|
I disagree with your conclusion that SC2 isn't, or can't be, a sport. Dreamhack had around 100,000 viewers at different points in the weekend.
SC2 is a sport [because] 100,000 viewers watched.
100,000 viewers watched [because] SC2 is a sport.
SC2 is a great game [because] it is so big.
It is so big [because] SC2 is a great game.
What happens when someone says "SC2 is big because it has the StarCraft brand and Blizzard's economic support" ? If you agree, then the circular argument presented before is destroyed. You have to argue with this new reason and offer reasons why it is well designed, why it is interesting to watch etc. Lots of people will say 'it's so much more interesting to see storms in BW because you know they're more difficult to do and require a lot of concentration.' It's a direct comparison to SC2. I'd like to see direct comparisons to BW that are supposed to show the opposite. But then we get the 'it's a totally different game!' cop-out and the thread becomes 15 pages of nothing.
|
The only tournament with any Blizzard support is GSL, which is only $1.2m of the $2.5m payed out this year (there's some leads that points to Blizzard only had paid for the three GSL Opens from last year and none this year). In fact, most other tournaments actually pay Blizzard for licensing fees, not the other way around.
|
On December 01 2011 05:03 gosuMalicE wrote:
Man this just read as a whiny rant by someone who is afraid of change. It is pretty clear to most people that BW is dead (or will be very soon) and that SC2 will be bigger and better then it ever was. The fact that things like barcraft exist for SC2 but didn't for BW completely counters your point that SC2 is boring to watch. 0/5 blog.
Wat? What? Whaaaaaaat?
BW soon dead? In 10 minutes, Sayle will rebroadcast the Proleague, then see yourself if BW is soon dead and if SC2 will be bigger and better.
|
On December 01 2011 05:48 Primadog wrote:
The only tournament with any Blizzard support is GSL, which is only $1.2m of the $2.5m payed out this year. In fact, most other tournaments actually pay Blizzard for licensing fees, not the other way around.
It would appear that the great circle has been mended, and the cycle can continue. Thanks be to Tastosis.
|
The game is supported in more ways than just tournaments... Blizzard spent a lot promoting this game and orchestrated its inauguration into 'eSports.' You can read so many interviews from before SC2 came, years before, where they said they wanted this game to be an eSport and were going to do their damnedest to facilitate that. Other companies may now be maintaining that, but if we are talking about 'why is SC2 big' you have to talk about why it grew to its current size, not why it maintains its size (which can be through sheer popular culture).
|
BW is slower paced then sc2 is why it isn't as enjoyable for fans to watch, i think this is numebr one reason why starcraft 2 is so popular because it improved upon one of the biggest points for why eSports wasnt popular the pace was all wrong. look at other competitive RTS games Company Of Heroes, Dawn of War they are super slow paced like brood war, so while the garnered decent fanbases and made it into eSports tournaments they have not lasted so well other then BW, this is where sc2 has moved ahead of other games it retains its straight up and down RTS gameplay while pushing the pace to something much faster and engaging.
my 2nd point to give direct comparisons between BW and sc2 is look at all the cool units that never get use in BW such as corsairs, we have a game that been around for longer then 10 years and its soooooo perfect that the pros dont use all the units please..... the unit balancing is so much better in sc2 then in brood war.(ZvZ in BW was always mutas..... boring)
|
You make sense !!
However there is too much rage in your speech
Guys lets just relax ok xD
btw bw > sc2
|
United States13896 Posts
On December 01 2011 04:57 Masayume wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 04:46 p4NDemik wrote:On December 01 2011 04:42 Masayume wrote:On December 01 2011 03:12 Chill wrote:
Disagree with most of what you wrote. For what I agree with, I then disagree with how you wrote it. This is exactly how I feel about this blog post. Instead of actually showing us some valid, unbiased criticism that is debatable and productive, you are making it easy on yourself by injecting an overdose of subjective negativity. Ridiculing everything that you don't like and declaring that the reason why SC2 is not an eSport makes for a poor argument to "prove your point". Please refrain from posting such things in the blog section. If you are frustrated, alright I understand, but don't drag everyone else with you. My advice is to keep to yourself if you are unable to contribute to the Teamliquid blog section. lol wtf I don't agree with the points he is trying to make but he is contributing a hell of a lot more than most people who write here and who are you to tell him to not write here? Is it really too much to ask for slightly more mature posts? Yes he does contribute more than the average person, but he does so in a way that invokes flame wars and all the sorts. I am merely stating that it's better to post this article without all the subjective negative comments that ridicule things that other people care about deeply. And if he can't do that, it would be better if he didn't post. Please read my post again and consider for a moment. It is better to try and encourage more constructive posts, then to just flame at him or letting these posts become the standard. This is my opinion and of course yours may differ. But as of late the posts on the forum and the blog section just seem to degrade in quality more and more. It should be more about constructive, positive posts. I might have worded it a bit ambiguous in my previous post though, my apologies.
Its a blog post. When you read a blog it's understood that it is HIS viewpoint and is not attempting to be unbiased in the same way you would hope a good news source would be. You're trying to hold his post to a standard he never set out to meet and he isn't required to in this forum. If this was posted in SC2 general, then yeah we may have a problem, but its his blog.
It's fine to advise him on how to make a more compelling case while respectfully disagreeing, but that last line just took it too far.
|
I'm gonna need to you qualify why BW is slower paced because usually that's how I feel about SC2 in the few games I've watched lol. 'Oh, it is 10 minutes in and all that's happened is some scouting and they're still on two bases...'
|
On December 01 2011 05:57 Chef wrote:
I'm gonna need to you qualify why BW is slower paced because usually that's how I feel about SC2 in the few games I've watched lol. 'Oh, it is 10 minutes in and all that's happened is some scouting and they're still on two bases...'
^ hahaha still on 2 bases this i guess is the difference between BW fans and sc2 fans, and thank you for illustrating my point in sc2 you can kill your opponent off one base in BW you have to expand to 3,4,5 so slow paced at 10 minutes in an sc2 game if they only socuted and had expanded you arent watching any pros.... and to finish my point i see action in an RTS as units getting destroyed positioning games being played xel naga towers be garrisoned...... not expand to a giant 4 base empire and building up the equivalent to a world war 1 army and then slow pushing against your enemy
|
Calgary26003 Posts
As someone who's watched many games of both, let me settle this:
They're different. Neither is faster than the other. You both don't know enough about the other game.
|
On December 01 2011 05:53 Sgonzo wrote:
my 2nd point to give direct comparisons between BW and sc2 is look at all the cool units that never get use in BW such as corsairs, we have a game that been around for longer then 10 years and its soooooo perfect that the pros dont use all the units please..... the unit balancing is so much better in sc2 then in brood war.(ZvZ in BW was always mutas..... boring)
Think you mean scouts, or at least I hope you do. ZvZ in BW has gone through many evolutions, and mutalisks were a popular one.
|
ive played brood war since the day it came out Chill............i believe i was in grade 5 or something i was raised on BW
edit: and i believe sc2 improved upon all gameplay elements of BW
|
I don't think you've made a very strong case. I think part of the intense nature of SC:BW is that because you branch out into the map so much many battles occur simultaneously and there are many more options. In SC2 it seems like there are one or two big conflicts which are unavoidable (and to me that makes them less interesting since they aren't the choice of the player).
On December 01 2011 06:01 Chill wrote:
As someone who's watched many games of both, let me settle this:
They're different. Neither is faster than the other. You both don't know enough about the other game.
You are right, I can't make a very strong argument because I have not watched enough SC2. I think still that they are both RTS games and there should be pros and cons to both that can be listed by those who enjoy them. From that list one could decide for themselves what pros are more valuable and what con's more forgivable.
|
Some clarifications.
If you have a post count higher than 10, you are a "hopeless nerd" in my book. If you have a post count higher than 100, you are an introvert. If you have a post count higher than 1000, you are an addict. I count myself as one of those.
As much as I am willing to embrace my nerdliness, there is a difference between saying to a random stranger on the street: "Hello, my name is ____. I devote the majority of my hobby time on competitive ____, which has been studied and refined for many years." and "Hello, my name is ____. I devote the majority of my hobby time on competitive ____, which was released last year."
Bonus points if you can say the latter statement with a straight face. Bonus points if you call yourself a "professional" at a game that's just over a year old. Bonus points if you think you're somehow healthier than a WoW addict. Bonus points if you resent the comparison.
When I was in middle school, I used to go to Magic: the Gathering tournaments at my nearby card/game store. I really liked playing the game with friends, I had a lot of fun building creative decks -- and then I'd go to these tournaments where I'd meet kids who were assholes, had bought-out decks with all the rares, and they'd win and I'd lose and it was no fun. The only way to play a good game is draft, imo. I don't hate MtG, I think it's made a lot of bad decisions post-5th edition, but somewhere in there is a redeemable game that's been zombified under the notion of constant cycles so that WotC can keep printing shiny cards to little boys (and men) who like the fantasy elements. MtG will keep releasing repetitive cycles with shitty concepts long after they "got it right" just as Blizzard will keep selling computer games as long as we keep buying them.
Why do we buy games if they're no good? We buy most games to be entertained, puzzled, and possessed by the story, and we eventually throw them away, perhaps to play again layer. We like novelty. But SC2 was different. It had to live up to Broodwar, the premier competitive RTS, analyzed by Koreans and converted into an art form.
My point is that if you have any stake in SC2: career, emotional, whatever... just try to put things in perspective and enjoy it for its own sake.
|
On December 01 2011 06:04 Chef wrote:
I don't think you've made a very strong case. I think part of the intense nature of SC:BW is that because you branch out into the map so much many battles occur simultaneously and there are many more options. In SC2 it seems like there are one or two big conflicts which are unavoidable (and to me that makes them less interesting since they aren't the choice of the player).
difference of opinions, i will say this Carrier Micro was actually possible in BW which does trump on gameplay element of sc2 XD had to go back on something i said this kills me
|
It perpetually disappoints me how many people are content with having others agree with them instead of seeking to be correct or at the very least gain greater understanding.
|
Calgary26003 Posts
On December 01 2011 06:02 Sgonzo wrote:
ive played brood war since the day it came out Chill............i believe i was in grade 5 or something i was raised on BW
edit: and i believe sc2 improved upon all gameplay elements of BW
Okay. Hooray! What do you want me to say?
|
A confusing blog.
I've definitely grown tired of SC2 (haven't followed any event since the summer) and find BW much more interesting to watch, but your wording is very strange. Whether we like it or not, SC2 is the biggest "eSport" (I've grown to hate this overused term) outside of SKorea.
There's money in golf because it draws an audience. Sports entertain for spectacle, games entertain personal satisfaction. Some of the best golf players can fight against the wind and terrain to place the ball uncannily close to the hole from an unreal distance, and people want to see this. No one will pay to see your grandmother putt balls around the lawn, no matter how good she is.You can sell spectacle, but you can't sell personal satisfaction. The best SC2 can hope for is taking pocket change from introverts with addiction problems (i.e. you and me), but it will never go mainstream until it achieves a WOW factor (needless to say, it has none).
This is where I got lost. SC2 may not be the more interesting or skilled game, but it does draw a much larger audience than BW. I was shocked to see that someone like Machine streaming SC2 had more viewers than Hiya at the same time. To all the new fans of the franchise, SC2 is their "spectacle", this game seems to have that WOW factor for them.
I'd bet a large amount of this has to do with modern day media websites such as youtube. SC2 was guaranteed success due to BW, but Blizzard lucked out since die hard fans would do all the SC2 advertising for them (and even run tournaments during the beta). Youtubers like HD and Husky brought in a large amount of casual fans who had never watched competitive gaming before and they fell in love with it. SC2 is their BW, and it's here to stay (no matter how flawed and boring the game may be to us).
|
On December 01 2011 05:46 Chef wrote:Show nested quote +I disagree with your conclusion that SC2 isn't, or can't be, a sport. Dreamhack had around 100,000 viewers at different points in the weekend. SC2 is a sport [because] 100,000 viewers watched. 100,000 viewers watched [because] SC2 is a sport. SC2 is a great game [because] it is so big. It is so big [because] SC2 is a great game. What happens when someone says "SC2 is big because it has the StarCraft brand and Blizzard's economic support" ? If you agree, then the circular argument presented before is destroyed. You have to argue with this new reason and offer reasons why it is well designed, why it is interesting to watch etc. Lots of people will say 'it's so much more interesting to see storms in BW because you know they're more difficult to do and require a lot of concentration.' It's a direct comparison to SC2. I'd like to see direct comparisons to BW that are supposed to show the opposite. But then we get the 'it's a totally different game!' cop-out and the thread becomes 15 pages of nothing.
Sure. Quote one sentence from my post and then infer that I am saying 'SC2 is a sport because 100,000 viewers watched'...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
