|
Hello!
Well this post is going to be a bit of a downer so if you're from wonderland you may want to stop reading right here since you might catch a pinch of realism if you read any further. So on to the topic of today's blog, my teamliquid and starcraft 2 interest.
First of let me just start out by saying, no I don't dislike either team liquid or blizzard, especially not team liquid. But there are somethings that are just quite bothersome about them both. First of let's start of with the easy one to bash blizzard.
I've been a huge fan of blizzard games since I played warcraft 2 for the first time, I just loved all of it and then when it was time for me to get my first own game ever it just so happend to coincide with the release date of starcraft. So I've grown up with their games and loved pretty much all of them heck even WoW was fun for a while. All their games up untill the release of Starcraft 2 has left a huge impression on me. Those games were so fine tuned and pretty much perfect I mean who doesn't get a fuzzy feeling inside just thinking back on the good times that were had with starcraft bw and warcraft 3. However with Sc2, the feeling is just not there. There's nothing special about it. Had it not been for the fantastic community backing it would just have been a mediocre rts like the C&Cs of recent years.
So what makes me think that it's such a mediocre game? Well the game was clearly built for the masses and not for the fans of the old game. This is an amazing tactic by blizzard though since it allows new people to get into it and just have fun with it. This is all good stuff, but not for the game which is currently the largest e-sport in the west. It's shameful to be honest that a game which requires not even half the time brood war did to get good at is getting so much attention because of a foundation that wasn't even built up by the westerners.
I mean heck I was terrible at brood war my peak laid at D+ and still I manage to get a high ranking in diamond whilst it was the highest league back in like December when I actually still played the game. Which just further proofs the fact that it's a game built to be easy. No longer is the 200 apm needed now you can get by with apm under 100 and still play pretty much perfectly. No longer is there any type of hard to master micro. Even such an easy task as vulture kiting would be considered hard in this game. And the pretty much unlimited control groups with multiple building selection makes multitasking and macro overall fairly simplistic.
And you may now be thinking of making a post about why I am not able to go pro then if it's that easy to play the game and apart from the lack of time the answer brings me on to my next point which is, consistency. This is the main thing that this game lacks. In a game where macro is so easy everyone pretty much can do it perfectly at the highest level you can't really just out macro your opponent you must counter what he is doing, the hard counter system is of course what I am talking about. This makes it hard to win every game since scouting is pretty much the only thing that can save you against these things. And though you can argue that "Well that's perfectly reasonable" and I completely agree, scouting is important and that's an ok thing in strategy games. However in starcraft 2 you need to know about these things so much quicker than you did in sc1. This is because of things such as larvae inject and chrono boost + warp in. These thing results in there being a much shorter time to get your desired unit to your opponent or mass up enough of your desired unit to hard counter the opponent. There's just so many variables in starcraft 2 which results in no consistency.
Take brood war for instance that game has had reigns of terrors of players who've completely dominated the scene for periods of time. This is something we lack in starcraft 2 there's just hard to get existed about the games when you can't make any sort of prediction of who'll win. This argument is often countered by well brood war has been out for x many years and it's been figured out. Well starcraft 2 if has soon been out for a year and a bit more than that if you count the beta and though we've had tons of tournaments there's been no real consistency in results I mean is there anyone who has won more than two prestigious tournaments back to back? If people spend as much time with the game as they do and claim to be better they should at least be able to show some sort of consistency. I mean I've gotten the chance to meet up with some of the pros and not even they are saying that they're enjoying the game that much at least not in comparison to game they played previously, starcraft 2 is just a much more profitable game for them to play which makes me a bit sad.
And that's enough about starcraft 2, the list goes on could talk about the non original boring units and them ruining the overall potential of the game but enough with the bashing. So lets get going with my second concern, teamliquid. And no this not going to be hateful or anything just why I don't spend as much time here as I could have. The main reason is this the sc2 people. And I know, yeah big newsflash. And this is for two reasons first that the sc2 section is evolving so slowly still there are posts that reflect that of what the sc2 section was last summer which was a shit fest and I'll admit that I wasn't exactly a good poster nor a guy who didn't cry imbalanced but with time I've just realized that those discussions lead to well, nowhere so I quit doing that bullshit. However some still remain and are whining about imbalance. Another thing that is getting better but has miles to go is the sc2 section in comparison to the brood war section in terms of quality posts. People really should start checking out the brood war section to see how hyping and discussions should be done. I mean during the SotG hiatus I've felt not direct need at all to visit this site which is kinda sad since I actually do like it a whole lot.
And one last thing that I that I find to be the most annoying of the all is the people on this site cheering on for e-sports when all they really mean is starcraft 2. e-sport =/= starcraft 2. Stacraft 2 <= e-sport. So if you really wanna further e-sports don't forget to support other games as well.
That's all I had on my mind, peace out.
 
|
I agree with most of what you said. I've always felt that sc2 lacks a lot of those small things that eventually allowed bonjwa's to distinguish themselves from the rest and achieve ridiculously high win rates. Stuff like 12 unit groups, individual building selections, having to actually select individual casters rather than just selecting your entire blob and blanketing the entire screen with what commentators refer to as "amazing storms" etc.
Some people like to call these things "limitations of the ui," but in my opinion they are only limitations at lower levels of play and are at the highest level quite the opposite; they present opportunity for the very best of the best to completely distinguish themselves from other pro's.
One year from now every pro will have mastered every micro/macro maneuver that is somewhat challenging in this game, and I expect most games are just going to come down to bo wins.
|
I completely, 100% agree. I've already lost interest twice now and I'll make sure not to go back this time.
|
On July 05 2011 02:13 hifriend wrote:
I agree with most of what you said. I've always felt that sc2 lacks a lot of those small things that eventually allowed bonjwa's to distinguish themselves from the rest and achieve ridiculously high win rates. Stuff like 12 unit groups, individual building selections, having to actually select individual casters rather than just selecting your entire blob and blanketing the entire screen with what commentators refer to as "amazing storms" etc.
Some people like to call these things "limitations of the ui," but in my opinion they are only limitations at lower levels of play and are at the highest level quite the opposite; they present opportunity for the very best of the best to completely distinguish themselves from other pro's.
One year from now every pro will have mastered every micro/macro maneuver that is somewhat challenging in this game, and I expect most games are just going to come down to bo wins.
Perhaps I'm being to optimistic, but I feel that all of these micro tricks that you speak of weren't discovered within a year Broodwar's release. Hell even the muta stacking trick didn't come around until like 2005.
So I guess at this point the OP is entirely correct, SC2 seems to lack those intricacies, but I don't think that similar things can't develope in SC2.
Just something to think about.
|
IMO sc2 has the better micro because of marines doing high dps so u gotta micro hard with them cuz the damage is so big that if u dont control = u lose. sc1 units arent that high dps so forgive bad micro a bit cause battles take longer. also you got the banelings, rine splits, pro forcefields etc, stuff like that doesnt happen in sc1.
so yeah, sc1 is a decent game but if you want really good micro, and not with the unfortunately stone age macro mechancis of sc1 then sc2 is the way to go
|
Papua New Guinea152 Posts
Nice points and I do agree that BW is a much better game than SC2 is right now, but as has been said hundreds of times already, BW had over 12 years to blossom into the game it is today. I have hope for SC2 to achieve great things, even if it seems a little stale or uninspired at this point in time. SC2 is shiny graphics-oriented game, while BW was a game that focused on gameplay. But that doesn't mean that SC2 can't develop the same level of strategy, tactics, and psychological mindgames as BW as it evolves, both as a game that is fun to play as well as being a spectator friendly e-sport. The main thing SC2 has going for it is of course the fantastic community, which BW could only ever dream of having outside of Korea.
Overall, while I agree that BW is (and probably will be) the better game, even 12 years from now, hell it's about time that we try something new. Even the best things in the world can get boring if we keep doing them for an indefinite amount of time. And I am glad that a lot of SC2 newcomers are discovering the joys of BW, a truly worthy predecessor to SC2.
|
On July 05 2011 02:21 xarthaz wrote:
IMO sc2 has the better micro because of marines doing high dps so u gotta micro hard with them cuz the damage is so big that if u dont control = u lose. sc1 units arent that high dps so forgive bad micro a bit cause battles take longer. also you got the banelings, rine splits, pro forcefields etc, stuff like that doesnt happen in sc1.
so yeah, sc1 is a decent game but if you want really good micro, and not with the unfortunately stone age macro mechancis of sc1 then sc2 is the way to go
Haha, omg, if your name wasn't familiar to me, I would have started to flame you.
If we can use little micro tricks depends entirely on Blizzard. Remember Fazing? Patched. Remember burrowed neural parasite? Patched. And I believe that the we have uncovered almost all of SC2's hidden mechanics.
|
On July 05 2011 02:17 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 02:13 hifriend wrote:
I agree with most of what you said. I've always felt that sc2 lacks a lot of those small things that eventually allowed bonjwa's to distinguish themselves from the rest and achieve ridiculously high win rates. Stuff like 12 unit groups, individual building selections, having to actually select individual casters rather than just selecting your entire blob and blanketing the entire screen with what commentators refer to as "amazing storms" etc.
Some people like to call these things "limitations of the ui," but in my opinion they are only limitations at lower levels of play and are at the highest level quite the opposite; they present opportunity for the very best of the best to completely distinguish themselves from other pro's.
One year from now every pro will have mastered every micro/macro maneuver that is somewhat challenging in this game, and I expect most games are just going to come down to bo wins. Perhaps I'm being to optimistic, but I feel that all of these micro tricks that you speak of weren't discovered within a year Broodwar's release. Hell even the muta stacking trick didn't come around until like 2005. So I guess at this point the OP is entirely correct, SC2 seems to lack those intricacies, but I don't think that similar things can't develope in SC2. Just something to think about.
Muta stacking was a bug initially though or well still is. But in this game the community is so big so things like these spread really fast so these become known much faster.
|
On July 05 2011 02:21 xarthaz wrote:
IMO sc2 has the better micro because of marines doing high dps so u gotta micro hard with them cuz the damage is so big that if u dont control = u lose. sc1 units arent that high dps so forgive bad micro a bit cause battles take longer. also you got the banelings, rine splits, pro forcefields etc, stuff like that doesnt happen in sc1.
so yeah, sc1 is a decent game but if you want really good micro, and not with the unfortunately stone age macro mechancis of sc1 then sc2 is the way to go
This makes me wonder if you've ever played bw... Ok marines are quite micro intensive versus banelings... Is that all you got? Let me counter then, controlling tons of control groups while individually selecting casters and using their abilites. Also to macro u can't look at the battle, the pure skill that is required to do that is just insane whilst marine splitting can be mastered in a few days if you focus on that shit.
|
On July 05 2011 02:27 blubbdavid wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 02:21 xarthaz wrote:
IMO sc2 has the better micro because of marines doing high dps so u gotta micro hard with them cuz the damage is so big that if u dont control = u lose. sc1 units arent that high dps so forgive bad micro a bit cause battles take longer. also you got the banelings, rine splits, pro forcefields etc, stuff like that doesnt happen in sc1.
so yeah, sc1 is a decent game but if you want really good micro, and not with the unfortunately stone age macro mechancis of sc1 then sc2 is the way to go Haha, omg, if your name wasn't familiar to me, I would have started to flame you. If we can use little micro tricks depends entirely on Blizzard. Remember Fazing? Patched. Remember burrowed neural parasite? Patched. And I believe that the we have uncovered almost all of SC2's hidden mechanics.
Although they said they patched it, you can still faze workers through enemy/allied units.
|
I don't feel like anybody is playing perfect SC2, so I don't agree that the skill cap is too low. I expect some more micro intensive units with the SC2 expansions, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the return of some more BW units.
The big thing we didn't have back in the day was so much cynicism. People concentrated so much on the positives and overcame many ingame problems themselves by using creative play. They didn't expect everything to be spoonfed to them after complaining enough.
|
On July 05 2011 02:51 deathly rat wrote:
I don't feel like anybody is playing perfect SC2, so I don't agree that the skill cap is too low. I expect some more micro intensive units with the SC2 expansions, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the return of some more BW units.
The big thing we didn't have back in the day was so much cynicism. People concentrated so much on the positives and overcame many ingame problems themselves by using creative play. They didn't expect everything to be spoonfed to them after complaining enough.
Just a quick thing: skill cap has little to do with "playing perfect". It just means that the mechanics are much easier to grasp, making things come easier to everyone, lessening the gap between the best and worst players.
|
On July 05 2011 02:51 deathly rat wrote:
I don't feel like anybody is playing perfect SC2, so I don't agree that the skill cap is too low. I expect some more micro intensive units with the SC2 expansions, and I wouldn't be surprised to see the return of some more BW units.
The big thing we didn't have back in the day was so much cynicism. People concentrated so much on the positives and overcame many ingame problems themselves by using creative play. They didn't expect everything to be spoonfed to them after complaining enough.
The reason I am being so negative is because blizzard themselves has put themselves up on another level than all other developers.. except valve of just producing great games so I just expect more from them and from the perspective of having some casual fun the game is great but from a watching pros own it up it's no where near brood war even the early days when the pros weren't that insane as they are today.
And I mean I am still cynical about other games but there's still greatness out there the last time I felt that about a game though was .. quite a while ago .. it was when fallout 3 was released.
|
On July 05 2011 02:13 hifriend wrote:
I agree with most of what you said. I've always felt that sc2 lacks a lot of those small things that eventually allowed bonjwa's to distinguish themselves from the rest and achieve ridiculously high win rates. Stuff like 12 unit groups, individual building selections, having to actually select individual casters rather than just selecting your entire blob and blanketing the entire screen with what commentators refer to as "amazing storms" etc.
Some people like to call these things "limitations of the ui," but in my opinion they are only limitations at lower levels of play and are at the highest level quite the opposite; they present opportunity for the very best of the best to completely distinguish themselves from other pro's.
One year from now every pro will have mastered every micro/macro maneuver that is somewhat challenging in this game, and I expect most games are just going to come down to bo wins.
you should play war wind or age of empires 1. bw has nothing on those games if you cherish a terrible UI and rigid game mechanics
|
On July 05 2011 03:15 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 02:13 hifriend wrote:
I agree with most of what you said. I've always felt that sc2 lacks a lot of those small things that eventually allowed bonjwa's to distinguish themselves from the rest and achieve ridiculously high win rates. Stuff like 12 unit groups, individual building selections, having to actually select individual casters rather than just selecting your entire blob and blanketing the entire screen with what commentators refer to as "amazing storms" etc.
Some people like to call these things "limitations of the ui," but in my opinion they are only limitations at lower levels of play and are at the highest level quite the opposite; they present opportunity for the very best of the best to completely distinguish themselves from other pro's.
One year from now every pro will have mastered every micro/macro maneuver that is somewhat challenging in this game, and I expect most games are just going to come down to bo wins. you should play war wind or age of empires 1. bw has nothing on those games if you cherish a terrible UI and rigid game mechanics
Yeah those are excellent games.  Maybe not for esports though, there has to be some sort of balance. I think cs 1.6 is a tremendously better esport than css though.
|
On July 05 2011 02:27 blubbdavid wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 02:21 xarthaz wrote:
IMO sc2 has the better micro because of marines doing high dps so u gotta micro hard with them cuz the damage is so big that if u dont control = u lose. sc1 units arent that high dps so forgive bad micro a bit cause battles take longer. also you got the banelings, rine splits, pro forcefields etc, stuff like that doesnt happen in sc1.
so yeah, sc1 is a decent game but if you want really good micro, and not with the unfortunately stone age macro mechancis of sc1 then sc2 is the way to go Haha, omg, if your name wasn't familiar to me, I would have started to flame you. If we can use little micro tricks depends entirely on Blizzard. Remember Fazing? Patched. Remember burrowed neural parasite? Patched. And I believe that the we have uncovered almost all of SC2's hidden mechanics.
those aren't good micro like muta harass or marine splitting(vs lurkers). fazing is a terrible idea and would ruin the skill(we can agree there is some) of sc2. That last sentence needs to be taken out. You're not psychic...You can't base an argument on saying you know what's hidden from us unless you work for blizzard.
|
I 100% agree with almost everything you've said.
Personally my interest in SC2 died out after beta, i played a bit and realized its just a less good sequel to broodwar.
So i've quit for good and don't plan on ever going back
|
On July 05 2011 03:19 hifriend wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:15 Roe wrote:On July 05 2011 02:13 hifriend wrote:
I agree with most of what you said. I've always felt that sc2 lacks a lot of those small things that eventually allowed bonjwa's to distinguish themselves from the rest and achieve ridiculously high win rates. Stuff like 12 unit groups, individual building selections, having to actually select individual casters rather than just selecting your entire blob and blanketing the entire screen with what commentators refer to as "amazing storms" etc.
Some people like to call these things "limitations of the ui," but in my opinion they are only limitations at lower levels of play and are at the highest level quite the opposite; they present opportunity for the very best of the best to completely distinguish themselves from other pro's.
One year from now every pro will have mastered every micro/macro maneuver that is somewhat challenging in this game, and I expect most games are just going to come down to bo wins. you should play war wind or age of empires 1. bw has nothing on those games if you cherish a terrible UI and rigid game mechanics Yeah those are excellent games. Maybe not for esports though, there has to be some sort of balance. I think cs 1.6 is a tremendously better esport than css though.
ugh dont forget empire earth. now that i think of it there isnt even a-move in war wind/aoe/ee. even bonjwas would be at a loss
|
Honestly, I thought SC2 had potential. But I just couldn't get into it at all... battles are too short because of the ridiculous damage bonuses, and the shiny graphics really get to me. I mean, you can't see anything in that mess. And what is this 1 dropship -> snipe your nexus bullshit? How much fucking DPS can a single unit have? Terrible. I have SC2 sitting on my computer, but I haven't touched it in a month or so. I don't have the urge to play... it's just not fun, plain and simple.
|
I agree 100% and I feel the same. But I've already bashed SC2 enough that my friends don't want to hear me anymore (at least they understand what I feel).
|
On July 05 2011 03:30 masami.sc wrote:
Honestly, I thought SC2 had potential. But I just couldn't get into it at all... battles are too short because of the ridiculous damage bonuses, and the shiny graphics really get to me. I mean, you can't see anything in that mess. And what is this 1 dropship -> snipe your nexus bullshit? How much fucking DPS can a single unit have? Terrible. I have SC2 sitting on my computer, but I haven't touched it in a month or so. I don't have the urge to play... it's just not fun, plain and simple.
this is the kind of post that should give people hope. essentially you're saying things are too fast, which(i assume) means that it takes a lot of skill to play well.
|
On July 05 2011 03:30 masami.sc wrote:
Honestly, I thought SC2 had potential. But I just couldn't get into it at all... battles are too short because of the ridiculous damage bonuses, and the shiny graphics really get to me. I mean, you can't see anything in that mess. And what is this 1 dropship -> snipe your nexus bullshit? How much fucking DPS can a single unit have? Terrible. I have SC2 sitting on my computer, but I haven't touched it in a month or so. I don't have the urge to play... it's just not fun, plain and simple.
Yeah same, I haven't played for many months. I prefer the good old feeling of playing, each weekend, in lan with my brother, sister and father at Brood war and Half life (We still do it! ). Ah the good old games, It's a good feeling talking about them, certainly a feeling I'll never have with any upcoming game. 
|
Canada13386 Posts
Well I can see your point but we can only hope that the world of SC2 will change with time and provide us with that more broodwar-esque feel. I think that we need more space control so that massing a ton of one unit cant win you the game in certain circustances. I want armies to be able to split up to both attack and defend, If I attack a Zerg and they counter with their whole army there is nothing I can do.
|
On July 05 2011 03:43 Essbee wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:30 masami.sc wrote:
Honestly, I thought SC2 had potential. But I just couldn't get into it at all... battles are too short because of the ridiculous damage bonuses, and the shiny graphics really get to me. I mean, you can't see anything in that mess. And what is this 1 dropship -> snipe your nexus bullshit? How much fucking DPS can a single unit have? Terrible. I have SC2 sitting on my computer, but I haven't touched it in a month or so. I don't have the urge to play... it's just not fun, plain and simple. Yeah same, I haven't played for many months. I prefer the good old feeling of playing, each weekend, in lan with my brother, sister and father at Brood war and Half life (We still do it! ). Ah the good old games, It's a good feeling talking about them, certainly a feeling I'll never have with any upcoming game.
that would be logically impossible.you can't expect to have good memories about a game that hasn't come out yet. how did you feel/think about BW when it had just come out?
|
On July 05 2011 03:39 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:30 masami.sc wrote:
Honestly, I thought SC2 had potential. But I just couldn't get into it at all... battles are too short because of the ridiculous damage bonuses, and the shiny graphics really get to me. I mean, you can't see anything in that mess. And what is this 1 dropship -> snipe your nexus bullshit? How much fucking DPS can a single unit have? Terrible. I have SC2 sitting on my computer, but I haven't touched it in a month or so. I don't have the urge to play... it's just not fun, plain and simple. this is the kind of post that should give people hope. essentially you're saying things are too fast, which(i assume) means that it takes a lot of skill to play well.
No fast = not enough time to do any micro not enough time to save ur structures the dps is too high in this game.
|
On July 05 2011 03:47 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:43 Essbee wrote:On July 05 2011 03:30 masami.sc wrote:
Honestly, I thought SC2 had potential. But I just couldn't get into it at all... battles are too short because of the ridiculous damage bonuses, and the shiny graphics really get to me. I mean, you can't see anything in that mess. And what is this 1 dropship -> snipe your nexus bullshit? How much fucking DPS can a single unit have? Terrible. I have SC2 sitting on my computer, but I haven't touched it in a month or so. I don't have the urge to play... it's just not fun, plain and simple. Yeah same, I haven't played for many months. I prefer the good old feeling of playing, each weekend, in lan with my brother, sister and father at Brood war and Half life (We still do it! ). Ah the good old games, It's a good feeling talking about them, certainly a feeling I'll never have with any upcoming game. that would be logically impossible.you can't expect to have good memories about a game that hasn't come out yet. how did you feel/think about BW when it had just come out?
You're probably totally right (I hope ) but seeing the new games coming out, I have little hope about them.
|
On July 05 2011 03:47 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:43 Essbee wrote:On July 05 2011 03:30 masami.sc wrote:
Honestly, I thought SC2 had potential. But I just couldn't get into it at all... battles are too short because of the ridiculous damage bonuses, and the shiny graphics really get to me. I mean, you can't see anything in that mess. And what is this 1 dropship -> snipe your nexus bullshit? How much fucking DPS can a single unit have? Terrible. I have SC2 sitting on my computer, but I haven't touched it in a month or so. I don't have the urge to play... it's just not fun, plain and simple. Yeah same, I haven't played for many months. I prefer the good old feeling of playing, each weekend, in lan with my brother, sister and father at Brood war and Half life (We still do it! ). Ah the good old games, It's a good feeling talking about them, certainly a feeling I'll never have with any upcoming game. that would be logically impossible.you can't expect to have good memories about a game that hasn't come out yet. how did you feel/think about BW when it had just come out?
Sc 1 was epic though I was like 7 when it was released but still there are tons of games that are just awesome out of the gate I mean fallout 3 is a game I've played tons because I just love all of it. Same with wc3 it was amazing from the day I bought it. A lot of games are like that like cod mw 1 was the shit man cod 1 and 2 as well. I mean you should like a game from start the start until well infinity for it to be deserving of all the praise sc2 is getting.
|
On July 05 2011 03:39 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 03:30 masami.sc wrote:
Honestly, I thought SC2 had potential. But I just couldn't get into it at all... battles are too short because of the ridiculous damage bonuses, and the shiny graphics really get to me. I mean, you can't see anything in that mess. And what is this 1 dropship -> snipe your nexus bullshit? How much fucking DPS can a single unit have? Terrible. I have SC2 sitting on my computer, but I haven't touched it in a month or so. I don't have the urge to play... it's just not fun, plain and simple. this is the kind of post that should give people hope. essentially you're saying things are too fast, which(i assume) means that it takes a lot of skill to play well.
I like to compare BW to chess, and SC2 to something more like... checkers. Sure, it's fun to play with your friends, and there are some people who can get pretty darn good at it. But it's still checkers.
|
If you are an active SCBW player you have to realise that since you are still playing a game which is over 10 years old, you should consider yourself a fanatic. This is absolutely fine, but realise that nothing is going to measure up to your favourate game, no matter how good it is.
|
Im calling bs on that deathly rat. plenty of new players who dont have experience or nostalgia related to old games, discover them and straight up prefer them to new ones.
the real reason is the change in game industry, orientation to high budget mass production of games which requires dumbing them down to the lowest common denominator. hence why big corporations wont release intellectually deep games any more - but small indie devs do.
|
On July 05 2011 04:31 xarthaz wrote:
Im calling bs on that deathly rat. plenty of new players who dont have experience or nostalgia related to old games, discover them and straight up prefer them to new ones.
the real reason is the change in game industry, orientation to high budget mass production of games which requires dumbing them down to the lowest common denominator. hence why big corporations wont release intellectually deep games any more - but small indie devs do.
Yeah I feel the same because the only new games I enjoy now are small indie games like minecraft, terraria, amnesia, etc... these are some quality games.
|
On July 05 2011 04:31 xarthaz wrote:
Im calling bs on that deathly rat. plenty of new players who dont have experience or nostalgia related to old games, discover them and straight up prefer them to new ones.
the real reason is the change in game industry, orientation to high budget mass production of games which requires dumbing them down to the lowest common denominator. hence why big corporations wont release intellectually deep games any more - but small indie devs do.
So true been falling more and more in love with indie games recently only developers with some balls these days
|
On July 05 2011 06:26 simme123 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2011 04:31 xarthaz wrote:
Im calling bs on that deathly rat. plenty of new players who dont have experience or nostalgia related to old games, discover them and straight up prefer them to new ones.
the real reason is the change in game industry, orientation to high budget mass production of games which requires dumbing them down to the lowest common denominator. hence why big corporations wont release intellectually deep games any more - but small indie devs do. So true been falling more and more in love with indie games recently only developers with some balls these days
I'm not gonna touch the BW/SC2 thing, my feelings on it would just be beating a dead horse, however I 100% agree with the indie devs comment.
I think it's partially because they RELY on their game to do well. Indie game flop usually means the company is fucked. Take any larger company, let's say Blizzard for example, puts out some game they spent a few months working on, and it flops...big deal. They've got other options to generate income. As long as it gets hyped and sells, they can ride the success of their other games in order to put out crappy games.
I respect Notch a lot, from Minecraft. I follow his twitter, he listens to what people want, and he works to implement them. People give him a LOT of flak for not really doing a 101% test on all of his patches, but you have to respect a guy who turned down many offers from other VERY large companies to do things his own way, and he is probably one of the most community driven developers that I've come across.
|
I don't see how your response to "but it's not totally figured out yet" actually addresses that point, you just say "well it's been out a year!" A year is still not indicative of its potential, where were the bonjwas of 1999 in SC? Remember that everyone seems to be thinking about BW when SC2's own 2 expansions haven't even come out.
I agree that lack of MBS and 12 unit max select makes BW harder, however I disagree with the idea that this is significant harm. No, perfect macro is not easy to achieve in SC2 - look at Happy, with his 90% win rate on ladder, where Day9's daily on him noted that his one weakness is still slipping up in macro. While you point towards your experience in getting to diamond, note that these ladder levels are all relative to population pool, and that this is also attributable to the simple fact that SC2 as a new game attracted a ton of players without prior RTS experience, meaning that your previous BW experience helped you rise among this new pool. Also see the thread about how the skill level has risen between Season 1 and 2 - last season's Diamond is now this season's Gold/Plat, not to mention the fact that there's now Masters/GM leagues. Coupled with that thread's data on lowering SC2 populations, this supports my counter-explanation that "I got high in ladder previously" was because there simply happened to be a lot more n00bs, not because the game was fundamentally easy.
Oh, and on a random note: player that has won more than 2 back-to-back major tournaments? MC won GSL March, Dreamhack Stockholm, then Copenhagen.
|
|
|
Better results than 2000 Boxer would have in BW today. Yet he was bonjwa, because competition is based on context, not the standard of a different game.
|
I think there are great quality new games as well as many many poor quality ones, but wasn't this always the case?
I consider SC2 along with Red Dead Redemption and Battlefeild Bad Company 2 (to name a few) to be absolutely great games that hold up to any comparison with games from the past. A lot of classic big hits from the past wouldn't even be a success if released today.
I blame nintendo for a growth in poor quality gimmiky games. The DS and Wii have provided huge hits for novelty games, which has shown a model for making money to developers of other platforms.
Minecraft and other indie games have caught my attention, but I have to say I have gotten bored of them quite quickly and found myself going back to playing triple-A titles quite soon.
|
And one last thing that I that I find to be the most annoying of the all is the people on this site cheering on for e-sports when all they really mean is starcraft 2. e-sport =/= starcraft 2. Stacraft 2 <= e-sport. So if you really wanna further e-sports don't forget to support other games as well.
This, this THIS.
Also, the only things people like about SC2 are the things that carried on from the original. If they released Broodwar on this same engine NO ONE would play this. I hope the sc2bw mod gets finished with the crappy ai and everything.
|
My feelings on the comparison between BW and SC2 are pretty much summed up by the sexy beast himself
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=239760
In SC2, the graphics are very nice and the overall mechanics of the game is easier so it’s easier to play, but because of that, each battle and strategy becomes more important. For example, many units in one control group tends to bunch up so you have to be careful to spread them in battle. As for strategy, there are many that just simply end the game if you are not prepared, so you have to be extremely careful, especially in the beginning of the game. What people say about early game scouting being difficult is true. However, through my vast experience, I have to predict by feel what my opponent’s strategy will be.
People keep saying that it is a different game but not how it is different. Or why this is a good/bad thing. For me, I love the fact the new people can get to a decent level quickly. This doesn't mean that they can dominate quickly. I would argue that no-one has so far dominated the scene. People say this is because the game is too volatile, or too gimmicky, or too build order based etc etc etc. You can blame this on the constant patching, the bigger community, the ease of replay access, the speed that news spreads now, the constant whining and so on. The point is no-one has figured it out yet.
There were obstacles in BW to becoming a bonjwa. That is why they were so rare. Thre are different obstacles for SC2. Whether they can be overcome remains to be seen.
I don't plan on trying to change your mind. Rather, just remember that because the game is different it will appeal to different people. If you can enjoy the new aspects of the game then you will enjoy SC2, if not well there is always BW.
PS. I played BW for many many years but only with mates. So perhaps this clouds my judgement. I do feel that the community aspect to BW has been lost, but this, as with the game, may just take time to fully develop. LAN was a big loss.
|
Did I mention the word bonjwa in my post? Please read more carefully. The other reply about comparing boxer's performance in 2000 is also pertinent. Seriously, it's the behavior of people like you that make bw fans look like elitist a-holes, even though the actual population doesn't deserve such a besmirched reputation.
|
The thing about the "it's not all figured out yet" argument: Yes, Brood War 1 year after its release was not entirely figured out. But the thing is, the BW scene was really small in the beginning - there was no pro scene, there was no Liquipedia or streams. You could hardly even watch a pro game, there were just these nerdy little descriptions of pro matches called "Battle Reports."
SC2 hasn't had a chance to naturally develop; nobody fooled around in this game. Right off the bat, tournaments were springing up, many of them sponsored by Blizzard - and these weren't your average, run of the mill tournaments... they were huge. The demand for SC2 pros was there before the first few patches. And needless to say, they were promptly filled. As a result, there were SC2 "pros" on the scene way before there were in Brood War.
In Brood War, a year after its release, there were PC bang heroes and ladder kings. Indeed, there were no snazzy rewards or sponsorship opportunities for the best players. There was no money involved - just passion. Pure and simple. For the love of the game. People saw unparalleled dedication in something, at first glance seemed banal and uninteresting. They made the games exciting, revolutionizing unique techniques to dispatch opponents. There was something elegant and ingenious about it - a time when even the RTS genre was in its primacy. Every discovery was awe inspiring and refreshing.
SC2 has been stripped down to the bare minimum, everything is crisp and clean; there are no dirty gears or kinks, just a smooth, classy veneer. It's appealing at first, but it wears thin fast. People figure things out quickly and efficiently, even utilizing old Brood War strategies to good effect. Pros are practicing 12 hours a day, already - just like in Brood War. It took years for real practice teams to arise in BW.
So SC2's pro scene clearly had a head start, and a large one at that. Therefore, the argument that this game hasn't had enough time to develop and grow is tedious.
|
Why is it that every time someone makes a would-be good post, they decide to exaggerate numbers and attract the trolls/SC2 defenders?
Saying SC2 is easier is fine and dandy, bashing it as an inferior game is also more than ok because it's true.
But when you exaggerate so humorously saying 200APM is no longer needed or even perfect play could be achieved with sub 100 APM, then you're just asking to get flamed.
|
On July 05 2011 13:56 masami.sc wrote:
The thing about the "it's not all figured out yet" argument: Yes, Brood War 1 year after its release was not entirely figured out. But the thing is, the BW scene was really small in the beginning - there was no pro scene, there was no Liquipedia or streams. You could hardly even watch a pro game, there were just these nerdy little descriptions of pro matches called "Battle Reports."
SC2 hasn't had a chance to naturally develop; nobody fooled around in this game. Right off the bat, tournaments were springing up, many of them sponsored by Blizzard - and these weren't your average, run of the mill tournaments... they were huge. The demand for SC2 pros was there before the first few patches. And needless to say, they were promptly filled. As a result, there were SC2 "pros" on the scene way before there were in Brood War.
In Brood War, a year after its release, there were PC bang heroes and ladder kings. Indeed, there were no snazzy rewards or sponsorship opportunities for the best players. There was no money involved - just passion. Pure and simple. For the love of the game. People saw unparalleled dedication in something, at first glance seemed banal and uninteresting. They made the games exciting, revolutionizing unique techniques to dispatch opponents. There was something elegant and ingenious about it - a time when even the RTS genre was in its primacy. Every discovery was awe inspiring and refreshing.
SC2 has been stripped down to the bare minimum, everything is crisp and clean; there's no dirty gears or kinks, just a smooth, classy veneer. It's appealing at first, but it wears thin fast. People figure things out quickly and efficiently, even utilizing old Brood War strategies to good effect. Pros are practicing 12 hours a day, already - just like in Brood War. It took years for real practice teams to arise in BW.
So SC2's pro scene clearly had a head start, and a large one at that. Therefore, the argument that this game hasn't had enough time to develop and grow is tedious.
Your logic is flawed. If the game has had enough time to develop there would be a dominant way of playing. There would be a flow to each race that happens in most games because it is the best way to play. Zerg is a classic case where hydra/corrupter used to be standard against the protoss ball, no longer the case.
Like I mentioned previously, the obstacles in SC2's first year are inherently different than in SC1. Using your example, the major obstacle for a pro in BW first year was getting enough money to play. In SC2 it is balancing streaming, coaching, community activities, practicing, tournaments, travel and other commitments. This is outside the game itself. There are also different obstacles inside the game. For example SC2 has a greater focus on strategy than mechanics.
Your argument seems to be that there is more information, a larger community and a polished game which allows pros to quickly get to the"top" level. Mine is that the "top" level hasn't been defined yet.
You mention that the BW scene was built on small passionate groups discovering new aspects of rts strategy. This is true and no sequel would ever be able to create that again. There are aspects of rts startegy that are the same regardless of the game. The fact that SC2 is based on the original means they share aspects that will allow people to port strategies across. Is this a bad thing?
It seems you want a game that is both similar enough to be a sequel but also completely different. I am not sure how that is possible.
|
@masami.sc you are wrong. Broodwar has had 10 proteams since 2002-03 with 12+ hours training regimes. AND A and B teams, something no SC2 team has (no reason to). And 12 years after the scene matured strategies are still being developed and games are way more varied, the game has simply more depth. This is no fanboyism, Ive laddered a lot on SC2 and watch streams + tournaments from time to time. Game is too damn volatile and has a lot of super boring units+spells.
|
I actually agree. I've played sc2 alot but I haven't played bw for many years. I have a limited time to play a game each day, I do indeed like to play competitive games but there is no point in playing competitive if there isn't a reasonable correlation between the amount of time you put into the game and your skill level. Indeed, this is somewhat the case for sc2 so let me explain it in more detail.
What exactly does it mean to be skilled? Think about it, it is not that obvious. A game that has a winner and a loser will always offer some kind of ways to improve your skill since clearly someone won and the other lost, right? A player having played 1000 games, no matter how this game is designed, will probably be more skilled than one who hasn't played it before. This is trivial but it illustrates a fact about sc2. As long as the game is somewhat reasonable created at a very basic level then the actual question of "good design" is related to what type of skills you can achieve rather than whether you can become a pro i.e. learn skills.
Allright. The skills in sc2 are very different from bw and depend on which race you play. If you don't like sc2 it is probably because you don't like the skills of this game. One of the important skills in sc2 is being able to counter what your opponent is doing with specific units. On the other hand, to do a specific all-in build that is hard to counter is also a skill in sc2. The units in sc2 are designed to counter specific units so basically one of the important things to learn in sc2 is to have the right units at the right time.
Mechanics is much less important than in bw and this is what I feel people are missing. The small details on how to micro your units and different macro styles have more or less disappeared. These are skills that people liked but cannot use in sc2.
I wish there were more skills to learn in sc2. That there were millions of ways to control your economy and units all leading to different styles and techniques. There would be simple skills for noobs and hard, but more efficient skills, for pros.
I wish Blizzard would consider a sc2pro version of the game.
|
Ah well, not much you can do. I usually just stop playing when I get bored of games and move onto something else which happens pretty often.
|
I'm personally waiting for 2-3 years after the final expansion is released in order to make the final judgement. There's still room for Blizzard or even the community to make changes to the game.
|
I agree with your stetement: those discussions lead to well, nowhere so I quit doing that bullshit
I don't blog either! Take care ^^
|
On July 05 2011 18:07 Mactator wrote:
I actually agree. I've played sc2 alot but I haven't played bw for many years. I have a limited time to play a game each day, I do indeed like to play competitive games but there is no point in playing competitive if there isn't a reasonable correlation between the amount of time you put into the game and your skill level. Indeed, this is somewhat the case for sc2 so let me explain it in more detail.
What exactly does it mean to be skilled? Think about it, it is not that obvious. A game that has a winner and a loser will always offer some kind of ways to improve your skill since clearly someone won and the other lost, right? A player having played 1000 games, no matter how this game is designed, will probably be more skilled than one who hasn't played it before. This is trivial but it illustrates a fact about sc2. As long as the game is somewhat reasonable created at a very basic level then the actual question of "good design" is related to what type of skills you can achieve rather than whether you can become a pro i.e. learn skills.
Allright. The skills in sc2 are very different from bw and depend on which race you play. If you don't like sc2 it is probably because you don't like the skills of this game. One of the important skills in sc2 is being able to counter what your opponent is doing with specific units. On the other hand, to do a specific all-in build that is hard to counter is also a skill in sc2. The units in sc2 are designed to counter specific units so basically one of the important things to learn in sc2 is to have the right units at the right time.
Mechanics is much less important than in bw and this is what I feel people are missing. The small details on how to micro your units and different macro styles have more or less disappeared. These are skills that people liked but cannot use in sc2.
I wish there were more skills to learn in sc2. That there were millions of ways to control your economy and units all leading to different styles and techniques. There would be simple skills for noobs and hard, but more efficient skills, for pros.
I wish Blizzard would consider a sc2pro version of the game.
(bolded part) There is about the same thing in TvP in BW. Vultures > Zealots > Tanks > Dragoons > Vultures so you have to make units based on what your opponent have but the difference with sc2 here is that even if you have, let's say, too few tanks (you have more vultures) for the number of dragoons of your opponent, only with your superior micro, skill or control, you can beat your enemy. You can also beat your enemy with less units depending on your unit placement and, again, with your control. I feel this is something missing in sc2.
Also, in BW you can't get up a ramp easily so that gives a big advantage to the defender and this is something else that makes the beauty of the game. You dont have a huge ball of units coming up the ramp while shoot-running and raping everything. In BW you have to control these units going up the ramp, recalling (arbiter) in your enemy base to remove the disadvantage of going up a ramp. It plays a lot on the basic physics of the game which is great.
|
On July 05 2011 18:16 Zapdos_Smithh wrote:
Ah well, not much you can do. I usually just stop playing when I get bored of games and move onto something else which happens pretty often.
Yeah haven't played sc2 in 3 months so yeah..
|
On July 05 2011 14:02 Ravencruiser wrote:
Why is it that every time someone makes a would-be good post, they decide to exaggerate numbers and attract the trolls/SC2 defenders?
Saying SC2 is easier is fine and dandy, bashing it as an inferior game is also more than ok because it's true.
But when you exaggerate so humorously saying 200APM is no longer needed or even perfect play could be achieved with sub 100 APM, then you're just asking to get flamed.
Uhm zerg is probably the only one where u need more than 100 apm so no I am not exaggerating..
|
Great read man! I agree that SC2 was made for more people to play. BW is so much more challenging. It really allows for the great players to be seperated from the good. I was stuck at D+ too on iCCup and I was like "QQ such a scrub" lol. Now, I've played for about 35 hours of SC2 (stuck on guest passes cuz of school and crap) and I'm in Division 2-5 Platinum on all of the accounts. But still, you can't deny the fact that SC2 has really ballooned ESPORTS especially in NA. Blizzard knows exactly what's going on.
|
On July 05 2011 14:02 Ravencruiser wrote:
Why is it that every time someone makes a would-be good post, they decide to exaggerate numbers and attract the trolls/SC2 defenders?
Saying SC2 is easier is fine and dandy, bashing it as an inferior game is also more than ok because it's true.
But when you exaggerate so humorously saying 200APM is no longer needed or even perfect play could be achieved with sub 100 APM, then you're just asking to get flamed.
Dunno what happened to the concept of "eapm" but I wouldn't be surprised if 50-60 effective apm was plenty to get by in sc2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
