearly as interesting unit chemistry between the races. so far it's basically just 2 balls of mostly ranged units (or zeals and zerglings which are the only 'useful" melee units in the game basically now) a-moving into each other with spells going off. maybe in time it will change but right now there's just no finesse like there is in any BW matchup.
In broodwar most of the 'epic' micro and tense moments came about because of players fighting against the interface for control. You dont need to fight against sc2, it gives it away easy. tl;dr: sc2 is a slut, bw is a hard to get prude. I'm gonna give it more time definitely, i still do watch it if not play, but I dont think micro and tense situations similar to BW will ever arise.
On July 22 2010 01:54 Piy wrote: Of course you can't compare BW and a game that hasn't been released yet. C'mon.
On July 11 2010 14:23 Ideas wrote: man i hate all this thought about "yea but SC2 isnt 12 years old!!!!"
it doesnt matter how old the game is. there is a competition between BW and SC2 right now, a competition to take up our free time. right now BW is out and costs 20$. SC2 is out and will cost 60$ in 3 weeks. basically you are all saying "yea BW is better but in a few years SC2 might be as good! just give it time!" is it unfair to compare the 2? absolutely not. Sure it has a lesser developed metagame but that doesnt mean i have to play this inferior game for 2 years until MAYBE it gets better.
basically BW is superior to SC2 right now in every gameplay regard except accessibility, which is where the masses of new SC2 users probably find most appealing (there is also probably the lot of people who like playing a game where most strategies are widely undiscovered, although that doesnt really apply to this comparison).
will SC2 improve and have greater dynamics over time? maybe. the expansions will add new units for sure, but even if they rival BW in terms of completely awesome game-changing units that are possibly the most exciting in the game, i have doubts that it will ever match the perfection of BW. a fun distraction for a time? sure, but it will just be like any other game i play for a week or 2 and then go back to my real game, BW.
On July 11 2010 11:59 ApacheChief wrote: I don't think this is true at all.
StarCraft 2 probably has MORE interactions between the races, with early game spells like forcefield, EMP and fungal growth.
I don't understand...
Have you played/watched BW a decent amount? I'm guessing you haven't.
Spells were a lot more devastating in BW. They were ESSENTIAL to some tactics. Getting storm out for the mass hydra bust, getting dark swarm to save yourself from the M&M/tank push, getting irradiate out to stop the powerful muta sniping, getting spider mines to deal with the mass speedlots, and many more. These were all absolutely critical and powerful to stopping the opponent's powerful push/strategy. But the beauty about it is that even though it's a great and powerful spell to repel the opponent's strategy, the opponent can still make use of his units with superior micro. Storm dodging, moving all units out of dark swarm quickly, scourging science vessels (which even the Terran can counter with even better micro), zealot bombing, etc.
SC2 introduces too many elements that weaken the effect of these awesome spells because of how easy smart casting is. This is an extremely poor decision in terms of game dynamics because now everyone can storm with similar efficiency. On the other hand, a greater player in BW can make less templars AND storm far more effectively and faster than a player who is slower and not as micro-prepped. This is key, a BW player with a couple of templars against zerg is scary. But it's not scary at all in SC2 until they have a ton of templars. You EARN your "terrible terrible damage" in BW, the game doesn't just give it to you.
Things in SC2 like FF, fungal growth, marauders' concussive shells, etc, don't allow the opponent to overcome these "counters" with greater micro. It's just not possible. If I get FF'd, the only thing I can do is just.. let my trapped units attack. There's really nothing else you can do. Fungal growth? Well, you're just trapped until it wears off. And I'm sure everyone has experienced trying to run away from marauders with the trailing units have zero hope of living. They don't give the option of "hey, great micro can get me out of this pinch!" And that's what makes BW the great spectator sport it is today.
I think SC2 is fun to watch, but just for how long? Who knows. I still get goosebumps watching BW games. I hope SC2 can still do the same, but that might be asking for too much.
On July 11 2010 14:53 sluggaslamoo wrote: Yeah likewise, SC2 has had 7 years of design time plus 12 years of BW evolution, to create a game that should be 100x better than BW from the get-go.
SC2 should have taken what was so captivating in BW and made it even better. IMO SC2 just seems to be riding on the success of BW, and hoping that any change will still lead to a good game.
On July 11 2010 15:11 QibingZero wrote: The years we've spent since SC was released were not just spent learning how to play that game - they were largely spent learning how to play RTS games. The best WC2 players on Kali, the best SC players at launch... players at that skill level would have trouble holding D on iccup today. The first day a player like Idra or Nony touched SC2, they were better at it than anyone was at SC for years. This is how far the RTS world has come since.
What I'm getting at is that all of these 'give it time' posts are ridiculous. Do you really think the top players aren't trying out every possible way to win? With players being picked up by eSports teams before the game is even released, you'd better believe they're trying every little trick they can to get the advantage over others. Despite everything though, they can't make infestors as game-changing as defilers were. They can't make skirmishes come as interesting as marine vs lurker or goons vs early terran pressure. There are limitations in place that simply cannot be overcome by 'figuring more stuff out'.
By the way, there's a terrible misconception going on here. It didn't take 10+ years for Starcraft to be an amazing and dynamic game to play and watch. In fact, we've enjoyed it for that long.
On July 22 2010 00:41 ramen247 wrote: go ahead but broodwar at first did not have this insane micro either.
you sound just like ssbb players. At first they all said that, now everyone knows that braw is just a shit game and all of the hard core melee players predictions have come true- brawl and sc2 is for noobs.
On July 22 2010 02:14 butchji wrote: Comparing StarCraft2 with StarCraft1 without BroodWar and any balancing would be more reasonable
Care to explain how exactly that makes sense?
Because it took like almost a decade to make BroodWar that perfect? Comparing it to a not even released game without its addons is just unfair.
How is it unfair? Blizzard has had this much time to perfect their game. It should be better than BW right off the bat. and TvZ aside, I'd argue that its definitely comparable to BW in terms of balance, so I dont know what you're getting at by saying it should be compared to sc without balancing. The balance in SC2 is fine. Thats not even the topic of discussion here. The thing is that the reason so many 'tense' moments happened in BW was because you had to struggle against the interface to do certain micro tricks, and that units and spells dealt ridiculous amounts of splash or AoE damage, or were ridiculous in some way or the other. Think about the most 'AAARGHHH' moments in BW, what were they? Lurkerling flanks, mnm micro against lurkers, reaver drops, well placed storms, swarms, I could go on, but anyone who has watched BW knows this. See a common theme? These are all situations that arise because of spells dealing incredible amounts of damage, or being plain out imbalanced (dark swarm, psionic storm, lets face it, those were insane) BW was balanced on the razors edge because everything was so insanely powerful. SC2 however is going the other way, maintaining balance by mellowing it down, understandable since you dont need to struggle against the interface (the other point) to cast spells and do micro. Spells cant be atrociously powerful because they are MUCH easier to cast now. As a result, see someone cast 8 storm? Meh who cares, a bronze player could do it. Do you see what I mean? This isnt a problem that can be solved by the wait and see approach
On July 22 2010 01:54 Piy wrote: Of course you can't compare BW and a game that hasn't been released yet. C'mon.
Everyone uses this as an excuse nowadays. I don't think it makes any sense to me, because while it's not out, it's basically in the form it will be in when it's released. No miracles are going to happen between now and then. Right now I don't like the game, and that's not changing on release. I'm going to play BW until SC2 is better than BW. I just feel bored playing SC2 compared to BW, so I won't play it until/if that changes.
We are excited about a new game with new possibilities for creativity and interest. It lacks the polish of BW currently, but we are looking forward to actively experiencing it's growth, both as an esport and a game in itself.
On July 22 2010 02:36 Piy wrote: We are excited about a new game with new possibilities for creativity and interest. It lacks the polish of BW currently, but we are looking forward to actively experiencing it's growth, both as an esport and a game in itself.
It has little to do with anything else.
Sure, I dont think anyone wants SC2 to fail tbh, not even the most die-hard BW fans. I mean come on, if its gonna be a better game, theres no reason not to play it. The thing is, right now, its not. And the reasons its not dont seem to be something that will change with patching and expansions (read above to see what I mean) Im just trying to get an explanation to refute those problems/points from someone, I am definitely not an SC2 anti-fan
On July 22 2010 00:41 ramen247 wrote: go ahead but broodwar at first did not have this insane micro either.
yes but we no better now, we are actively looking for it and can't find it. you sound just like ssbb players. At first they all said that, now everyone knows that braw is just a shit game and all of the hard core melee players predictions have come true- brawl and sc2 is for noobs.
QTF Even winning in sc2 is boring. After a game the most thrill i get is being excited to change games.
On July 22 2010 02:14 butchji wrote: Comparing StarCraft2 with StarCraft1 without BroodWar and any balancing would be more reasonable
Care to explain how exactly that makes sense?
Because it took like almost a decade to make BroodWar that perfect? Comparing it to a not even released game without its addons is just unfair.
How is it unfair? Blizzard has had this much time to perfect their game. It should be better than BW right off the bat. and TvZ aside, I'd argue that its definitely comparable to BW in terms of balance, so I dont know what you're getting at by saying it should be compared to sc without balancing. The balance in SC2 is fine. Thats not even the topic of discussion here. The thing is that the reason so many 'tense' moments happened in BW was because you had to struggle against the interface to do certain micro tricks, and that units and spells dealt ridiculous amounts of splash or AoE damage, or were ridiculous in some way or the other. Think about the most 'AAARGHHH' moments in BW, what were they? Lurkerling flanks, mnm micro against lurkers, reaver drops, well placed storms, swarms, I could go on, but anyone who has watched BW knows this. See a common theme? These are all situations that arise because of spells dealing incredible amounts of damage, or being plain out imbalanced (dark swarm, psionic storm, lets face it, those were insane) BW was balanced on the razors edge because everything was so insanely powerful. SC2 however is going the other way, maintaining balance by mellowing it down, understandable since you dont need to struggle against the interface (the other point) to cast spells and do micro. Spells cant be atrociously powerful because they are MUCH easier to cast now. As a result, see someone cast 8 storm? Meh who cares, a bronze player could do it. Do you see what I mean? This isnt a problem that can be solved by the wait and see approach
Here is the thing. This is all on a POV. SC2 is better than BW right off the bat. The interface is better, the gameplay is smoother, the balance is better. What most here hate about it, is it doesn't have rediculous demands that make for exciting play. You don't see it because it is not a game being played by people who are paid to play it nonstop and have 12 years of strategy and build orders to follow. Of course you can argue that you already know what is happening with it and it will fail. Take a look at starcraft 1 from release day up until BW and tell me you knew it was a game that would have people playing it for money in a professional league.
BW beta was really stupid. Hello reavers doing 250 damage per shot and other stupid balance issues. Sc2 beta was really stupid at the start but it got better and better over a few months it is still not perfect in any means.This is 1/3 of sc2 we are seeing. They have 2 more expansions to add on it until we see the vision Blizzard had for it(Blizzard always has the vision of the final product years down the road)
I like both BW and SC2. BW will still be here SC2 will be coming and both should learn to live with each other.
On July 22 2010 02:36 Piy wrote: We are excited about a new game with new possibilities for creativity and interest. It lacks the polish of BW currently, but we are looking forward to actively experiencing it's growth, both as an esport and a game in itself.
It has little to do with anything else.
Sure, I dont think anyone wants SC2 to fail tbh, not even the most die-hard BW fans. I mean come on, if its gonna be a better game, theres no reason not to play it. The thing is, right now, its not. And the reasons its not dont seem to be something that will change with patching and expansions (read above to see what I mean) Im just trying to get an explanation to refute those problems/points from someone, I am definitely not an SC2 anti-fan
That's the same logic that indicates that we should never watch any film but Citizen Kane because it is the best ever, and every film since then has been a waste of time.
Nobody should have bothered writing plays after Hamlet.
Noone should have released an album after Sgt. Pepper.
On July 22 2010 00:59 Arrian wrote: you're not giving it enough time
On July 22 2010 00:44 Misrah wrote:
On July 22 2010 00:41 ramen247 wrote: go ahead but broodwar at first did not have this insane micro either.
yes but we no better now, we are actively looking for it and can't find it. you sound just like ssbb players. At first they all said that, now everyone knows that braw is just a shit game and all of the hard core melee players predictions have come true- brawl and sc2 is for noobs.
brawl was designed to be a shit game. it was designed not to be competitive. sakuri even said so. that's a false analogy
and looking for it is really irrelevant. nobody looked for wavedashing. hell, the developers even knew about wavedashing but it took years for anybody else to come up with it. it was discovered by accident. nobody was looking for certain micro tricks/gimmicks etc. these things are discovered, not invented. it takes time, and dedication, but they happen. the impatience among the community is profoundly misplaced, and it hurts the game when people don't even give it a chance when they expect the game to be as developed as bw right out of the gate.
Wavedashing didn't take years. It took like a year before people found it. People even implemented it a few months after its discovery. Also, people didn't look for wavedashing because it didn't exist in smash64 (and people hardly played that). Compare it to L-canceling which was in both, and I'm pretty sure Isai knew about it and looked for it.
Your point being? This actually supports my point. You're not finding stuff because the same stuff isn't in this game for obvious reasons. It's going to take time to find the tricks/gimmicks/etc. There are good reasons why muta micro for example isn't in this one, and reasons why other tricks aren't in it either. Every game has exploits. Every game. They just take time to find.
And the tricks and gimmicks part actually applies to both games because regardless of the intent behind the creation of the games, the glitches/tricks/gimmicks will exist anyway. Even if Sakurai wanted Melee to be a shit game, if he didn't stop the glitches, it would be competitive.
Exactly what I said. None of this refutes the idea that these things will take time, which was my point. Misrah was saying that they don't exist because they haven't been found already, which is ridiculous.
Speaking of which, when was it stated that the developers knew of wavedashing already? I mean, they probably knew of L-canceling because it was in both 64 and melee, and then auto-canceling in brawl, but wavedashing?
Go take it up with Smashboards. That's where i heard it from, and I tend to trust them on issues of smash.
On July 22 2010 02:36 Piy wrote: We are excited about a new game with new possibilities for creativity and interest. It lacks the polish of BW currently, but we are looking forward to actively experiencing it's growth, both as an esport and a game in itself.
It has little to do with anything else.
Sure, I dont think anyone wants SC2 to fail tbh, not even the most die-hard BW fans. I mean come on, if its gonna be a better game, theres no reason not to play it. The thing is, right now, its not. And the reasons its not dont seem to be something that will change with patching and expansions (read above to see what I mean) Im just trying to get an explanation to refute those problems/points from someone, I am definitely not an SC2 anti-fan
That's the same logic that indicates that we should never watch any film but Citizen Kane because it is the best ever, and every film since then has been a waste of time.
Nobody should have bothered writing plays after Hamlet.
Noone should have released an album after Sgt. Pepper.
Every RPG since FFIV deserved to sell no copies.
See how bad this reasoning is?
I think you are exaggerating. Im not saying people shouldnt buy SC2, or play it, thats ridiculous. I'm just saying that I think there are certain aspects of it that keep it from having the scope to imrpove. I'd definitely buy the game, even if it was absolute shit, if only for the single player. But in a contest between BW and sc2 for long term play, if sc2 doesnt gain that 'oomph!' that BW had (in ways that i described in previous posts), then BW is simply the better game. This is not saying that sc2 will never gain that, I'm just not sure how it should, or how blizzard should go about making it so.
On July 22 2010 02:36 Piy wrote: We are excited about a new game with new possibilities for creativity and interest. It lacks the polish of BW currently, but we are looking forward to actively experiencing it's growth, both as an esport and a game in itself.
It has little to do with anything else.
Sure, I dont think anyone wants SC2 to fail tbh, not even the most die-hard BW fans. I mean come on, if its gonna be a better game, theres no reason not to play it. The thing is, right now, its not. And the reasons its not dont seem to be something that will change with patching and expansions (read above to see what I mean) Im just trying to get an explanation to refute those problems/points from someone, I am definitely not an SC2 anti-fan
That's the same logic that indicates that we should never watch any film but Citizen Kane because it is the best ever, and every film since then has been a waste of time.
Nobody should have bothered writing plays after Hamlet.
Noone should have released an album after Sgt. Pepper.
Every RPG since FFIV deserved to sell no copies.
See how bad this reasoning is?
I think you are exaggerating. Im not saying people shouldnt buy SC2, or play it, thats ridiculous. I'm just saying that I think there are certain aspects of it that keep it from having the scope to imrpove. I'd definitely buy the game, even if it was absolute shit, if only for the single player. But in a contest between BW and sc2 for long term play, if sc2 doesnt gain that 'oomph!' that BW had (in ways that i described in previous posts), then BW is simply the better game. This is not saying that sc2 will never gain that, I'm just not sure how it should, or how blizzard should go about making it so.
how do you know that there are certain aspects to keep it from improving? also, u are making an IF statement. anything can happen. just give it some time!
On July 22 2010 02:36 Piy wrote: We are excited about a new game with new possibilities for creativity and interest. It lacks the polish of BW currently, but we are looking forward to actively experiencing it's growth, both as an esport and a game in itself.
It has little to do with anything else.
Sure, I dont think anyone wants SC2 to fail tbh, not even the most die-hard BW fans. I mean come on, if its gonna be a better game, theres no reason not to play it. The thing is, right now, its not. And the reasons its not dont seem to be something that will change with patching and expansions (read above to see what I mean) Im just trying to get an explanation to refute those problems/points from someone, I am definitely not an SC2 anti-fan
That's the same logic that indicates that we should never watch any film but Citizen Kane because it is the best ever, and every film since then has been a waste of time.
Nobody should have bothered writing plays after Hamlet.
Noone should have released an album after Sgt. Pepper.
Every RPG since FFIV deserved to sell no copies.
See how bad this reasoning is?
I think you are exaggerating. Im not saying people shouldnt buy SC2, or play it, thats ridiculous. I'm just saying that I think there are certain aspects of it that keep it from having the scope to imrpove. I'd definitely buy the game, even if it was absolute shit, if only for the single player. But in a contest between BW and sc2 for long term play, if sc2 doesnt gain that 'oomph!' that BW had (in ways that i described in previous posts), then BW is simply the better game. This is not saying that sc2 will never gain that, I'm just not sure how it should, or how blizzard should go about making it so.
how do you know that there are certain aspects to keep it from improving? also, u are making an IF statement. anything can happen. just give it some time!
I dont KNOW, I just think so, based on BW. I mean the most exciting moments, as I already described, come from mechanics in the game that dont exist in SC2, for good reason; i.e, the better interface and smartcasting causing spells to become more easy to cast. again its just an opinion, and like I said yeah i'll buy it and play it, and if it becomes better than BW (from a spectator view) then definitely play it competitively too :D edit: I think a simple way to describe part of the problem, is that anything FLASHY, pleasant to view in sc2, can be done by even the slowest and worst player. The best players set themselves apart through means that you normally cant really see outright in a game, better macro, timings, unit combos, etc
I'm playing broodwar through usa wcg then it'll be pure sc2. sc2 is the future, it's what everyones interested in and it's where the money, sponsors, events and tournaments are headed so I have no choice. Neither do the major teams or top level players. Many people agree broodwar is the better game but what wins the day in the end are viewers and money. What do people want to watch and sponsor now? starcraft 2.
On July 22 2010 03:19 LuckyFool wrote: I'm playing broodwar through usa wcg then it'll be pure sc2. sc2 is the future, it's what everyones interested in and it's where the money, sponsors, events and tournaments are headed so I have no choice. Neither do the major teams or top level players. Many people agree broodwar is the better game but what wins the day in the end are viewers and money. What do people want to watch and sponsor now? starcraft 2.
Exactly for these reasons SC2 will last till the next "big" game comes out, just like WC3. People were playing it for 2 years, when there was money in it and after that it was all about DOTA.
Nowadays its the same with SC2. Everyone is "omg I`m gonna be pro at SC2, I`m gonna win a thousand dollars from a tourney omg!".
BW is art, bw is passion and in my mind there will never be better game than it.
On July 22 2010 03:19 LuckyFool wrote: I'm playing broodwar through usa wcg then it'll be pure sc2. sc2 is the future, it's what everyones interested in and it's where the money, sponsors, events and tournaments are headed so I have no choice. Neither do the major teams or top level players. Many people agree broodwar is the better game but what wins the day in the end are viewers and money. What do people want to watch and sponsor now? starcraft 2.
are you playing for the sponsors or because you love the game?
On July 22 2010 02:36 Piy wrote: We are excited about a new game with new possibilities for creativity and interest. It lacks the polish of BW currently, but we are looking forward to actively experiencing it's growth, both as an esport and a game in itself.
It has little to do with anything else.
Sure, I dont think anyone wants SC2 to fail tbh, not even the most die-hard BW fans. I mean come on, if its gonna be a better game, theres no reason not to play it. The thing is, right now, its not. And the reasons its not dont seem to be something that will change with patching and expansions (read above to see what I mean) Im just trying to get an explanation to refute those problems/points from someone, I am definitely not an SC2 anti-fan
That's the same logic that indicates that we should never watch any film but Citizen Kane because it is the best ever, and every film since then has been a waste of time.
Nobody should have bothered writing plays after Hamlet.
Noone should have released an album after Sgt. Pepper.
Every RPG since FFIV deserved to sell no copies.
See how bad this reasoning is?
I think you are exaggerating. Im not saying people shouldnt buy SC2, or play it, thats ridiculous. I'm just saying that I think there are certain aspects of it that keep it from having the scope to imrpove. I'd definitely buy the game, even if it was absolute shit, if only for the single player. But in a contest between BW and sc2 for long term play, if sc2 doesnt gain that 'oomph!' that BW had (in ways that i described in previous posts), then BW is simply the better game. This is not saying that sc2 will never gain that, I'm just not sure how it should, or how blizzard should go about making it so.
But there's no way of predicting that. You just seem to be disagreeing for the sake of it.
On July 22 2010 03:19 LuckyFool wrote: I'm playing broodwar through usa wcg then it'll be pure sc2. sc2 is the future, it's what everyones interested in and it's where the money, sponsors, events and tournaments are headed so I have no choice. Neither do the major teams or top level players. Many people agree broodwar is the better game but what wins the day in the end are viewers and money. What do people want to watch and sponsor now? starcraft 2.
are you playing for the sponsors or because you love the game?
The top foreigners play SC2 because its a way to earn cash, which they can't do in SC1.
On July 22 2010 02:36 Piy wrote: We are excited about a new game with new possibilities for creativity and interest. It lacks the polish of BW currently, but we are looking forward to actively experiencing it's growth, both as an esport and a game in itself.
It has little to do with anything else.
Sure, I dont think anyone wants SC2 to fail tbh, not even the most die-hard BW fans. I mean come on, if its gonna be a better game, theres no reason not to play it. The thing is, right now, its not. And the reasons its not dont seem to be something that will change with patching and expansions (read above to see what I mean) Im just trying to get an explanation to refute those problems/points from someone, I am definitely not an SC2 anti-fan
That's the same logic that indicates that we should never watch any film but Citizen Kane because it is the best ever, and every film since then has been a waste of time.
Nobody should have bothered writing plays after Hamlet.
Noone should have released an album after Sgt. Pepper.
Every RPG since FFIV deserved to sell no copies.
See how bad this reasoning is?
I think you are exaggerating. Im not saying people shouldnt buy SC2, or play it, thats ridiculous. I'm just saying that I think there are certain aspects of it that keep it from having the scope to imrpove. I'd definitely buy the game, even if it was absolute shit, if only for the single player. But in a contest between BW and sc2 for long term play, if sc2 doesnt gain that 'oomph!' that BW had (in ways that i described in previous posts), then BW is simply the better game. This is not saying that sc2 will never gain that, I'm just not sure how it should, or how blizzard should go about making it so.
But there's no way of predicting that. You just seem to be disagreeing for the sake of it.
I dont even understand how you could thing im 'disagreeing for the sake of it' because thats what you seem to be doing. I put forward my points in one of my first posts, you did nothing to address or refute them. You just keep saying im wrong without giving any reasoning.
I think SC2 will get better in terms of strategy and management. Remember Brood War sucked in its early years, but then it got better with the time as progamers discovered new strategies in all MU and the game got balanced and very interesting to play and watch. It'll be the same for SC2.
On July 22 2010 02:14 butchji wrote: Comparing StarCraft2 with StarCraft1 without BroodWar and any balancing would be more reasonable
You know, I played some vanilla SC recently with some friends and the balance isn't bad at all, TvZ works in a different dynamic and so does ZvP, altho PvT is imba due to no range goliaths. And you know what, playing vanilla SC was still very very fun due to the freshness of a new spin on PvZ and TvZ, and it was helluva lot more fun to watch then boring SC2.
And bullshit on those saying it took BW to become perfect, BW was perfect since 1.08, which is back in like 2000. It only took them about a year or so to perfect the game, its just the players took a decade to become perfect. Please stop saying that BW took a decade to become perfect, its a fucking stupid statement.
On July 22 2010 00:41 ramen247 wrote: go ahead but broodwar at first did not have this insane micro either.
what is this bullshit, BW was primarily a micro game from the start, the micro was insane in its own way, where they played it like WC3 and made the most out of every damn unit they had.
On July 22 2010 04:33 Arkqn wrote: I think SC2 will get better in terms of strategy and management. Remember Brood War sucked in its early years, but then it got better with the time as progamers discovered new strategies in all MU and the game got balanced and very interesting to play and watch. It'll be the same for SC2.
On July 11 2010 14:23 Ideas wrote: man i hate all this thought about "yea but SC2 isnt 12 years old!!!!"
it doesnt matter how old the game is. there is a competition between BW and SC2 right now, a competition to take up our free time. right now BW is out and costs 20$. SC2 is out and will cost 60$ in 3 weeks. basically you are all saying "yea BW is better but in a few years SC2 might be as good! just give it time!" is it unfair to compare the 2? absolutely not. Sure it has a lesser developed metagame but that doesnt mean i have to play this inferior game for 2 years until MAYBE it gets better.
basically BW is superior to SC2 right now in every gameplay regard except accessibility, which is where the masses of new SC2 users probably find most appealing (there is also probably the lot of people who like playing a game where most strategies are widely undiscovered, although that doesnt really apply to this comparison).
will SC2 improve and have greater dynamics over time? maybe. the expansions will add new units for sure, but even if they rival BW in terms of completely awesome game-changing units that are possibly the most exciting in the game, i have doubts that it will ever match the perfection of BW. a fun distraction for a time? sure, but it will just be like any other game i play for a week or 2 and then go back to my real game, BW.
On July 11 2010 11:59 ApacheChief wrote: I don't think this is true at all.
StarCraft 2 probably has MORE interactions between the races, with early game spells like forcefield, EMP and fungal growth.
I don't understand...
Have you played/watched BW a decent amount? I'm guessing you haven't.
Spells were a lot more devastating in BW. They were ESSENTIAL to some tactics. Getting storm out for the mass hydra bust, getting dark swarm to save yourself from the M&M/tank push, getting irradiate out to stop the powerful muta sniping, getting spider mines to deal with the mass speedlots, and many more. These were all absolutely critical and powerful to stopping the opponent's powerful push/strategy. But the beauty about it is that even though it's a great and powerful spell to repel the opponent's strategy, the opponent can still make use of his units with superior micro. Storm dodging, moving all units out of dark swarm quickly, scourging science vessels (which even the Terran can counter with even better micro), zealot bombing, etc.
SC2 introduces too many elements that weaken the effect of these awesome spells because of how easy smart casting is. This is an extremely poor decision in terms of game dynamics because now everyone can storm with similar efficiency. On the other hand, a greater player in BW can make less templars AND storm far more effectively and faster than a player who is slower and not as micro-prepped. This is key, a BW player with a couple of templars against zerg is scary. But it's not scary at all in SC2 until they have a ton of templars. You EARN your "terrible terrible damage" in BW, the game doesn't just give it to you.
Things in SC2 like FF, fungal growth, marauders' concussive shells, etc, don't allow the opponent to overcome these "counters" with greater micro. It's just not possible. If I get FF'd, the only thing I can do is just.. let my trapped units attack. There's really nothing else you can do. Fungal growth? Well, you're just trapped until it wears off. And I'm sure everyone has experienced trying to run away from marauders with the trailing units have zero hope of living. They don't give the option of "hey, great micro can get me out of this pinch!" And that's what makes BW the great spectator sport it is today.
I think SC2 is fun to watch, but just for how long? Who knows. I still get goosebumps watching BW games. I hope SC2 can still do the same, but that might be asking for too much.
On July 11 2010 14:53 sluggaslamoo wrote: Yeah likewise, SC2 has had 7 years of design time plus 12 years of BW evolution, to create a game that should be 100x better than BW from the get-go.
SC2 should have taken what was so captivating in BW and made it even better. IMO SC2 just seems to be riding on the success of BW, and hoping that any change will still lead to a good game.
On July 11 2010 15:11 QibingZero wrote: The years we've spent since SC was released were not just spent learning how to play that game - they were largely spent learning how to play RTS games. The best WC2 players on Kali, the best SC players at launch... players at that skill level would have trouble holding D on iccup today. The first day a player like Idra or Nony touched SC2, they were better at it than anyone was at SC for years. This is how far the RTS world has come since.
What I'm getting at is that all of these 'give it time' posts are ridiculous. Do you really think the top players aren't trying out every possible way to win? With players being picked up by eSports teams before the game is even released, you'd better believe they're trying every little trick they can to get the advantage over others. Despite everything though, they can't make infestors as game-changing as defilers were. They can't make skirmishes come as interesting as marine vs lurker or goons vs early terran pressure. There are limitations in place that simply cannot be overcome by 'figuring more stuff out'.
By the way, there's a terrible misconception going on here. It didn't take 10+ years for Starcraft to be an amazing and dynamic game to play and watch. In fact, we've enjoyed it for that long.
I keep these in my profile for these occasions
Also, what made BW great is that it is not designed to play like we play it now, nobody wanted us to 3 hatch muta or 9 minute push in TvZ. These carefully planned out build orders and strategies were made by players. With starcraft 2, however, blizzard already tried to create a super-balanced ultra fun competitive game, they already tried to make it similar to the current state of bw (i mean balanced and competitive) from launch because obviously people are not going to wait 9 years until the game "gets better"
Obviously that is why you cant say "dont compare vanilla sc2 to brood war" and shit like that, its retarded. The game is supposed to be good right now, are you saying that you are only playing the game because you want to wait years before blizzard stops patching and expanding the game?
And yeah im not expecting sc2 to be a near-perfect competitive game because obviously its designed mainly for casual players since thats where the money is at.
On July 22 2010 00:41 ramen247 wrote: go ahead but broodwar at first did not have this insane micro either.
yes but we no better now, we are actively looking for it and can't find it. you sound just like ssbb players. At first they all said that, now everyone knows that braw is just a shit game and all of the hard core melee players predictions have come true- brawl and sc2 is for noobs.
Terrible example. People were looking for it back then as well - the thing is that you don't know Starcraft 2, whereas from Melee to Brawl, the game was almost identical. Of course that BW is better now, but saying that there's no way SC2 can get better is incredibly narrow-minded.
SC2 already has the experience and the top-notch players, and yet it's still powerfully underwhelming. The issue is not with how much we can do in the coming years to develop the game even further, the issue is with the fundamentals of the game itself. It just doesn't have the same potential that BW had (and reached).
Sure, SC2 might be entertaining and exciting for the viewers. Sure, it might still be difficult, fun, and rewarding for the players. But it doesn't do it in the same way that BW did it for all the hardcore players.
It's lacking many things that BW has and instead has so many superfluous gadgets and gizmos that are just so meh.
I think an apt comparison would be the older Acura Integra and the newer Honda Civic. You might have all the nice commodities of a modern car that makes the Civic luxurious and comfortable for everyone. But in the end, no one can deny that the Integra is a blast to drive, and far more at that than the Civic.
When it comes to buying time, it's all up to the consumer to purchase whatever they want. For the veteran BW players, they know the experience of playing a game that has aged perfectly like fine wine, and nothing can replace BW. For everyone else, what's new and "in" is the most appealing, and SC2 will be right on the shelves for their eager little hands.
Even though I'll be among the many sheeples playing SC2 but BW will always be the real game.
On July 22 2010 04:33 Arkqn wrote: I think SC2 will get better in terms of strategy and management. Remember Brood War sucked in its early years, but then it got better with the time as progamers discovered new strategies in all MU and the game got balanced and very interesting to play and watch. It'll be the same for SC2.
In its early years nobody knew what an RTS was. They were so new. Now we have thousands of players with years upon years of RTS experience playing a game with similar mechanics to its predecessor. The average skill of RTS players in general has grown exponentially. Back when BW came out people didn't even have the idea to make excess workers to transfer to an expansion. We've pretty much carried over all of our mechanics (macro, positioning, adding buildings, etc), concepts of timing, micro, and whatnot over to Sc2. The "remember BW sucked in the beginning too" argument is really stupid and shortsighted.
Brood War's better for now and likely always will be. I'll be playing it til the end of time (or until computers get too good for it). Starcraft 2 is a good game but it isn't likely that it'll ever be as good as Brood War. But hey, there's always a chance. But in the end, that's what the casuals flock to so that's where the good foreigners will go so they can earn money.
On July 22 2010 00:38 neobowman wrote: Brood War was just perfect. You can't recreate a lurker contain in Z v P in Starcraft 2. The moment of insane micro when a Protoss tries to break out, the Zerg tries to snipe the observer and the Protoss in turn, tries to storm the **** out of every living Zerg unit while trying to save his observer at the same time. There's no Starcraft 2 equivalent.
It seems perfect to you because the level of play has evolved so much. Perfection, or near perfection is achieved over time, and may have little to do with the game itself. As uttered numerous times before, it's too early to tell.
In any case you can't recreate a lurker contain in ZvP in SC2 simply because there is no lurker in SC2 =p
On July 22 2010 01:53 TheAntZ wrote: In broodwar most of the 'epic' micro and tense moments came about because of players fighting against the interface for control. You dont need to fight against sc2, it gives it away easy. tl;dr: sc2 is a slut, bw is a hard to get prude. I'm gonna give it more time definitely, i still do watch it if not play, but I dont think micro and tense situations similar to BW will ever arise.
It's not just the interface. BW had many units that were a) powerful and b) very hard to control. These units that would single handedly decide a battle depending on how they were used, and that had overwhelming potential but could also royally suck depending on how you used them.
Examples include: Vessels, defilers, mines, lurkers (position these poorly or burrow a few seconds too late vs terran and your army evaporates in seconds), templars, reaver / shuttle, arbiter, mutas (being microed) and whatnot. Add to that an unforgiving interface that only allows you to control 12 units at a time and you have an extremely entertaining to watch micro battle.
On July 22 2010 01:53 TheAntZ wrote: In broodwar most of the 'epic' micro and tense moments came about because of players fighting against the interface for control. You dont need to fight against sc2, it gives it away easy. tl;dr: sc2 is a slut, bw is a hard to get prude. I'm gonna give it more time definitely, i still do watch it if not play, but I dont think micro and tense situations similar to BW will ever arise.
It's not just the interface. BW had many units that were a) powerful and b) very hard to control. These units that would single handedly decide a battle depending on how they were used, and that had overwhelming potential but could also royally suck depending on how you used them.
Examples include: Vessels, defilers, mines, lurkers (position these poorly or burrow a few seconds too late vs terran and your army evaporates in seconds), templars, reaver / shuttle, arbiter, mutas (being microed) and whatnot. Add to that an unforgiving interface that only allows you to control 12 units at a time and you have an extremely entertaining to watch micro battle.
yea SC2 is just missing the super-units of BW like defilers, lurkers, reavers, mines, etc. they still have strong units like colossi and broodlords, but they just lack that risk/reward and gameplay depth that the BW equivalent had. there's not much to controlling a colossi well in battle outside of just kiting. compare that to a reaver where you are constantly taking it in and out of a shuttle in battle and aiming your scarabs correctly.
the expansions REALLY need to add units that have a lot more depth to controlling them (IE it takes a lot of practice to properly control them well like reaver/shuttle or muta micro) and have a high risk/high reward mentality. right now i cant really think of any SC2 units that are nearly as exciting as the BW super-units.
On July 22 2010 00:59 Arrian wrote: you're not giving it enough time
On July 22 2010 00:44 Misrah wrote:
On July 22 2010 00:41 ramen247 wrote: go ahead but broodwar at first did not have this insane micro either.
yes but we no better now, we are actively looking for it and can't find it. you sound just like ssbb players. At first they all said that, now everyone knows that braw is just a shit game and all of the hard core melee players predictions have come true- brawl and sc2 is for noobs.
brawl was designed to be a shit game. it was designed not to be competitive. sakuri even said so. that's a false analogy
and looking for it is really irrelevant. nobody looked for wavedashing. hell, the developers even knew about wavedashing but it took years for anybody else to come up with it. it was discovered by accident. nobody was looking for certain micro tricks/gimmicks etc. these things are discovered, not invented. it takes time, and dedication, but they happen. the impatience among the community is profoundly misplaced, and it hurts the game when people don't even give it a chance when they expect the game to be as developed as bw right out of the gate.
Wavedashing didn't take years. It took like a year before people found it. People even implemented it a few months after its discovery. Also, people didn't look for wavedashing because it didn't exist in smash64 (and people hardly played that). Compare it to L-canceling which was in both, and I'm pretty sure Isai knew about it and looked for it.
And the tricks and gimmicks part actually applies to both games because regardless of the intent behind the creation of the games, the glitches/tricks/gimmicks will exist anyway. Even if Sakurai wanted Melee to be a shit game, if he didn't stop the glitches, it would be competitive. Speaking of which, when was it stated that the developers knew of wavedashing already? I mean, they probably knew of L-canceling because it was in both 64 and melee, and then auto-canceling in brawl, but wavedashing?
I'll jump in here, Melee is the only game I play really really serious right now:
1. Developers put L-cancelling in Melee to make it more competitively. 2. Wavedashing was discovered during the final months of developement but the devs didn't care and decided to let it stay.
SC2 already has the experience and the top-notch players, and yet it's still powerfully underwhelming. The issue is not with how much we can do in the coming years to develop the game even further, the issue is with the fundamentals of the game itself. It just doesn't have the same potential that BW had (and reached).
Sure, SC2 might be entertaining and exciting for the viewers. Sure, it might still be difficult, fun, and rewarding for the players. But it doesn't do it in the same way that BW did it for all the hardcore players.
It's lacking many things that BW has and instead has so many superfluous gadgets and gizmos that are just so meh.
Pardon me for being 'that guy' but how exactly do you know that? Like...any of it?
How do you know it doesn't have the same potential, or that it doesn't do it for all the 'hardcore' players? Like...you're speaking for a lot of people here, and I don't really know where you come off doing it. A number of vocal people have said they're not playing SC2, but there's a whole new lot coming to SC2 as well who are hard core gamers from other games like War3 and the like. And as for potential, how do you know? Have you tried every unit combo, every ability in every situation and tried units in various mechanical situations to tease out any extra uses? I doubt it. Just give the game time before you judge it and the community so broadly. It may well happen that it doesn't have the depth, but we have no way of knowing it yet. The game hasn't even been released.
On July 22 2010 03:19 LuckyFool wrote: I'm playing broodwar through usa wcg then it'll be pure sc2. sc2 is the future, it's what everyones interested in and it's where the money, sponsors, events and tournaments are headed so I have no choice. Neither do the major teams or top level players. Many people agree broodwar is the better game but what wins the day in the end are viewers and money. What do people want to watch and sponsor now? starcraft 2.
are you playing for the sponsors or because you love the game?
When I first started playing broodwar I played because I loved the game. I still love the game. It is and probably always will be the better game. But as I grew older I found I stopped playing as much simply for the love of the game and more for the rush and excitement of competing with other good players. I loved the feeling I got right before an important tournament game or some higher profile match against somebody well known. Sponsors and money keep top players playing the game at top levels and provide tournaments and situations like this. It also gives you people to look up to and respect in terms of skill and ability, IdrA, Nony, White-Ra, they played because of sponsors and money and while I knew I was never going to be at their level, to be playing the same game and studying them helped rise the competitive level of the game and helped overall make the game more competitive and amazing.
I was never sponsored in broodwar or ever played for money the best rank I ever got was B on iccup (during tsl ladder when it was much easier) I was never a top level player, but the past 1.5 years or so I've played primarily because of events, such as tsl and wcgs. Of course I loved the game but both money and the competitive aspects that money and sponsors brought to the game started carrying equal weight for me. Also I wanted to be able to have things I could talk about with my friends in real life and money and sponsors make playing so much seem more worthwhile. People would ask me "Why are you playing that old game so much?" And I'd be able to tell them about the TSL and the winner gets 10k, then they would just tell me to go play more and win that 10k. I knew I never really had a chance but I started having more and more conversations and started getting more people around me more interested in broodwar thanks to the sponsor/money situation and major tournaments and wcgs.
I still love the game but I love competing and tournaments just as much now too and if I continue to only play broodwar only the first half of this equation will be fulfilled. On the other hand sc2 only seems to fulfill the second part of this equation. So I will be forced to make a decision. Considering the majority of my friends are moving to sc2 and the majority of people only seem to care about sc2 now I will have no choice really but to switch to sc2, people want sc2 events/lans they want sc2 tournaments and teams. I've made the decision to stop playing as much for the love of the game when I quit playing almost purely on useast 1.5 years ago to try and push myself in wcg's and various other lan events and tournaments.
I will continue to play broodwar occasionally because I do indeed love the game but I'm at a point now where whether I like it or not the business aspects have started pulling me over purely loving the game.
SC2 already has the experience and the top-notch players, and yet it's still powerfully underwhelming. The issue is not with how much we can do in the coming years to develop the game even further, the issue is with the fundamentals of the game itself. It just doesn't have the same potential that BW had (and reached).
Sure, SC2 might be entertaining and exciting for the viewers. Sure, it might still be difficult, fun, and rewarding for the players. But it doesn't do it in the same way that BW did it for all the hardcore players.
It's lacking many things that BW has and instead has so many superfluous gadgets and gizmos that are just so meh.
Pardon me for being 'that guy' but how exactly do you know that? Like...any of it?
How do you know it doesn't have the same potential, or that it doesn't do it for all the 'hardcore' players? Like...you're speaking for a lot of people here, and I don't really know where you come off doing it. A number of vocal people have said they're not playing SC2, but there's a whole new lot coming to SC2 as well who are hard core gamers from other games like War3 and the like. And as for potential, how do you know? Have you tried every unit combo, every ability in every situation and tried units in various mechanical situations to tease out any extra uses? I doubt it. Just give the game time before you judge it and the community so broadly. It may well happen that it doesn't have the depth, but we have no way of knowing it yet. The game hasn't even been released.
Refer to Ideas' post, I think he sums it up better than I could.
On July 11 2010 14:23 Ideas wrote: man i hate all this thought about "yea but SC2 isnt 12 years old!!!!"
it doesnt matter how old the game is. there is a competition between BW and SC2 right now, a competition to take up our free time. right now BW is out and costs 20$. SC2 is out and will cost 60$ in 3 weeks. basically you are all saying "yea BW is better but in a few years SC2 might be as good! just give it time!" is it unfair to compare the 2? absolutely not. Sure it has a lesser developed metagame but that doesnt mean i have to play this inferior game for 2 years until MAYBE it gets better.
basically BW is superior to SC2 right now in every gameplay regard except accessibility, which is where the masses of new SC2 users probably find most appealing (there is also probably the lot of people who like playing a game where most strategies are widely undiscovered, although that doesnt really apply to this comparison).
will SC2 improve and have greater dynamics over time? maybe. the expansions will add new units for sure, but even if they rival BW in terms of completely awesome game-changing units that are possibly the most exciting in the game, i have doubts that it will ever match the perfection of BW. a fun distraction for a time? sure, but it will just be like any other game i play for a week or 2 and then go back to my real game, BW.
On July 11 2010 11:59 ApacheChief wrote: I don't think this is true at all.
StarCraft 2 probably has MORE interactions between the races, with early game spells like forcefield, EMP and fungal growth.
I don't understand...
Have you played/watched BW a decent amount? I'm guessing you haven't.
Spells were a lot more devastating in BW. They were ESSENTIAL to some tactics. Getting storm out for the mass hydra bust, getting dark swarm to save yourself from the M&M/tank push, getting irradiate out to stop the powerful muta sniping, getting spider mines to deal with the mass speedlots, and many more. These were all absolutely critical and powerful to stopping the opponent's powerful push/strategy. But the beauty about it is that even though it's a great and powerful spell to repel the opponent's strategy, the opponent can still make use of his units with superior micro. Storm dodging, moving all units out of dark swarm quickly, scourging science vessels (which even the Terran can counter with even better micro), zealot bombing, etc.
SC2 introduces too many elements that weaken the effect of these awesome spells because of how easy smart casting is. This is an extremely poor decision in terms of game dynamics because now everyone can storm with similar efficiency. On the other hand, a greater player in BW can make less templars AND storm far more effectively and faster than a player who is slower and not as micro-prepped. This is key, a BW player with a couple of templars against zerg is scary. But it's not scary at all in SC2 until they have a ton of templars. You EARN your "terrible terrible damage" in BW, the game doesn't just give it to you.
Things in SC2 like FF, fungal growth, marauders' concussive shells, etc, don't allow the opponent to overcome these "counters" with greater micro. It's just not possible. If I get FF'd, the only thing I can do is just.. let my trapped units attack. There's really nothing else you can do. Fungal growth? Well, you're just trapped until it wears off. And I'm sure everyone has experienced trying to run away from marauders with the trailing units have zero hope of living. They don't give the option of "hey, great micro can get me out of this pinch!" And that's what makes BW the great spectator sport it is today.
I think SC2 is fun to watch, but just for how long? Who knows. I still get goosebumps watching BW games. I hope SC2 can still do the same, but that might be asking for too much.
On July 11 2010 14:53 sluggaslamoo wrote: Yeah likewise, SC2 has had 7 years of design time plus 12 years of BW evolution, to create a game that should be 100x better than BW from the get-go.
SC2 should have taken what was so captivating in BW and made it even better. IMO SC2 just seems to be riding on the success of BW, and hoping that any change will still lead to a good game.
On July 11 2010 15:11 QibingZero wrote: The years we've spent since SC was released were not just spent learning how to play that game - they were largely spent learning how to play RTS games. The best WC2 players on Kali, the best SC players at launch... players at that skill level would have trouble holding D on iccup today. The first day a player like Idra or Nony touched SC2, they were better at it than anyone was at SC for years. This is how far the RTS world has come since.
What I'm getting at is that all of these 'give it time' posts are ridiculous. Do you really think the top players aren't trying out every possible way to win? With players being picked up by eSports teams before the game is even released, you'd better believe they're trying every little trick they can to get the advantage over others. Despite everything though, they can't make infestors as game-changing as defilers were. They can't make skirmishes come as interesting as marine vs lurker or goons vs early terran pressure. There are limitations in place that simply cannot be overcome by 'figuring more stuff out'.
By the way, there's a terrible misconception going on here. It didn't take 10+ years for Starcraft to be an amazing and dynamic game to play and watch. In fact, we've enjoyed it for that long.
I keep these in my profile for these occasions
Thank you AntZ.. I was about to have to waste my time explaining all these points but you saved me <3
SC2 already has the experience and the top-notch players, and yet it's still powerfully underwhelming. The issue is not with how much we can do in the coming years to develop the game even further, the issue is with the fundamentals of the game itself. It just doesn't have the same potential that BW had (and reached).
Sure, SC2 might be entertaining and exciting for the viewers. Sure, it might still be difficult, fun, and rewarding for the players. But it doesn't do it in the same way that BW did it for all the hardcore players.
It's lacking many things that BW has and instead has so many superfluous gadgets and gizmos that are just so meh.
Pardon me for being 'that guy' but how exactly do you know that? Like...any of it?
How do you know it doesn't have the same potential, or that it doesn't do it for all the 'hardcore' players? Like...you're speaking for a lot of people here, and I don't really know where you come off doing it. A number of vocal people have said they're not playing SC2, but there's a whole new lot coming to SC2 as well who are hard core gamers from other games like War3 and the like. And as for potential, how do you know? Have you tried every unit combo, every ability in every situation and tried units in various mechanical situations to tease out any extra uses? I doubt it. Just give the game time before you judge it and the community so broadly. It may well happen that it doesn't have the depth, but we have no way of knowing it yet. The game hasn't even been released.
I think he just means it doesn't have the potential to be as exciting, which I agree with. What mostly turns me off watching Sc2 is that its hardly impressive, mainly because its easier to pull the stuff off.
This makes my jaw drop but with smartcasting any competent player can replicate it in sc2
On July 22 2010 02:14 butchji wrote: Comparing StarCraft2 with StarCraft1 without BroodWar and any balancing would be more reasonable
Care to explain how exactly that makes sense?
Because it took like almost a decade to make BroodWar that perfect? Comparing it to a not even released game without its addons is just unfair.
How is it unfair? Blizzard has had this much time to perfect their game. It should be better than BW right off the bat. and TvZ aside, I'd argue that its definitely comparable to BW in terms of balance, so I dont know what you're getting at by saying it should be compared to sc without balancing. The balance in SC2 is fine. Thats not even the topic of discussion here. The thing is that the reason so many 'tense' moments happened in BW was because you had to struggle against the interface to do certain micro tricks, and that units and spells dealt ridiculous amounts of splash or AoE damage, or were ridiculous in some way or the other. Think about the most 'AAARGHHH' moments in BW, what were they? Lurkerling flanks, mnm micro against lurkers, reaver drops, well placed storms, swarms, I could go on, but anyone who has watched BW knows this. See a common theme? These are all situations that arise because of spells dealing incredible amounts of damage, or being plain out imbalanced (dark swarm, psionic storm, lets face it, those were insane) BW was balanced on the razors edge because everything was so insanely powerful. SC2 however is going the other way, maintaining balance by mellowing it down, understandable since you dont need to struggle against the interface (the other point) to cast spells and do micro. Spells cant be atrociously powerful because they are MUCH easier to cast now. As a result, see someone cast 8 storm? Meh who cares, a bronze player could do it. Do you see what I mean? This isnt a problem that can be solved by the wait and see approach
I think I would definitely think the same way if I was nerding StarCraft for the last decade 24/7 and have like 300 APM. For the casual gamer I think StarCraft 2 is more fun. Don't get me wrong I love BroodWar but all the "meeeeh, starcraft 2 sux so much" is so over the top - Don't get it why you have to tell that to everyone anyway? Just keep playing BroodWar and enjoy it calmly. Of course the pro scene will never reach the astonishment of BroodWar but it will succeed in other ways.
I think that all the top foreigners switched to SC2 because of : - all the sponsors opportunities and big cash prizes. I'm not saying it's wrong, most of them are still studying, or still young, and we all know young people need as much money as possible :D - the other part are good BW players but not top players, andt SC2 is giving them a second chance to be on top.
And once again, I find SC2 terrible to watch, I'd rather watch a curling game. Oh, btw, if you want to watch an amazing PvP with back and forth and incredible defenses, watch Pure vs Pusan from MBC vs Fox day3. You won't ever see that in a SC2 PvP + Show Spoiler +
On July 22 2010 02:14 butchji wrote: Comparing StarCraft2 with StarCraft1 without BroodWar and any balancing would be more reasonable
Care to explain how exactly that makes sense?
Because it took like almost a decade to make BroodWar that perfect? Comparing it to a not even released game without its addons is just unfair.
How is it unfair? Blizzard has had this much time to perfect their game. It should be better than BW right off the bat. and TvZ aside, I'd argue that its definitely comparable to BW in terms of balance, so I dont know what you're getting at by saying it should be compared to sc without balancing. The balance in SC2 is fine. Thats not even the topic of discussion here. The thing is that the reason so many 'tense' moments happened in BW was because you had to struggle against the interface to do certain micro tricks, and that units and spells dealt ridiculous amounts of splash or AoE damage, or were ridiculous in some way or the other. Think about the most 'AAARGHHH' moments in BW, what were they? Lurkerling flanks, mnm micro against lurkers, reaver drops, well placed storms, swarms, I could go on, but anyone who has watched BW knows this. See a common theme? These are all situations that arise because of spells dealing incredible amounts of damage, or being plain out imbalanced (dark swarm, psionic storm, lets face it, those were insane) BW was balanced on the razors edge because everything was so insanely powerful. SC2 however is going the other way, maintaining balance by mellowing it down, understandable since you dont need to struggle against the interface (the other point) to cast spells and do micro. Spells cant be atrociously powerful because they are MUCH easier to cast now. As a result, see someone cast 8 storm? Meh who cares, a bronze player could do it. Do you see what I mean? This isnt a problem that can be solved by the wait and see approach
I think I would definitely think the same way if I was nerding StarCraft for the last decade 24/7 and have like 300 APM. For the casual gamer I think StarCraft 2 is more fun. Don't get me wrong I love BroodWar but all the "meeeeh, starcraft 2 sux so much" is so over the top - Don't get it why you have to tell that to everyone anyway? Just keep playing BroodWar and enjoy it calmly. Of course the pro scene will never reach the astonishment of BroodWar but it will succeed in other ways.
I never said starcraft 2 sucks, I dont know why people keep saying I said things that I didnt I said I dont think it is as good as BW. In its own right its an amazingly balanced game, its fun as hell, that much is true, but people keep saying that certain things that were in BW will arise in sc2 that are not currently there. Im tired of arguing the same point, i've already explained why I think that wont happen, and i've already explained its an OPINION, i acknowledge theres a very good chance that im wrong, and I will play the game if it gets better thats 100% guaranteed. But right now SC2 should have taken the best points of BW, could have been better than BW, but its still not. Also,
I think I would definitely think the same way if I was nerding StarCraft for the last decade 24/7 and have like 300 APM
Im a D+ player with maybe 140ish apm. The reason I currently prefer BW over sc2, is that when I watch SC2, I am not excited. Interested, if the game is good and showing good builds and unit compositions, i think 'hey thats smart' but I never stare at the screen all bug eyed like i do when a reavers scarab is about to pick to either blow up or dud. Already many examples have been given, but simply put theres a lot more exciting and tense stuff in BW, that makes watching it fun beyond just learning from the games you watch. And when you do the stuff you saw progamers doing and you do it well, that gives you a feeling of 'fuck yeah' but in sc2, everyone can do everything. The things that set good players aside from the people who play once a week are not easily visible just like that.
On July 22 2010 02:14 butchji wrote: Comparing StarCraft2 with StarCraft1 without BroodWar and any balancing would be more reasonable
Care to explain how exactly that makes sense?
Because it took like almost a decade to make BroodWar that perfect? Comparing it to a not even released game without its addons is just unfair.
How is it unfair? Blizzard has had this much time to perfect their game. It should be better than BW right off the bat. and TvZ aside, I'd argue that its definitely comparable to BW in terms of balance, so I dont know what you're getting at by saying it should be compared to sc without balancing. The balance in SC2 is fine. Thats not even the topic of discussion here. The thing is that the reason so many 'tense' moments happened in BW was because you had to struggle against the interface to do certain micro tricks, and that units and spells dealt ridiculous amounts of splash or AoE damage, or were ridiculous in some way or the other. Think about the most 'AAARGHHH' moments in BW, what were they? Lurkerling flanks, mnm micro against lurkers, reaver drops, well placed storms, swarms, I could go on, but anyone who has watched BW knows this. See a common theme? These are all situations that arise because of spells dealing incredible amounts of damage, or being plain out imbalanced (dark swarm, psionic storm, lets face it, those were insane) BW was balanced on the razors edge because everything was so insanely powerful. SC2 however is going the other way, maintaining balance by mellowing it down, understandable since you dont need to struggle against the interface (the other point) to cast spells and do micro. Spells cant be atrociously powerful because they are MUCH easier to cast now. As a result, see someone cast 8 storm? Meh who cares, a bronze player could do it. Do you see what I mean? This isnt a problem that can be solved by the wait and see approach
Here is the thing. This is all on a POV. SC2 is better than BW right off the bat. The interface is better, the gameplay is smoother, the balance is better. What most here hate about it, is it doesn't have rediculous demands that make for exciting play. You don't see it because it is not a game being played by people who are paid to play it nonstop and have 12 years of strategy and build orders to follow. Of course you can argue that you already know what is happening with it and it will fail. Take a look at starcraft 1 from release day up until BW and tell me you knew it was a game that would have people playing it for money in a professional league.
BW beta was really stupid. Hello reavers doing 250 damage per shot and other stupid balance issues. Sc2 beta was really stupid at the start but it got better and better over a few months it is still not perfect in any means.This is 1/3 of sc2 we are seeing. They have 2 more expansions to add on it until we see the vision Blizzard had for it(Blizzard always has the vision of the final product years down the road)
I like both BW and SC2. BW will still be here SC2 will be coming and both should learn to live with each other.
Wait wait wait, you aren't seriously trying to tell me that SC2 is more balanced than Brood War, are you?
I know you neobowman! I recognise your name from BWMN, anyway.
I think everyone on TL who loves SC should really watch every OSL finals ever made. It really gives you an appreciation of just how much this game has evolved and been through, and WHY it is such a good game. It is not so simple as 'you can do this and this which doesn't happen in such and such a game.' It's the way it is constantly fresh. At every point in SC history people have felt 'okay, we've basically got things figured out' or 'SC is basically dead' and then someone completely changes everything. I was going to write my own long rant on this but... Yeah. I think you get such a greater appreciation of StarCraft if you've been around for awhile, or at least take the time to learn it's history.
Who cares if SC2 MIGHT become good? SC:BW already is. SC:BW is a legitimate sport... more legitimate than hockey or baseball or football if you ask me. SC2 is just a game. Sure, it COULD become a sport, but it seems to be trying to hard. Games should become sports on their own (by the will of the players and fans), not because Blizzard paid a lot of money. I think we're going to see SC2 rejected by a lot of people who find Blizzard's presence a little overwhelming.
On July 22 2010 14:25 Megalisk wrote: WHY DOES EVERYONG USE THE ARGUMENT "IT TOOK A DECADE TO MAKE BROODWAR PERFECT", PATCH 1.08 CAME OUT IN 2001. It was the last balance patch.
I think that BW has always been a great game, but that to say it has been the same since 2001 is absurd. Many glitches have completely changed the dynamic of this game, and the way maps are made has evolved and influenced play as well. Remember when July was the only Zerg who could really muta micro? Everyone became July after Shark brought knowledge of magic boxes out into the open, but before that you could basically hold off muta with like 2 turrets because it was really hard to micro them effectively. Players used to use mineral patches and their own buildings to get the unwieldy beasts to stack. The same can be said of vultures. Before people learned patrol micro, you could counter them with speedlings if you wanted. This game is SO different every 2 years it's unbelievable.
On July 22 2010 15:33 Chef wrote: I know you neobowman! I recognise your name from BWMN, anyway.
I think everyone on TL who loves SC should really watch every OSL finals ever made. It really gives you an appreciation of just how much this game has evolved and been through, and WHY it is such a good game. It is not so simple as 'you can do this and this which doesn't happen in such and such a game.' It's the way it is constantly fresh. At every point in SC history people have felt 'okay, we've basically got things figured out' or 'SC is basically dead' and then someone completely changes everything. I was going to write my own long rant on this but... Yeah. I think you get such a greater appreciation of StarCraft if you've been around for awhile, or at least take the time to learn it's history.
Who cares if SC2 MIGHT become good? SC:BW already is. SC:BW is a legitimate sport... more legitimate than hockey or baseball or football if you ask me. SC2 is just a game. Sure, it COULD become a sport, but it seems to be trying to hard. Games should become sports on their own (by the will of the players and fans), not because Blizzard paid a lot of money. I think we're going to see SC2 rejected by a lot of people who find Blizzard's presence a little overwhelming.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii129/neoalbert/Non-SC/FlameWar.jpg)
