|
On February 08 2012 00:53 FuxFux wrote:
A game that requires no skill such as LoL might make you feel relieved, you might feel good about yourself when you win matches. Owning noobs and what-not. But deluding yourself into believing you are actually playing a game superior to StarCraft 2 is unacceptable, and quite frankly, pathethic.
If you read his reddit posts you will see that this statement is exactly the thing that he is angry at the SC2 community about. Calling LoL a game that takes no skill is purely ignorant. It is the sort of statement that creates an unnecessary separation between the two game's communities.
|
On February 08 2012 00:53 FuxFux wrote:
A game that requires no skill such as LoL might make you feel relieved, you might feel good about yourself when you win matches. Owning noobs and what-not. But deluding yourself into believing you are actually playing a game superior to StarCraft 2 is unacceptable, and quite frankly, pathethic.
I'm going to save this quote forever, to show all these new sc2 members of the forums, how we BW players and they are not so different. How does it feel having your game threatened by what you deem an inferior game? Count your blessings, at least your competitor isn't mocking your game by solely riding off of its success and cannibalizing your current infrastructure.
Maybe you should go talk to Idra about his opinions on sc2?
|
TL might not be the most fair and balanced place to discuss whether or not SC2 has a dominant hold on eSports.
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
Where did Destiny say this? In what context? Why do you care? How can LoL take no skill? Why am I posting this? Would the wood chuck chuck wood if the wood chuck could chuck wood? How now brown cow?
Some questions are never meant to be answered.
|
On February 08 2012 04:17 drgoats wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 00:53 FuxFux wrote:
A game that requires no skill such as LoL might make you feel relieved, you might feel good about yourself when you win matches. Owning noobs and what-not. But deluding yourself into believing you are actually playing a game superior to StarCraft 2 is unacceptable, and quite frankly, pathethic.
If you read his reddit posts you will see that this statement is exactly the thing that he is angry at the SC2 community about. Calling LoL a game that takes no skill is purely ignorant. It is the sort of statement that creates an unnecessary separation between the two game's communities.
Tic-tac-toe requires skill too. So does basketball on a 3 foot hoop. So does soccer with a 30 foot wide goal and no goalie. What we're talking about is skill ceiling. LoL has a fairly low skill ceiling. Dota 2 is decently higher. Sc2 is even higher. But in SC2, pure mechanical skill and mermorization will get you very far(some say, way too far), whereas in Dota 2/LoL/HoN, pure mechanical skill is about 10% of the skill required to play the game well at a very high level.
Apples, Oranges, LoL sucks, in my personal opinion.
|
I think its a very bold statement from someone with next to no achievements. If it doesn't take any skill, the scene wouldn't look like it looks right now.
I agree that skill if you compare for example Broodwar and Starcraft isn't as rewarding especially with in my opinion Protoss and Zerg, yet to state that it takes no skill to play is blatanly wrong and proven by people investing a lot of time yet achieving nothing.
|
I assume he was trolling. Nobody's that stupid.
|
No need to hate on LoL. Of course the learning curve and skill needed for LoL is lower than SC2, but we do not need to bash, as its growth could promote cross-over appeal to SC2 (hopefully). Second, don't take what Destiny says too seriously, as it is very possible that he was trolling to prompt a reaction.
|
Destiny, who streams 8 hours a day. Yet has no results says Starcraft takes no skill.
He's just trolling.
Now let us look at League of Legends. If League of Legends required no skill, it would not be considered a rising e-sport. If you actually played League of Legends enough, you would know that there are a lot of things that need to be taken into account throughout the laning phase, mid game, and late game. During the laning phase, it is all about harass trades, last hitting, positioning, and overall trying to win your lane. Midgame revolves around securing objectives on the map, i.e. dragon, red/blue buffs for your carries, and pushing down lanes. Once again, this requires thought-process and in most cases, positioning. Late game revolves around team fights and baron. Again, positioning, but now teamwork is a HUGE factor.
I've played Halo and a bit of LoL. Just to draw a comparison. In both games there is a REALLLLLLLLLLLLY small individual skill cap and what both games came down to is which team worked better together. For me personally this isn't fun. In Halo teamwork basically meant people furfilling their roles as a player and getting as much guns on one person. There probably isn't much more to LoL teamwork aswell. Anyway I was a high level Halo player but LoL i've never really played so maybe it's different.
|
On February 08 2012 02:35 Destiny wrote:
My complaint has never been that Starcraft 2 is "hard", just that time invested into the game is everything, with strategy/intelligence taking a far far far backseat to just raw games invested.
Investing time into a game is rewarding for every game. It can be LoL, DotA or any other game there is. The amount you have to put into a game might be slightly different and I think a lot of people would say LoL and DotA do require less time to play or reach a higher level.
You don't need to be a strategic mastermind in Starcraft and your statement that strategy is less rewarding (I guess) is true, because there's not enough room for it. LoL / DotA is a teamgame and there are way more possibilities to exploit that with strategic decisions. Starcraft in itself is very complex and its more about reading and understand the game and its flow paired with insanely mechanical demand to the player.
If you don't like how the game is designed, feel free to play another game that is more strategic or strategically demanding, yet I can assure you that no one in Starcraft may it MVP or NesTea does fully understand the game and its strategies yet, thats why the game still develops.
Also I do think your race is not the very best to play very strategic based games, but reactive mechanical games.
|
i dont understand why people still watch his stream
i stopped watching it at least 6 months ago probably more than that
|
On February 08 2012 05:01 atmuh wrote:
i dont understand why people still watch his stream
i stopped watching it at least 6 months ago probably more than that
Thanks for contributing to this discussion, even though the whole thing is pretty stupid.
|
On February 08 2012 04:47 mTw|NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 02:35 Destiny wrote:
My complaint has never been that Starcraft 2 is "hard", just that time invested into the game is everything, with strategy/intelligence taking a far far far backseat to just raw games invested.
Investing time into a game is rewarding for every game. It can be LoL, DotA or any other game there is. The amount you have to put into a game might be slightly different and I think a lot of people would say LoL and DotA do require less time to play or reach a higher level. You don't need to be a strategic mastermind in Starcraft and your statement that strategy is less rewarding (I guess) is true, because there's not enough room for it. LoL / DotA is a teamgame and there are way more possibilities to exploit that with strategic decisions. Starcraft in itself is very complex and its more about reading and understand the game and its flow paired with insanely mechanical demand to the player. If you don't like how the game is designed, feel free to play another game that is more strategic or strategically demanding, yet I can assure you that no one in Starcraft may it MVP or NesTea does fully understand the game and its strategies yet, thats why the game still develops. Also I do think your race is not the very best to play very strategic based games, but reactive mechanical games.
Yup agree with this. If you are looking for more strategic based games zerg isn't the race for you at all lol terran would probably be the best fit for that.
I am curious why Destiny is complaining about investing time into a game does he think he should only have to play 3-4 hours a day and beat top tier players? That would be retarded and I actually can't believe he doesn't think you should have to invest so much time to become good -_-.
|
On February 08 2012 05:04 Cokefreak wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 05:01 atmuh wrote:
i dont understand why people still watch his stream
i stopped watching it at least 6 months ago probably more than that Thanks for contributing to this discussion, even though the whole thing is pretty stupid.
no problem
|
On February 08 2012 04:08 rei wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 02:35 Destiny wrote:
I've made some pretty outlandish statements recently, mostly out of anger, I think, due to how fucking stupid the vocal minority in this community is. That being said, the "strategy" aspect of Starcraft 2 is insanely lacking. I've given up trying to convince casuals of that, but I'd gladly discuss that aspect with any other pro gamer, and I'm pretty certain they'd agree with me.
My complaint has never been that Starcraft 2 is "hard", just that time invested into the game is everything, with strategy/intelligence taking a far far far backseat to just raw games invested.
We would like to see your argument on how strategy aspect of sc2 is insanely lacking(lacking compare to wah?), and why time invested into the game is everything, and why strategy / intelligence is taking a far far far back seat. What about tactics? is that also lacking too? i'm sure someone as smart as yourself knows the difference between strategic aspect of sc2 and tactically aspect of sc2. If you compared sc2 with bw, then ya your statement make sense, sc2 is lacking, but you have not played bw, so you have no idea of how deep that rabbit hole goes.(and time invested in bw is even more a factor than sc2) Where do you draw your arguments?
Just write everything off I say as QQ and go ask other pros. I've tried to explain it too many times, but if you don't actually play the game at a high level it's too easy to dismiss everything I say.
|
On February 08 2012 05:06 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 04:47 mTw|NarutO wrote:On February 08 2012 02:35 Destiny wrote:
My complaint has never been that Starcraft 2 is "hard", just that time invested into the game is everything, with strategy/intelligence taking a far far far backseat to just raw games invested.
Investing time into a game is rewarding for every game. It can be LoL, DotA or any other game there is. The amount you have to put into a game might be slightly different and I think a lot of people would say LoL and DotA do require less time to play or reach a higher level. You don't need to be a strategic mastermind in Starcraft and your statement that strategy is less rewarding (I guess) is true, because there's not enough room for it. LoL / DotA is a teamgame and there are way more possibilities to exploit that with strategic decisions. Starcraft in itself is very complex and its more about reading and understand the game and its flow paired with insanely mechanical demand to the player. If you don't like how the game is designed, feel free to play another game that is more strategic or strategically demanding, yet I can assure you that no one in Starcraft may it MVP or NesTea does fully understand the game and its strategies yet, thats why the game still develops. Also I do think your race is not the very best to play very strategic based games, but reactive mechanical games. Yup agree with this. If you are looking for more strategic based games zerg isn't the race for you at all lol terran would probably be the best fit for that. I am curious why Destiny is complaining about investing time into a game does he think he should only have to play 3-4 hours a day and beat top tier players? That would be retarded and I actually can't believe he doesn't think you should have to invest so much time to become good -_-.
No, he believes that the ''strategy'' part of this game is very slim and that you don't need much intelligence and all that matters is how many hours you put in. He also is willing to make the statement that LoL or DotA do require more ''strategy and intelligence'' However we haven't even defined what ''strategy'' is so nobody can make a statement like this.
|
France12886 Posts
On February 08 2012 04:36 mTw|NarutO wrote:
I think its a very bold statement from someone with next to no achievements. If it doesn't take any skill, the scene wouldn't look like it looks right now.
I agree that skill if you compare for example Broodwar and Starcraft isn't as rewarding especially with in my opinion Protoss and Zerg, yet to state that it takes no skill to play is blatanly wrong and proven by people investing a lot of time yet achieving nothing.
Yeah that's what I was thinking.
Why the huck would he talk about "pro-level" when he has never achieved such a thing o_o. There are a lot of players at the top of european GM who could not be considered "pro" and I'm sure that Destiny never got top on EU ladder (and obviously no results but doing good on ladder is at least a beginning).
But he is probably trolling
|
On February 08 2012 05:13 Destiny wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 04:08 rei wrote:On February 08 2012 02:35 Destiny wrote:
I've made some pretty outlandish statements recently, mostly out of anger, I think, due to how fucking stupid the vocal minority in this community is. That being said, the "strategy" aspect of Starcraft 2 is insanely lacking. I've given up trying to convince casuals of that, but I'd gladly discuss that aspect with any other pro gamer, and I'm pretty certain they'd agree with me.
My complaint has never been that Starcraft 2 is "hard", just that time invested into the game is everything, with strategy/intelligence taking a far far far backseat to just raw games invested.
We would like to see your argument on how strategy aspect of sc2 is insanely lacking(lacking compare to wah?), and why time invested into the game is everything, and why strategy / intelligence is taking a far far far back seat. What about tactics? is that also lacking too? i'm sure someone as smart as yourself knows the difference between strategic aspect of sc2 and tactically aspect of sc2. If you compared sc2 with bw, then ya your statement make sense, sc2 is lacking, but you have not played bw, so you have no idea of how deep that rabbit hole goes.(and time invested in bw is even more a factor than sc2) Where do you draw your arguments? Just write everything off I say as QQ and go ask other pros. I've tried to explain it too many times, but if you don't actually play the game at a high level it's too easy to dismiss everything I say.
People mostly dismiss what you say because you haven't really played SC2 at a high level so it's hard to take your word that SC2 is easy.
|
On February 08 2012 05:17 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2012 05:13 Destiny wrote:On February 08 2012 04:08 rei wrote:On February 08 2012 02:35 Destiny wrote:
I've made some pretty outlandish statements recently, mostly out of anger, I think, due to how fucking stupid the vocal minority in this community is. That being said, the "strategy" aspect of Starcraft 2 is insanely lacking. I've given up trying to convince casuals of that, but I'd gladly discuss that aspect with any other pro gamer, and I'm pretty certain they'd agree with me.
My complaint has never been that Starcraft 2 is "hard", just that time invested into the game is everything, with strategy/intelligence taking a far far far backseat to just raw games invested.
We would like to see your argument on how strategy aspect of sc2 is insanely lacking(lacking compare to wah?), and why time invested into the game is everything, and why strategy / intelligence is taking a far far far back seat. What about tactics? is that also lacking too? i'm sure someone as smart as yourself knows the difference between strategic aspect of sc2 and tactically aspect of sc2. If you compared sc2 with bw, then ya your statement make sense, sc2 is lacking, but you have not played bw, so you have no idea of how deep that rabbit hole goes.(and time invested in bw is even more a factor than sc2) Where do you draw your arguments? Just write everything off I say as QQ and go ask other pros. I've tried to explain it too many times, but if you don't actually play the game at a high level it's too easy to dismiss everything I say. People mostly dismiss what you say because you haven't really played SC2 at a high level so it's hard to take your word that SC2 is easy.
beat me to it
|
France12886 Posts
On February 08 2012 04:46 Recognizable wrote:Destiny, who streams 8 hours a day. Yet has no results says Starcraft takes no skill. He's just trolling. Show nested quote +Now let us look at League of Legends. If League of Legends required no skill, it would not be considered a rising e-sport. If you actually played League of Legends enough, you would know that there are a lot of things that need to be taken into account throughout the laning phase, mid game, and late game. During the laning phase, it is all about harass trades, last hitting, positioning, and overall trying to win your lane. Midgame revolves around securing objectives on the map, i.e. dragon, red/blue buffs for your carries, and pushing down lanes. Once again, this requires thought-process and in most cases, positioning. Late game revolves around team fights and baron. Again, positioning, but now teamwork is a HUGE factor.
I've played Halo and a bit of LoL. Just to draw a comparison. In both games there is a REALLLLLLLLLLLLY small individual skill cap and what both games came down to is which team worked better together. For me personally this isn't fun. In Halo teamwork basically meant people furfilling their roles as a player and getting as much guns on one person. There probably isn't much more to LoL teamwork aswell. Anyway I was a high level Halo player but LoL i've never really played so maybe it's different.
Which Halo do you play?
Halo took less and less skill in the latest games but on Halo 1, a team who won was a team with the best individuals, not so much on Halo 2 but individual skill was really useful and there was quite a high skillcap for a console FPS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
