OSL begins on March 31st - Page 18

On March 22 2012 09:05 Waxangel wrote:
I can only hope that...

...they came up with a not sucky group selection method during the few free MONTHS they had

also, I hope they stopped pretending that ro36 is real osl

On March 22 2012 13:10 Xinflames wrote:
Darn, still not switching to SC2?

On March 22 2012 13:10 Xinflames wrote:
Darn, still not switching to SC2?

On March 22 2012 13:31 Xinflames wrote:
Not trolling, I want to see to see the best RTS players in the world play SC2. I was never into the BW scene, but I have heard how much higher the caliber of play is vs the current SC2 progammers. I think it will be very exciting to see the "old" vs "new" and really shake up the SC2 scene. And I lurk everyday on TL but hardly post, so I can't voice opinion? Just saying

On March 22 2012 13:31 Xinflames wrote:
Not trolling, I want to see to see the best RTS players in the world play SC2. I was never into the BW scene, but I have heard how much higher the caliber of play is vs the current SC2 progammers. I think it will be very exciting to see the "old" vs "new" and really shake up the SC2 scene. And I lurk everyday on TL but hardly post, so I can't voice opinion? Just saying

On March 22 2012 15:10 VManOfMana wrote:


If you want to see the best RTS players in the world, you might as well see them
play the best RTS in the world. Why dillute the experience?

On March 22 2012 13:59 jidolboy wrote:

You cant voice your opinion here by indirectly saying you want BW dead
"Darn, still not switching to SC2?"
Here, the word "still" and the phrase in general, in my opinion was understood as you are tired of high class players still playing old ass ugly BW. And you want them to play SC2.
You might not have meant it that way, but it felt like that to me.

On March 22 2012 17:18 Dakure wrote:
Damn dude you're reading way too much into those few words. Talk about switch has been going around for a few months. And April was mentioned in particular. So the still doesn't mean anything more than its dictionary definition. Are all you BW guys really sensitive about your sport or is it just you?

Edit: Also, if you're nitpicky about his post you should quote the word "Dam" not "still." The "dam" indicates unsatisfactory results, hence wanting BW dead. The 'still' really means nothing, man.

On March 22 2012 16:08 Caihead wrote:


The debate between which game is better comes down to very simple terms: BW is extremely analog, and many of its inherent design flaws (pathing ai, scarab ai, control group, building grouping, lack of queued orders, etc) have become staple and audiences enjoy watching people perfect their control around these inherent flaws (let's not beat around the bush here, these are flaws, but they are flaws that have made the game much more interesting to watch due to the nature of the engine). Pro-gamers have developed so many techniques from these inherent flaws such as muta stacking (different movement speed units grouped together), avoiding scarab shots, pushing workers / units through minerals or pylon walls, landing units in between tank shots due to them firing simultaneously in range, etc; the progaming scene and the meta has evolved around these facts so much that official maps like outlier are specifically designed so workers / units can glitch through minerals. SC2 is extremely polished, alot of the inherent flaws of BW have been removed or entirely eliminated, the game is much faster and more fluid because of this; but as a result many people who love the analog nature and nuances of BW feel alienated. However I don't think it's a question that the SC2 engine is much more technically capable.

On March 22 2012 19:26 writer22816 wrote:


All this discussion of BW being a "flawed game" is just bullshit. If these so-called "design flaws" improve the game then how can they be flaws? Yes, a lot of things that we love about BW are unintentional on Blizzard's part. Who cares? They make the game better. Why on earth would we need to improve them?

I just don't understand why SC2 fans love to point out how BW is "flawed". Yes, maybe a large part of BW's balance was an accident. At least it is balanced and entertaining to watch. SC2 is neither. But oh wait, at least it is "more polished" and more "technically capable".

On March 22 2012 19:37 Caihead wrote:


They are flaws because they aren't intentional design decisions as well as being glitches / bugs that any programmer would facepalm at? Are units supposed to be able to pass through a solid building because a worker is mining minerals next to it? And I made it clear that improving on certain things in certain ways, while not personally preferable to some people, are exactly what gamers are going to ask for. No one is going to ask programmers to intentionally leave glitches and bugs that are completely illogical in games nowadays, BW gets away with it because it's become a part of the officially sanctioned meta game via map making and official rules, even then certain bugs DO limit the effectiveness of certain units (imagine if reavers didn't dud, imagine if terrans didn't have to watch their Valkyrie count because of projectile limit, there was even debate about rather muta stacking should be allowed, rather lifting buildings to crush interceptors is a legitimate strategy, etc). I'm not looking for people to change BW, far from it, I'm asking people to understand why people love the game, why I personally love the game, despite its flaws. I made my post specifically to explain that it's personal preference and to discourage people from hating on either game.

And we should care because it's entirely possible to incorporate / create more imaginative combinations of unit control / positioning scenarios with new engines and technology that aren't even possible with in the BW engine, how much more amazing would new rts' be if there were officially sanctioned ways of controlling units that the programmers left in because they understand how illogical (by practical standards) concepts can be incorporated into a game that makes it more interesting to play / watch? Some obvious examples of ideas that they left in the game that you might not have even noticed from BW to SC2 are: you can control where the scv's position is while constructing a building by stopping construction and resuming it from a direction / with another scv. You can still avoid projectiles on ground units by lifting them in and out of dropships. Etc. An excellent example of SC2 coming up with its own methods of meta-gaming with new abilities which were not inherent design decisions would be the archon toilet where you intentionally let your archons enter a vortex so you can deal massive aoe damage while the units reappear.