What's the difference between golf and croquet? Both are played on a grassy pitch. Both require players to precisely strike dimpled spheres toward targets. Both are played competitively somewhere in the world. So why does one give us names like Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson, while the other is the choice lawn game of homely women?
Casual gamers, circa 1873.
Golf is a sport. Croquet is a game.
Biathlon is a sport. Riflery is a hobby.
Baseball is a sport. Kickball is a joke.
Rally racing is a sport. Stock car racing is for kids who like explosions.
One makes you sweat, the other makes you yawn. One might kill you, the other kills time. One is hardcore, the other is casual. One is inspirational, the other is whimsical. One draws an audience, the other is mutual masturbation.
It is the final point that I think is most discriminating: watchability makes a sport. The ability of someone uninitiated to the rules and formalities to immediately grasp the level of skill required to play, and immediately be awestruck by superior performance; the inability of players to give it anything short of everything.
By this standard it is hard to say what might constitute an eSport. After all, there are thousands of computer games out there, some that will never achieve a large following despite their high skill ceiling and well-thought design. Most have arcane rules that an outsider would not readily appreciate. And for every computer game that is out there, there is someone that is a wizard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQZ9wXO8RVs
Every computer game has its Lim Yo Hwan.
I would argue that SC2 is not an eSport (it's merely an eGame), but this shouldn't be controversial. We know it's inferior to Broodwar. We know it's boring to watch. We know if Blizzard released SC3 tomorrow we'd forget SC2 like a bad dream. Most of all, a real sport does not have a steering committee to shuffle the rules of the game on a monthly basis. Sports do not release expansion packs. Sports do not come with "intellectual property" restrictions and license agreements dictating how you may play and whom you may play with. Sports do not tolerate lag.
A sport also lives on its own, by the interest and involvement of players. To this end, it must either be fun or inspire people to become better players in the absence of external encouragement. Take chess. You can play online ladders against some of the best in the world, or you can enjoy a game in your home on your own time, and when it's over it's over -- no post-game commentary or highlights necessary. Chess has survived hundreds of years without television or Internet promotion. Broodwar was ready for Korean prime time because an entire generation of kids was already in love with the game.
When SC2 was announced, we knew that it would be a visual feast, but also that it would necessarily compete with Broodwar -- in this sense it was forced upon the thriving Broodwar community, and many were apprehensive that SC2 would not live up to Broodwar's quality. I'm sure Blizzard works diligently on patching the bore out of the game, but real sports do not have this kind of problem, or this kind of solution. As of today, the only things pumping life into competitive SC2 are its angels (Blizzard et al) and sponsors that buy advertisement space during events. And this is where we can get down to the real difference between golf and croquet:
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).
I enjoy futbol, I ridicule football. One is celebrated worldwide, invokes violent nationalism, and is a joy to watch even if you've never followed the game or the teams. The other is bogged down in rules, stoppage of play, and turns its players into human battering rams. Both are sports in that they can draw an audience, but if you have watched American NFL you will understand that the genius of football as a "sport" is not its spectacle, or strategy, or anything else that might define a sport. Televised football is in fact a genius of marketing. It provides just enough hard-hitting violence in 1-2 minute blocks and then the clock stops, and that means a commercial break. In short, it's ripe for whoring out.
Imagine if SC2 made it onto ESPN. I can't, because all the games would have to last 5-10 minutes instead of 20-30 to make room for commercials. Ok, imagine SC2 on Pay-Per-View or another premium channel. Would you pay premium rates for HD Starcraft on your television? Maybe, you're exceptional. I'm certain there are more people willing to pay for MMA and softcore porn than for pasty nerds blowing shit up on computers. Live skin >> digital skin.
Well how about the Internet? Surely eSports can flourish there. Whether or not it's flourishing, that's pretty much what we have today, and even if you get tens of thousands of people tuning in to GSL/IPL/TSL/etc, you've pretty much accounted for everyone that's potentially interested in watching. And no, your non-nerdy friends aren't interested in watching space-pokemon blow each other up for great glory.
Your non-nerdy friends also don't care what "damage" Savior dealt to eSports. The fact that such a large amount of personal profit could be made on the black market proves that Broodwar went mainstream... SC2 can only hope to achieve such notoriety in its lifetime. Fixed computer games, like fixed boxing matches, fixed wrestling matches, fixed horse races, or any kind of thrown victory upset people because they destroy the illusion of spectacle. Ruined matches remind you just how meaningless the game actually is and how much emotional stake you've entrusted inside the hype. Have established strategy games like chess ever had this kind of identity crisis, or do we play games for other reasons?
Barcrafts are another manifestation of this identity crisis. What could be more mainstream than drinking beer and watching "the game" with other young men in the commons? Beer is great, I love beer, but the game sucks, so stop pretending that you're having a good time or that it validates your lifestyle. You're not having a good time, and you're still a nerd. You're a lonely yuppie (or worse, underage!) with nerdy hobbies desperately seeking acceptance inside an alienating society. The bartender doesn't give a fuck what the customers want to watch as long as the hockey/baseball/basketball game is not on and no one else complains. You can attend bar meetups on almost any hobby group if you look hard enough, but your willingness to spend money to be with people just like you is no more of an indicator that eSports is growing than weekend book clubs among housewives are an indicator that competitive literary leagues are on the rise.
Foreigners need to stop wishing for South Korea to come to their neighborhood; you cannot force culture. SC2 is an entertainment platform developed by Blizzard, delivered by the Internet streaming sites, promoted by high-end computer hardware manufacturers (i.e. shit you don't need), energy drinks, & other providers of "gamer gear," and ultimately consumed by you, the lonely PC gamer of the Western world who wants a sense of community in his hobbies. The benefactors of this niche market don't care about social recognition, they just want your money. If you advertise it to your friends, that makes "eSports" more money.
So when iNcontroL writes that he wants 2012 to be an even bigger year for eSports, he should probably just be satisfied that he's got a home, friends, and a semi-stable career playing a mediocre computer game with some gore and neat explosions. EG is doing better than most. Prize pools may increase under better sponsorship, but the payout is still chancey and not going to improve the quality of life of players. Under the facade of "dedication to the game," players are required to work long hours for little pay (a tiny bunkbed & Ramen noodles is not pay, it's slave wages, or the college experience without the education) and sacrificing the best years of their lives for what... the entertainment of some netizens? A slim chance at fame and riches?
What ever happened to fun gaming?
Sometimes I worry that the competitive Starcraft scene is too concerned with the image of "eSports," and not discriminating enough of the game within the sport. Sometimes I think that there are too many events & wanna-be events, too many casters & wanna-be casters, too many progamers & wanna-be progamers. All too often the quality is low, which is a shame when the people that put things together are taking personal risks or volunteering their time. I hope it's worth it for the people who have a lot invested. I hope it's still fun for the players, because it's not going to get any better than this. This is the complete and fulfilled dream of eSports, and the only thing hurting eSports now is its own self-obsession.
So, to summarize your post, you don't like Sc2. Ok. Oh yeah, I liked the part where you secretly entered the mind of every pro-gamer and discovered that not a single one of them actually enjoys playing........................A hater and a mind-reader a good poster does not make.
stopped reading @ your analysis of american football. no one watches for the violence or the commercials, but rather the plays and the physical/mental strength required to execute. you seem to be of the vocal minority here on the rest of your post.
Excellent analysis of football. American football is a game designed for commercial whoring, and is perfect for the retarded average American who is in just for some violence. This and hockey make the perfect marketable "sport".
I don't think golf has the WOW factor you're talking about... 99% of the time it's just meh, then it's spectacular when the guy makes a hole in 1. Overall I thought that your comprehension of sport was pretty low and why did you felt the urge to give us your opinion when no one obviously care...
No, you think sc2 is boring to watch. I enjoy watching it. I enjoy playing it.
Your efforts would probably be more productive if you put the time you spend disparaging and insulting SC2 viewers/casters/players into supporting/promoting Brood War. Be positive about BW rather than negative about SC2.
Okay, I am going to disagree with your ridiculous arguments/statements 1 at a time.
On December 01 2011 01:45 mmp wrote: I would argue that SC2 is not an eSport (it's merely an eGame), but this shouldn't be controversial. We know it's inferior to Broodwar. We know it's boring to watch. We know if Blizzard released SC3 tomorrow we'd forget SC2 like a bad dream. Most of all, a real sport does not have a steering committee to shuffle the rules of the game on a monthly basis. Sports do not release expansion packs. Sports do not come with "intellectual property" restrictions and license agreements dictating how you may play and whom you may play with. Sports do not tolerate lag.
We don't "know" that SC2 is "boring to watch". Why don't you tell that to the tens of thousands of people going to events or tuning in online to watch SC2. If people thought it was boring to watch, they wouldn't watch it so much. I, for one, love watching SC2 and think that many games are super exciting (sure, you can point me to boring ball v. ball games, but I can point you to equally many exciting, action-packed games).
Moreover, real sports do have steering committees that update the rules to their sports as necessary. I know you despise American football (I'll get to that in a second), but the rules are constantly being updated for the NFL, with each season. For example, this season every questionable touchdown is automatically reviewed by replay to confirm that the call was correct. They are using technology to make sure that refs make the right calls, and rightfully so. The NFL has also added rules regarding helmet-to-helmet contact in a (futile) attempt to protect players against concussions. Real sports also come with many restrictions, in some cases more restrictive than restrictions placed on SC2. For example, try uploading your own commentary to the footage of an NFL game or MLB game on Youtube. Oh wait, you can't rebroadcast those sports at will, because it's illegal.
On December 01 2011 01:45 mmp wrote: I enjoy futbol, I ridicule football. One is celebrated worldwide, invokes violent nationalism, and is a joy to watch even if you've never followed the game or the teams. The other is bogged down in rules, stoppage of play, and turns its players into human battering rams. Both are sports in that they can draw an audience, but if you have watched American NFL you will understand that the genius of football as a "sport" is not its spectacle, or strategy, or anything else that might define a sport. Televised football is in fact a genius of marketing. It provides just enough hard-hitting violence in 1-2 minute blocks and then the clock stops, and that means a commercial break. In short, it's ripe for whoring out.
I don't understand why this paragraph is a part of your post -- all you're going to do is offend fans of the most popular sport in America. Many people find your glorious "futbol" boring to watch, just as you say that SC2 is boring. To see some Americans take on soccer, see the Simpsons clip about it: Simpsons makes fun of soccer. Don't get me wrong, I love watching soccer. But for the uninitiated, sometimes it can just be really boring to watch players pass the ball around for an hour and a half, taking 5-10 shots the entire game, and maybe scoring once or twice. Anyways, I don't see how hating on American football has anything to do with SC2.
On December 01 2011 01:45 mmp wrote: Barcrafts are another manifestation of this identity crisis. What could be more mainstream than drinking beer and watching "the game" with other young men in the commons? Beer is great, I love beer, but the game sucks, so stop pretending that you're having a good time or that it validates your lifestyle. You're not having a good time, and you're still a nerd. You're a lonely yuppie (or worse, underage!) with nerdy hobbies desperately seeking acceptance inside an alienating society.
Really? This just seems like a BW fanboy whining about SC2 not being as fun for him to watch as BW, and then taking his frustration out on the people that enjoy coming together and watching SC2 together. I went to a Barcraft and really enjoyed it with some of my friends. Am I a nerd? Yes, and proud of it. Am I a lonely yuppie seeking acceptance? No, I'm a full-time software developer who lives with his girlfriend and enjoys a variety of different things. Sorry if that makes you jealous. Sorry if I enjoy watching SC2. But please, stop the hating.
TL;DR I'm sorry you don't enjoy SC2, but that doesn't mean others don't as well. You're wrong in pretty much everything you say.
Your post is full of terrible opinions and mute points in my opinion. You hate starcraft 2 and you're a self hating nerd. Other than that i'm not sure what i'm supposed to take away from this post. I take an interest in eSports, and therefore, am invested in it's future. But thats not why I have passion for the game, merely a side effect of that passion.
mmp you talk like your opinion is the end all. Its not. Just because you don't enjoy the game doesn't mean its bad. If you don't like starcraft 2 then stop playing, watching, and posting. kthx
On December 01 2011 01:45 mmp wrote: Sometimes I worry that the competitive Starcraft scene is too concerned with the image of "eSports," and not discriminating enough of the game within the sport. Sometimes I think that there are too many events & wanna-be events, too many casters & wanna-be casters, too many progamers & wanna-be progamers. All too often the quality is low, which is a shame when the people that put things together are taking personal risks or volunteering their time. I hope it's worth it for the people who have a lot invested. I hope it's still fun for the players, because it's not going to get any better than this. This is the complete and fulfilled dream of eSports, and the only thing hurting eSports now is its own self-obsession.
A very solid but flawed rant.
It's not just SC2 fans that are driving the "eSports" image, it's Blizzard itself. Blizzard has a vested interest in making Starcraft II as big as Brood War was (and is) in Korea, and is encouraging people to take it incredibly seriously toward that end.
That said, I don't agree with your argument that all of this is at all detracting from the actual enjoyment of the game. Just because people play soccer professionally doesn't mean that laypeople don't like playing soccer.
It's an interesting point of view, although I think you were probably overly... enthusiastic in attempting to make your point, and will draw lots of flamers. In fact I'm going to disagree in many places, but let's start with the good.
I think you're correct in saying there's too much blather and concern about "esports" as a separate thing. To me, all the talk about "esports" tends to come across as suggesting that we don't see Starcraft II as a big enough game on its own: that we recognize limitations. On the one hand, duh: not every game can possible appeal to everyone. On the other hand, that implication that a widely-played game with an international scene and beaucoup hype can't stand on its own is, even if true, incredibly unfortunate coming from the game's own fanbase. The question isn't "esports", the question is SC2. Tennis is international fanfare; badminton is, mostly, a picnic game. There is no "Roger Federer's lack of results is hurting racket sports" nonsense: even if you saw anything like that message, it would be tennis it was hurting.
On the other hand, your own black-and-white distinctions between "sports" and "games", and your own biases, hurt your message. On your own sort of terms, for instance, but with a different bias, I could be a typical American and talk nonsense about how, "Football is a sport but soccer's just a game, football's an intensely strategic game while soccer they just run around a bunch and its international success is purely a result of FIFA marketing and historical leftovers". Which is ignorant and judgmental, but no more implausible than your own viewpoint. (For the record, I enjoy watching both.)
What comes across most clearly is that you don't like Starcraft II. Which is fine: I don't much like rugby. But I think you're so fixated on that, and that idea is reinforced by your (legitimate) dislike of the "esports" mantra, that you never take the step back to ask why the game's been such a huge hit. Marketing has something to do with it, as does the history of BW; a growing gaming population has more.
What you dismiss as lack of "sport"-ness is due to growing pains. Chess rules were unsettled for thousands of years. The NFL changes rules every couple years; FIFA issues new points of emphasis and rewords things; etc. If we imagine a sort of Platonic ideal of "Starcraft", which like chess or tennis comes to dominate a field and be "the" game for a significant population, it may be that Blizzard lucked out the first time and BW will be the iteration that finally survives. It also may be that we'll be blown away by SC4: Doom of the Xel'Naga, a ludicrously well-balanced 5-race game.
In short, while I agree with you about the whole "esports" thing, your other points seem more bias-driven than reasonable criticism.
There are lots of things I don't enjoy but I don't make threads about them to belittle them and convince other people that they shouldn't like it either.
Setting the anti-SC2 bias aside, one of the main points of this blog (that the eSports scene is being driven from the top-down by business interests and isn't growing organically like the Korean BW scene did) is not a new one. What is new is that the OP is criticizing the model for being successful.
I suspect this would've been better-received without all the "SC2 sucks" stuff... but you asked for it hehe. Or maybe you wrote that to filter out all the mindless fanboys who would just rage and leave before finishing the read? (Some SC2 fanboys did manage to finish the blog though!)
I guess I agree with your assessment that SC2 is still an eGame. A shiny, not-bad game with a lot of time and money invested into it (and I don't think you should just automatically discount that!), which makes it seem really popular and awesome (and maybe some think it is), but... it's a game. On the other hand, I'm not sure BW is that much more of a sport; match-fixing can occur as long as there's money being bet on the side.
And I agree somewhat with your main (?) point: that the concept of "eSports" is really just a (nearly) empty battle-cry to rally behind. It's good for game and competitive gamers to get bolder and try to become more mainstream; if they don't try, it's never going to happen! But I think a lot of people have some sort of (mis)conception that whatever game they're playing is the whole world and the most mainstream and nothing bad will ever happen to it, blah blah blah. Even BW is in its last breath; not sure SC2 can last much longer (after all the expansions are released) without the artificial support it's getting now...
On December 01 2011 01:45 mmp wrote: Most of all, a real sport does not have a steering committee to shuffle the rules of the game on a monthly basis. Sports do not release expansion packs.
I'm not quite sure what you're going for here, since it certainly sounded like you considered BW an e-sport but not SC2. You remember that it took many balance patches and expansion pack to make SC1 the game it is, right? For that matter, you call chess a sport, but even chess is the (admittedly very long-standing) last game in a chain of related games lost to mists of history. Of course the rules of games change over time, that's true of ANY sport. Tennis is a sport, and has been around since the mid-late 19th century, but there wasn't a tie-breaker rule until the 70s... With a video game that change just happens very quickly at the beginning before things stabilize.
Sports do not release expansion packs. Sports do not come with "intellectual property" restrictions and license agreements dictating how you may play and whom you may play with. Sports do not tolerate lag.
On December 01 2011 02:26 SenorChang wrote: There are lots of things I don't enjoy but I don't make threads about them to belittle them and convince other people that they shouldn't like it either.
1/5 for the blog and quoting this because SenorChang basically covers my exact feelings reading this.
On December 01 2011 02:27 Battleaxe wrote: Started with some promise, ended with a bunch of shit.
3/5 for the effort though
Pretty much this. There were some good points but they were buried in a pile of crap. I love it when random people in the internet tell me that I am in fact not having fun watching Starcraft, Im just pretending. Glad I can now drop my act and admit that this game is terrible and Ive been actually suffering the whole time Ive been watching/playing it, you saw right trough me. Right.
After reading your rant, are you secretly screaming out to everyone involved in gaming to get a life? If you don't enjoy watching/playing a game or sport then that is fine just don't belittle fans of the game. However you do give some good points worth thinking about.
I agree with a lot of your points about forced culture and entertainment platform etc but every game that became a sport went through periods where stuff was changed a lot and everyone sucked. Some guy didn't just write down the rules for Futbol perfectly the first time, for example.
On December 01 2011 01:45 mmp wrote: Warning! Long meaningless rant ahead!
You posted this 10 years early. Starcraft 2 is not hurting anything because it's still in it's infancy, it is trying to discover itself by doing so many different things and you are treating it as an adult. Waaaay to early man, cya in 10 years.
Just let the anger out man, it makes things easier. When you go down make sure you go down kicking and screaming, let everyone know that you fought till the very end. BW got less then 12 months left so make sure you are heard plenty before then.
Out of the ashes of a once great eSport a new king will be crowned. Yes it is going happen and no amount of arguing, kicking, screaming and crying will stop it. I could post a fine wall of text with wellwritten arguments like you did brave one, but how about I just end it with "Time will prove you wrong"
Man that King of Kong documentary creeps me out. Sad to say, but I bet my view of competitive arcade gaming is how a lot of people view our "esport". It looks like a bunch of old men with too much passion and not enough common sense. Hypocritically I think thats how some of us folks are with SC2, at least we got money in the game though.
Oh god, after the first page, I was a little scared there for my fellow BW fans, I thought we had devolved into nodding our heads at any tripe that even briefly mentioned "how bad SC2 is". Page 2 saved my faith.
1. Commercial time can be saved with re-runs after the commercials. Think live stream with a delay as long as the commercial(s) have pushed back the live game. Thus, eSports can and should be broadcast on major television networks.
2. Video games are becoming more casual, and more people are accepting of them as a hobby. Hobbies have potential for extreme competition. The casual factor is evidenced by the Nintendo Wii, things like the Xbox's Kinect, and, relative to Brood War, SC2. This draws in a larger audience simply because of the accessibility. Even though SC2 will never see skill gaps as high as that between Flash and MVP, the increased accessibility is a plus for eSports because games like SC2 can become catalysts for increased viewership and corporate broadcasting, giving other games like BW a better chance to hit the mainstream.
On December 01 2011 03:12 Archvil3 wrote: Just let the anger out man, it makes things easier. When you go down make sure you go down kicking and screaming, let everyone know that you fought till the very end. BW got less then 12 months left so make sure you are heard plenty before then.
Out of the ashes of a once great eSport a new king will be crowned. Yes it is going happen and no amount of arguing, kicking, screaming and crying will stop it. I could post a fine wall of text with wellwritten arguments like you did brave one, but how about I just end it with "Time will prove you wrong"
I guess you're just kind of hoping that no one will remember you posted this in 12 months. I say you volunteer yourself for a ban if you're wrong. That would show some form of confidence in your otherwise bland and meaningless prediction.
There are some good points in here, but I feel like your argument was compromised by how much you appear to loathe SC2. Its come out sounding like the rant of a digruntled BW fan, rather than a serious consideration of SC2 as an esport.
You make it sound like SC2 is barely scrapping by as some kind of low quality, forced entertainment when really its growth feels a lot more organic and natural. You contend that SC2 should be happy with how far it is as a mediocore game, but I would argue that the SC2 scene will grow even further in the coming years. Whlie SC2 may not be as pure and perfect in form as BW, what really matters for it to grow as an esport is how much it is embraced by the community. And the community seems to be loving it right now.
You're entire article now breaks down. Also I get the impression that you don't like SC2. Now stop pretending like your own opinion is shared by everyone.
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.
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 voice his opinion?
sound like a hater, you do know that everything you mentioned there can be play as competitively as the players make it, the reason why most things are popular these days is marketing anyways so this post was very un-enlightening just another person herp derping the games i like better then yours XD are cry cry. had enough of these type of blogs stop hating do something positive for eSports bro
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.
Ah, more SC2 bashing using personal opinion as evidence of fact. Except 10 times longer than usual.
You just insulted StarCraft 2, American football, and stock car racing (presumably NASCAR) in your post as somehow not legitimate. I won't pretend to like the latter two, but I know both draw millions of fans who know way more about the sports than I do, many of whom are intelligent and can tell you exactly why they like to watch these sports and how much skill is required. Your ignorance to fact isn't a reason why these sports aren't legitimate.
On December 01 2011 02:07 Carapas wrote: I don't think golf has the WOW factor you're talking about... 99% of the time it's just meh, then it's spectacular when the guy makes a hole in 1. Overall I thought that your comprehension of sport was pretty low and why did you felt the urge to give us your opinion when no one obviously care...
^ agree it seemed to me that you already were not that interested in most sports aswell, stock car racing cannot be compared to rally car racing because they're basic skills needed are completely different, stock cars are all about pacing and passing, rally cars you ahve to pay attention more or less to your route and the terrain and being able to navigate the difficult terrain and having working car rather then ensuring that your pitting at right times or conserving gas properly....... overall you make comparisons betweeen things that cant be compared, maybe do two leagues of the same sport but then all the pro leagues have good skill in their respective countries..... if there isnt the skill base there they dont have a pro league simple
Barcrafts are another manifestation of this identity crisis. What could be more mainstream than drinking beer and watching "the game" with other young men in the commons? Beer is great, I love beer, but the game sucks, so stop pretending that you're having a good time or that it validates your lifestyle.
This is the best version of "if it's not in BW, it's bad" I ever seen.
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.
Barcrafts are another manifestation of this identity crisis. What could be more mainstream than drinking beer and watching "the game" with other young men in the commons? Beer is great, I love beer, but the game sucks, so stop pretending that you're having a good time or that it validates your lifestyle.
This is the most version of "it's no in BW, therefore it's bad" I ever seen.
^ agree, i see barcrafts as more of a thing to find the poeple who also enjoy sc2 and share your love of the game in a social atmosphere and to show people not involved in eSports that it isnt a buncha "nerds" sitting in their moms basement playing games by themselves. We regular people who like watching eSports.
If BarCraft had picked up for BW, the game may not had died outside of Korea, and OP won't be complainting bitterly about nerds justifying their lifestyle.
I think his point (however elusive it may be) with that is that barcrafts shouldn't validate a game, the game itself needs to be worthy. So if someone thinks 'well this game must be good because there's so many barcrafts for it' he is saying that is a poor reason to think the game is good, rather it's an excuse to drink and hang out with people. Then that combines with a certain distaste for people who idealise this lifestyle (going to bars) as a part of their identity rather than enjoying it for it's own sake (like the person who goes to parties in high school because parties are parties and they help you fit in). This is what he means by the word 'identity crisis,' I mean. Seeking social acceptance rather than being secure about your hobbies.
I don't like how alienating the OP is to SC2 fans because it really is blog ladder suicide and doesn't help his cause of convincing anyone of anything (if that is indeed his cause, maybe this is just catharsis), but he writes pretty well and if you read the content there is food for thought in there.
edit: more posts were made above me while responding to primadog... Well this is exactly it. If you think that you're not a nerd or whatever just because you go to a bar and drink, then this is really an insecurity because you are afraid of being seen as someone who doesn't go to bars and is therefore not in line with a perceived social norm (and in reality no one gives a shit if you go to bars or not—and people will still think you're a social failure if you go to a bar and still say dumb things).
On December 01 2011 05:09 Chef wrote: I think his point (however elusive it may be) with that is that barcrafts shouldn't validate a game, the game itself needs to be worthy. So if someone thinks 'well this game must be good because there's so many barcrafts for it' he is saying that is a poor reason to think the game is good, rather it's an excuse to drink and hang out with people. Then that combines with a certain distaste for people who idealise this lifestyle (going to bars) as a part of their identity rather than enjoying it for it's own sake (like the person who goes to parties in high school because parties are parties and they help you fit in). This is what he means by the word 'identity crisis,' I mean. Seeking social acceptance rather than being secure about your hobbies.
I don't like how alienating the OP is to SC2 fans because it really is blog ladder suicide and doesn't help his cause of convincing anyone of anything (if that is indeed his cause, maybe this is just catharsis), but he writes pretty well and if you read the content there is food for thought in there.
I think that's a large spin on what he said to say the least. I think he was more saying "SC2 is garbage."
You're right, he definitely made it clear he doesn't like SC2, it's not an unbiased argument. But there are still points that you could legitimately counter if you wanted to, like this thing about barcraft being more about self-validation than the game. Or you could take that as an initial counter that you agree with, but bring up a reason that SC2 is good for the game itself which doesn't rely on social events as proof (which in my experience is often the argument relied upon).
On December 01 2011 05:09 Chef wrote: I think his point (however elusive it may be) with that is that barcrafts shouldn't validate a game, the game itself needs to be worthy. So if someone thinks 'well this game must be good because there's so many barcrafts for it' he is saying that is a poor reason to think the game is good, rather it's an excuse to drink and hang out with people. Then that combines with a certain distaste for people who idealise this lifestyle (going to bars) as a part of their identity rather than enjoying it for it's own sake (like the person who goes to parties in high school because parties are parties and they help you fit in). This is what he means by the word 'identity crisis,' I mean. Seeking social acceptance rather than being secure about your hobbies.
I don't like how alienating the OP is to SC2 fans because it really is blog ladder suicide and doesn't help his cause of convincing anyone of anything (if that is indeed his cause, maybe this is just catharsis), but he writes pretty well and if you read the content there is food for thought in there.
edit: more posts were made above me while responding to primadog... Well this is exactly it. If you think that you're not a nerd or whatever just because you go to a bar and drink, then this is really an insecurity because you are afraid of being seen as someone who doesn't go to bars and is therefore not in line with a perceived social norm (and in reality no one gives a shit if you go to bars or not).
^ there is food for thought, but all of his statements of fact are simply disrespectful or down right insulting to the sports mentioned and the people who watch them/play them, i love soccer and american football both very different sports and cant be compared and then to bring hockey into the issue and poke at its violence, then only casually in passsing mention MMA as a highly paid for pay per view event shows to me that ingesting his food for thought might actually slow down my brain so ill pass. you wanna hate on somehting for violence and not a sport, look up rio all stars worst MMA league ever bare knuckle, half circle with wall to bash people against ring, many of the fighters are just regular guys off the streeet, super low paying.
On December 01 2011 05:09 Chef wrote: I think his point (however elusive it may be) with that is that barcrafts shouldn't validate a game, the game itself needs to be worthy. So if someone thinks 'well this game must be good because there's so many barcrafts for it' he is saying that is a poor reason to think the game is good, rather it's an excuse to drink and hang out with people. Then that combines with a certain distaste for people who idealise this lifestyle (going to bars) as a part of their identity rather than enjoying it for it's own sake (like the person who goes to parties in high school because parties are parties and they help you fit in). This is what he means by the word 'identity crisis,' I mean. Seeking social acceptance rather than being secure about your hobbies.
I don't like how alienating the OP is to SC2 fans because it really is blog ladder suicide and doesn't help his cause of convincing anyone of anything (if that is indeed his cause, maybe this is just catharsis), but he writes pretty well and if you read the content there is food for thought in there.
edit: more posts were made above me while responding to primadog... Well this is exactly it. If you think that you're not a nerd or whatever just because you go to a bar and drink, then this is really an insecurity because you are afraid of being seen as someone who doesn't go to bars and is therefore not in line with a perceived social norm (and in reality no one gives a shit if you go to bars or not—and people will still think you're a social failure if you go to a bar and still say dumb things).
SC2, BW, whatever. The true eSports is the blog ladder anyways.
On December 01 2011 05:17 Chef wrote: You're right, he definitely made it clear he doesn't like SC2, it's not an unbiased argument. But there are still points that you could legitimately counter if you wanted to, like this thing about barcraft being more about self-validation than the game. Or you could take that as an initial counter that you agree with, but bring up a reason that SC2 is good for the game itself which doesn't rely on social events as proof.
Even the "self-validation" argument doesn't make sense. I went to barcraft, many of the TL "old guard" went to barcrafts. We don't go out of some whimpsical belief that being there will make SC2 mainstream (or a real eSports, whatever the hell that means), we went because it's fun. Whatever validation that arised from ten thousand nerds going to barcraft during MLG Providence, is a side effect, not the purpose.
I dunno, I know a lot of people who work out or go to clubs just to say that they do. I think it's a reasonable criticism of the reliance of social events to prove a game is good. Enjoy barcraft—that's fine—but the question remains: Can barcraft events be used as proof that SC2 is a good game? Without thinking too deeply about it I would say no.
I don't see the connection, Chef. Look at any barcraft thread and identity for us where the topic says something along the line "coming to this barcraft will make StarCraft 2 an eSports." I created this movement, and this argument never even crossed my mind back in June, simply because it's absurd and you don't motivate nerds this way. This is not a "let's all tweet #MSL and try to save MBCGames" campaign. Those things never work.
People go to barcraft because passion is better shared. It's a socializing experience over a common interest. What peer pressure is there when before BarCraft, the local fans never actually talk to each other?
in my experience people do what they enjoy and then try to make excuses for that behaviour if it is not accepted mainstream, and that in most cases using gym as example if someone is going to gym so that they can say they go to the gym if you break it down they are going for themselves in order to have the peace of mind they get from going to the gym and being able to say that, who cares what illicited the actions its the end result that matters, whether the person is happy because they are really interested in health and fitness or if the person is happy because they can tell people they go to the gym it doesnt matter does it?
I think you are misunderstanding me. Barcraft isn't proof SC2 is bad or that the people who go to barcrafts are hopeless nerds. It just also can't be proof that it's good. BW players like to make arguments like 'high skill gap, player personality comes out through their game play, great units, high variability, still evolving etc' to say why BW is a great game. You can contest that SC2 also carries these components, and maybe even say it does so to a greater degree, but that is where the argument should be if there is to be any. What you hear more often though is about how big sc2 is as the proof why it is good... Which is a sort of poor argument. SC2 is huge, BW is dying! I think we've even seen that said a couple times this thread lol.
I think this "The ability of someone uninitiated to the rules and formalities to immediately grasp the level of skill required to play, and immediately be awestruck by superior performance; the inability of players to give it anything short of everything" is your strongest point. That's something that SC2 severely lacks, and will most likely never have. The problem is that there's a disconnect between what the audience actually sees and what the player is actually doing (physically). There's no doubt that SC2 and BW both require a ridiculous amount of skill to play, but it doesn't matter if that skill isn't immediately visible to the audience. In soccer you can clearly see a players foot connect with the ball and then how the ball reacts. That's what makes it so easy for anybody to watch and understand.
The problem is you contradict yourself by introducing chess. Chess has no immediate WOW factor - no non-physical sport does. Uninitiated people cannot immediately grasp the level of skill required to play. Very few people care to watch it. But, regardless of niche, it's still a sport... right? Unfortunately for your argument, SC2 is exactly the same. Its audience is limited mostly to those who play, it isn't very accessible to the uninitiated and there's no immediate WOW factor.
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. Whether or not those viewers were all 'introverts with addiction problems' is irrelevant. I could stereotype a lot of specific audiences into just as offensive categories but it doesn't mean anything. Those people still enjoy what they're watching for whatever reason it may be.
I get where your hatred is coming from though, and I feel the same way about a lot of the things you write, but redefining what a sport is in order to attack SC2 isn't a particularly clever way of going about things, especially with obvious contradictions within your own post. Just enjoy whatever aspect of the game it is you enjoy and ignore the rest of it.
On December 01 2011 05:32 Chef wrote: I think you are misunderstanding me. Barcraft isn't proof SC2 is bad or that the people who go to barcrafts are hopeless nerds. It just also can't be proof that it's good. BW players like to make arguments like 'high skill gap, player personality comes out through their game play, great units, high variability, still evolving etc' to say why BW is a great game. You can contest that SC2 also carries these components, and maybe even say it does so to a greater degree, but that is where the argument should be if there is to be any. What you hear more often though is about how big sc2 is as the proof why it is good... Which is a sort of poor argument. SC2 is huge, BW is dying! I think we've even seen that said a couple times this thread lol.
^ i dunno i think that perhaps barcrafts can be a measure of sc2's success, in that there is enough of an enjoyment of eSports that people are willing to shell out bucks to have an enjoyable experience while watching it, and that bars are willing to risk showing it while it is still so niche. look at international numbers for sc2 streams on own3d.tv and twitch.tv and you'll see the difference sc2 is one of the most watched games and when watching other games if you talk in chat almost everybody who watches has a passing knowledge if not a true sc2 fan themselves things like this speak for themselves that eSports isnt dead dying or will be.
In response to his origonal post, do you actually get to see financial statements for all pro-gamers? do you actually have the data to show its slave labour that its not benefitting th eplayers in any way?
On December 01 2011 05:32 Chef wrote: I think you are misunderstanding me. Barcraft isn't proof SC2 is bad or that the people who go to barcrafts are hopeless nerds. It just also can't be proof that it's good. BW players like to make arguments like 'high skill gap, player personality comes out through their game play, great units, high variability, still evolving etc' to say why BW is a great game. You can contest that SC2 also carries these components, and maybe even say it does so to a greater degree, but that is where the argument should be if there is to be any. What you hear more often though is about how big sc2 is as the proof why it is good... Which is a sort of poor argument. SC2 is huge, BW is dying! I think we've even seen that said a couple times this thread lol.
I agree, BarCraft probably could had risen for any competitive game, be it BW or SC2 or SF or HoN. Of course, we can probably have a case on why it focused on SC2, but that's another topic. I just want to tackle how absurd that the OP wrote
so stop pretending that you're having a good time or that it validates your lifestyle
which has no merit. Besides this specific line of thought, the rest of the topic is the same-old same-old. Arguments debated to death ever since SC2 was announced. The second renaissance for BW will not come from the death of SC2. Whenever I see a thread about how "SC2 fans aren't watching a real game," the only answer for it is
Yes, there's a lot of fans for SC2, but you may not like it. Dont' be a dick about it. You're giving BW fans a bad name (to the OP).
Good read. I'm starting to think you're wrong about some things though. Cleary SC2 is more fun to watch than bw was in the foreign scene. I'd have agreed with you 3 months ago much more than I do now.
Many things I could say have been said already so I have to pare it down:
A huge difference between the cultural development (note: I don't mean game development) of SC2 from BW is that our community is self-aware. SC2 has fans who know of the stakes at hand, and want to use the knowledge gleaned from the history of BW in SK to grow the scene internationally. This apparently seems artificial to you, but who wouldn't use the knowledge they have gleaned to share their passion with others? Time will tell if SC2 has staying power in the hearts of its fans, but you have no grounds to claim that they must now be deceiving themselves, pretending to enjoy SC2 out of hope that 'eSports' can become mainstream. You just look like you have a superiority complex.
Your 'American football' vs. 'futbol' argument is bullshit. You could have just left the 'Hand-egg' image macro in place of your whole paragraph and hardly lost content. You clearly don't understand why people enjoy it, and have made up a stupid reason for why people watch it. I could just as well say that futbol is just an excuse for a crowd to ogle sweaty athletic/attractive men for an hour and a half. I personally find futbol a bit dull, but recognize from conversations I've heard and read that there must be some level of strategy and depth to it even if I haven't experienced enough of the sport to understand it. I think this blog wouldn't have been made if you were willing to think the same way.
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)
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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).
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'...
To me, the only things common between BW and SC2 are the name "Starcraft" and the universe in which the single-player campaigns unfold. Multiplayer-wise, they are totally different.
Then I beg the question: "Does single-player alone justify SC2 taking the name Starcraft?"
On December 01 2011 06:10 jpak wrote: To me, the only things common between BW and SC2 are the name "Starcraft" and the universe in which the single-player campaigns unfold.
This forum is one of the very few places you could say this and have a chance for people to take you seriously.
This is a bullshit statement aimed at cheaply belittling SC2 without instead of going through the subtleties of execution of the RTS genre that might make you prefer resulting multiplayer experience in BW over SC2.
It's pretty sad when you have to have to write such a long text just to make sure you're better than the masses. You even hate American Football just because everyone else like it. If you would be living in Europe, you'd hate soccer.
On December 01 2011 06:10 jpak wrote: To me, the only things common between BW and SC2 are the name "Starcraft" and the universe in which the single-player campaigns unfold. Multiplayer-wise, they are totally different.
Then I beg the question: "Does single-player alone justify SC2 taking the name Starcraft?"
Please name some RTS games that are closer to Brood War than SC2.
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'...
I was using your post to illustrate an earlier point I'd just made. Sorry if you feel that was unfair treatment of your other ideas.
edit: To clarify, my point which was that when people want to legitimize SC2 they often turn to numbers like this. People did that in BW too, saying all the time how big it is in Korea etc. It's sort of the easiest way to get grandma's approval, but it's not really useful information for a discussion about why SC2 is legitimate/good/etc. I contend if you were not trying to legitimize SC2 with that number, I have no idea why you brought it up.
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?
^ dude your the one who told me ive never seen a game of BW in my life, i'm telling you that statement is wrong, and it was pretty ignorant for you to have said that in the first place
On December 01 2011 06:06 mmp wrote: 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.
SC2 has only been around for a year. NOBODY knows the future of the game. When StarCraft 1 came out for a year, before Brood War, NOBODY knows what would happen to it either. If this is 5 years from now and SC2 has died, then you can bump this and tell everybody "I told you so".
You simply don't have the evidence to say what you are saying. Brood War became what it became partly on the merits of the game, but also partly on the passion of the players and fans who wish to keep it alive. It's the exact same fucking thing for SC2 except the game is "slightly worse" than Brood War, however much you can justify that.
And then you go to bash football and NASCAR when it's clear you don't know anything about these sports either, you're just bashing them because YOU see no merits in the sports. That doesn't help your argument.
All in all, whatever legitimate point you have, you basically buried it underneath a lot of things that are not just biased, but flat out wrong.
100k viewers isn't bad, but that's worldwide. And you're not missing too many people, anyone who wants to watch is watching.
You can fit thousands of people in a stadium. Renting out an auditorium in Atlantic City doesn't make you legit.
Millions tune in to every day to watch short-lived mini-series that I've never heard of and that will be discarded by network executives for the next hot thing a month later. How does Starcraft compete with human drama, human sex, & human violence? It doesn't, because normal people (not like you and me) don't have brains that light up when animated monsters explode.
On December 01 2011 06:18 mmp wrote: 100k viewers isn't bad, but that's worldwide. And you're not missing too many people, anyone who wants to watch is watching.
You can fit thousands of people in a stadium. Renting out an auditorium in Atlantic City doesn't make you legit.
Millions tune in to every day to watch short-lived mini-series that I've never heard of and that will be discarded by network executives for the next hot thing a month later. How does Starcraft compete with human drama, human sex, & human violence? It doesn't, because normal people (not like you and me) don't have brains that light up when animated monsters explode.
^ agreed with your final point.... and about the 100k taht is at one time numbers overall there was probly 10-15x that number who tuned in to watch
On December 01 2011 06:18 mmp wrote: 100k viewers isn't bad, but that's worldwide. And you're not missing too many people, anyone who wants to watch is watching.
You can fit thousands of people in a stadium. Renting out an auditorium in Atlantic City doesn't make you legit.
Millions tune in to every day to watch short-lived mini-series that I've never heard of and that will be discarded by network executives for the next hot thing a month later. How does Starcraft compete with human drama, human sex, & human violence? It doesn't, because normal people (not like you and me) don't have brains that light up when animated monsters explode.
I can believe that there are many people who would hold this opinion, personally I can't see how you can hold it consistently in a way that includes SC2 and excludes BW.
On December 01 2011 06:06 mmp wrote: 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.
The first part of this paragraph has nothing to do with the second. This is the problem of your OP in microcosm.
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?
^ dude your the one who told me ive never seen a game of BW in my life, i'm telling you that statement is wrong, and it was pretty ignorant for you to have said that in the first place
I said you don't know enough about the game. As in you never studied it or played it at a high level. Playing since "you believe you were in grade 5 or something" doesn't disprove that.
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?
^ dude your the one who told me ive never seen a game of BW in my life, i'm telling you that statement is wrong, and it was pretty ignorant for you to have said that in the first place
I said you don't know enough about the game. As in you never studied it or played it at a high level. Playing since "you believe you were in grade 5 or something" doesn't disprove that.
^ i guess i shoulda said ive been playign since it came out and started watching BW after the slump, when it got super popular again, and its not as fast paced as sc2
On December 01 2011 06:06 mmp wrote: 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.
The first part of this paragraph has nothing to do with the second. This is the problem of your OP in microcosm.
What don't you understand about meandering? Convoluted? Tortuous? Roundabout?
As a gamer, you are attracted to the surface elements that are most appealing to you, but as time goes on you realize that what you genuinely enjoyed is just part of a cyclical marketing scheme. We were genuinely drawn in to the rich game that was Broodwar (post patches, post Korean deconstruction). But now that it's gone, phased out, and we're stuck with an inferior sequel that we asked for because we dared to dream that Broodwar could be remade into something young and fresh.
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'...
I was using your post to illustrate an earlier point I'd just made. Sorry if you feel that was unfair treatment of your other ideas.
edit: To clarify, my point which was that when people want to legitimize SC2 they often turn to numbers like this. People did that in BW too, saying all the time how big it is in Korea etc. It's sort of the easiest way to get grandma's approval, but it's not really useful information for a discussion about why SC2 is legitimate/good/etc. I contend if you were not trying to legitimize SC2 with that number, I have no idea why you brought it up.
Of course you have no idea why I brought it up. You didn't read my entire post and you didn't read it as a reply to the OP, which is what it was.
If you HAD read the entirety of my post in context, ie as a reply to the OP then it would have made perfect sense. He spoke about other sports drawing money because they have an audience, and later that SC2's audience basically doesn't count because they're all introverts with addiction problems. I posted that number to demonstrate that firstly SC2 does have an audience, and then the rest of that paragraph (ie the part you didn't read) was on the irrelevance of who that audience is.
well written OP.. too bad its a bit off on the facts and other things.
Have you played Frisbee Golf (Disc Golf).. that's surely a sport and at one point it was just considered this college game that old and new hippies played. I use this sport a lot when talking about esports, because of how they changed the 'perception' of it. SC2, I agree, unless you really understand the game, is difficult to watch.. .but defining a sport by 'watchability' is just asinine. NASCAR is 'watchable' and yet you mention it as not a true sport. Argue that with me and millions of people on television and over 100k live at the event will disagree with you. The idea of esports as a 'sport' is not, and should not be, about the physical (or lack there of) nature of the game..instead it should be about the 'competition'. A sport is merely a competition. I have had this arguement before with others.. but I believe ANY game can be an esport... especially when money is pumped into it. Any game (ie Yahoo Pool, Angry Birds and even Farmville) can be considered an esport with a proper structure, format and competitive aspect in place. Lucky for our community.. we do have our limits and those types of games do not warrant that label for many of us. However... with that being said.. look at HaxBall.
Anyway... its a well written piece and you are entitled to your opinion.. I for one appreciate it and I think it lends to mostly healthy conversation.
On December 01 2011 06:06 mmp wrote: 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.
The first part of this paragraph has nothing to do with the second. This is the problem of your OP in microcosm.
What don't you understand about meandering? Convoluted? Tortuous? Roundabout?
As a gamer, you are attracted to the surface elements that are most appealing to you, but as time goes on you realize that what you genuinely enjoyed is just part of a cyclical marketing scheme. We were genuinely drawn in to the rich game that was Broodwar (post patches, post Korean deconstruction). But now that it's gone, phased out, and we're stuck with an inferior sequel that we asked for because we dared to dream that Broodwar could be remade into something young and fresh.
Hey bro, you're not stuck with anything. You can still watch Broodwar. I hear they've got this sweet Proleague thing going on, you should check it out.
points for being at least reasonably thought out and additional points for sticking to your convictions. Personally I disagree on many, nearly all, of your points but TBH I kind-of enjoyed the read. I could nerd-rage about how wrong you are but at the of the day this is the only thing that comes to mind. http://xkcd.com/386/
On December 01 2011 06:14 blackone wrote: It's pretty sad when you have to have to write such a long text just to make sure you're better than the masses. You even hate American Football just because everyone else like it. If you would be living in Europe, you'd hate soccer.
On December 01 2011 06:10 jpak wrote: To me, the only things common between BW and SC2 are the name "Starcraft" and the universe in which the single-player campaigns unfold. Multiplayer-wise, they are totally different.
Then I beg the question: "Does single-player alone justify SC2 taking the name Starcraft?"
Please name some RTS games that are closer to Brood War than SC2.
Other RTS games don't matter in this discussion because I am looking strictly at the two games that share the name "Starcraft." Whether the other games are closer to Brood War or not is therefore irrelevant.
So now, I ask again: Does SC2 justify itself in taking the name "Starcraft" just because both have Kerrigan, Raynor, and Mengsk? Just because they share some units and spells?
Opinions disguised as facts with convincing writing.
On December 01 2011 01:45 mmp wrote:
I would argue that SC2 is not an eSport (it's merely an eGame), but this shouldn't be controversial. We know it's inferior to Broodwar. We know it's boring to watch. We know if Blizzard released SC3 tomorrow we'd forget SC2 like a bad dream. Most of all, a real sport does not have a steering committee to shuffle the rules of the game on a monthly basis. Sports do not release expansion packs. Sports do not come with "intellectual property" restrictions and license agreements dictating how you may play and whom you may play with. Sports do not tolerate lag.
This is very annoying. How can you talk on everybody's behalf? The amount of people watching live events continues to skyrocket. Hundreds of threads on esports appear daily on screddit and TL alone. What twisted world do you live in where the community's general consensus is that the game is boring to watch? Here is an example of an opinion disguised as a fact.
No, sports do NOT come with expansion packs. Or, they didn't in the past. That's because a video game, to date, has not been classified a sport. You know that what prevents an expansion pack from being classified as a sport is NOT the fact that is is an expansion, but because it is a videogame. Convincing writing, but you're full of bullshit.
A sport also lives on its own, by the interest and involvement of players. To this end, it must either be fun or inspire people to become better players in the absence of external encouragement. Take chess. You can play online ladders against some of the best in the world, or you can enjoy a game in your home on your own time, and when it's over it's over -- no post-game commentary or highlights necessary. Chess has survived hundreds of years without television or Internet promotion. Broodwar was ready for Korean prime time because an entire generation of kids was already in love with the game.
When SC2 was announced, we knew that it would be a visual feast, but also that it would necessarily compete with Broodwar -- in this sense it was forced upon the thriving Broodwar community, and many were apprehensive that SC2 would not live up to Broodwar's quality. I'm sure Blizzard works diligently on patching the bore out of the game, but real sports do not have this kind of problem, or this kind of solution. As of today, the only things pumping life into competitive SC2 are its angels (Blizzard et al) and sponsors that buy advertisement space during events. And this is where we can get down to the real difference between golf and croquet:
What you are doing is mentioning aspects of SC2 and then somehow coming to the conclusion that they are negative, that they prove it can never be a sport. What you are missing is the middleground. Not only do you not have proof to back this up, you don't even have a reason, proof or no proof. "In football, the goalkeeper can use his hands. Thus, it is not a sport". Illogical.
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).
I enjoy futbol, I ridicule football. One is celebrated worldwide, invokes violent nationalism, and is a joy to watch even if you've never followed the game or the teams. The other is bogged down in rules, stoppage of play, and turns its players into human battering rams. Both are sports in that they can draw an audience, but if you have watched American NFL you will understand that the genius of football as a "sport" is not its spectacle, or strategy, or anything else that might define a sport. Televised football is in fact a genius of marketing. It provides just enough hard-hitting violence in 1-2 minute blocks and then the clock stops, and that means a commercial break. In short, it's ripe for whoring out.
As somebody that plays "futbol" three times a week and follows it rather religiously, it is very often NOT a joy to watch at all. The very rare game will entertain properly, most will be a walkover by one team without much interesting play. I quite like the fact you've ripped this argument off of a John Cleese video on Youtube where he says the exact same thing, and you're both equally wrong. Sports are different. Just because the one you prefer is different in a way you prefer doesn't prove it superior.
Imagine if SC2 made it onto ESPN. I can't, because all the games would have to last 5-10 minutes instead of 20-30 to make room for commercials. Ok, imagine SC2 on Pay-Per-View or another premium channel. Would you pay premium rates for HD Starcraft on your television? Maybe, you're exceptional. I'm certain there are more people willing to pay for MMA and softcore porn than for pasty nerds blowing shit up on computers. Live skin >> digital skin.
Well how about the Internet? Surely eSports can flourish there. Whether or not it's flourishing, that's pretty much what we have today, and even if you get tens of thousands of people tuning in to GSL/IPL/TSL/etc, you've pretty much accounted for everyone that's potentially interested in watching. And no, your non-nerdy friends aren't interested in watching space-pokemon blow each other up for great glory.
Your non-nerdy friends also don't care what "damage" Savior dealt to eSports. The fact that such a large amount of personal profit could be made on the black market proves that Broodwar went mainstream... SC2 can only hope to achieve such notoriety in its lifetime. Fixed computer games, like fixed boxing matches, fixed wrestling matches, fixed horse races, or any kind of thrown victory upset people because they destroy the illusion of spectacle. Ruined matches remind you just how meaningless the game actually is and how much emotional stake you've entrusted inside the hype. Have established strategy games like chess ever had this kind of identity crisis, or do we play games for other reasons?
Oh look, more opinions disguised as facts. I have introduced 4 friends into Starcraft who have actually bought the game, and watched TSL3 with about 8 on my PC back in Summer.
Barcrafts are another manifestation of this identity crisis. What could be more mainstream than drinking beer and watching "the game" with other young men in the commons? Beer is great, I love beer, but the game sucks, so stop pretending that you're having a good time or that it validates your lifestyle. You're not having a good time, and you're still a nerd. You're a lonely yuppie (or worse, underage!) with nerdy hobbies desperately seeking acceptance inside an alienating society. The bartender doesn't give a fuck what the customers want to watch as long as the hockey/baseball/basketball game is not on and no one else complains. You can attend bar meetups on almost any hobby group if you look hard enough, but your willingness to spend money to be with people just like you is no more of an indicator that eSports is growing than weekend book clubs among housewives are an indicator that competitive literary leagues are on the rise.
Now it's just rambling nonsensical bullshit. You go to Barcraft, you're enjoying yourself? NO YOU'RE NOT STUPID NERD YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED.
Foreigners need to stop wishing for South Korea to come to their neighborhood; you cannot force culture. SC2 is an entertainment platform developed by Blizzard, delivered by the Internet streaming sites, promoted by high-end computer hardware manufacturers (i.e. shit you don't need), energy drinks, & other providers of "gamer gear," and ultimately consumed by you, the lonely PC gamer of the Western world who wants a sense of community in his hobbies. The benefactors of this niche market don't care about social recognition, they just want your money. If you advertise it to your friends, that makes "eSports" more money.
So much of what you said there applies to football. Sponsors advertising stupid shit, people looking for a sense of community in their hobbies, "The Man" wanting your money. How do any of these invalidate the concept of SC2 being a sport?
So when iNcontroL writes that he wants 2012 to be an even bigger year for eSports, he should probably just be satisfied that he's got a home, friends, and a semi-stable career playing a mediocre computer game with some gore and neat explosions. EG is doing better than most. Prize pools may increase under better sponsorship, but the payout is still chancey and not going to improve the quality of life of players. Under the facade of "dedication to the game," players are required to work long hours for little pay (a tiny bunkbed & Ramen noodles is not pay, it's slave wages, or the college experience without the education) and sacrificing the best years of their lives for what... the entertainment of some netizens? A slim chance at fame and riches?
People work hard to get famous. People work hard to get anywhere they want to. The most famous players make big money, the lower players have to endure hard years to get there. You think this doesn't apply to other sports?
What ever happened to fun gaming?
Sometimes I worry that the competitive Starcraft scene is too concerned with the image of "eSports," and not discriminating enough of the game within the sport. Sometimes I think that there are too many events & wanna-be events, too many casters & wanna-be casters, too many progamers & wanna-be progamers. All too often the quality is low, which is a shame when the people that put things together are taking personal risks or volunteering their time. I hope it's worth it for the people who have a lot invested. I hope it's still fun for the players, because it's not going to get any better than this. This is the complete and fulfilled dream of eSports, and the only thing hurting eSports now is its own self-obsession.
No, you don't. You want it to fail. You have created these opinions for which flawed is too much of an understatement to use because you WANT controversial opinions. You don't WANT to follow what the crowd are following. If it fails, you'll be laughing, "haha! I wasn't like the rest, I predicted this!". That is your motivation. You are not worried. Anybody remotely worried would have obliterated those pathetic arguments in their own head. And you know what? I'm willing to bet most people who agree with this thread have adopted that mentality.
Funny how the OP makes the bw-sc2 comparison, which is essentially irrelevant. Not to mention he doesn't explore the comparison he brings up by discussing whether bw is a sport, and if it is what makes it a better spectacle than sc2. This is a thinly veiled bw elitism blog, nothing to see here.
BUfels, don't argue like that (quote a point at a time and respond to each one). It's a really miserable and tedious way to argue and wastes a lot of time. Respond in a general, manageable way, or pick a section that interests you most or follow the current discussion of the thread.
I got the same advice 7 years ago and I'm so glad I did.
On December 01 2011 07:28 Chef wrote: BUfels, don't argue like that (quote a point at a time and respond to each one). It's a really miserable and tedious way to argue and wastes a lot of time. Respond in a general, manageable way, or pick a section that interests you most or follow the current discussion of the thread.
I got the same advice 7 years ago and I'm so glad I did.
It's been a very long time since I've used a forum, I always used to use that way. Guess I should get out of the habit whenever I come here.
I did have specific points to reply to though, I find it easier to organise it like that.
On December 01 2011 05:53 Sgonzo wrote: 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)
What is it with the influx of these trash articles lately from people that have no qualifications in the industry and really no clue overall what they are talking about?
And why can't BW and SC2 fans just leave each other in peace instead of throwing proverbial jabs at each other in the form of pieces like this .
As for the actual article there is too many horrible sweeping generalizations and incorrect statements to go over all, but the main one that stuck out was saying that everybody that is interested in watching SC2 is already doing so online. That is false, day in and day out the viewership of SC2 continues to grow and there is MOUNTAINS of proof to back it up.
Also with regards to Barcraft, MMA became much more popular in the USA as it became a "bar" event. I had tons of friends that had ZERO interest in MMA, but when I went to a bar to hang out with other MMA fans and watch the fights, and they would tag along. Now most of them never miss an event. When I went to my first UFC a a bar, there was like 10 people there for the fights, now there is often 2 hour waits an hour before it starts.
This is seriously the worst article I have read in a long long time. 0/5
As always with these anti SC2 blogs, its a bunch of crap. Well written, but crap none the less, this guy goes into detail why, so read him instead of the OP:+ Show Spoiler +
On December 01 2011 07:10 BUfels wrote: Opinions disguised as facts with convincing writing.
I would argue that SC2 is not an eSport (it's merely an eGame), but this shouldn't be controversial. We know it's inferior to Broodwar. We know it's boring to watch. We know if Blizzard released SC3 tomorrow we'd forget SC2 like a bad dream. Most of all, a real sport does not have a steering committee to shuffle the rules of the game on a monthly basis. Sports do not release expansion packs. Sports do not come with "intellectual property" restrictions and license agreements dictating how you may play and whom you may play with. Sports do not tolerate lag.
This is very annoying. How can you talk on everybody's behalf? The amount of people watching live events continues to skyrocket. Hundreds of threads on esports appear daily on screddit and TL alone. What twisted world do you live in where the community's general consensus is that the game is boring to watch? Here is an example of an opinion disguised as a fact.
No, sports do NOT come with expansion packs. Or, they didn't in the past. That's because a video game, to date, has not been classified a sport. You know that what prevents an expansion pack from being classified as a sport is NOT the fact that is is an expansion, but because it is a videogame. Convincing writing, but you're full of bullshit.
A sport also lives on its own, by the interest and involvement of players. To this end, it must either be fun or inspire people to become better players in the absence of external encouragement. Take chess. You can play online ladders against some of the best in the world, or you can enjoy a game in your home on your own time, and when it's over it's over -- no post-game commentary or highlights necessary. Chess has survived hundreds of years without television or Internet promotion. Broodwar was ready for Korean prime time because an entire generation of kids was already in love with the game.
When SC2 was announced, we knew that it would be a visual feast, but also that it would necessarily compete with Broodwar -- in this sense it was forced upon the thriving Broodwar community, and many were apprehensive that SC2 would not live up to Broodwar's quality. I'm sure Blizzard works diligently on patching the bore out of the game, but real sports do not have this kind of problem, or this kind of solution. As of today, the only things pumping life into competitive SC2 are its angels (Blizzard et al) and sponsors that buy advertisement space during events. And this is where we can get down to the real difference between golf and croquet:
What you are doing is mentioning aspects of SC2 and then somehow coming to the conclusion that they are negative, that they prove it can never be a sport. What you are missing is the middleground. Not only do you not have proof to back this up, you don't even have a reason, proof or no proof. "In football, the goalkeeper can use his hands. Thus, it is not a sport". Illogical.
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).
I enjoy futbol, I ridicule football. One is celebrated worldwide, invokes violent nationalism, and is a joy to watch even if you've never followed the game or the teams. The other is bogged down in rules, stoppage of play, and turns its players into human battering rams. Both are sports in that they can draw an audience, but if you have watched American NFL you will understand that the genius of football as a "sport" is not its spectacle, or strategy, or anything else that might define a sport. Televised football is in fact a genius of marketing. It provides just enough hard-hitting violence in 1-2 minute blocks and then the clock stops, and that means a commercial break. In short, it's ripe for whoring out.
As somebody that plays "futbol" three times a week and follows it rather religiously, it is very often NOT a joy to watch at all. The very rare game will entertain properly, most will be a walkover by one team without much interesting play. I quite like the fact you've ripped this argument off of a John Cleese video on Youtube where he says the exact same thing, and you're both equally wrong. Sports are different. Just because the one you prefer is different in a way you prefer doesn't prove it superior.
Imagine if SC2 made it onto ESPN. I can't, because all the games would have to last 5-10 minutes instead of 20-30 to make room for commercials. Ok, imagine SC2 on Pay-Per-View or another premium channel. Would you pay premium rates for HD Starcraft on your television? Maybe, you're exceptional. I'm certain there are more people willing to pay for MMA and softcore porn than for pasty nerds blowing shit up on computers. Live skin >> digital skin.
Well how about the Internet? Surely eSports can flourish there. Whether or not it's flourishing, that's pretty much what we have today, and even if you get tens of thousands of people tuning in to GSL/IPL/TSL/etc, you've pretty much accounted for everyone that's potentially interested in watching. And no, your non-nerdy friends aren't interested in watching space-pokemon blow each other up for great glory.
Your non-nerdy friends also don't care what "damage" Savior dealt to eSports. The fact that such a large amount of personal profit could be made on the black market proves that Broodwar went mainstream... SC2 can only hope to achieve such notoriety in its lifetime. Fixed computer games, like fixed boxing matches, fixed wrestling matches, fixed horse races, or any kind of thrown victory upset people because they destroy the illusion of spectacle. Ruined matches remind you just how meaningless the game actually is and how much emotional stake you've entrusted inside the hype. Have established strategy games like chess ever had this kind of identity crisis, or do we play games for other reasons?
Oh look, more opinions disguised as facts. I have introduced 4 friends into Starcraft who have actually bought the game, and watched TSL3 with about 8 on my PC back in Summer.
Barcrafts are another manifestation of this identity crisis. What could be more mainstream than drinking beer and watching "the game" with other young men in the commons? Beer is great, I love beer, but the game sucks, so stop pretending that you're having a good time or that it validates your lifestyle. You're not having a good time, and you're still a nerd. You're a lonely yuppie (or worse, underage!) with nerdy hobbies desperately seeking acceptance inside an alienating society. The bartender doesn't give a fuck what the customers want to watch as long as the hockey/baseball/basketball game is not on and no one else complains. You can attend bar meetups on almost any hobby group if you look hard enough, but your willingness to spend money to be with people just like you is no more of an indicator that eSports is growing than weekend book clubs among housewives are an indicator that competitive literary leagues are on the rise.
Now it's just rambling nonsensical bullshit. You go to Barcraft, you're enjoying yourself? NO YOU'RE NOT STUPID NERD YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED.
Foreigners need to stop wishing for South Korea to come to their neighborhood; you cannot force culture. SC2 is an entertainment platform developed by Blizzard, delivered by the Internet streaming sites, promoted by high-end computer hardware manufacturers (i.e. shit you don't need), energy drinks, & other providers of "gamer gear," and ultimately consumed by you, the lonely PC gamer of the Western world who wants a sense of community in his hobbies. The benefactors of this niche market don't care about social recognition, they just want your money. If you advertise it to your friends, that makes "eSports" more money.
So much of what you said there applies to football. Sponsors advertising stupid shit, people looking for a sense of community in their hobbies, "The Man" wanting your money. How do any of these invalidate the concept of SC2 being a sport?
So when iNcontroL writes that he wants 2012 to be an even bigger year for eSports, he should probably just be satisfied that he's got a home, friends, and a semi-stable career playing a mediocre computer game with some gore and neat explosions. EG is doing better than most. Prize pools may increase under better sponsorship, but the payout is still chancey and not going to improve the quality of life of players. Under the facade of "dedication to the game," players are required to work long hours for little pay (a tiny bunkbed & Ramen noodles is not pay, it's slave wages, or the college experience without the education) and sacrificing the best years of their lives for what... the entertainment of some netizens? A slim chance at fame and riches?
People work hard to get famous. People work hard to get anywhere they want to. The most famous players make big money, the lower players have to endure hard years to get there. You think this doesn't apply to other sports?
Sometimes I worry that the competitive Starcraft scene is too concerned with the image of "eSports," and not discriminating enough of the game within the sport. Sometimes I think that there are too many events & wanna-be events, too many casters & wanna-be casters, too many progamers & wanna-be progamers. All too often the quality is low, which is a shame when the people that put things together are taking personal risks or volunteering their time. I hope it's worth it for the people who have a lot invested. I hope it's still fun for the players, because it's not going to get any better than this. This is the complete and fulfilled dream of eSports, and the only thing hurting eSports now is its own self-obsession.
No, you don't. You want it to fail. You have created these opinions for which flawed is too much of an understatement to use because you WANT controversial opinions. You don't WANT to follow what the crowd are following. If it fails, you'll be laughing, "haha! I wasn't like the rest, I predicted this!". That is your motivation. You are not worried. Anybody remotely worried would have obliterated those pathetic arguments in their own head. And you know what? I'm willing to bet most people who agree with this thread have adopted that mentality.
On December 01 2011 05:53 Sgonzo wrote: 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)
:D. On another note after reading through all this I can only say I can't believe The King of Kong was such an amazing 'movie' / 'documentary'. It is clearly more entertaining to watch than sc2 because it is faster paced! and has mario! can't go wrong.
i liked this blog, i am watching the king of kong atm so interesting lol maybe the blog its not politically correct but it bring some interesting points
On December 01 2011 07:10 BUfels wrote: Opinions disguised as facts with convincing writing.
Actually, they're opinions disguised as opinions with extremely hasty writing, but thank you for the benefit of the doubt.
If that was all you could rebutt in my entire post, then you don't believe in what you wrote.
How can I rebutt what is not false? Your determination to argue on a factual basis makes strong-arming my argument very difficult!
Unfortunately I think you're focusing on all of the chips and cracks of what I wrote and not looking at the broader sculpture. You don't have to agree with my disparaging portrayal of one sport over another to hold your own biases on the same subject and arrive at your own criteria for discriminating the real sports from the phony.
This is very annoying. How can you talk on everybody's behalf? The amount of people watching live events continues to skyrocket. Hundreds of threads on esports appear daily on screddit and TL alone. What twisted world do you live in where the community's general consensus is that the game is boring to watch? Here is an example of an opinion disguised as a fact.
No, sports do NOT come with expansion packs. Or, they didn't in the past. That's because a video game, to date, has not been classified a sport. You know that what prevents an expansion pack from being classified as a sport is NOT the fact that is is an expansion, but because it is a videogame. Convincing writing, but you're full of bullshit.
So we agree, video games are not sports -- unless you're partial to the belief that there is something special about SC2. I feel it too... it's called advertisement. Your tastes and preferences are warped to fit the market, and so we must be living in revolutionary times where anything is possible and your mother and sister will learn Starcraft and there will be stadiums full of cheering fans for... Idra??? (kill me now)
What you are doing is mentioning aspects of SC2 and then somehow coming to the conclusion that they are negative, that they prove it can never be a sport. What you are missing is the middleground. Not only do you not have proof to back this up, you don't even have a reason, proof or no proof. "In football, the goalkeeper can use his hands. Thus, it is not a sport". Illogical.
This isn't algebra. It's a hypothesis. Agree with it or not, the preface introduces the body material -- it does need to validate it. That's for you to think about.
Oh look, more opinions disguised as facts. I have introduced 4 friends into Starcraft who have actually bought the game, and watched TSL3 with about 8 on my PC back in Summer.
Barcrafts are another manifestation of this identity crisis. What could be more mainstream than drinking beer and watching "the game" with other young men in the commons? Beer is great, I love beer, but the game sucks, so stop pretending that you're having a good time or that it validates your lifestyle. You're not having a good time, and you're still a nerd. You're a lonely yuppie (or worse, underage!) with nerdy hobbies desperately seeking acceptance inside an alienating society. The bartender doesn't give a fuck what the customers want to watch as long as the hockey/baseball/basketball game is not on and no one else complains. You can attend bar meetups on almost any hobby group if you look hard enough, but your willingness to spend money to be with people just like you is no more of an indicator that eSports is growing than weekend book clubs among housewives are an indicator that competitive literary leagues are on the rise.
Now it's just rambling nonsensical bullshit.
Yes, definitely rambling. Quite shitty.
You go to Barcraft, you're enjoying yourself? NO YOU'RE NOT STUPID NERD YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED.
I never said you weren't allowed (who am I to prevent you?). I just said you were going to a bar for all the wrong reasons, reasons we nerds do not like to tell ourselves when we engage in social nerddom. In a nutshell, you're trying to shape the world around your private interests, rather than embracing the world as it is.
Foreigners need to stop wishing for South Korea to come to their neighborhood; you cannot force culture. SC2 is an entertainment platform developed by Blizzard, delivered by the Internet streaming sites, promoted by high-end computer hardware manufacturers (i.e. shit you don't need), energy drinks, & other providers of "gamer gear," and ultimately consumed by you, the lonely PC gamer of the Western world who wants a sense of community in his hobbies. The benefactors of this niche market don't care about social recognition, they just want your money. If you advertise it to your friends, that makes "eSports" more money.
So much of what you said there applies to football. Sponsors advertising stupid shit, people looking for a sense of community in their hobbies, "The Man" wanting your money. How do any of these invalidate the concept of SC2 being a sport?
Because SC2 only exists to promote these things, much like the NFL. Without big sponsorship SC2 would be deader than Samir Duran, just a shiny walking corpse that no one takes seriously for its competitive value. The significance attached to skill in SC2 is completely artificial.
So when iNcontroL writes that he wants 2012 to be an even bigger year for eSports, he should probably just be satisfied that he's got a home, friends, and a semi-stable career playing a mediocre computer game with some gore and neat explosions. EG is doing better than most. Prize pools may increase under better sponsorship, but the payout is still chancey and not going to improve the quality of life of players. Under the facade of "dedication to the game," players are required to work long hours for little pay (a tiny bunkbed & Ramen noodles is not pay, it's slave wages, or the college experience without the education) and sacrificing the best years of their lives for what... the entertainment of some netizens? A slim chance at fame and riches?
People work hard to get famous. People work hard to get anywhere they want to. The most famous players make big money, the lower players have to endure hard years to get there. You think this doesn't apply to other sports?
NCAA, poker, whatever... most never make it. The smart ones know when to walk away and revert to plan B. No one can be successful without hard work, but you need to be honest with yourself about what your goals are and why they're important to you. Most are in it for the money, and few will win big, so what does that make the rest? I think "dedicated" is too kind.
Sometimes I worry that the competitive Starcraft scene is too concerned with the image of "eSports," and not discriminating enough of the game within the sport. Sometimes I think that there are too many events & wanna-be events, too many casters & wanna-be casters, too many progamers & wanna-be progamers. All too often the quality is low, which is a shame when the people that put things together are taking personal risks or volunteering their time. I hope it's worth it for the people who have a lot invested. I hope it's still fun for the players, because it's not going to get any better than this. This is the complete and fulfilled dream of eSports, and the only thing hurting eSports now is its own self-obsession.
No, you don't. You want it to fail. You have created these opinions for which flawed is too much of an understatement to use because you WANT controversial opinions. You don't WANT to follow what the crowd are following. If it fails, you'll be laughing, "haha! I wasn't like the rest, I predicted this!". That is your motivation. You are not worried. Anybody remotely worried would have obliterated those pathetic arguments in their own head.
That is a false characterization (I'm more of the "mwahaha" evil laugher). No I am genuinely concerned about all of those talented "pros" who may have stable gigs for now, but they're not going to win a major tournament any time soon, some of them do not look happy where they are (which is sad considering they're playing a game for a living), and their youthful talents are going to waste chasing an artificial dream. At best, they can entertain us with exciting games, but (as I have already laid out) the game itself is not conducive to this task.
I agree with the part about the lag and how it shouldn't be tolerated. I also sort of agree with the part about TV playing ads and stuff. As a BW fan though, you could definitely have formatted/worded it better. It's like the inverse equivalent of some SC2 fan shitting on our game because of the 12 year old graphics.
Personally, I do sort of agree that this "ESPORTS" thing is a bit too flashy for my taste. It's nice to have GSL, you can watch over the internet, talk about Korean culture, tell about South Korea's history w/ the PC bangs.
MLG brings a different flavor, and for some reason, I don't like it as much. It's not cause of the fact that there are fewer Koreans, but the fact that we're trying to sell SC2 as a product when I still think the players and the games are pretty mediocre at best.
We have ads for energy drinks, computer parts, and gaming equipment. It's not exactly mainstream at all. Only gamers would be the main consumers of those things. You read about the history of CJ entus, and how the Xellos and Co. would have to use their prize money to buy food for themselves, and suddenly CJ, a food company, decides to sponsor them. Personally I find that that sort of thing applied to S. Korea coz they had this momentum with the PC Bangs and their economic crisis. If you were to make these things apply to the west, there would have to be a removal of the stigma that is already there. Like, even though BW is good, the games are epic, I wouldn't talk to anyone I know about it.
Your argument would be stronger if it wasn't rife with false / unproven premises.
It is the final point that I think is most discriminating: watchability makes a sport. The ability of someone uninitiated to the rules and formalities to immediately grasp the level of skill required to play, and immediately be awestruck by superior performance; the inability of players to give it anything short of everything.
Oh okay, so you give your opinion and say that it's a fact, pretend to read people's mind ("you are not having fun!"), know who "we" are ("nerds"), and many other points that ruin the few very good points you make here and there.
For example, you seem to hold BW in a superior level; but the truth is, SC1 and SC2 are just the... same. A video game. One can argue that the first one requires more skill, but does chess require skill to play? You can actually be quite good at the game after a year of practice. I was quite good when I was 8 years old.
The skill cap is just a fancy and artificial way to elevate anything above something else with no other apparent reason. You could do amazing tricks in a basketball court, but a nice 3-pointer will be just as amazing. The skillcap is an excuse.
Having played BW, I can tell that the big differences I see is years and years of experimenting strategies, AND to be more demanding in terms of hand speed. But really, if I want to see who has the fastest hands, I'll just download a few episodes of America's got talent.
On December 01 2011 08:24 419 wrote: Your argument would be stronger if it wasn't rife with false / unproven premises.
There are no premises. Just biased statements. I'm sure you can fill in your own premises as necessary for your individual level of agreement. If you don't agree at all, then I would have wasted my time trying to convince you with vain argument.
It's easier for both of us if you just agree in full.
Yes, your blog is long but nothing you said deserve any further reply.
. It's not cause of the fact that there are no Koreans, but the fact that we're trying to sell SC2 as a product when I still think the players and the games are pretty mediocre at best
So you've just obviously not watched MLG for the past year or you'd realize there's an absolute shit-ton of Koreans at every MLG.........
Is every matchup in SC2 fun to watch right now? No. Is SC2 fun to watch right now overall? Yes.
Is BW harder? Hell yeah. Is there ANY indication to your average viewer that this is the case? Fuck no. FUCK NO.
How the hell can anyone tell that those 20 gateways are being individually selected as opposed to being on a hotkey?
. It's not cause of the fact that there are no Koreans, but the fact that we're trying to sell SC2 as a product when I still think the players and the games are pretty mediocre at best
So you've just obviously not watched MLG for the past year or you'd realize there's an absolute shit-ton of Koreans at every MLG.........
Is every matchup in SC2 fun to watch right now? No. Is SC2 fun to watch right now overall? Yes.
Is BW harder? Hell yeah. Is there ANY indication to your average viewer that this is the case? Fuck no. FUCK NO.
How the hell can anyone tell that those 20 gateways are being individually selected as opposed to being on a hotkey?
This, OP is an idiot and obviously has no idea what he's talking about.
. It's not cause of the fact that there are no Koreans, but the fact that we're trying to sell SC2 as a product when I still think the players and the games are pretty mediocre at best
So you've just obviously not watched MLG for the past year or you'd realize there's an absolute shit-ton of Koreans at every MLG.........
Is every matchup in SC2 fun to watch right now? No. Is SC2 fun to watch right now overall? Yes.
Is BW harder? Hell yeah. Is there ANY indication to your average viewer that this is the case? Fuck no. FUCK NO.
How the hell can anyone tell that those 20 gateways are being individually selected as opposed to being on a hotkey?
I know that BW is considered harder just due to the amount of APM that has to be spent macroing...
But I saw a glimmer of something I had not before seen when MVP played Leenock in the semifinals of the GSL this season... all of the APM that would have been used for macro was funneled purely into harassing and attacking. It was insane.
It gave me a shiver of what we can expect to come. 5 pronged attacks, each individually micro'd, all at the same time, repeated over and over as units keep pumping out as attacks get deflected. Defenders having to be all over the place, perfectly splitting their army to deal with all the attacks, and microing them all simultaneously.
We're reaching the point when people have way more to do in a game than they have the APM for, which is when it begins to equal the difficulty of BW.
You just wrote like 10 paragraphs on a Starcraft fansite about how you don't like Starcraft. None of use are forcing you to like starcraft, but please don't belittle us for liking it.
On December 01 2011 09:03 Liquid`Jinro wrote: You are an idiot.
Yes, your blog is long but nothing you said deserve any further reply.
. It's not cause of the fact that there are no Koreans, but the fact that we're trying to sell SC2 as a product when I still think the players and the games are pretty mediocre at best
So you've just obviously not watched MLG for the past year or you'd realize there's an absolute shit-ton of Koreans at every MLG.........
Is every matchup in SC2 fun to watch right now? No. Is SC2 fun to watch right now overall? Yes.
Is BW harder? Hell yeah. Is there ANY indication to your average viewer that this is the case? Fuck no. FUCK NO.
How the hell can anyone tell that those 20 gateways are being individually selected as opposed to being on a hotkey?
I know that BW is considered harder just due to the amount of APM that has to be spent macroing...
But I saw a glimmer of something I had not before seen when MVP played Leenock in the semifinals of the GSL this season... all of the APM that would have been used for macro was funneled purely into harassing and attacking. It was insane.
It gave me a shiver of what we can expect to come. 5 pronged attacks, each individually micro'd, all at the same time, repeated over and over as units keep pumping out as attacks get deflected. Defenders having to be all over the place, perfectly splitting their army to deal with all the attacks, and microing them all simultaneously.
We're reaching the point when people have way more to do in a game than they have the APM for, which is when it begins to equal the difficulty of BW.
You're talking about the point where Leenock was right clicking infestor without energy across the map or what ? That serie was enjoyable, but I was not exactly watching the same stuff as people in the LR thread. I'd also love to see your 5 pronged attack.
On December 01 2011 05:53 Sgonzo wrote: 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)
haha i hope youre being sarcastic. if not, i guess youre just a troll. or some bronze kid who got frustrated and decided to go on a meaningless rant. although i will say that your arguments are pretty funny in a completely biased, petulant way
On December 01 2011 09:03 Liquid`Jinro wrote: You are an idiot.
Yes, your blog is long but nothing you said deserve any further reply.
. It's not cause of the fact that there are no Koreans, but the fact that we're trying to sell SC2 as a product when I still think the players and the games are pretty mediocre at best
So you've just obviously not watched MLG for the past year or you'd realize there's an absolute shit-ton of Koreans at every MLG.........
Is every matchup in SC2 fun to watch right now? No. Is SC2 fun to watch right now overall? Yes.
Is BW harder? Hell yeah. Is there ANY indication to your average viewer that this is the case? Fuck no. FUCK NO.
How the hell can anyone tell that those 20 gateways are being individually selected as opposed to being on a hotkey?
I know that BW is considered harder just due to the amount of APM that has to be spent macroing...
But I saw a glimmer of something I had not before seen when MVP played Leenock in the semifinals of the GSL this season... all of the APM that would have been used for macro was funneled purely into harassing and attacking. It was insane.
It gave me a shiver of what we can expect to come. 5 pronged attacks, each individually micro'd, all at the same time, repeated over and over as units keep pumping out as attacks get deflected. Defenders having to be all over the place, perfectly splitting their army to deal with all the attacks, and microing them all simultaneously.
We're reaching the point when people have way more to do in a game than they have the APM for, which is when it begins to equal the difficulty of BW.
APM in BW is just spent macroing? That is a lie. There is more APM because there is no MBS, but it's not the main reason for more APM.
Well that's mainly our point. 5 pronged attacks? Surely you saw ForGG demolish Polt. That's sort of what we are talking about. His banshees were all over Polt's face.
I don't entirely agree with your post. I find myself disagreeing to most of your arguments rather then finding them persuasive. To be honest I am getting the feeling you are just jelly that you are working some dead beat job and not doing what these 'others' have taken the risk and are starting to get the pay off.
Let's take a look at your concluding statement because a conclusion in any reasonable argument should summarize your main point...
What ever happened to fun gaming? It's still fun for me, It's still fun for... thousands of people... sorry if you don't find it fun, maybe you should go watch competitive HoN or LoL.
Sometimes I worry that the competitive Starcraft scene is too concerned with the image of "eSports," and not discriminating enough of the game within the sport. I don't understand, you have a better game for eSports? Last time I checked eSports was pretty much created by Counter Strike, DoTA and Starcraft: Brood War and have been the title games of the biggest gaming tournaments like WCG since the dawn of competitive gaming. Is SCII a perfect game? Not perfect, but neither was SC:BW yet it was the choice platform that spawned into the mutli-million industry in Korea and is now the platform of the eSports movement that is rising in NA/EU.
Sometimes I think that there are too many events & wanna-be events, too many casters & wanna-be casters, too many progamers & wanna-be progamers. And this is hurting eSports how? Sorry I didn't know schools offered degrees in eSports, last time I checked it was still a "new" thing, a technological phenomena if you will. Sure too many of anything can be a bad thing but we won't know until the damage is done because there is no way of knowing.
All too often the quality is low, which is a shame when the people that put things together are taking personal risks or volunteering their time. I hope it's worth it for the people who have a lot invested. Obviously it is paying off for people that have invested a lot in it in the past. Is eSports on the brink of collapsing? Actually for the state of the economy it is doing fairly well and appears to only be growing. Investments are risks, so thanks for hoping probably the only thing you got right (?)
"I hope it's still fun for the players, because it's not going to get any better than this. This is the complete and fulfilled dream of eSports, and the only thing hurting eSports now is its own self-obsession." Wrong, there are many areas of improvements as covered by the latest State of the Game. Dreamhack, MLG and IPL can all learn from each other and there are vast space for improvement. You must have the lowest standards because I for one am pretty sure things can get better (but can also get worse).
. It's not cause of the fact that there are no Koreans, but the fact that we're trying to sell SC2 as a product when I still think the players and the games are pretty mediocre at best
So you've just obviously not watched MLG for the past year or you'd realize there's an absolute shit-ton of Koreans at every MLG.........
Is every matchup in SC2 fun to watch right now? No. Is SC2 fun to watch right now overall? Yes.
Is BW harder? Hell yeah. Is there ANY indication to your average viewer that this is the case? Fuck no. FUCK NO.
How the hell can anyone tell that those 20 gateways are being individually selected as opposed to being on a hotkey?
It is pretty obvious to the viewer of the skill difference between bw and sc2. All i ever see in sc2 are big army balls that just run into each other and die, and that's game, while the same isn't true to the same degree in bw.
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'...
I was using your post to illustrate an earlier point I'd just made. Sorry if you feel that was unfair treatment of your other ideas.
edit: To clarify, my point which was that when people want to legitimize SC2 they often turn to numbers like this. People did that in BW too, saying all the time how big it is in Korea etc. It's sort of the easiest way to get grandma's approval, but it's not really useful information for a discussion about why SC2 is legitimate/good/etc. I contend if you were not trying to legitimize SC2 with that number, I have no idea why you brought it up.
Of course you have no idea why I brought it up. You didn't read my entire post and you didn't read it as a reply to the OP, which is what it was.
If you HAD read the entirety of my post in context, ie as a reply to the OP then it would have made perfect sense. He spoke about other sports drawing money because they have an audience, and later that SC2's audience basically doesn't count because they're all introverts with addiction problems. I posted that number to demonstrate that firstly SC2 does have an audience, and then the rest of that paragraph (ie the part you didn't read) was on the irrelevance of who that audience is.
I did read your whole post (and read it again now) and I still feel like bringing up the point about SC2's numbers being legitimate is giving importance to those numbers. It doesn't make sense to talk about something if you don't think it is important to your argument. It's like 'ok my thesis is that SC2 is good... but for some reason I'm going to argue a point in my essay that I don't think proves my thesis just because it's there' That doesn't make sense, right? Either you don't think the point about numbers is relevant and you explain why it doesn't further his argument, or you do think they're relevant and explain why his interpretation of numbers is wrong. You don't just argue something that is irrelevant to your beliefs.
When analysing poetry we often ask 'why use this word, why bring up this fact?' because there is always a reason or it is just banal and stupid. Like a poet chooses from an entire dictionary of words to make his point, so does the poster choose from the entire OP what to make his point. To say that you just wanted to counter that point for no reason even though you don't think it matters makes me not pity you at all for being the butt of my example.
I only bring this up because you're continuing to bat things back and forth with the respondents, and it's important to me that something I care about is not misrepresented.
On December 01 2011 06:06 mmp wrote: 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.
Re: MtG, you obviously have no idea really. That is a very slanted and one-dimensional characterization of the competitive scene.
I wouldn't presume to judge your BW/SC2 opinions and argumentation based on entirely separate opinions on a different subject, but --- based on your comments about MtG you clearly have some kind of nostalgia complex, like many of us, and it is clouding your view. The quote above would indicate to me that you have little authority to evaluate design choices and competitive culture.
I am bashing your MtG slander more than you, sorry. -___-
I enjoy futbol, I ridicule football. One is celebrated worldwide, invokes violent nationalism, and is a joy to watch even if you've never followed the game or the teams. The other is bogged down in rules, stoppage of play, and turns its players into human battering rams. Both are sports in that they can draw an audience, but if you have watched American NFL you will understand that the genius of football as a "sport" is not its spectacle, or strategy, or anything else that might define a sport. Televised football is in fact a genius of marketing. It provides just enough hard-hitting violence in 1-2 minute blocks and then the clock stops, and that means a commercial break. In short, it's ripe for whoring out.
This is the single most ridiculous thing ive ever read in my life. The increased prevalence of 3+ wide receiver sets and overall "pass-happy" trend that offenses adopt more and more. The shifting role of the tight end from mostly a blocking role to a much more pass catching one, which requires a change in the skillset for emerging players. The increased use of the 3-4 defensive alignment and the emphasis on quicker, faster, more versatile linebackers designed to make it harder for the offensive line to read who the pass rushers are. The west-coast offense and its revolutionnary idea of opening up running lanes by employing short, high percentage passes. Because you dont see the strategies and tactics involved in football doesnt mean they dont exist.
For all I care 'futbol' is 22 guys running after a ball for 90 minutes and sometimes shooting it at a big net. See how that works? (btw I dont actually think that, just pointing out how any sport can be made to sound stupid)
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'...
I was using your post to illustrate an earlier point I'd just made. Sorry if you feel that was unfair treatment of your other ideas.
edit: To clarify, my point which was that when people want to legitimize SC2 they often turn to numbers like this. People did that in BW too, saying all the time how big it is in Korea etc. It's sort of the easiest way to get grandma's approval, but it's not really useful information for a discussion about why SC2 is legitimate/good/etc. I contend if you were not trying to legitimize SC2 with that number, I have no idea why you brought it up.
Of course you have no idea why I brought it up. You didn't read my entire post and you didn't read it as a reply to the OP, which is what it was.
If you HAD read the entirety of my post in context, ie as a reply to the OP then it would have made perfect sense. He spoke about other sports drawing money because they have an audience, and later that SC2's audience basically doesn't count because they're all introverts with addiction problems. I posted that number to demonstrate that firstly SC2 does have an audience, and then the rest of that paragraph (ie the part you didn't read) was on the irrelevance of who that audience is.
I did read your whole post (and read it again now) and I still feel like bringing up the point about SC2's numbers being legitimate is giving importance to those numbers. It doesn't make sense to talk about something if you don't think it is important to your argument. It's like 'ok my thesis is that SC2 is good... but for some reason I'm going to argue a point in my essay that I don't think proves my thesis just because it's there' That doesn't make sense, right? Either you don't think the point about numbers is relevant and you explain why it doesn't further his argument, or you do think they're relevant and explain why his interpretation of numbers is wrong. You don't just argue something that is irrelevant to your beliefs.
When analysing poetry we often ask 'why use this word, why bring up this fact?' because there is always a reason or it is just banal and stupid. Like a poet chooses from an entire dictionary of words to make his point, so does the poster choose from the entire OP what to make his point. To say that you just wanted to counter that point for no reason even though you don't think it matters makes me not pity you at all for being the butt of my example.
I argued with him using that point because it demonstrates his inconsistent application of the criteria for what makes a sport. It wasn't a question of relevance or irrelevance, it was a question of inconsistency. An argument rife with inconsistencies isn't an argument at all, and it makes no sense to pretend that it is and then argue with it anyway.
Maybe my original post wasn't as clear with my intentions as it could have been, but I certainly don't think your interpretation was at all reasonable. To be honest I think you were just looking for a way to post your 'numbers don't make a game legitimate' spiel without it being off topic, and I gave you the in that you needed.
There's money in golf because it draws an audience. Sports entertain for spectacle, games entertain personal satisfaction.
I think your basic premise is wrong. Sports entertain because there are people watching wanting to be entertained. Your choice of golf is enlightening. The reason there is money in golf is not because it has a mass audience hungering for amazing feats of skill. It is because the people who play golf are generally middle-aged to older white middle class males with disposable income. Note the sponsors, Tag Heur, Rolex. Not exactly screaming out to your average blue-collar bloke.
There is money in golf because of what demographic is draws, not the numbers. How many people who don't play golf actually watch it? It has weird rules and customs that most people just shake their heads at. It is simple enough to get the gist but to really understand you need to play. It is similar for E-Sports, it is just that instead of middle class white guys it is focused on younger nerdier types.
This is the best blog i've ever read i gave you 5 Stars. I'm not sure why i loved your Blog so much i don't really care about the points you made its just funny to read you ranting in this manner about this stuff i laughed out loud several times.
Well how about the Internet? Surely eSports can flourish there. Whether or not it's flourishing, that's pretty much what we have today, and even if you get tens of thousands of people tuning in to GSL/IPL/TSL/etc, you've pretty much accounted for everyone that's potentially interested in watching. And no, your non-nerdy friends aren't interested in watching space-pokemon blow each other up for great glory.
Your non-nerdy friends also don't care what "damage" Savior dealt to eSports. The fact that such a large amount of personal profit could be made on the black market proves that Broodwar went mainstream... SC2 can only hope to achieve such notoriety in its lifetime. Fixed computer games, like fixed boxing matches, fixed wrestling matches, fixed horse races, or any kind of thrown victory upset people because they destroy the illusion of spectacle. Ruined matches remind you just how meaningless the game actually is and how much emotional stake you've entrusted inside the hype. Have established strategy games like chess ever had this kind of identity crisis, or do we play games for other reasons?
Barcrafts are another manifestation of this identity crisis. What could be more mainstream than drinking beer and watching "the game" with other young men in the commons? Beer is great, I love beer, but the game sucks, so stop pretending that you're having a good time or that it validates your lifestyle. You're not having a good time, and you're still a nerd. You're a lonely yuppie (or worse, underage!) with nerdy hobbies desperately seeking acceptance inside an alienating society. The bartender doesn't give a fuck what the customers want to watch as long as the hockey/baseball/basketball game is not on and no one else complains. You can attend bar meetups on almost any hobby group if you look hard enough, but your willingness to spend money to be with people just like you is no more of an indicator that eSports is growing than weekend book clubs among housewives are an indicator that competitive literary leagues are on the rise.
Foreigners need to stop wishing for South Korea to come to their neighborhood; you cannot force culture. SC2 is an entertainment platform developed by Blizzard, delivered by the Internet streaming sites, promoted by high-end computer hardware manufacturers (i.e. shit you don't need), energy drinks, & other providers of "gamer gear," and ultimately consumed by you, the lonely PC gamer of the Western world who wants a sense of community in his hobbies. The benefactors of this niche market don't care about social recognition, they just want your money. If you advertise it to your friends, that makes "eSports" more money.
So when iNcontroL writes that he wants 2012 to be an even bigger year for eSports, he should probably just be satisfied that he's got a home, friends, and a semi-stable career playing a mediocre computer game with some gore and neat explosions. EG is doing better than most. Prize pools may increase under better sponsorship, but the payout is still chancey and not going to improve the quality of life of players. Under the facade of "dedication to the game," players are required to work long hours for little pay (a tiny bunkbed & Ramen noodles is not pay, it's slave wages, or the college experience without the education) and sacrificing the best years of their lives for what... the entertainment of some netizens? A slim chance at fame and riches?
I bolded the parts that were so funny i actually did lol
Wow, you are totally ignorant and wrong, you obviously have no idea what you are taling about. I could write a 20 page essay about how twisted your mind is, but i really have better things to do.
It's amazing how americans in general can be so.... I'll let this video speak my mind:
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 storm comparison is particularly good; in another blog post on here about the Dreamhack finals someone compares a single storm to that of Jangbi storms. Not only a BW example actually being used as the skill comparison but also an example completely another level and not even close to the same skill.
I liked the OP, it wasn't exactly a game vs game comparison like people are making it out to be though. Too many people back down from their real opinions just cause it might piss people off; least he's backing his opinion up rather than simply using a circular argument as a reason.
Edit: also the guy who continues this stupid thought that in the future there will somehow be 5 pronged attacks all individually microed.. what the hell are you talking about. I doubt that SC2 even has more actual actions dedicated to unit micro than BW does, considering the fact you have large engagements lasting 5 seconds. People are not going to develop the ability to have 1000 APM and do 5000 actions in 5 seconds.
On December 01 2011 14:17 Ninjahoe wrote: Wow, you are totally ignorant and wrong, you obviously have no idea what you are taling about. I could write a 20 page essay about how twisted your mind is, but i really have better things to do.
You are an idiot to to take a comment by an american on a forum and generalize it to all rofl. Did you know there are stupid people in your country as well? Hell all over the world. Maybe I should take that next time I see a sweden who's dumb just assume its all of sweden jesus christ -_-.
On December 01 2011 14:17 Ninjahoe wrote: Wow, you are totally ignorant and wrong, you obviously have no idea what you are taling about. I could write a 20 page essay about how twisted your mind is, but i really have better things to do.
Wow, the OP has opened my eyes to the fact that i don't actually enjoy watching competetive eSports, not just SC2, i mean, i know you were going with the whole personal attacks, but i saw past that argument, i saw what you really meant. You of course meant to say, no one really likes anything they enjoy doing at all, we just pay money and spend time doing things because as a race were all too retarded to realise we dont actually enjoy anything we think we do. Well thank you so much for telling me that all meaning in everyones lives are completely hollow, now that i know i don't actually enjoy any activity i previously thought i enjoyed, i can really free up a lot of my time to sitting staring at a wall, i mean, i wont enjoy, but that's impossible anyway right?
*Wee, i can make illogical statements based off previous illogical assumptions too, woopy look at me, all growed up*
On December 01 2011 09:07 Lightwip wrote: I see what you're trying to say. There seems to be quite the "For the glory of eSports!" attitude among the SC2 community.
Yes, I love those guys who mistake eSports for SC2.
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'...
I was using your post to illustrate an earlier point I'd just made. Sorry if you feel that was unfair treatment of your other ideas.
edit: To clarify, my point which was that when people want to legitimize SC2 they often turn to numbers like this. People did that in BW too, saying all the time how big it is in Korea etc. It's sort of the easiest way to get grandma's approval, but it's not really useful information for a discussion about why SC2 is legitimate/good/etc. I contend if you were not trying to legitimize SC2 with that number, I have no idea why you brought it up.
Of course you have no idea why I brought it up. You didn't read my entire post and you didn't read it as a reply to the OP, which is what it was.
If you HAD read the entirety of my post in context, ie as a reply to the OP then it would have made perfect sense. He spoke about other sports drawing money because they have an audience, and later that SC2's audience basically doesn't count because they're all introverts with addiction problems. I posted that number to demonstrate that firstly SC2 does have an audience, and then the rest of that paragraph (ie the part you didn't read) was on the irrelevance of who that audience is.
I did read your whole post (and read it again now) and I still feel like bringing up the point about SC2's numbers being legitimate is giving importance to those numbers. It doesn't make sense to talk about something if you don't think it is important to your argument. It's like 'ok my thesis is that SC2 is good... but for some reason I'm going to argue a point in my essay that I don't think proves my thesis just because it's there' That doesn't make sense, right? Either you don't think the point about numbers is relevant and you explain why it doesn't further his argument, or you do think they're relevant and explain why his interpretation of numbers is wrong. You don't just argue something that is irrelevant to your beliefs.
When analysing poetry we often ask 'why use this word, why bring up this fact?' because there is always a reason or it is just banal and stupid. Like a poet chooses from an entire dictionary of words to make his point, so does the poster choose from the entire OP what to make his point. To say that you just wanted to counter that point for no reason even though you don't think it matters makes me not pity you at all for being the butt of my example.
I argued with him using that point because it demonstrates his inconsistent application of the criteria for what makes a sport. It wasn't a question of relevance or irrelevance, it was a question of inconsistency. An argument rife with inconsistencies isn't an argument at all, and it makes no sense to pretend that it is and then argue with it anyway.
Maybe my original post wasn't as clear with my intentions as it could have been, but I certainly don't think your interpretation was at all reasonable. To be honest I think you were just looking for a way to post your 'numbers don't make a game legitimate' spiel without it being off topic, and I gave you the in that you needed.
Either way, whatever.
Molest me not with your imprudent excuses. Philosophy 101: Attacking someone's weak points in order to disprove their stronger/more-interesting points does not disprove their stronger/more-interesting points. Yes, the OP is inconsistent. It's a rant. That doesn't mean that we as posters can't have a meaningful discussion inspired by it. It doesn't mean we have to degrade ourselves to trivial discussion.
That is probably the best question/statement in this blog.
A lot of people are too worried about getting on a team and being pro, instead of just playing the game for fun.
About 75% of the people who play Starcraft 2 do not post on TeamLiquid or /r/starcraft or any site of the like. These are the casual gamers who play the game for fun. They're not posting at all, or if they are they're probably posting on the Battle.Net forums.
You won't find most of the casual gamers in a competitive-based community like this.
all your problems lie in the complexity of the primitive device you're pulling the attention with
edit : there is a problem inherent to what you use a video game for
a game of starcraft isn't a simulation because the simulation is the game (aka video games) it's very difficult for anything outside arts to draw interest over a simulation, let alone it beeing a competition
to some extent esports can be a competition of simulation, which isn't very interesting
however that doesn't mean esports won't ever happen, it prolly will actually, but competition might be very dull and uninteresting
edit : .. unless the acts in the game of simulation lead to acts in physical reality edit 2 : so far the only way starcraft interest is linked to reality is through player's fandom, wich isn't exactly the best attention syncer to draw new audiences.
So you're whining about something you hate? I dont get it. To state that barcraft is an identity crisis is just confusing and grasping for something to bash on. It's a event made to enjoy something, not to cover our insecureness of the esports phenomenon we all swear to protect. >.>
One thing semi-unrelated to the post is why people mesure mainstream success in if it's on TV or not. A TV-centered home is imo long gone. It feels like we just dont yet know it. SC does not need TV to become something great. It's already great in its own way. I think internet will become the new TV in a couple of years when the technically impaired starts getting fewer. Just a couple of years ago it was nerdy to browse and use the internet while today almost a majority of the people that thought internet usage was a meaningless thing update their facebook every other hour.
On December 01 2011 18:15 FaZe wrote: Starcraft is our golf.
Oh please. Starcraft is our sitting around the table with friends and playing cards.
Golf is more popular now than it was a generation ago.
Unless by "our", you mean us video game nerds, and not the current generation.
"Oh please", none of my friends are payed hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to play cards around the table.
I know golf is more popular now, I'm drawing a parallel to the growth of Starcraft 2.
The current generation ARE "video game nerds". I don't know many people who play absolutely no video games. Once the stigma around gaming is desolved, pro gaming is going to hit a whole new level of popularity.
On December 01 2011 18:15 FaZe wrote: Starcraft is our golf.
Oh please. Starcraft is our sitting around the table with friends and playing cards.
Golf is more popular now than it was a generation ago.
Unless by "our", you mean us video game nerds, and not the current generation.
"Oh please", none of my friends are payed hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to play cards around the table.
I know golf is more popular now, I'm drawing a parallel to the growth of Starcraft 2.
The current generation ARE "video game nerds". I don't know many people who play absolutely no video games. Once the stigma around gaming is desolved, pro gaming is going to hit a whole new level of popularity.
Not really getting your point, I don't get payed hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to play cards either, or Starcraft. (Some card players do though.)
I know tons of people that don't play video games anymore, probably 95-99% of the people I know couldn't be characterized as "video game nerds". And I'm a HUGE video game nerd.
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'...
I was using your post to illustrate an earlier point I'd just made. Sorry if you feel that was unfair treatment of your other ideas.
edit: To clarify, my point which was that when people want to legitimize SC2 they often turn to numbers like this. People did that in BW too, saying all the time how big it is in Korea etc. It's sort of the easiest way to get grandma's approval, but it's not really useful information for a discussion about why SC2 is legitimate/good/etc. I contend if you were not trying to legitimize SC2 with that number, I have no idea why you brought it up.
Of course you have no idea why I brought it up. You didn't read my entire post and you didn't read it as a reply to the OP, which is what it was.
If you HAD read the entirety of my post in context, ie as a reply to the OP then it would have made perfect sense. He spoke about other sports drawing money because they have an audience, and later that SC2's audience basically doesn't count because they're all introverts with addiction problems. I posted that number to demonstrate that firstly SC2 does have an audience, and then the rest of that paragraph (ie the part you didn't read) was on the irrelevance of who that audience is.
I did read your whole post (and read it again now) and I still feel like bringing up the point about SC2's numbers being legitimate is giving importance to those numbers. It doesn't make sense to talk about something if you don't think it is important to your argument. It's like 'ok my thesis is that SC2 is good... but for some reason I'm going to argue a point in my essay that I don't think proves my thesis just because it's there' That doesn't make sense, right? Either you don't think the point about numbers is relevant and you explain why it doesn't further his argument, or you do think they're relevant and explain why his interpretation of numbers is wrong. You don't just argue something that is irrelevant to your beliefs.
When analysing poetry we often ask 'why use this word, why bring up this fact?' because there is always a reason or it is just banal and stupid. Like a poet chooses from an entire dictionary of words to make his point, so does the poster choose from the entire OP what to make his point. To say that you just wanted to counter that point for no reason even though you don't think it matters makes me not pity you at all for being the butt of my example.
I argued with him using that point because it demonstrates his inconsistent application of the criteria for what makes a sport. It wasn't a question of relevance or irrelevance, it was a question of inconsistency. An argument rife with inconsistencies isn't an argument at all, and it makes no sense to pretend that it is and then argue with it anyway.
Maybe my original post wasn't as clear with my intentions as it could have been, but I certainly don't think your interpretation was at all reasonable. To be honest I think you were just looking for a way to post your 'numbers don't make a game legitimate' spiel without it being off topic, and I gave you the in that you needed.
Either way, whatever.
Molest me not with your imprudent excuses. Philosophy 101: Attacking someone's weak points in order to disprove their stronger/more-interesting points does not disprove their stronger/more-interesting points. Yes, the OP is inconsistent. It's a rant. That doesn't mean that we as posters can't have a meaningful discussion inspired by it. It doesn't mean we have to degrade ourselves to trivial discussion.
Sigh. I could keep arguing, but I don't want to win that badly. I maintain that my post made perfect sense if interpreted as intended. Maybe I didn't write it well enough for that to be the case, but whatever.
On December 01 2011 12:03 Probulous wrote: I think your basic premise is wrong. Sports entertain because there are people watching wanting to be entertained. Your choice of golf is enlightening. The reason there is money in golf is not because it has a mass audience hungering for amazing feats of skill. It is because the people who play golf are generally middle-aged to older white middle class males with disposable income. Note the sponsors, Tag Heur, Rolex. Not exactly screaming out to your average blue-collar bloke.
There is money in golf because of what demographic is draws, not the numbers. How many people who don't play golf actually watch it? It has weird rules and customs that most people just shake their heads at. It is simple enough to get the gist but to really understand you need to play. It is similar for E-Sports, it is just that instead of middle class white guys it is focused on younger nerdier types.
Huge surge in the best athletes playing golf instead of more traditional conventional sports. Your post would have been correct 15 years ago. It's dead wrong now.
On December 01 2011 12:03 Probulous wrote: I think your basic premise is wrong. Sports entertain because there are people watching wanting to be entertained. Your choice of golf is enlightening. The reason there is money in golf is not because it has a mass audience hungering for amazing feats of skill. It is because the people who play golf are generally middle-aged to older white middle class males with disposable income. Note the sponsors, Tag Heur, Rolex. Not exactly screaming out to your average blue-collar bloke.
There is money in golf because of what demographic is draws, not the numbers. How many people who don't play golf actually watch it? It has weird rules and customs that most people just shake their heads at. It is simple enough to get the gist but to really understand you need to play. It is similar for E-Sports, it is just that instead of middle class white guys it is focused on younger nerdier types.
Huge surge in the best athletes playing golf instead of more traditional conventional sports. Your post would have been correct 15 years ago. It's dead wrong now.
From what I remember, golf was pretty popular 15 years ago.
On December 01 2011 02:26 SenorChang wrote: There are lots of things I don't enjoy but I don't make threads about them to belittle them and convince other people that they shouldn't like it either.
Hit the nail on the head for me SenorChang. I think that this is pretty much how I felt when reading the post, I mean granted he did warn us in the first sentence "rant incoming". But still not really a fan of the huge hate post, just constant bashing of SC2 and the people who enjoy to watch it really unnessesary.
Don't get me wrong I wish that I knew about the BW scene when I was playing, and I really have fallen in love with it through SC2, but we don't need to go about bashing the other games.
Ah, I've been wanting to say something here, but I haven't been sure where to start. The very-negative responses ("trash article", "stop posting", etc.) are generally frustrating/not useful filler, to me; it's not an article, it's not posted in SC2 general, the facts are stated as opinions, and this is mmp's blog. He considered his audience -- that is, people who really care about eSports, -- so show some damn respect and at least consider the context he's writing in, please. It's more frustrating because for every "I agree" or "5/5" (sarcastic or actual) one-liner there are 20 long-winded counter-rants on why his opinion is wrong and he's an idiot who understands nothing about the intricacies of competitive croquet. And then someone else who has no fucking idea what trolling means comes in and calls him one.
...Anyway. Personal mini-rant aside, one of FaZe's post seems like an alright place to start, so I'll see if I can put together something coherent about that first.
On December 02 2011 03:10 FaZe wrote: "Oh please", none of my friends are payed hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to play cards around the table.
I know golf is more popular now, I'm drawing a parallel to the growth of Starcraft 2.
The current generation ARE "video game nerds". I don't know many people who play absolutely no video games. Once the stigma around gaming is dissolved, pro gaming is going to hit a whole new level of popularity.
It seems entirely fair to assume none of your friends are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to play Starcraft 2, either. I could be wrong and you could know some people, but it still holds true for just about everyone else, and you completely missed his point.
You also fell into the trap (which was mentioned in an earlier post) of equating "pro gaming" with "pro SC2", I think. "When the stigma around gaming dissolves" (whatever that means), what exactly does it matter to you if your game isn't the one that the general public embraces? If your local or national news reports on a match-fixing scandal in the CSFL (Collegiate Street Fighter League), do you suddenly give a shit because ESPORTS? Or do you continue not giving a shit, just like you may or may not give even half a shit about what happens within poker or chess now?
What I'm asking for, and not just from FaZe, is a clear picture of the end goal for "eSports". Ok, so, we promote the growth of eSports. We do this by going to events (for the games we like), cheering for the players (of the games we like), and we try our hardest to get involved however possible (with the games we like). What happens when pro gaming hits this completely expected whole new level of popularity? And what if it happens, but our game -- most of the people who read this should assume I mean Starcraft 2 -- isn't the game that matters anymore? If GSL and Dreamhack SC2 and MLG SC2 never post bigger numbers than they have to date, but instead something else posts massive numbers and acquires mainstream recognition, do we settle for a "Mission Accomplished" Final Edit?
Is money the goal? Is the existence of nerdy superstars in a multi-billion dollar gaming industry validation enough? What about multi-trillion? How many zeros do you need to add to players' salaries before we're watching the news in tears because "we" helped a change happen? Is it influence? Or popularity? Or, are all of those synonymous, and none of them correct, even? Or, did the OP touch on a feasible point that eSports (and sports-sports) are defined by spectacle and watchability? (burn the heretic)
The question isn't rhetorical, I really don't know what a victory is supposed to look like in this battle against ???? for eSports.
I agree that SC2 lacks the spectacle it needs to be that shining example of eSports incarnate. It wasn't stated explicitly in this OP (but in others), but I agree that the skill floor* for competitive SC2 is too low to consider it a serious contender for bringing eSports to the West. And it's been said before elsewhere, but I agree that without a player that can absolutely demolish every other top player in a fit of dominance that doesn't end until someone unquestionably better comes along, competitive SC2 will absolutely not become a (or "the") mainstream eSport, should the phrase come to mean the same thing as "eSports" plus "mainstream" in the near future. That's what I believe. That is my opinion.
And I think the critical flaw in your OP, mmp, was the failure to acknowledge that, following the expansion packs (which real sports do not have), SC2 will not be what it is today. Or, at least, a failure to emphasize that point. Or maybe it's not a flaw at all, and that was intentional. Whatever. Point being, by comparison, the game after the last expansion (no guarantees on what that means) will show something like the difference between vanilla Starcraft and Starcraft 2; a completely different game with several similarities, and several [more] significant changes. Whether or not you already believe that the final, completed game will be something worthy of "eSports" (whatever that means), or whether you agree with mmp that the game/any game is doomed to fail to meet expectations is 100% speculation, regardless.
I don't want to write about the "illusion of spectacle"/SC2 identity crisis from the OP...not right now, anyway. Maybe another time. This post is rather long, though, and I haven't decided how I feel either way, seeing as I'm one of those lonely nerds generally seeking validation. "Stop pretending that you're having a good time" was, in my opinion, one of those rant-ish things that, when you're writing something, seems ultimately unimportant, but which internet people will instantly latch on to so that they can disregard the rest of your well-written, heavily opinionated blog post.
And then they go "trololololol".
Anyway, I actually gave it a 5/5 a while ago, even though I've got mixed feelings about the content. Props for being bold, anyway.
Who knows, maybe you'll find something in SC2 (present or future) to excite you, eventually. And maybe I will, too.
EDIT: Thanks for reading.
*Please note that I did not fucking say skill ceiling. Do not respond to this post (seriously) by talking about the god damned unreachable-but-objectively(?)-lower-than-BW's skill ceiling.
Thinking OP is an idiot who hasnt watched any MLG this year as Jinro said. Your own argument defeats itself. The whole "gold is a sport cause it draws an audience" nonsense. Have you not seen the viewership results for GSL, MLG or NASL (The game just played I believe had 30k viewers). You really need to stop spewing bullshit an get your head checked cause you are clearly deficient in the brain department.
5/5 from me , I really like the idea that you give broodwar as a legitimate sport and sc2 as something a "grandma would be playing to pass time " . Which of course as a broodwar fan I am happy about it , although people on the other side who plays the same game would not be so happy about it .....
I disagree with almost the entire article, although I'm still pretty sympathetic to the BW > SC2 argument. American football is actually the one of the most strategically deep team sports in the world, just read a few articles on http://www.smartfootball.com to see what I mean. Second of all, soccer IS shown on ESPN with no commercial breaks, so there's no reason ESPN can't show long games. But the most important thing is that for thousands of people worldwide, eSports is fun. It's a new thing beyond the game for people to enjoy, and Barcrafts are simply a way to get together and enjoy it. No one's forcing it to be mainstream, people are just getting together and doing what they like.
Are "great games" in your mind only vintage / old graphics ? Because if it is your opinion is really flawed.
If you don't follow the natural evolution of games you won't ever get "eSport". How many Donky Kong MLG's / OSL's did you watched in the last 10-20 years ?
On December 05 2011 19:45 Ktk wrote: Starcraft is not fun to play for most people, Starcraft is not fun to watch for most people.
Such a waste of bits and effort. Sorry, it's just YOU that knows it's inferior to Broodwar. It's just YOU that knows it's boring to watch. Don't state YOUR opinions as fact, they're not.
"Thriving Broodward community" - really, I would think that outside of Korea SC2 following is 10x the size of what Broodwar had on SC2 launch. I'm sorry to say but it's not quality of the community that makes a sport, it's quantity, football is a great example of that. Out of my current WoW guild I'm the only guy that has ever played BW yet 5-6 people still play SC2. Of course they're all kids barely over 20 but still.
What version is the expansion Starcraft Broodwar on now?
On December 05 2011 21:42 dakalro wrote: Such a waste of bits and effort. Sorry, it's just YOU that knows it's inferior to Broodwar. It's just YOU that knows it's boring to watch. Don't state YOUR opinions as fact, they're not.
"Thriving Broodward community" - really, I would think that outside of Korea SC2 following is 10x the size of what Broodwar had on SC2 launch. I'm sorry to say but it's not quality of the community that makes a sport, it's quantity, football is a great example of that. Out of my current WoW guild I'm the only guy that has ever played BW yet 5-6 people still play SC2. Of course they're all kids barely over 20 but still.
What version is the expansion Starcraft Broodwar on now?
2.156 broodwar you know protoss scouts can shoot lasers and nuclear at the same time and only cost 150 mineral and 150 gas , I am enjoying broodwar now because blizzard is currently nerfing and patching broodwar at the same time . So much love from dustin bowder indeed.
I'll quote Tasteless on this one: "I hate it when people have wrong opinions!"
You say you think SC2 is boring, and then interpret that as meaning that everybody actually feels that SC2 is boring, and are only deluding themselves?
Your entire post does not make sense outside the context of trolling, sir.
Mixed feelings about it... When I read it quickly (meaning I just skim across the parts that ridicule SC2 and other "sports"), it makes perfect sense. When I read it slowly, I just shake my head cause I know that a flamewar (albeit, a small one) is bound to start between fans of BW and SC2.
I'll just state the part I like the most though:
LAN.
Goddamnit Blizzard. You were the chosen one! It was said that you would destroy the perception that video games were a waste of time, not join the other *coughEAcough* corporations who sacrifice quality for simplicity! You were to bring balance to the nerds, not leave them disconnected!
EDIT: And just because I used a quote from a horrible movie doesn't mean I condone watching it. Star Wars ended 30 years ago.
On December 01 2011 07:10 BUfels wrote: Opinions disguised as facts with convincing writing.
Actually, they're opinions disguised as opinions with extremely hasty writing, but thank you for the benefit of the doubt.
If that was all you could rebutt in my entire post, then you don't believe in what you wrote.
How can I rebutt what is not false? Your determination to argue on a factual basis makes strong-arming my argument very difficult!
Unfortunately I think you're focusing on all of the chips and cracks of what I wrote and not looking at the broader sculpture. You don't have to agree with my disparaging portrayal of one sport over another to hold your own biases on the same subject and arrive at your own criteria for discriminating the real sports from the phony.
This is very annoying. How can you talk on everybody's behalf? The amount of people watching live events continues to skyrocket. Hundreds of threads on esports appear daily on screddit and TL alone. What twisted world do you live in where the community's general consensus is that the game is boring to watch? Here is an example of an opinion disguised as a fact.
No, sports do NOT come with expansion packs. Or, they didn't in the past. That's because a video game, to date, has not been classified a sport. You know that what prevents an expansion pack from being classified as a sport is NOT the fact that is is an expansion, but because it is a videogame. Convincing writing, but you're full of bullshit.
So we agree, video games are not sports -- unless you're partial to the belief that there is something special about SC2. I feel it too... it's called advertisement. Your tastes and preferences are warped to fit the market, and so we must be living in revolutionary times where anything is possible and your mother and sister will learn Starcraft and there will be stadiums full of cheering fans for... Idra??? (kill me now)
What you are doing is mentioning aspects of SC2 and then somehow coming to the conclusion that they are negative, that they prove it can never be a sport. What you are missing is the middleground. Not only do you not have proof to back this up, you don't even have a reason, proof or no proof. "In football, the goalkeeper can use his hands. Thus, it is not a sport". Illogical.
This isn't algebra. It's a hypothesis. Agree with it or not, the preface introduces the body material -- it does need to validate it. That's for you to think about.
Oh look, more opinions disguised as facts. I have introduced 4 friends into Starcraft who have actually bought the game, and watched TSL3 with about 8 on my PC back in Summer.
Barcrafts are another manifestation of this identity crisis. What could be more mainstream than drinking beer and watching "the game" with other young men in the commons? Beer is great, I love beer, but the game sucks, so stop pretending that you're having a good time or that it validates your lifestyle. You're not having a good time, and you're still a nerd. You're a lonely yuppie (or worse, underage!) with nerdy hobbies desperately seeking acceptance inside an alienating society. The bartender doesn't give a fuck what the customers want to watch as long as the hockey/baseball/basketball game is not on and no one else complains. You can attend bar meetups on almost any hobby group if you look hard enough, but your willingness to spend money to be with people just like you is no more of an indicator that eSports is growing than weekend book clubs among housewives are an indicator that competitive literary leagues are on the rise.
You go to Barcraft, you're enjoying yourself? NO YOU'RE NOT STUPID NERD YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED.
I never said you weren't allowed (who am I to prevent you?). I just said you were going to a bar for all the wrong reasons, reasons we nerds do not like to tell ourselves when we engage in social nerddom. In a nutshell, you're trying to shape the world around your private interests, rather than embracing the world as it is.
Foreigners need to stop wishing for South Korea to come to their neighborhood; you cannot force culture. SC2 is an entertainment platform developed by Blizzard, delivered by the Internet streaming sites, promoted by high-end computer hardware manufacturers (i.e. shit you don't need), energy drinks, & other providers of "gamer gear," and ultimately consumed by you, the lonely PC gamer of the Western world who wants a sense of community in his hobbies. The benefactors of this niche market don't care about social recognition, they just want your money. If you advertise it to your friends, that makes "eSports" more money.
So much of what you said there applies to football. Sponsors advertising stupid shit, people looking for a sense of community in their hobbies, "The Man" wanting your money. How do any of these invalidate the concept of SC2 being a sport?
Because SC2 only exists to promote these things, much like the NFL. Without big sponsorship SC2 would be deader than Samir Duran, just a shiny walking corpse that no one takes seriously for its competitive value. The significance attached to skill in SC2 is completely artificial.
So when iNcontroL writes that he wants 2012 to be an even bigger year for eSports, he should probably just be satisfied that he's got a home, friends, and a semi-stable career playing a mediocre computer game with some gore and neat explosions. EG is doing better than most. Prize pools may increase under better sponsorship, but the payout is still chancey and not going to improve the quality of life of players. Under the facade of "dedication to the game," players are required to work long hours for little pay (a tiny bunkbed & Ramen noodles is not pay, it's slave wages, or the college experience without the education) and sacrificing the best years of their lives for what... the entertainment of some netizens? A slim chance at fame and riches?
People work hard to get famous. People work hard to get anywhere they want to. The most famous players make big money, the lower players have to endure hard years to get there. You think this doesn't apply to other sports?
NCAA, poker, whatever... most never make it. The smart ones know when to walk away and revert to plan B. No one can be successful without hard work, but you need to be honest with yourself about what your goals are and why they're important to you. Most are in it for the money, and few will win big, so what does that make the rest? I think "dedicated" is too kind.
Sometimes I worry that the competitive Starcraft scene is too concerned with the image of "eSports," and not discriminating enough of the game within the sport. Sometimes I think that there are too many events & wanna-be events, too many casters & wanna-be casters, too many progamers & wanna-be progamers. All too often the quality is low, which is a shame when the people that put things together are taking personal risks or volunteering their time. I hope it's worth it for the people who have a lot invested. I hope it's still fun for the players, because it's not going to get any better than this. This is the complete and fulfilled dream of eSports, and the only thing hurting eSports now is its own self-obsession.
No, you don't. You want it to fail. You have created these opinions for which flawed is too much of an understatement to use because you WANT controversial opinions. You don't WANT to follow what the crowd are following. If it fails, you'll be laughing, "haha! I wasn't like the rest, I predicted this!". That is your motivation. You are not worried. Anybody remotely worried would have obliterated those pathetic arguments in their own head.
That is a false characterization (I'm more of the "mwahaha" evil laugher). No I am genuinely concerned about all of those talented "pros" who may have stable gigs for now, but they're not going to win a major tournament any time soon, some of them do not look happy where they are (which is sad considering they're playing a game for a living), and their youthful talents are going to waste chasing an artificial dream. At best, they can entertain us with exciting games, but (as I have already laid out) the game itself is not conducive to this task.
Blizzard has already said Samir Duran isn't dead ^ fail edit: /sarcasm
EPT![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/45/Edouard_Manet_012.jpg/640px-Edouard_Manet_012.jpg)
