EPTI'm not saying that non-broodwar players suck at macro, just that we have a slight advantage in general.
My rant on the level of skill in SC2 - Page 2
| Blogs > UBERtoSS_hV |
|
jimminy_kriket
Canada5500 Posts
I'm not saying that non-broodwar players suck at macro, just that we have a slight advantage in general. | ||
|
Ynot_Fighting
United States216 Posts
On September 02 2010 06:00 Murderotica wrote: Alright basically where I think the fault lies is in part due to what you're saying but also in part it contradicts you as well. Here is the way I see it: In the early day of BW the apm was lower not only because the game is fresh but because it didn't DEMAND the apm from the players, because their gaming environment wasn't as competitive as it is today. What I mean is that you are one of the few 100 apm players playing back in 1999 and you run into 95% 50 apm players and below, what NEED to you have to play faster if you are already so superior to the average skill level of the tier below you? The tier below you being that 4% that play at 80 apm or something (you being the 1%). So therefore, due to a lack of pressure, there is a lack of demand for the best to improve. The best improve only when they notice themselves fall behind either relative to their own group (the other best rising to 125 apm), or the tier below (them rising to your level of apm in greater numbers, therefore making each game harder and you being forced to play at your maximum potential more often, therefore tuning your sense of the game and etc. because each game you play challenges you more you feel the need to rise above again as a psychological reaction of being a usurped gosu). So therefore, you are right about this: the lack of APPARENT motivation from most players to get better is indicative of complacency, and thus people should be more motivated. But there need to be more players that naturally rise up to achieve that competitive motivation of "I want to be as good as those guys that keep raping me" in order to rise to a level where they pressure the current pros. That will certainly take time more than anything... So Chill is very much right. People can't help it if they advance in SC2 poorly despite their BW experience even if they used to be gosu, and that is because a large portion of the SC2 playerbase has never played SC2 or any similar game even and thus starts off at a large handicap, diluting the player base with noobs. Mmm, I like this post... So high, sorry if I fucked up a lot of shit. I love this post and I can agree with you. The hunger to be that top tier player and for others to follow suit. And well maybe this image of a perfect player is in my head but thats ok! | ||
|
Floophead_III
United States1832 Posts
On September 02 2010 05:42 Chill wrote: The game is a month old. BW is 12 years old. Give it time. +1 User was warned for this post | ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
| ||
|
Chunkybuddha
Canada347 Posts
On September 02 2010 05:42 Chill wrote: The game is a month old. BW is 12 years old. Give it time. I really wish you put that in big bold letters across the front page so everyone can read that!!!! | ||
|
Fontong
United States6454 Posts
On September 02 2010 06:30 Chunkybuddha wrote: I really wish you put that in big bold letters across the front page so everyone can read that!!!! Yeah really. You guys ever watch some 2000 Boxer reps? First time I saw those things I thought the reps were corrupted and comps had taken over. | ||
|
SubtleArt
2710 Posts
On September 02 2010 05:42 Chill wrote: The game is a month old. BW is 12 years old. Give it time. Brood war was made at a time was the RTS genre was barely on its feet, Sc2 isn't. On top of that Sc2 enjoys the skill level brought forth by people with a decade of BW experience, so this argument is kinda lame to me. | ||
|
SirGlinG
Sweden933 Posts
On September 02 2010 05:44 UBERtoSS_hV wrote: That's an excuse to me. People should consider BW as the training grounds for SC2. The fundamentals and mechanics have already been established but people are just lazy about it. SC2 gives a lot of freedoms BW didn't have and provides an easier learning curve but I just think that anyone who has played brood war should know what it takes. ie.. Chill. You should know  In a bw game a player can use his 250 apm because it is clear what to do with your apm. What to do has been under development for 12 years. So even if the mechanical skill is similar, the strategic depth is different, that's the issue with your argument. If a player simply could improvise "a plan of perfection" after the game's been out 1 month and use his bw mechanics then it would work out but that's not the case. | ||
|
Misanthrope
United States924 Posts
| ||
|
JIJIyO
Canada1957 Posts
I'm aware you've been an even longer member than I have though haha (I had another account banned......so maybe not LOL). I totally agree, but from the casual gamer's perspective, these are all necessary. Reviews/magazines/etc would rate SC2 as a terrible game if they didn't have intelligent AI. While Actizzard is pushing ESPORTS, only the "elitists" left over like the old way. Obviously there are individuals who like both games, but many have moved on and are prepared for a new game. I complain as much as anyone about SC2 and its low skill level and whatnot, but I'm over that. If it succeeds so be it. I just want BW to live on. I think I may have drifted off, but I hope my post is coherent enough. I can't really think straight right now, so I'll stop typing before I spew out more words. Also, I miss seeing you post in the BW forums Chill TT | ||
|
Spiffeh
United States830 Posts
Like a sproutling, it needs water, love, and time, before it blossoms into a giant oak tree. | ||
|
Count9
China10928 Posts
| ||
|
Redmark
Canada2129 Posts
On September 02 2010 06:45 SubtleArt wrote: Brood war was made at a time was the RTS genre was barely on its feet, Sc2 isn't. On top of that Sc2 enjoys the skill level brought forth by people with a decade of BW experience, so this argument is kinda lame to me. Except the culmination of all that experience (Brood War progamers) aren't really playing SC2. Besides, the OP's point (I think lol) was that even the top players make too many mistakes. If so much skill was brought over from BW, what does that say about BW? If skill really transfers over so easily we'd be forced to conclude that SC2 is a much harder game than BW. | ||
|
news
892 Posts
| ||
|
news
892 Posts
| ||
hifriend
China7935 Posts
On September 02 2010 05:35 UBERtoSS_hV wrote: In Brood war when you watched a pro rep you could really feel complete dominance and the feeling of "he's doing what i think he should do and he's pulling it off exactly how it's suppose to be." Pro's. And that's comparably 'late' in starcraft's progression compared to sc2 atm. Today's executions and strategies will obviously look laughable in the future, but enjoy the process. | ||
Chill
Calgary25977 Posts
On September 02 2010 06:45 SubtleArt wrote: Brood war was made at a time was the RTS genre was barely on its feet, Sc2 isn't. On top of that Sc2 enjoys the skill level brought forth by people with a decade of BW experience, so this argument is kinda lame to me. The same could be said about Starcraft from War2 and War3 from Starcraft. The SC2 level is only about a fucking billion miles above 1998 Starcraft so stop talking out of your ass. | ||
|
news
892 Posts
On September 02 2010 07:39 Chill wrote: The same could be said about Starcraft from War2 and War3 from Starcraft. The SC2 level is only about a fucking billion miles above 1998 Starcraft so stop talking out of your ass. bw and wc3 were the first RTS with any kind of serious competition, plus sc2 is too similar to bw to not expect these things to be happening. I just realized you're actually saying that, but this is what the guy you quoted is saying too.. | ||
|
Chill
Calgary25977 Posts
On September 02 2010 07:39 News wrote: We already have people that play way above that in terms of skill and mechanics, it's a failed argument. bw and wc3 were the first RTS with any kind of serious competition, plus sc2 is too similar to bw to not expect these things to be happening. The skills are directly transferable, right? That's why all the best Starcraft players are the best Starcraft 2 players, right? Like remember when Huk won TSL and when Tester won the OSL? Now, of course that's not a fair argument, but I think you're simplifying things to the point of ridicule. Obviously there's some overlap, but it's not absolute. So here we having amateurs saying the overlap is nearly absolute, when the players, results, and game mechanics say otherwise. What can I possible say? Like if the mechanics and skillsets are identical and the prize money shot up 100 fold, what is your explanation for the skill drop? Laziness? REALLY? If people are so bad why don't you just go win up all the tournaments? Like I can't even form a rational argument here because this thread is basically "Hi I'm fucking terrible but in my genius opinion players aren't good enough." How do we respond to that? "Oh yea ironically everyone decided to just play shitty at this game so more people had a fair chance. Keen eye." | ||
|
news
892 Posts
| ||
| ||
