On March 08 2011 02:14 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:So it is fair to say this is by in large a temporary dislike of the game based on expectations you have created from professional players building on 12 years of trial and error, history and practice. We are starting to see more games where unit positioning is becoming more and more important with "death ball" strategies becoming less and less powerful as opponents adapt.
No, it's not temporary and its roots are not in my appreciation of progamers' skill.
If you compare the micro potential of BW units with their sc2 counterpart you'll see a large gap. People drool over MKP's Marine micro - imagine BW has dozens of units that, if used by a skilled player, can really wreck havoc. SC2 simply doesn't have that.
What's worse, whenever a new trick gets discovered, blizzard dilligently patches it out. Take Void Rays for example. Such "unintended features" are what made BW BW. Same for Quake 3 and CS. They all had those.
Also, as someone mentioned above, sc2 units are too mobile. And there are some broken mechanics that will eventually get nerfed into insignificance.
I think over time, as we get better maps that are designed to challenge SC2 play, and not try to convert BW play into SC2, we will see a return of that excitement you were talking about
I really don't see what you're trying to say here. From what I see, the maps that "challenge sc2 play" are usually garbage (talking about blizzard maps). The most acclaimed maps were largely inspired by the BW map making school (iCCup, GSL maps).
I don't watch a whole lot of BW, but I would have no problem agreeing that the players in that game are definitely more refined and are cognitive of the tons of subtleties and strategies they can expereince, while SC2 pros are still feeling around for that complete "game sense" or "star sense" top tier BW players have.
It's not as much about players having refined their play in BW, as it is about the BW engine, the bugs that actually enhence the gameplay, the counter system that is neither hard nor soft, but rather based on micro and positioning, the nature of each race, and so on.
Sc2 by design sacrifices both skill "floor" and "ceiling" for the sake of accessibility. Smart-casting resulted in overnerfed spells and the lack of really game changing spells, MBS/auto-mining resulted in managing 4-6 bases being as easy as managing just 1-2, as well as less multi-tasking demands, the new pathing, hard counters and DPS changes caused ball vs. ball gameplay and 1 second long battles, and so on, and so on.
Again I do not have the same emotional investment or history with BW that many of you have, but I think its a little harsh to imply SC2 will forever be inferior to BW. I really think it could eventually surpass it if given enough time and care (and Blizzard, for the love of god, stops listening to their official forums. Have you see that place?! It makes you want to kick a baby.)
I used to believe sc2 would surpass BW, but I've seen blizzard's track record. They're doing the opposite of what they should be doing to make sure sc2 lives up to BW. The game is pretty much devoid of micro (not only compared to BW, but also WC3 and even some CNC games), lacks multi-tasking, and has other problems I've mentioned. Blizzard has some inexplicable problems with addressing the problems with their ladder mappool. Not to mention the failure that is BNet "2.0" and the lack of LAN, as well as the KeSPA negotiations fiasco (should've just let KeSPA handle the esports side of sc2 - it would've been at least twice as large by now).
On March 08 2011 04:16 Krogan wrote: This is great news imo, world moves on and it would be much better for esports if people would just get behind sc2 and not split up the scene. The same situation almost killed CS as people refused to move to CS:S and while there were some good reasons not to go to CS:S there is no reason by nostalgia to stay with SC:BW.
So pretty much I don't believe the two can co exist and there is no doubt that Sc2 will be the game to go forward.
Why is supporting a game that's inferior on so many levels much better for esports? The reasons why BW is a better esport material and so many people (even those currently playing sc2 for a living) prefer it over sc2 are not driven by nostalgia. You'd have to be pretty ignorant to imply that nostalgia kept the game alive for so many years. ;;
You know what would be much better for esports? BW getting its own "HD Remix." Good 2D graphics with maybe small UI adjustments. That way the graphics wouldn't be an instant put-off for the masses, and gameplay could attract a ton of competitive players. Not even Koreans would have problem transitioning to it.
And thank god people didn't transition to CS:S as it's a crappy, dumbed down version of the original CS. T___T
I guess it kinda makes sense, especially since the people who only play competitively anymore are generally in Korean proleagues. It's unfortunate, I like watching BW, but with the whole KeSPA vs. Blizzard thing it makes sense.
On March 08 2011 02:14 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:So it is fair to say this is by in large a temporary dislike of the game based on expectations you have created from professional players building on 12 years of trial and error, history and practice. We are starting to see more games where unit positioning is becoming more and more important with "death ball" strategies becoming less and less powerful as opponents adapt.
No, it's not temporary and its roots are not in my appreciation of progamers' skill.
If you compare the micro potential of BW units with their sc2 counterpart you'll see a large gap. People drool over MKP's Marine micro - imagine BW has dozens of units that, if used by a skilled player, can really wreck havoc. SC2 simply doesn't have that.
What's worse, whenever a new trick gets discovered, blizzard dilligently patches it out. Take Void Rays for example. Such "unintended features" are what made BW BW. Same for Quake 3 and CS. They all had those.
I think over time, as we get better maps that are designed to challenge SC2 play, and not try to convert BW play into SC2, we will see a return of that excitement you were talking about
I really don't see what you're trying to say here. From what I see, the maps that "challenge sc2 play" are usually garbage (talking about blizzard maps). The most acclaimed maps were largely inspired by the BW map making school (iCCup, GSL maps).
I don't watch a whole lot of BW, but I would have no problem agreeing that the players in that game are definitely more refined and are cognitive of the tons of subtleties and strategies they can expereince, while SC2 pros are still feeling around for that complete "game sense" or "star sense" top tier BW players have.
It's not as much about players having refined their play in BW, as it is about the BW engine, the bugs that actually enhence the gameplay, the counter system that is neither hard nor soft, but rather based on micro and positioning, the nature of each race, and so on.
Sc2 by design sacrifices both skill "floor" and "ceiling" for the sake of accessibility. Smart-casting resulted in overnerfed spells and the lack of really game changing spells, MBS/auto-mining resulted in managing 4-6 bases being as easy as managing just 1-2, as well as less multi-tasking demands, the new pathing, hard counters and DPS changes caused ball vs. ball gameplay and 1 second long battles, and so on, and so on.
Again I do not have the same emotional investment or history with BW that many of you have, but I think its a little harsh to imply SC2 will forever be inferior to BW. I really think it could eventually surpass it if given enough time and care (and Blizzard, for the love of god, stops listening to their official forums. Have you see that place?! It makes you want to kick a baby.)
I used to believe sc2 would surpass BW, but I've seen blizzard's track record. They're doing the opposite of what they should be doing to make sure sc2 lives up to BW. The game is pretty much devoid of micro (not only compared to BW, but also WC3 and even some CNC games), lacks multi-tasking, and has other problems I've mentioned. Blizzard has some inexplicable problems with addressing the problems with their ladder mappool. Not to mention the failure that is BNet "2.0" and the lack of LAN, as well as the KeSPA negotiations fiasco (should've just let KeSPA handle the esports side of sc2 - it would've been at least twice as large by now).
On March 08 2011 04:16 Krogan wrote: This is great news imo, world moves on and it would be much better for esports if people would just get behind sc2 and not split up the scene. The same situation almost killed CS as people refused to move to CS:S and while there were some good reasons not to go to CS:S there is no reason by nostalgia to stay with SC:BW.
So pretty much I don't believe the two can co exist and there is no doubt that Sc2 will be the game to go forward.
Why is supporting a game that's inferior on so many levels much better for esports? The reasons why BW is a better esport material and so many people (even those currently playing sc2 for a living) prefer it over sc2 are not driven by nostalgia. You'd have to be pretty ignorant to imply that nostalgia kept the game alive for so many years. ;;
You know what would be much better for esports? BW getting its own "HD Remix." Good 2D graphics with maybe small UI adjustments. That way the graphics wouldn't be an instant put-off for the masses, and gameplay could attract a ton of competitive players. Not even Koreans would have problem transitioning to it.
And thank god people didn't transition to CS:S as it's a crappy, dumbed down version of the original CS. T___T
Bottom line, what's probably better for esports is to stop fighting an already lost battle. Grab some perspective while at it too. Much of what you conclude as fact is just pretty much your very biased opinion. At least try not to let it reek when you're going to defend the game you love. A considerable amount of nostalgia is unavoidable when such a big icon for the whole gaming industry beings to fade, but SC2 is by no means a bad replacement. Give it some credit, enjoy it as the rest of us.
On March 08 2011 05:10 maybenexttime wrote:You know what would be much better for esports? BW getting its own "HD Remix." Good 2D graphics with maybe small UI adjustments. That way the graphics wouldn't be an instant put-off for the masses, and gameplay could attract a ton of competitive players. Not even Koreans would have problem transitioning to it.
I'd don't usually quote ppl and expand on their comments, but BAM! Talk about 100% hitting the nail on the head! It's too bad Blizzard waited so damn long to build SC2 and got sucked into the "3D" world. The game didn't need a complete makeover. An epic add-on (remember when BroodWar replaced SCraft!) or HD remix would have been a dream come true. I never wanted a NEW scraft, just a better one!
On March 08 2011 02:14 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:So it is fair to say this is by in large a temporary dislike of the game based on expectations you have created from professional players building on 12 years of trial and error, history and practice. We are starting to see more games where unit positioning is becoming more and more important with "death ball" strategies becoming less and less powerful as opponents adapt.
No, it's not temporary and its roots are not in my appreciation of progamers' skill.
If you compare the micro potential of BW units with their sc2 counterpart you'll see a large gap. People drool over MKP's Marine micro - imagine BW has dozens of units that, if used by a skilled player, can really wreck havoc. SC2 simply doesn't have that.
What's worse, whenever a new trick gets discovered, blizzard dilligently patches it out. Take Void Rays for example. Such "unintended features" are what made BW BW. Same for Quake 3 and CS. They all had those.
Also, as someone mentioned above, sc2 units are too mobile. And there are some broken mechanics that will eventually get nerfed into insignificance.
I think over time, as we get better maps that are designed to challenge SC2 play, and not try to convert BW play into SC2, we will see a return of that excitement you were talking about
I really don't see what you're trying to say here. From what I see, the maps that "challenge sc2 play" are usually garbage (talking about blizzard maps). The most acclaimed maps were largely inspired by the BW map making school (iCCup, GSL maps).
I don't watch a whole lot of BW, but I would have no problem agreeing that the players in that game are definitely more refined and are cognitive of the tons of subtleties and strategies they can expereince, while SC2 pros are still feeling around for that complete "game sense" or "star sense" top tier BW players have.
It's not as much about players having refined their play in BW, as it is about the BW engine, the bugs that actually enhence the gameplay, the counter system that is neither hard nor soft, but rather based on micro and positioning, the nature of each race, and so on.
Sc2 by design sacrifices both skill "floor" and "ceiling" for the sake of accessibility. Smart-casting resulted in overnerfed spells and the lack of really game changing spells, MBS/auto-mining resulted in managing 4-6 bases being as easy as managing just 1-2, as well as less multi-tasking demands, the new pathing, hard counters and DPS changes caused ball vs. ball gameplay and 1 second long battles, and so on, and so on.
Again I do not have the same emotional investment or history with BW that many of you have, but I think its a little harsh to imply SC2 will forever be inferior to BW. I really think it could eventually surpass it if given enough time and care (and Blizzard, for the love of god, stops listening to their official forums. Have you see that place?! It makes you want to kick a baby.)
I used to believe sc2 would surpass BW, but I've seen blizzard's track record. They're doing the opposite of what they should be doing to make sure sc2 lives up to BW. The game is pretty much devoid of micro (not only compared to BW, but also WC3 and even some CNC games), lacks multi-tasking, and has other problems I've mentioned. Blizzard has some inexplicable problems with addressing the problems with their ladder mappool. Not to mention the failure that is BNet "2.0" and the lack of LAN, as well as the KeSPA negotiations fiasco (should've just let KeSPA handle the esports side of sc2 - it would've been at least twice as large by now).
On March 08 2011 04:16 Krogan wrote: This is great news imo, world moves on and it would be much better for esports if people would just get behind sc2 and not split up the scene. The same situation almost killed CS as people refused to move to CS:S and while there were some good reasons not to go to CS:S there is no reason by nostalgia to stay with SC:BW.
So pretty much I don't believe the two can co exist and there is no doubt that Sc2 will be the game to go forward.
Why is supporting a game that's inferior on so many levels much better for esports? The reasons why BW is a better esport material and so many people (even those currently playing sc2 for a living) prefer it over sc2 are not driven by nostalgia. You'd have to be pretty ignorant to imply that nostalgia kept the game alive for so many years. ;;
You know what would be much better for esports? BW getting its own "HD Remix." Good 2D graphics with maybe small UI adjustments. That way the graphics wouldn't be an instant put-off for the masses, and gameplay could attract a ton of competitive players. Not even Koreans would have problem transitioning to it.
And thank god people didn't transition to CS:S as it's a crappy, dumbed down version of the original CS. T___T
Bottom line, what's probably better for esports is to stop fighting an already lost battle. Grab some perspective while at it too. Much of what you conclude as fact is just pretty much your very biased opinion. At least try not to let it reek when you're going to defend the game you love. A considerable amount of nostalgia is unavoidable when such a big icon for the whole gaming industry beings to fade, but SC2 is by no means a bad replacement. Give it some credit, enjoy it as the rest of us.
What bias? Huh?
Also BW is not fading, far from it. T____T And sc2 wouldn't be a bad replacement for any other RTS, but it's bad for BW. BW is really something "beyond the game", while sc2 is merely a good game, although with many flaws the developers refuse to address.
On March 08 2011 02:14 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:So it is fair to say this is by in large a temporary dislike of the game based on expectations you have created from professional players building on 12 years of trial and error, history and practice. We are starting to see more games where unit positioning is becoming more and more important with "death ball" strategies becoming less and less powerful as opponents adapt.
No, it's not temporary and its roots are not in my appreciation of progamers' skill.
If you compare the micro potential of BW units with their sc2 counterpart you'll see a large gap. People drool over MKP's Marine micro - imagine BW has dozens of units that, if used by a skilled player, can really wreck havoc. SC2 simply doesn't have that.
What's worse, whenever a new trick gets discovered, blizzard dilligently patches it out. Take Void Rays for example. Such "unintended features" are what made BW BW. Same for Quake 3 and CS. They all had those.
Also, as someone mentioned above, sc2 units are too mobile. And there are some broken mechanics that will eventually get nerfed into insignificance.
I think over time, as we get better maps that are designed to challenge SC2 play, and not try to convert BW play into SC2, we will see a return of that excitement you were talking about
I really don't see what you're trying to say here. From what I see, the maps that "challenge sc2 play" are usually garbage (talking about blizzard maps). The most acclaimed maps were largely inspired by the BW map making school (iCCup, GSL maps).
I don't watch a whole lot of BW, but I would have no problem agreeing that the players in that game are definitely more refined and are cognitive of the tons of subtleties and strategies they can expereince, while SC2 pros are still feeling around for that complete "game sense" or "star sense" top tier BW players have.
It's not as much about players having refined their play in BW, as it is about the BW engine, the bugs that actually enhence the gameplay, the counter system that is neither hard nor soft, but rather based on micro and positioning, the nature of each race, and so on.
Sc2 by design sacrifices both skill "floor" and "ceiling" for the sake of accessibility. Smart-casting resulted in overnerfed spells and the lack of really game changing spells, MBS/auto-mining resulted in managing 4-6 bases being as easy as managing just 1-2, as well as less multi-tasking demands, the new pathing, hard counters and DPS changes caused ball vs. ball gameplay and 1 second long battles, and so on, and so on.
Again I do not have the same emotional investment or history with BW that many of you have, but I think its a little harsh to imply SC2 will forever be inferior to BW. I really think it could eventually surpass it if given enough time and care (and Blizzard, for the love of god, stops listening to their official forums. Have you see that place?! It makes you want to kick a baby.)
I used to believe sc2 would surpass BW, but I've seen blizzard's track record. They're doing the opposite of what they should be doing to make sure sc2 lives up to BW. The game is pretty much devoid of micro (not only compared to BW, but also WC3 and even some CNC games), lacks multi-tasking, and has other problems I've mentioned. Blizzard has some inexplicable problems with addressing the problems with their ladder mappool. Not to mention the failure that is BNet "2.0" and the lack of LAN, as well as the KeSPA negotiations fiasco (should've just let KeSPA handle the esports side of sc2 - it would've been at least twice as large by now).
On March 08 2011 04:16 Krogan wrote: This is great news imo, world moves on and it would be much better for esports if people would just get behind sc2 and not split up the scene. The same situation almost killed CS as people refused to move to CS:S and while there were some good reasons not to go to CS:S there is no reason by nostalgia to stay with SC:BW.
So pretty much I don't believe the two can co exist and there is no doubt that Sc2 will be the game to go forward.
Why is supporting a game that's inferior on so many levels much better for esports? The reasons why BW is a better esport material and so many people (even those currently playing sc2 for a living) prefer it over sc2 are not driven by nostalgia. You'd have to be pretty ignorant to imply that nostalgia kept the game alive for so many years. ;;
You know what would be much better for esports? BW getting its own "HD Remix." Good 2D graphics with maybe small UI adjustments. That way the graphics wouldn't be an instant put-off for the masses, and gameplay could attract a ton of competitive players. Not even Koreans would have problem transitioning to it.
And thank god people didn't transition to CS:S as it's a crappy, dumbed down version of the original CS. T___T
Bottom line, what's probably better for esports is to stop fighting an already lost battle. Grab some perspective while at it too. Much of what you conclude as fact is just pretty much your very biased opinion. At least try not to let it reek when you're going to defend the game you love. A considerable amount of nostalgia is unavoidable when such a big icon for the whole gaming industry beings to fade, but SC2 is by no means a bad replacement. Give it some credit, enjoy it as the rest of us.
You have to understand that if even the pros at your game don't like playing sc2 then there is something wrong.
On March 08 2011 05:10 maybenexttime wrote:You know what would be much better for esports? BW getting its own "HD Remix." Good 2D graphics with maybe small UI adjustments. That way the graphics wouldn't be an instant put-off for the masses, and gameplay could attract a ton of competitive players. Not even Koreans would have problem transitioning to it.
I'd don't usually quote ppl and expand on their comments, but BAM! Talk about 100% hitting the nail on the head! It's too bad Blizzard waited so damn long to build SC2 and got sucked into the "3D" world. The game didn't need a complete makeover. An epic add-on (remember when BroodWar replaced SCraft!) or HD remix would have been a dream come true. I never wanted a NEW scraft, just a better one!
And yet, for every BW fan who says that SC2 changes too much, there are at least 2 casual players who say that SC2 changed too little and is a BW clone. Heck, even Kotaku claims that they were disappointed by the fact that SC2 wasn't different enough from BW. http://kotaku.com/#!5720176/the-year-in-disappointments
Obviously, Blizzard can't satisfy everyone. No one can. Blizzard tried to compromise, yet we still get people complaining that SC2 changed too much/little compared to BW.
The fact the game requires less mechanics to play than the original is not his opinion though, it's just true and certainly could harm it's eSports potential in the long run. Personally i don't find as much enjoyment watching pro SC2 because simply it is not impressive. A lot of it is not beyond what i can manage to do with my paltry 140 apm.. yet in BW, the skill ceiling is ridiculous. The jump from top amateurs to pro is insanely high even. I don't watch FPS or fighting games often but i'm guessing people watch those for the same reasons we enjoy BW, frighteningly good reflexes and skills that is beyond the audiences skills.
I'm sure someone is going to pop up and tell me how SC2 hasn't advanced to this point yet; Please don't bring up that tired argument again. Anyway in regards for the topic i think it's very much a shame it's not being supported considering BW has been in it from the start i believe, and still has a stable proscene. If eSports is to be viable in the long-term surely supporting the players and older games is important..
On March 08 2011 05:41 Musiq wrote: You have to understand that if even the pros at your game don't like playing sc2 then there is something wrong.
This reminds me of the other day when i saw Kolll ban someone from his stream for asking if he played SC2. I get the feeling from interviews that a lot of foreign players are simply switching for the possibility to make money rather than genuinely think its better which is unfortunate.. i see a lot of answers like 'It has potential' and avoiding the question when the inevitable comparison to BW is asked.
On March 08 2011 05:10 maybenexttime wrote:You know what would be much better for esports? BW getting its own "HD Remix." Good 2D graphics with maybe small UI adjustments. That way the graphics wouldn't be an instant put-off for the masses, and gameplay could attract a ton of competitive players. Not even Koreans would have problem transitioning to it.
I'd don't usually quote ppl and expand on their comments, but BAM! Talk about 100% hitting the nail on the head! It's too bad Blizzard waited so damn long to build SC2 and got sucked into the "3D" world. The game didn't need a complete makeover. An epic add-on (remember when BroodWar replaced SCraft!) or HD remix would have been a dream come true. I never wanted a NEW scraft, just a better one!
Do you HONESTLY believe that a HD Remix of BW would have increased the TL.net userbase tenfold, had millions of new people playing worldwide and prompted sponsors to pump hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars into the foreign scene?
There's a lot of nostalgia in this thread by but and large the BW (and WC3) community has transitioned into SC2 about as smoothly as any competitive scene I can recall so I don't think the game has been quite the failure some on this forum wish to believe.
On March 08 2011 02:14 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:So it is fair to say this is by in large a temporary dislike of the game based on expectations you have created from professional players building on 12 years of trial and error, history and practice. We are starting to see more games where unit positioning is becoming more and more important with "death ball" strategies becoming less and less powerful as opponents adapt.
No, it's not temporary and its roots are not in my appreciation of progamers' skill.
If you compare the micro potential of BW units with their sc2 counterpart you'll see a large gap. People drool over MKP's Marine micro - imagine BW has dozens of units that, if used by a skilled player, can really wreck havoc. SC2 simply doesn't have that.
What's worse, whenever a new trick gets discovered, blizzard dilligently patches it out. Take Void Rays for example. Such "unintended features" are what made BW BW. Same for Quake 3 and CS. They all had those.
Also, as someone mentioned above, sc2 units are too mobile. And there are some broken mechanics that will eventually get nerfed into insignificance.
I think over time, as we get better maps that are designed to challenge SC2 play, and not try to convert BW play into SC2, we will see a return of that excitement you were talking about
I really don't see what you're trying to say here. From what I see, the maps that "challenge sc2 play" are usually garbage (talking about blizzard maps). The most acclaimed maps were largely inspired by the BW map making school (iCCup, GSL maps).
I don't watch a whole lot of BW, but I would have no problem agreeing that the players in that game are definitely more refined and are cognitive of the tons of subtleties and strategies they can expereince, while SC2 pros are still feeling around for that complete "game sense" or "star sense" top tier BW players have.
It's not as much about players having refined their play in BW, as it is about the BW engine, the bugs that actually enhence the gameplay, the counter system that is neither hard nor soft, but rather based on micro and positioning, the nature of each race, and so on.
Sc2 by design sacrifices both skill "floor" and "ceiling" for the sake of accessibility. Smart-casting resulted in overnerfed spells and the lack of really game changing spells, MBS/auto-mining resulted in managing 4-6 bases being as easy as managing just 1-2, as well as less multi-tasking demands, the new pathing, hard counters and DPS changes caused ball vs. ball gameplay and 1 second long battles, and so on, and so on.
Again I do not have the same emotional investment or history with BW that many of you have, but I think its a little harsh to imply SC2 will forever be inferior to BW. I really think it could eventually surpass it if given enough time and care (and Blizzard, for the love of god, stops listening to their official forums. Have you see that place?! It makes you want to kick a baby.)
I used to believe sc2 would surpass BW, but I've seen blizzard's track record. They're doing the opposite of what they should be doing to make sure sc2 lives up to BW. The game is pretty much devoid of micro (not only compared to BW, but also WC3 and even some CNC games), lacks multi-tasking, and has other problems I've mentioned. Blizzard has some inexplicable problems with addressing the problems with their ladder mappool. Not to mention the failure that is BNet "2.0" and the lack of LAN, as well as the KeSPA negotiations fiasco (should've just let KeSPA handle the esports side of sc2 - it would've been at least twice as large by now).
On March 08 2011 04:16 Krogan wrote: This is great news imo, world moves on and it would be much better for esports if people would just get behind sc2 and not split up the scene. The same situation almost killed CS as people refused to move to CS:S and while there were some good reasons not to go to CS:S there is no reason by nostalgia to stay with SC:BW.
So pretty much I don't believe the two can co exist and there is no doubt that Sc2 will be the game to go forward.
Why is supporting a game that's inferior on so many levels much better for esports? The reasons why BW is a better esport material and so many people (even those currently playing sc2 for a living) prefer it over sc2 are not driven by nostalgia. You'd have to be pretty ignorant to imply that nostalgia kept the game alive for so many years. ;;
You know what would be much better for esports? BW getting its own "HD Remix." Good 2D graphics with maybe small UI adjustments. That way the graphics wouldn't be an instant put-off for the masses, and gameplay could attract a ton of competitive players. Not even Koreans would have problem transitioning to it.
And thank god people didn't transition to CS:S as it's a crappy, dumbed down version of the original CS. T___T
Bottom line, what's probably better for esports is to stop fighting an already lost battle. Grab some perspective while at it too. Much of what you conclude as fact is just pretty much your very biased opinion. At least try not to let it reek when you're going to defend the game you love. A considerable amount of nostalgia is unavoidable when such a big icon for the whole gaming industry beings to fade, but SC2 is by no means a bad replacement. Give it some credit, enjoy it as the rest of us.
What bias? Huh?
Also BW is not fading, far from it. T____T And sc2 wouldn't be a bad replacement for any other RTS, but it's bad for BW. BW is really something "beyond the game", while sc2 is merely a good game, although with many flaws the developers refuse to address.
Keep in mind SC2 has two more expansions on the way, both of which i'm sure will add more depth to the game. Give it a chance to fully form before you call it "merely a good game"
On March 08 2011 05:48 infinity2k9 wrote: The fact the game requires less mechanics to play than the original is not his opinion though, it's just true and certainly could harm it's eSports potential in the long run. Personally i don't find as much enjoyment watching pro SC2 because simply it is not impressive
this opinion would not exist if we could link to youtubes of some of the best games in SC2, but unfortunately very few of them are the first game of a series on GOM.
also the OMG thats incredible factor tends to be cerebral instead of physical.
that is it's amazing because they thought of everything, not amazing because they clicked fast.
Kind of like that famous boxer game where he proxy raxed and made a bunch of depots around the map, and then slowly drew the noose tighter and tighter.
On March 08 2011 05:10 maybenexttime wrote:You know what would be much better for esports? BW getting its own "HD Remix." Good 2D graphics with maybe small UI adjustments. That way the graphics wouldn't be an instant put-off for the masses, and gameplay could attract a ton of competitive players. Not even Koreans would have problem transitioning to it.
I'd don't usually quote ppl and expand on their comments, but BAM! Talk about 100% hitting the nail on the head! It's too bad Blizzard waited so damn long to build SC2 and got sucked into the "3D" world. The game didn't need a complete makeover. An epic add-on (remember when BroodWar replaced SCraft!) or HD remix would have been a dream come true. I never wanted a NEW scraft, just a better one!
Do you HONESTLY believe that a HD Remix of BW would have increased the TL.net userbase tenfold, had millions of new people playing worldwide and prompted sponsors to pump hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars into the foreign scene?
There's a lot of nostalgia in this thread by but and large the BW (and WC3) community has transitioned into SC2 about as smoothly as any competitive scene I can recall so I don't think the game has been quite the failure some on this forum wish to believe.
How many of the people will stay in the long run though? I don't think anyones saying its a failure (though it's certainly underperformed in the Korean market compared to the rest of the world), but people are worried about the game and if it's worthy for eSports, not that theres millions of casual players who bought it. They won't be around in a few years time anyway.
On March 08 2011 05:48 infinity2k9 wrote: The fact the game requires less mechanics to play than the original is not his opinion though, it's just true and certainly could harm it's eSports potential in the long run. Personally i don't find as much enjoyment watching pro SC2 because simply it is not impressive
this opinion would not exist if we could link to youtubes of some of the best games in SC2, but unfortunately very few of them are the first game of a series on GOM.
also the OMG thats incredible factor tends to be cerebral instead of physical.
that is it's amazing because they thought of everything, not amazing because they clicked fast.
Kind of like that famous boxer game where he proxy raxed and made a bunch of depots around the map, and then slowly drew the noose tighter and tighter.
This is the other obvious reply... someone trying to point out the game is more strategical based. But then your example is a BW game.. remember this is a sequel and a LOT of potential strategies have been thought of ages ago anyway. Not everyone can innovate. So what example is there, strategical or mechanical, that is impressive in SC2 in comparison to BW? Cause i just see re-thinking of strategy that people thought of years ago, and re-implementations of old ideas. At the end of the day something like that is hardly even a WOW moment usually, like doing a clever fake such as making your cyber core spin to fake upgrade. Thats cerebral but spectator wise its not exactly exciting.
On March 08 2011 05:10 maybenexttime wrote:You know what would be much better for esports? BW getting its own "HD Remix." Good 2D graphics with maybe small UI adjustments. That way the graphics wouldn't be an instant put-off for the masses, and gameplay could attract a ton of competitive players. Not even Koreans would have problem transitioning to it.
I'd don't usually quote ppl and expand on their comments, but BAM! Talk about 100% hitting the nail on the head! It's too bad Blizzard waited so damn long to build SC2 and got sucked into the "3D" world. The game didn't need a complete makeover. An epic add-on (remember when BroodWar replaced SCraft!) or HD remix would have been a dream come true. I never wanted a NEW scraft, just a better one!
Do you HONESTLY believe that a HD Remix of BW would have increased the TL.net userbase tenfold, had millions of new people playing worldwide and prompted sponsors to pump hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars into the foreign scene?
There's a lot of nostalgia in this thread by but and large the BW (and WC3) community has transitioned into SC2 about as smoothly as any competitive scene I can recall so I don't think the game has been quite the failure some on this forum wish to believe.
How many of the people will stay in the long run though? I don't think anyones saying its a failure (though it's certainly underperformed in the Korean market compared to the rest of the world), but people are worried about the game and if it's worthy for eSports, not that theres millions of casual players who bought it. They won't be around in a few years time anyway.
IMO, I would give it until 2015 after the last patch after the last expansion is released before any final judgement are made about the game's viability as an e-sport. SC1 without BW didn't seem to be particularly mind-blowing as an e-sport, and there is little reason to believe that Blizzard can't turn around SC2 with one or two expansions like they did with BW or even WC3 Frozen Throne. Until then, SC2 is an unfinished product that has tons of untapped potential waiting to be unleashed once the proper tweaks are made.
On March 08 2011 02:14 Torpedo.Vegas wrote:So it is fair to say this is by in large a temporary dislike of the game based on expectations you have created from professional players building on 12 years of trial and error, history and practice. We are starting to see more games where unit positioning is becoming more and more important with "death ball" strategies becoming less and less powerful as opponents adapt.
No, it's not temporary and its roots are not in my appreciation of progamers' skill.
If you compare the micro potential of BW units with their sc2 counterpart you'll see a large gap. People drool over MKP's Marine micro - imagine BW has dozens of units that, if used by a skilled player, can really wreck havoc. SC2 simply doesn't have that.
What's worse, whenever a new trick gets discovered, blizzard dilligently patches it out. Take Void Rays for example. Such "unintended features" are what made BW BW. Same for Quake 3 and CS. They all had those.
Also, as someone mentioned above, sc2 units are too mobile. And there are some broken mechanics that will eventually get nerfed into insignificance.
I think over time, as we get better maps that are designed to challenge SC2 play, and not try to convert BW play into SC2, we will see a return of that excitement you were talking about
I really don't see what you're trying to say here. From what I see, the maps that "challenge sc2 play" are usually garbage (talking about blizzard maps). The most acclaimed maps were largely inspired by the BW map making school (iCCup, GSL maps).
I don't watch a whole lot of BW, but I would have no problem agreeing that the players in that game are definitely more refined and are cognitive of the tons of subtleties and strategies they can expereince, while SC2 pros are still feeling around for that complete "game sense" or "star sense" top tier BW players have.
It's not as much about players having refined their play in BW, as it is about the BW engine, the bugs that actually enhence the gameplay, the counter system that is neither hard nor soft, but rather based on micro and positioning, the nature of each race, and so on.
Sc2 by design sacrifices both skill "floor" and "ceiling" for the sake of accessibility. Smart-casting resulted in overnerfed spells and the lack of really game changing spells, MBS/auto-mining resulted in managing 4-6 bases being as easy as managing just 1-2, as well as less multi-tasking demands, the new pathing, hard counters and DPS changes caused ball vs. ball gameplay and 1 second long battles, and so on, and so on.
Again I do not have the same emotional investment or history with BW that many of you have, but I think its a little harsh to imply SC2 will forever be inferior to BW. I really think it could eventually surpass it if given enough time and care (and Blizzard, for the love of god, stops listening to their official forums. Have you see that place?! It makes you want to kick a baby.)
I used to believe sc2 would surpass BW, but I've seen blizzard's track record. They're doing the opposite of what they should be doing to make sure sc2 lives up to BW. The game is pretty much devoid of micro (not only compared to BW, but also WC3 and even some CNC games), lacks multi-tasking, and has other problems I've mentioned. Blizzard has some inexplicable problems with addressing the problems with their ladder mappool. Not to mention the failure that is BNet "2.0" and the lack of LAN, as well as the KeSPA negotiations fiasco (should've just let KeSPA handle the esports side of sc2 - it would've been at least twice as large by now).
On March 08 2011 04:16 Krogan wrote: This is great news imo, world moves on and it would be much better for esports if people would just get behind sc2 and not split up the scene. The same situation almost killed CS as people refused to move to CS:S and while there were some good reasons not to go to CS:S there is no reason by nostalgia to stay with SC:BW.
So pretty much I don't believe the two can co exist and there is no doubt that Sc2 will be the game to go forward.
Why is supporting a game that's inferior on so many levels much better for esports? The reasons why BW is a better esport material and so many people (even those currently playing sc2 for a living) prefer it over sc2 are not driven by nostalgia. You'd have to be pretty ignorant to imply that nostalgia kept the game alive for so many years. ;;
You know what would be much better for esports? BW getting its own "HD Remix." Good 2D graphics with maybe small UI adjustments. That way the graphics wouldn't be an instant put-off for the masses, and gameplay could attract a ton of competitive players. Not even Koreans would have problem transitioning to it.
And thank god people didn't transition to CS:S as it's a crappy, dumbed down version of the original CS. T___T
Bottom line, what's probably better for esports is to stop fighting an already lost battle. Grab some perspective while at it too. Much of what you conclude as fact is just pretty much your very biased opinion. At least try not to let it reek when you're going to defend the game you love. A considerable amount of nostalgia is unavoidable when such a big icon for the whole gaming industry beings to fade, but SC2 is by no means a bad replacement. Give it some credit, enjoy it as the rest of us.
What bias? Huh?
Also BW is not fading, far from it. T____T And sc2 wouldn't be a bad replacement for any other RTS, but it's bad for BW. BW is really something "beyond the game", while sc2 is merely a good game, although with many flaws the developers refuse to address.
Keep in mind SC2 has two more expansions on the way, both of which i'm sure will add more depth to the game. Give it a chance to fully form before you call it "merely a good game"
I know that there are two expansions on the way, however, my point is that the game is heading in the wrong direction.
Blizzard refuses to address several of the issues that can be fixed before the expansions, such as micro (Project Micro e.g.), maps (iCCup, GSL), not patching out tricks discovered by players, etc.
I find it highly unlikely that blizzard will fix the engine related issues in either of the expansions either. I also don't expect any radical change in their design philosophy (many dull units, overnerfed spells, broken maps, too many extremely mobile units instead of positional play, hard counters, etc.), because they have confirmed they want to stick to it in many interviews, and, apparently, want to design the game in a predictable way in order to be able to balance it (which is flawed - they have to make the units fun in the first place, then make them require skill to use, and only then try to balance them, otherwise what's the point of having a balanced, but boring game?).
On March 08 2011 05:48 infinity2k9 wrote: The fact the game requires less mechanics to play than the original is not his opinion though, it's just true and certainly could harm it's eSports potential in the long run. Personally i don't find as much enjoyment watching pro SC2 because simply it is not impressive
this opinion would not exist if we could link to youtubes of some of the best games in SC2, but unfortunately very few of them are the first game of a series on GOM.
also the OMG thats incredible factor tends to be cerebral instead of physical.
that is it's amazing because they thought of everything, not amazing because they clicked fast.
Kind of like that famous boxer game where he proxy raxed and made a bunch of depots around the map, and then slowly drew the noose tighter and tighter.
Seriously, even the top sc2 players admit that the game is far from as mechanically demanding as BW. SC2 has maybe a couple units that allow for the kind of micro you see in BW, while BW has plenty of them. Same for spells. Not to mention the fact that BW has very few spells that prevent micro, while in sc2 they're the core spells (FF, Fungal, Marauder's shells).
And you're talking as if BW didn't have any celebral "wow moments," while it actually has more of them (mostly because it's way more refined after so many years).
Also that "clicking fast," as you put it, is extremely mentally taxing in itself. Pretty much anybody is capable of 200-300 APM - by spamming keys or even typing. However, not everyone is mentally capable to translate that speed into meaningful actions within the game.
Take WC3 and BW for example. 300 APM (average) in WC3 is worth less than 300 APM in BW, if you compare the FPVODs, as WC3 progamers tend to fill the downtimes (when they're not in any battle) with spam, so that they can keep up with the speed requirement in battles.
On March 07 2011 18:06 AcOrP wrote: I'm confused by all the posts here to be honest watching SC:BW kept me for years while SC2 lost me for a few months, I think if SC2 replace BW in korea it won't take long till people get bored. I don't find it fun to watch SC2 games anymore not GSL nor anyother tourney, lets see if the expansions bring more entertaiment but if they don't SC2 will die in a year or two...
I have seen similar posts like these. I played a bit of Brood war in early 2000's (01-03ish) then on and off until SC2. But I never got into esports really until SC2. Could hardcore BW viewers elaborate a bit more upon exactly what facets of competitive play are attractive to watch in BW and what turns you off to SC2. I'm curious if its something fundamental in the game design that is unchangable or something temporal that will/could either be patched by the developers or altered by the tournament organizers/team organizers.
What turns me off in sc2? Ball vs. ball gameplay, lack of positioning and micro compared to BW (look up some highlight videos in TLPD/YouTube, especially Jaedong's and JulyZerg's Muta micro, sc2 Muta "micro" pales in comparison), lots of boring spells (because of smart-casting blizzard had to severely nerf plenty of promising spells), dull/broken units (such as Colossus, Immortal, Marauder, etc.; especially considering the fact that they replaced some of the most amazing units in the history of RTS games, like Vultures), comparable lack of mechanical demands, the lack of "bugs" that made the game more varied (like mineral jumping e.g.), horrible maps, the fact that the three races are pretty similar compared to their BW counterparts (in BW playing another match-up is almost like playing another game).
I especially dislike the fact that in sc2 managing 4-5 bases is as easy as managing just 1-2, pretty much. In BW the more bases you have, the more multi-tasking demanding playing the game gets. You have to manage your "screen time" and so on.
I'm sure there are more. If you read this post, tell me if you want me to post some more. ;p
So it is fair to say this is by in large a temporary dislike of the game based on expectations you have created from professional players building on 12 years of trial and error, history and practice. We are starting to see more games where unit positioning is becoming more and more important with "death ball" strategies becoming less and less powerful as opponents adapt.
I think over time, as we get better maps that are designed to challenge SC2 play, and not try to convert BW play into SC2, we will see a return of that excitement you were talking about.
I don't watch a whole lot of BW, but I would have no problem agreeing that the players in that game are definitely more refined and are cognitive of the tons of subtleties and strategies they can expereince, while SC2 pros are still feeling around for that complete "game sense" or "star sense" top tier BW players have.
Again I do not have the same emotional investment or history with BW that many of you have, but I think its a little harsh to imply SC2 will forever be inferior to BW. I really think it could eventually surpass it if given enough time and care (and Blizzard, for the love of god, stops listening to their official forums. Have you see that place?! It makes you want to kick a baby.)
Not going to happen unless Blizz decides to move away from their hard counter system. SC2 lacks units who can completely wreck the opposing side because of how they are designed and how they function, not because they have some arbitrary damage bonus against a certain type of unit.
Unit positioning is also not as important when most units are extremely mobile. SC2 needs more siege tank-type units that are more powerful when positioned correctly but can't have their positioning changed easily. Not to mention that the SC2 siege tank is weaker than the BW siege tank.
Mobility isn't all that common in SC2. Zerg need upgrades and creep to be tactically mobile early game. Zealots are kinda slow without upgrades along with the mothership, void rays, HT's, Obs, Warp Prisms, etc. Terran have Thors, Siege tanks, BC's, etc. So I think that unit positioning is more of a factor regarding map layout then the current units directly (which do still need some tweaking). Maps designed around SC2 mechanics and units instead of transplanting Brood War design elements and logic would yield far better games, because SC2 is not BW (obviously). But it bears repeating because you cannot simply copy and paste strategies, maps, and game sense between the two, which is a factor I think that contributes to the polarized community.
Also, I am not sure what you meant by one unit that can completely wreck the opposing side because of how they are designed and how they function. That sounds horrible for balance.
@maybenexttime
By the map thing I meant maps that designed with SC2 mechanics and game design in mind rather then mapmakers copy and pasting BW maps and expecting BW-like results in SC2. The game needs to develop more and map makers need to develop maps that capitalize and are balanced around the unique designs on SC2 and not try to emulate BW-style maps. I do agree though I Blizzard's lack of apparent attention to the 3rd party map makers in regards to streamlining competitive play with the new maps (see vote up system instead of vote down).
Also, correct me if I am wrong, but Blizzard did a lot of patching for Starcraft in the early to mid life span. Only later did they really just drop support for it when SC2 development got underway. Balancing and altering "unintended" things did happen.
I really do see where you are coming from in your criticisms. If you take SC2's design and impart it upon BW style logic and habits, it appears all wrong. And I can't argue against that. If Flash or Jaedong had auto-cast or Mules etc. etc. it would totally be game breaking. But the thing is, SC2 is not BW. Its a different Starcraft experience. And one that admittedly does need refinement and further tweaking. If you are looking for Blizzard to tweak it back into a virtual BW clone, I am sorry but you are going to be sorely disappointed.
SC2 has a lot of potential, and a combination of effective game tweaks to units (perhaps adding a few units here and there) and better map pools I think would really lead you to change your mind. Giving pros more time to develop their game sense and comfort with their races would lead to much more interesting battles and series. But if you keep holding on to the notion that SC2 NEEDS to be BW or else it will fail, your only going to kill the game for yourself.
I think the majority of what you said is not a permanent flaw in SC2. Most can be changed with a patch, a new map or a better composition of players. But what we have right now is a bunch of old Brood War pros, trying to carry over as much Brood War skill as they can and manipulate the game such that it plays out in a Brood War fashion (comfort zone), all the while being viewed by a large portion of the audience who are Brood War fanatics. Your reaction is totally understandable. This is steadily changing, but the key factor here is both games are Starcraft, but SC2 is not BW.
This is the other obvious reply... someone trying to point out the game is more strategical based. But then your example is a BW game.. remember this is a sequel and a LOT of potential strategies have been thought of ages ago anyway. Not everyone can innovate. So what example is there, strategical or mechanical, that is impressive in SC2 in comparison to BW? Cause i just see re-thinking of strategy that people thought of years ago, and re-implementations of old ideas. At the end of the day something like that is hardly even a WOW moment usually, like doing a clever fake such as making your cyber core spin to fake upgrade. Thats cerebral but spectator wise its not exactly exciting.
unsure what you are trying to say with this paragraph of nonsese and tired arguments
but you know whatever i'll let the elitists be and go back to playing my game that is an equal to BW in potential.
You're just repeating the 'It has a lot of potential' line that loads of people say, but potential for what? Units that are new such as the Thor lets just say. What potential does a unit like this have? Its a big robot that shoots air and ground. Thats it, it'll never evolve into something more. That's one problem i have with the design. By unit which is powerful enough to win games alone he means something like the reaver; It's completely dependent on your skill and the opponents skill in deflecting it. Or something like muta/wraith patrol harass. There is kiting but that's it really, anyone can kite especially now there's not much reason to have your attention elsewhere. It's not a very 'dynamic' in my opinion in regards to unit design.
Now obviously some things will be too powerful simply because of autocast and mass control. But what is there to replace whats missing? I liked the ideas of forcefield when i heard it, but in practice with autocast it's not as interesting as i first thought. It doesn't need to be like BW but it isn't replacing features of the previous game at all from my point of view. Think of say, MnM vs lurker ling. The battle constantly shifting back and forth and requiring a ton of attention and skill. I just don't see that in SC2.
This is the other obvious reply... someone trying to point out the game is more strategical based. But then your example is a BW game.. remember this is a sequel and a LOT of potential strategies have been thought of ages ago anyway. Not everyone can innovate. So what example is there, strategical or mechanical, that is impressive in SC2 in comparison to BW? Cause i just see re-thinking of strategy that people thought of years ago, and re-implementations of old ideas. At the end of the day something like that is hardly even a WOW moment usually, like doing a clever fake such as making your cyber core spin to fake upgrade. Thats cerebral but spectator wise its not exactly exciting.
unsure what you are trying to say with this paragraph of nonsese and tired arguments
but you know whatever i'll let the elitists be and go back to playing my game that is an equal to BW in potential.
What is hard for you to understand? Your example of a good strategic play was FROM Brood War.. I'm asking you to tell me an example from SC2 which is not possible in BW. And again you just repeat this 'potential' line with no explanation. What potential i ask you. In the future all i see is builds being refined better to edge out more units mostly, or unit compositions changing along with patches.
All i'm seeing from SC2 players is this constant mention of potential like theres something coming that somehow we don't know about.. if anything thats the tired argument.
EPT
