| Forum Index > BW General |
|
aimaimaim
Philippines2167 Posts
On April 27 2011 20:55 0neder wrote: I miss some old units too, but I think many people in this thread haven't been following SC2 that much... I don't think so .. some here actually follow SC2 regularly .. | ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES51546 Posts
On April 27 2011 21:02 Aus)MaCrO wrote: Call me crazy, but I think if "Starcraft" wasn't in the title, and some less renowned developer had made it, SC2 would have already fallen by the wayside as just another RTS. or it would actually be taken for what it is...an RTS that came closest to BW.Well second...I find Armies of Exirgo to be closer. | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On April 27 2011 21:58 BLinD-RawR wrote: or it would actually be taken for what it is...an RTS that came closest to BW. I'm not too sure about that. | ||
|
infinity2k9
United Kingdom2397 Posts
On April 27 2011 12:19 tissue wrote: Is it just me or does anyone roll their eyes whenever you watch an SC2 VOD and the maxed-out army balls engage and the commentator has nothing to say but " -AND HEEERE WE GO, UNIT X IS KILLING THE SHIT OUT OF UNIT Y, BUT UNIT Z IS DOING SOOOO MUCH DAMAGE" Perhaps the sad thing is that there really isn't that much more to say. Yeah frankly it's quite sad. I've watched quite a bit of SC2 to at least understand the high level games, and the fake excitement is so lame. I don't blame all the pro players for switching though, i mean why not? Finally a chance to make money right. But it's going to dry up eventually. Personally i don't see a long term stable scene being created. Least in a macro game like Flash vs BeSt, despite the fact they didn't even engage for so long.. it was actually impressive when it got to that point. I know people are pushing forwards SC2 maps to be more a similar macro-orientated style, but the thing is, when it does get to that point then why would it be anymore interesting to a spectator? Lategame ball vs ball with little micro and easy macro is not interesting i don't care how many people try to make arguments otherwise. | ||
|
Jojo131
Brazil1631 Posts
Personally i feel WC3 (especially The Frozen Throne) was a better game. There were many innovations, most of them are interesting (heroes, aura, armor type, etc).. Trying too hard to make a "balanced" game from the get-go intead of an interesting one has costed Blizz this title imo.. In terms of trying out new things and creating more interesting features, I think Blizz hit it off pretty well with WC3 TFT. It added another layer of skill and creativity in terms of hero+item customization in addition to army composition. Really enjoyed WC3, so sad they took a step back in SC2. | ||
|
JadeFist
United States1225 Posts
On April 25 2011 23:08 Rampager wrote: I love both games equally, obviously brood war requires far superior mechanics but both are easy to learn hard to master games. Can't everyone just <3 It's difficult to <3 a game that stole a shitton of popularity as well as the ENTIRE foreigner scene from BW, the clearly superior game and sport. | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
On April 27 2011 23:42 infinity2k9 wrote: Yeah frankly it's quite sad. I've watched quite a bit of SC2 to at least understand the high level games, and the fake excitement is so lame. I don't blame all the pro players for switching though, i mean why not? Finally a chance to make money right. But it's going to dry up eventually. Personally i don't see a long term stable scene being created. Least in a macro game like Flash vs BeSt, despite the fact they didn't even engage for so long.. it was actually impressive when it got to that point. I know people are pushing forwards SC2 maps to be more a similar macro-orientated style, but the thing is, when it does get to that point then why would it be anymore interesting to a spectator? Lategame ball vs ball with little micro and easy macro is not interesting i don't care how many people try to make arguments otherwise. Considering that additional B.net content is being added into the game via patches and that the 2nd expansion pack is slated to be released 4 years from now, I think the longevity of the SC2 scene has already been guaranteed to be artificially extended to 5 years. The promise of new content will keep players interested in the game, and the expansion packs should give an extra boost to the scene and playerbase should it stagnate. After that, it's anyone's guess. Even if interest subsides and money dries up, the scene should still live on as long as dedicated individuals like Day9 and others fight to keep their supposedly sinking ship afloat. The SC2 scene has pretty much swallowed up most of the WC3 scene and non-Korean BW scene, so it's going to be pretty hard for the SC2 ship to completely sink with all these players still competing. Considering that it's unlikely that the WC3 and non-Korean BW scenes are going to experience a miraculous resurgence in the future, I think the only real threat to the longevity of SC2's pro scene is the release of another big e-sports RTS to draw away the fans and players. Until then, there are hordes of organizations and individuals working hard to ensure the long-term success of the SC2 scene, and they're not going to go down without a fight even with an inferior game at their hands. Also, although boring lategame ball vs ball is the status quo right now, it is possible for games to deviate from that status quo. There have been quite a few scrappier, more intense matches that go into the lategame yet contain minimum amounts of the ball vs ball syndrome; the entire San vs sC series from GSL5 comes to mind. Granted, these kinds of games are not the norm, but their possibility keeps fans coming back to sit through boring games in hopes that a greater, more epic game might happen. IMO, the best SC2 games tend to be more entertaining than the average BW game. Of course, the best BW games are almost untouchable in terms of entertainment. Also, although I do agree that Blizzard did an arguably better job with WC3: TFT in some aspects, I find that game to be more entertaining when played instead of when watched. The art style and effects sometimes do make it harder to distinguish forms, and the low lethality/high durability of units also may have hurt the spectator appeal for some people. Although the heroes and all the other special features made the game a blast to play, I always felt that WC3 had a pretty high spectator learning curve to fully enjoy watching. | ||
|
Antoniuss
Portugal26 Posts
I love BW, but i take off the nostalgia glasses. You know the answer for the ball vs ball argument. Pointing that out just proves that you all haven´t been watching korea play since broodwar came out, and believe me, at that time, it was way worse. | ||
|
qdenser
Canada133 Posts
On April 28 2011 01:14 Antoniuss wrote: Did everyone expect that a game in this age, would come out, with the clunky mechanics that BW had, the outdated interface, and the same bugs and imbalances BW had? Seriously? I love BW, but i take off the nostalgia glasses. You know the answer for the ball vs ball argument. Pointing that out just proves that you all haven´t been watching korea play since broodwar came out, and believe me, at that time, it was way worse. no, nobody expected a game like BW to be released by blizzard, because it is more profitable to make a very easy game | ||
|
lungo
Denmark276 Posts
for me, spending the time playing the campaigns was worth it tho sadly, this is the end for "my starcraft", which i have been following everyday since 2002, | ||
|
ffreakk
Singapore2155 Posts
On April 28 2011 01:14 Antoniuss wrote: Did everyone expect that a game in this age, would come out, with the clunky mechanics that BW had, the outdated interface, and the same bugs and imbalances BW had? Seriously? I love BW, but i take off the nostalgia glasses. You know the answer for the ball vs ball argument. Pointing that out just proves that you all haven´t been watching korea play since broodwar came out, and believe me, at that time, it was way worse. Ahhh, i was wondering when one of these people will show up.. "Take off your nostalgia glasses, SC2 is still in its infancy stage." there were always some of the SC2 boys who came along and say this. Sorry, but both the developers and players of that "infant" had 13 years worth of e-Sport knowledge to learn from. In Starcraft: Brood War, people didnt even think it was possible for this e-Sport model to exist, they just blindly played and enjoyed and innovated. - just how long do you think it took for people to discover: maynard, fast expand, micro, macro, harass, build order, etc? SC2 players havnt it all learned from day 0. - developers, likewise, had 13 years to study. That they still fail right now is ... disappointing. | ||
|
Weemoed
Netherlands741 Posts
On April 27 2011 21:41 aimaimaim wrote: I don't think so .. some here actually follow SC2 regularly .. I followed it quite a lot at the very start, but recently, I'm not really interested in Starcraft 2 anymore. That is, watching the games seems quite boring to be honest, with a much smaller percentage of actual enjoyable games in comparison to Starcraft: Broodwar. However, the game itself it quite fun to play yourself. | ||
|
xbankx
703 Posts
On April 28 2011 03:02 ffreakk wrote: Ahhh, i was wondering when one of these people will show up.. "Take off your nostalgia glasses, SC2 is still in its infancy stage." there were always some of the SC2 boys who came along and say this. Sorry, but both the developers and players of that "infant" had 13 years worth of e-Sport knowledge to learn from. In Starcraft: Brood War, people didnt even think it was possible for this e-Sport model to exist, they just blindly played and enjoyed and innovated. - just how long do you think it took for people to discover: maynard, fast expand, micro, macro, harass, build order, etc? SC2 players havnt it all learned from day 0. - developers, likewise, had 13 years to study. That they still fail right now is ... disappointing. SC2 is a completely different game. So experience in starcraft/other rts isn't going to help all that much. I was a decent in bw destroying most of my friends because I had higher apm and better understand of the game from watching BW vods. But for SC2, completely different game means other than the standard micro/macro, build order/timing attacks does not transfer. An perfect example is forge FE in BW works wonders versus zerg, but in SC2 you are gonna get obliterated if you try to forge FE. Timing attacks are still being figured out as well. In 1 year, many builds were discovered but in no means is the game fully understood as much as BW. If you watch PvZ for BW in the early 200x and watch PvZ after the Bisu's starleague win. It is completely different. You will be like "lols, shitty build, how can people not realize forge FE is just better". Developers aren't even from SC:bw/SC. Browder is from CnC and other rts games. An 1 year old RTS game is definitely still in its infancy. A perfect example that the game is still evolving at an extremely fast rate is that 3 month ago, protoss is considered the weakest race. After 2 patches of protoss nerf, protoss just became the strongest race in tourney result. | ||
|
ffreakk
Singapore2155 Posts
Im not saying SC2 copies BW's build order.. Im talking about the concept of Build Order itself took a REALLY long time to get discovered in Brood War (Midas was the first to advocate strict adhering to Build Order, if im not mistaken?). Only until iloveoov that macro was really discovered and developed, Boxer taught everyone what "micro" is. Similarly, fast expand, timing pushes, are all concepts that were developed (by the BW scene) prior to SC2. You cant really deny that those concepts are widely used in Starcraft 2 today, so much that many people are taking it for granted (you even said "standard" micro/macro.. That standard took many years to be discovered, fyi). Edit: On the point of Protoss and their rise to power in SC2 aka "evolution", would a "Marine now deals 100 damage" buff put T instantly as the strongest race? Definitely. Is the game evolving? Probably not. The game should be given time to evolved based on fixed values, not constantly changing ones. Plus, lolbuffing a race to OP-ness, or lolnerfing them to obscurity is neither difficult nor new, Blizz's been doing it since WC3. | ||
|
xbankx
703 Posts
On April 28 2011 04:11 ffreakk wrote: You are misunderstanding my points. Im not saying SC2 copies BW's build order.. Im talking about the concept of Build Order itself took a REALLY long time to get discovered in Brood War (Midas was the first to advocate strict adhering to Build Order, if im not mistaken?). Only until iloveoov that macro was really discovered and developed, Boxer taught everyone what "micro" is. Similarly, fast expand, timing pushes, are all concepts that were developed (by the BW scene) prior to SC2. You cant really deny that those concepts are widely used in Starcraft 2 today, so much that many people are taking it for granted. concepts may be figured out, but I know what "build order", "micro", and "macro" means but it does not mean it is the same. It took thousands and thousands of games and a few years to optimally figure out 3 hatch mutas into 5 hatch hydras and that took a dedicated pro scene. Many builds like flash's double armory build and Bisu's sair/dt build took 1 person but it required that person. So many builds in broodwar so many timings in broodwar took years to discover like double factory into fake double. Thats why when you said just because we know what micro,macro, and build order mean. It does not mean we can figure out everything in a year. I think in terms of different timings/build orders sc2 only scratched the surface of possibility. Im not quite sure you understand when I brought out the protoss example. Blizzard nerfed protoss for 2 patches in a row. It was considered the weakest race before the 2 patches but after the two patches, protoss is seen as the strongest. The game is evolving. An example is more like terran in bw is weakest race atm, you half damage damage on tanks/marine then terran is now seen as strongest race. | ||
|
ffreakk
Singapore2155 Posts
What i am saying is, after some time to employ those concepts that took many years to be discovered in BW, the game should be considered fairly developed (as much as 7-8 years into Brood War's lifetime), not still in its "infancy" stage like many of the SC2 ppl would like to believe. Plus how do you evolve when half the things discovered yesterday would be garbage tomorrow because of a new patch?. | ||
|
xbankx
703 Posts
On April 28 2011 04:24 ffreakk wrote: Im not saying that people have figured out all of SC2, even Brood War's meta-game is still constantly evolving. What i am saying is, after some time to employ those concepts that took many years to be discovered in BW, the game should be considered fairly developed (as much as 7-8 years into Brood War's lifetime), not still in its "infancy" stage like many of the SC2 ppl would like to believe. Plus how do you evolve when half the things discovered yesterday would be garbage tomorrow because of a new patch?. Thats for the pro players to figure out. Because the game is so new, there are a lot of "balance" fixes needed because blizzard can't count on all the different build orders that can arise. BW was indeed a very lucky game in that it was very well designed in terms of balance at the start(with protoss being probably the weakest). I mean if you think about it, terran was supposedly the most mobile race (at least according to blizzard planning) but if you look at all matchup. Terran is very immobile with the exception of SK terran. I don't quite understand your first statement. | ||
|
Sawamura
Malaysia7602 Posts
On April 28 2011 04:35 xbankx wrote: Thats for the pro players to figure out. Because the game is so new, there are a lot of "balance" fixes needed because blizzard can't count on all the different build orders that can arise. BW was indeed a very lucky game in that it was very well designed in terms of balance at the start(with protoss being probably the weakest). I mean if you think about it, terran was supposedly the most mobile race (at least according to blizzard planning) but if you look at all matchup. Terran is very immobile with the exception of SK terran. I don't quite understand your first statement. Protoss weak you are kidding me == | ||
|
Crisium
United States1618 Posts
| ||
|
xbankx
703 Posts
In terms of tourney results for BW, toss is definitely the weakest at the highest level of play. I think the only period of toss domiance was the 6 dragon period. | ||
| ||
|
|
INu's Battles
herO vs Classic
Percival vs Rogue
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
MilkiCow vs TBD
Clem vs TBD
BSL Open Qualifier
BSL Open Qualifier
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Rush vs Light
WardiTV Weekly
Monday Night Weeklies
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Soma vs Soulkey
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
