|
On April 17 2012 05:01 Otolia wrote:
You should be thankful the whole mod staff is biased towards BW because the kind of hate that you display towards the other part of the community is simply disgusting. Anything remotely similar happening on the SC 2 side towards BW would be met with many 2 days ban.
As someone said, we (SC 2 guys whom you don't have any respect for) are forced to come here because the other thread has been closed by heyoka. And now we are insulted by raging fans who don't wish to discuss with us because they think only them have the right to speak here.
I feel bad for you. I know I wouldn't like to enter your community right now and I hope you had warmer welcome when you first came here.
NO, you don't "HAVE TO COME HERE" you can stay in the SC2 forum, we don't want you here. This is the BW forum and i personally don't like the idea of SC2 fanboys coming here and trying to convince us that SC2 is good etc etc ...
|
The difference between SC and SC2 is something like this, in terms of spectator sport:
1. I can watch BW on 320p and have 5 times better insight then 720p SC2
2. When I watch BW I see what a single zergling is doing. When I watch SC2, I see two clumps shooting at each other, one disappearing eventually.
3. When I watch BW each unit is distinctive from the terrain. Really. It may not be more real, but it is purposeful. When I watch SC2, I miss so many things.
It's not that BW is perfect. But it is at the moment comparably more interesting to SC2 as football is to curling; no offense intended to curling fans. And I doubt that SC2 can surmount the obstacles because they are not balance related, but presentation related. SC2 will last as long as Blizzard pumps funds in the project.
|
On April 17 2012 05:02 Egyptian_Head wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 04:53 corumjhaelen wrote:
Some people worked for SC2. I respect quite a few of them.
SC2 did not work for what it is.
It's a 3 star rated game on Amazon. Amazon really? Have you ever read an amazon review. Go look at the reviews for the game. Its mostly fanboys and haters giving 5 and 1 star reviews respectively. The game has problems but no sensible person in the world would say 1 star. I wouldn't give it 5 stars as there are problems and there were especially on launch. and 5 point rating is so flawed you cannot give a reasonable score. Scores in general are flawed but scores out of 5 doubly so.
Yes I have. They were not nearly as unreasonnable as you make it sound.
Of course the debates are going to be heated and unreasonable, it's the internet. But this is an average, so it might just have a meaning you know. Just a vague picture of course, but it's something a bit better than the "reviews" given by the video game "press". I'd say overall, 3 stars is about what the game deserves. Funnily enough, there are some better rated game on Amazon, despite the "fanboys and haters". BW for instance.
|
On April 17 2012 04:50 gCgCrypto wrote:
@LEGAsee
I see your point and apriciate a actually good response.
And i by no means think that transitioning from BW to SC2 makes enything better at all.
However i think in the current state it is necessarry.
I would have loved for SC2 to be exactly like BW but with better grafix but that is only me.
What makes me so mad is how the initial thread didnt start off with "oh it sucks we, we don´t want our Pros to go enywhere" but with "Oh it sux, i hope our pros quit progaming or go to lol so they do not play SC2"
There is a severe difference between being mad about Broodwar seemingly coming to the end and being mad about Broodwar merging with SC2.
I fully understand everyone that feels bad that his passion (and for my my whole childhood) is going down but i feel no empathy at all for those that only feel bad because what they love is swiching to sc2.
That might not be the case for most, actually i think the lesser amount is like that but sadly exactly those contribute a lot to the conversation.
to try and finally formulate what i try to say all the time:
What makes me so mad is the "FUC* YOU SC2 KIDS, YOU DON´T DESERVE OUR PROS" attitude that some show in this thread, as if SC2 caused all this and as if SC2 did not work for what it is now
I can’t speak for everyone here, but I’m pretty sure that most BW fans think this merge sucks because:
1. BW players might divide their training schedule between BW and SC2 which means a decline in game quality.
2. There will be less BW games played.
3. Less BW games means that it will be even harder for new players to get a spot which means that the influx of new blood will halt, which ultimately kills the scene.
4. The outcome of Proleague games will be decided by SC2 matches.
It’s not that I hate SC2, it is just incredibly boring to watch compared to BW. Many people who don’t like SC2 doesn’t give a shit whether A-teamers starts to play SC2, LoL or Diddy Kong Racing – it is all equally bad.
|
On April 17 2012 05:05 Rainalcar wrote:
The difference between SC and SC2 is something like this, in terms of spectator sport:
1. I can watch BW on 320p and have 5 times better insight then 720p SC2
2. When I watch BW I see what a single zergling is doing. When I watch SC2, I see two clumps shooting at each other, one disappearing eventually.
3. When I watch BW each unit is distinctive from the terrain. Really. It may not be more real, but it is purposeful. When I watch SC2, I miss so many things.
It's not that BW is perfect. But it is at the moment comparably more interesting to SC2 as football is to curling; no offense intended to curling fans. And I doubt that SC2 can surmount the obstacles because they are not balance related, but presentation related. SC2 will last as long as Blizzard pumps funds in the project.
Lets have a person who did not watch either of the games watch a replay and another one a cast of both games and see if they say the same mister non biased ...
And btw Blizzard was not pumping enything into SC2 at all, all they did was one Tournament per year with some qualifiers and i am sure you know how meny tournaments there are.
|
On April 17 2012 05:08 corumjhaelen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 05:02 Egyptian_Head wrote:On April 17 2012 04:53 corumjhaelen wrote:
Some people worked for SC2. I respect quite a few of them.
SC2 did not work for what it is.
It's a 3 star rated game on Amazon. Amazon really? Have you ever read an amazon review. Go look at the reviews for the game. Its mostly fanboys and haters giving 5 and 1 star reviews respectively. The game has problems but no sensible person in the world would say 1 star. I wouldn't give it 5 stars as there are problems and there were especially on launch. and 5 point rating is so flawed you cannot give a reasonable score. Scores in general are flawed but scores out of 5 doubly so. Yes I have. They were not nearly as unreasonnable as you make it sound. Of course the debates are going to be heated and unreasonable, it's the internet. But this is an average, so it might just have a meaning you know. Just a vague picture of course, but it's something a bit better than the "reviews" given by the video game "press". I'd say overall, 3 stars is about what the game deserves. Funnily enough, there are some better rated game on Amazon, despite the "fanboys and haters". BW for instance.
Barbie fashion show included
http://www.amazon.com/Barbie-Fashion-Show-Pc/dp/B0001BR9O8
4 stars. Sounds unreasonable to me for this game to be better rated than sc2.
|
On April 17 2012 05:15 Egyptian_Head wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 05:08 corumjhaelen wrote:On April 17 2012 05:02 Egyptian_Head wrote:On April 17 2012 04:53 corumjhaelen wrote:
Some people worked for SC2. I respect quite a few of them.
SC2 did not work for what it is.
It's a 3 star rated game on Amazon. Amazon really? Have you ever read an amazon review. Go look at the reviews for the game. Its mostly fanboys and haters giving 5 and 1 star reviews respectively. The game has problems but no sensible person in the world would say 1 star. I wouldn't give it 5 stars as there are problems and there were especially on launch. and 5 point rating is so flawed you cannot give a reasonable score. Scores in general are flawed but scores out of 5 doubly so. Yes I have. They were not nearly as unreasonnable as you make it sound. Of course the debates are going to be heated and unreasonable, it's the internet. But this is an average, so it might just have a meaning you know. Just a vague picture of course, but it's something a bit better than the "reviews" given by the video game "press". I'd say overall, 3 stars is about what the game deserves. Funnily enough, there are some better rated game on Amazon, despite the "fanboys and haters". BW for instance. Barbie fashion show included http://www.amazon.com/Barbie-Fashion-Show-Pc/dp/B0001BR9O84 stars.
Only 76 reviews. It's probably a pretty good game for its target.
|
On April 17 2012 05:09 gn0m wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 04:50 gCgCrypto wrote:
@LEGAsee
I see your point and apriciate a actually good response.
And i by no means think that transitioning from BW to SC2 makes enything better at all.
However i think in the current state it is necessarry.
I would have loved for SC2 to be exactly like BW but with better grafix but that is only me.
What makes me so mad is how the initial thread didnt start off with "oh it sucks we, we don´t want our Pros to go enywhere" but with "Oh it sux, i hope our pros quit progaming or go to lol so they do not play SC2"
There is a severe difference between being mad about Broodwar seemingly coming to the end and being mad about Broodwar merging with SC2.
I fully understand everyone that feels bad that his passion (and for my my whole childhood) is going down but i feel no empathy at all for those that only feel bad because what they love is swiching to sc2.
That might not be the case for most, actually i think the lesser amount is like that but sadly exactly those contribute a lot to the conversation.
to try and finally formulate what i try to say all the time:
What makes me so mad is the "FUC* YOU SC2 KIDS, YOU DON´T DESERVE OUR PROS" attitude that some show in this thread, as if SC2 caused all this and as if SC2 did not work for what it is now I can’t speak for everyone here, but I’m pretty sure that most BW fans think this merge sucks because: 1. BW players might divide their training schedule between BW and SC2 which means a decline in game quality. 2. There will be less BW games played. 3. Less BW games means that it will be even harder for new players to get a spot which means that the influx of new blood will halt, which ultimately kills the scene. 4. The outcome of Proleague games will be decided by SC2 matches. It’s not that I hate SC2, it is just incredibly boring to watch compared to BW. Many people who don’t like SC2 doesn’t give a shit whether A-teamers starts to play SC2, LoL or Diddy Kong Racing – it is all equally bad.
I totally agree with everything you just said, and it is not what i tried to say and still this is no reason to be so offensive to enyone fro the SC2 fanbase. WE did not make this proposal for PL, i´d rather have pure BW PL untill we are ready to have a pure SC2 PL.
The only thing i am mad about is the argument that this whole thing is only bad because Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty is the worst game on the planet and does not deserve to be called starcraft because it only gained this popularity by having this name.
|
On April 17 2012 05:09 gCgCrypto wrote:
And btw Blizzard was not pumping enything into SC2 at all, all they did was one Tournament per year with some qualifiers and i am sure you know how meny tournaments there are.
Perhaps someone with better sleuthing skills can bring up the actual link, but I'm pretty sure when sc2 came out, Blizzard said they were putting up a LOT of money to kickstart its "e-sport" aspect. With the prize pools as they were, it could've paid for like 50 major tournaments or something ridiculous like that.
|
On April 17 2012 05:09 gCgCrypto wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 05:05 Rainalcar wrote:
The difference between SC and SC2 is something like this, in terms of spectator sport:
1. I can watch BW on 320p and have 5 times better insight then 720p SC2
2. When I watch BW I see what a single zergling is doing. When I watch SC2, I see two clumps shooting at each other, one disappearing eventually.
3. When I watch BW each unit is distinctive from the terrain. Really. It may not be more real, but it is purposeful. When I watch SC2, I miss so many things.
It's not that BW is perfect. But it is at the moment comparably more interesting to SC2 as football is to curling; no offense intended to curling fans. And I doubt that SC2 can surmount the obstacles because they are not balance related, but presentation related. SC2 will last as long as Blizzard pumps funds in the project. Lets have a person who did not watch either of the games watch a replay and another one a cast of both games and see if they say the same mister non biased ... And btw Blizzard was not pumping enything into SC2 at all, all they did was one Tournament per year with some qualifiers and i am sure you know how meny tournaments there are.
Actually they sponsered the entire first three seasons of the GSL too. Heard something about NASL and other big tournaments early on but I can't provide sources or anything for those.
On April 17 2012 05:01 Otolia wrote:
You should be thankful the whole mod staff is biased towards BW because the kind of hate that you display towards the other part of the community is simply disgusting. Anything remotely similar happening on the SC 2 side towards BW would be met with many 2 days ban.
As someone said, we (SC 2 guys whom you don't have any respect for) are forced to come here because the other thread has been closed by heyoka. And now we are insulted by raging fans who don't wish to discuss with us because they think only them have the right to speak here.
I feel bad for you. I know I wouldn't like to enter your community right now and I hope you had warmer welcome when you first came here.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=321400
Right there in the SC2 forums. Just because you don't bother to look doesn't give you an excuse.
|
Why "until" we are ready for SC2? Do we need to be ready for SC2?
|
On April 17 2012 05:19 blubbdavid wrote:
Why "until" we are ready for SC2? Do we need to be ready for SC2?
You don´t, if you are not then its fine, thats not the point i tried to adress (at least if this is directed to me) what i wanted to say that i disslike the mixed league and the "being ready" only came in there because i am certain that this swich would happen eventually. If not to sc2 then to something different. There would come a time when people would just not want to watch the old grafix.
And if the swich would be to a BW with better grafix i would be more then happy to swich to it.
EDIT: and i do not mean you as a person would ever have to swich but i am talking about BW dying eventually and people swiching somewhere, even if you might stay by bw for eternity.
|
On April 17 2012 05:16 corumjhaelen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 05:15 Egyptian_Head wrote:On April 17 2012 05:08 corumjhaelen wrote:On April 17 2012 05:02 Egyptian_Head wrote:On April 17 2012 04:53 corumjhaelen wrote:
Some people worked for SC2. I respect quite a few of them.
SC2 did not work for what it is.
It's a 3 star rated game on Amazon. Amazon really? Have you ever read an amazon review. Go look at the reviews for the game. Its mostly fanboys and haters giving 5 and 1 star reviews respectively. The game has problems but no sensible person in the world would say 1 star. I wouldn't give it 5 stars as there are problems and there were especially on launch. and 5 point rating is so flawed you cannot give a reasonable score. Scores in general are flawed but scores out of 5 doubly so. Yes I have. They were not nearly as unreasonnable as you make it sound. Of course the debates are going to be heated and unreasonable, it's the internet. But this is an average, so it might just have a meaning you know. Just a vague picture of course, but it's something a bit better than the "reviews" given by the video game "press". I'd say overall, 3 stars is about what the game deserves. Funnily enough, there are some better rated game on Amazon, despite the "fanboys and haters". BW for instance. Barbie fashion show included http://www.amazon.com/Barbie-Fashion-Show-Pc/dp/B0001BR9O84 stars. Only 76 reviews. It's probably a pretty good game for its target.
And yet they all use the same rating. All you can say is, good graphics, decent sound, long single player, active multiplayer, continual balance updates. etc. etc. mashing it all up into a single score is just ridiculous. Using that that score to judge a game is equally ridiculous.
|
On April 17 2012 05:15 Egyptian_Head wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 05:08 corumjhaelen wrote:On April 17 2012 05:02 Egyptian_Head wrote:On April 17 2012 04:53 corumjhaelen wrote:
Some people worked for SC2. I respect quite a few of them.
SC2 did not work for what it is.
It's a 3 star rated game on Amazon. Amazon really? Have you ever read an amazon review. Go look at the reviews for the game. Its mostly fanboys and haters giving 5 and 1 star reviews respectively. The game has problems but no sensible person in the world would say 1 star. I wouldn't give it 5 stars as there are problems and there were especially on launch. and 5 point rating is so flawed you cannot give a reasonable score. Scores in general are flawed but scores out of 5 doubly so. Yes I have. They were not nearly as unreasonnable as you make it sound. Of course the debates are going to be heated and unreasonable, it's the internet. But this is an average, so it might just have a meaning you know. Just a vague picture of course, but it's something a bit better than the "reviews" given by the video game "press". I'd say overall, 3 stars is about what the game deserves. Funnily enough, there are some better rated game on Amazon, despite the "fanboys and haters". BW for instance. Barbie fashion show included http://www.amazon.com/Barbie-Fashion-Show-Pc/dp/B0001BR9O84 stars. Sounds unreasonable to me for this game to be better rated than sc2.
Brood War has 4.6 Battle Chest 4.8
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias=videogames&field-keywords=brood war
Everything looks in order to me 
|
On April 17 2012 05:28 Egyptian_Head wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 05:16 corumjhaelen wrote:On April 17 2012 05:15 Egyptian_Head wrote:On April 17 2012 05:08 corumjhaelen wrote:On April 17 2012 05:02 Egyptian_Head wrote:On April 17 2012 04:53 corumjhaelen wrote:
Some people worked for SC2. I respect quite a few of them.
SC2 did not work for what it is.
It's a 3 star rated game on Amazon. Amazon really? Have you ever read an amazon review. Go look at the reviews for the game. Its mostly fanboys and haters giving 5 and 1 star reviews respectively. The game has problems but no sensible person in the world would say 1 star. I wouldn't give it 5 stars as there are problems and there were especially on launch. and 5 point rating is so flawed you cannot give a reasonable score. Scores in general are flawed but scores out of 5 doubly so. Yes I have. They were not nearly as unreasonnable as you make it sound. Of course the debates are going to be heated and unreasonable, it's the internet. But this is an average, so it might just have a meaning you know. Just a vague picture of course, but it's something a bit better than the "reviews" given by the video game "press". I'd say overall, 3 stars is about what the game deserves. Funnily enough, there are some better rated game on Amazon, despite the "fanboys and haters". BW for instance. Barbie fashion show included http://www.amazon.com/Barbie-Fashion-Show-Pc/dp/B0001BR9O84 stars. Only 76 reviews. It's probably a pretty good game for its target. And yet they all use the same rating. All you can say is, good graphics, decent sound, long single player, active multiplayer, continual balance updates. etc. etc. mashing it all up into a single score is just ridiculous. Using that that score to judge a game is equally ridiculous.
It measures one thing, how satisfied were customers on average, nothing else.
|
It's one thing for BW to have a natural death but for it to go like this is just so unsatisfying.
|
Everyone will see.
Brood War will not die.
Haters gon hate.
That's all you need in terms of mindset.
|
On April 17 2012 05:08 corumjhaelen wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 05:02 Egyptian_Head wrote:On April 17 2012 04:53 corumjhaelen wrote:
Some people worked for SC2. I respect quite a few of them.
SC2 did not work for what it is.
It's a 3 star rated game on Amazon. Amazon really? Have you ever read an amazon review. Go look at the reviews for the game. Its mostly fanboys and haters giving 5 and 1 star reviews respectively. The game has problems but no sensible person in the world would say 1 star. I wouldn't give it 5 stars as there are problems and there were especially on launch. and 5 point rating is so flawed you cannot give a reasonable score. Scores in general are flawed but scores out of 5 doubly so. Yes I have. They were not nearly as unreasonnable as you make it sound. Of course the debates are going to be heated and unreasonable, it's the internet. But this is an average, so it might just have a meaning you know. Just a vague picture of course, but it's something a bit better than the "reviews" given by the video game "press". I'd say overall, 3 stars is about what the game deserves. Funnily enough, there are some better rated game on Amazon, despite the "fanboys and haters". BW for instance.
As a fan of both games (BW fan since 2005, SC2 fan since its release), this thread has just made sad and bitter, but this comment actually made me laugh really hard.
If you really want to entertain the logically fallacious, "Amazon ratings convey a pretty decent idea of quality," then I would like to point out that BW (4.5 stars) is equal to the Twilight Complete Saga (also 4.5) in terms of quality. Oh, and let's not forget that BW can't even compete with Plants vs Zombies (5 stars).
As much as the emotionally charged elitism in this thread (and any topic where SC2 and BW fans co-exist), even some of the worst debates have made more sense than your comment. At least admit that you presented irrelevant evidence to support your beliefs, if nothing else.
|
I am posting here to give my applause to ZNF for his superb effort at holding down the BW fort for all of us out there against the misinformed. Now where is Holgerius when you need him, the guy is resilient as fuck (especially when it comes to Flash).
|
On April 17 2012 05:47 Scribble wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 05:08 corumjhaelen wrote:On April 17 2012 05:02 Egyptian_Head wrote:On April 17 2012 04:53 corumjhaelen wrote:
Some people worked for SC2. I respect quite a few of them.
SC2 did not work for what it is.
It's a 3 star rated game on Amazon. Amazon really? Have you ever read an amazon review. Go look at the reviews for the game. Its mostly fanboys and haters giving 5 and 1 star reviews respectively. The game has problems but no sensible person in the world would say 1 star. I wouldn't give it 5 stars as there are problems and there were especially on launch. and 5 point rating is so flawed you cannot give a reasonable score. Scores in general are flawed but scores out of 5 doubly so. Yes I have. They were not nearly as unreasonnable as you make it sound. Of course the debates are going to be heated and unreasonable, it's the internet. But this is an average, so it might just have a meaning you know. Just a vague picture of course, but it's something a bit better than the "reviews" given by the video game "press". I'd say overall, 3 stars is about what the game deserves. Funnily enough, there are some better rated game on Amazon, despite the "fanboys and haters". BW for instance. As a fan of both games (BW fan since 2005, SC2 fan since its release), this thread has just made sad and bitter, but this comment actually made me laugh really hard. If you really want to entertain the logically fallacious, "Amazon ratings convey a pretty decent idea of quality," then I would like to point out that BW (4.5 stars) is equal to the Twilight Complete Saga (also 4.5) in terms of quality. Oh, and let's not forget that BW can't even compete with Plants vs Zombies (5 stars). As much as the emotionally charged elitism in this thread (and any topic where SC2 and BW fans co-exist), even some of the worst debates have made more sense than your comment. At least admit that you presented irrelevant evidence to support your beliefs, if nothing else.
You don't get it. I have never said that Amazon ratings was an accurate measure of the quality of anything. It's a partial measure of consumer satisfaction. Plant vs Zombie and Twilight certainly have had incredible success, and whatever the intrinsec quality those two thing might have, they are certainly quality products, especially for their target market (even if Twilight is a terrible piece fo litterature, which it is not really, because it's not litterature, it's a commercial product for pre teen girls, and an amazing one it seems).
By the way, a much better counter example would be an amazing product having incredibly low ratings. I have no doubt that you can find one, but funnily enough I think it will be much harder.
I just gave data that supported my view, I'm sorry to have derailed this marvelous thread :-( I'll probably leave it at that though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
