|
On May 29 2012 23:57 Gebus wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 23:32 stevewch wrote:
what's the problem if people want to stay with the better one?
a change is always welcome, but it has to be a change to better, not a change to worse. the problem is things like this- "Even if I returned, I know the kingdom of E-sports from the glory days will never return." and "When compared to BW, the biggest difference is that SC2 just isn't fun to watch" he has no proof to say things like that, just assuming that because he doesn't like watching sc2 that it will never become as popular as brood war.
He does have proof that it's harder to understand. For example, he talked about legibility directly relating to enjoyment, and cited WC3 as an example of a competitive game that wasn't really successful in terms of casual fans.
Almost all SC2 spells don't have casting animations - that makes it harder to understand and enjoy. Additionally, there are LOTS of abilities, almost one or more per unit. Remind you of WC3? I hold out hope, but he seems to be more of a realist.
|
As long as I can see casts of 2 people playing Starcraft 2, I'll be satisfied.
As for the coach's statement 'You cannot artificially create an E-sports scene', whilst I do not agree with him, I do feel that the potential for growth in E-Sports is much smaller than what other people envision.
I actually do no want the Starcraft 2 scene to go mainstream (such as ESPN) since I quite like the size of the community as it is.
|
Great interview.
Every matchup without protoss it's fun to watch in SC2, high level TvZ is awesome.
PvZ> Nexus, hatch, hatch. Roaches vs ball transitioning to BL/festor vs Mothership/ball.
PvT> Protoss tries to ball, Terran tries to avoid it.
PvP> Worst matchup for many reasons, no extra bases for example.
In my opinion protoss race has to be completely redesigned.
I like all the matchups in BW, including ZvZ
|
On May 30 2012 01:59 Cejotas wrote:
Great interview.
Every matchup without protoss it's fun to watch in SC2, high level TvZ is awesome.
PvZ> Nexus, hatch, hatch. Roaches vs ball transitioning to BL/festor vs Mothership/ball.
PvT> Protoss tries to ball, Terran tries to avoid it.
PvP> Worst matchup for many reasons, no extra bases for example.
In my opinion protoss race has to be completely redesigned.
I like all the matchups in BW, including ZvZ
Yes, the game would be better without Prostoss 
|
you should make a blog of this so i could give you 5 stars <3
|
SC 2 is definitely not fun to watch in its current state. There needs to be something done about the unit clumping since that is a major factor in making the game ugly to watch. I remember seeing a post on tl of how groups of units would look like if they changed the clumping thing.
|
Great interview, always nice to hear what a old time coach has to say.
I have to say it is interesting to hear what people are saying about the comparison of sc and sc2. Most of it being subjective, including what I am saying. However as time has been going on and more SC pros are trying out SC2 they are saying the opposite what most of you are saying. The macro is easier to control but that does not mean that it is easier. If you have two pros playing each other they both have the same macro advantage vs regular sc. This is a competitive game vs people so your are looking at people's skills as well as mechanics. That being said the micro is harder than SC. And before all you say that it is not lets look at the latest interviews from Jaedong, Bisu, and Flash. They all agree that the micro is harder in SC2. Unless you guys think you have more insight than them I suggest you let your walls down a little and give it a chance.
Its like trying to write a program from scratch. Or building something using only primitive tools. Of course some aspects are going to be harder but your end goal is not going to be as beautiful. Do not be so naive to think that it is easier becaues the tools are more primitive. In SC2 you can be doing things constantly and as the game goes on you can expand and macro much faster than SC so it goes out of control way faster. The pros also say how the game is smoother. This does not mean it is easier either. Both players with have the smoothness advantage. This just means that you can be more accurate,precise, and faster. You can argue that these things can make it harder because we are optimizing peoples reaction time. Perhaps battles seem clumped and ball'd up armies are often seen because it is hard to be efficent.
The games are simliar in some ways but are different in many. In the end it comes down to the strategic mind of the player and the time they sacrifice. I think SC2 has catered to the faster paced decision making that will ultimately lead to a more advanced game.
|
|
|
Really great to see this history I knew nothing about. Really impressed with a lot of what Coach Jung had to say. Shame he isn't a fan of SC2... Maybe he's got it right, time will tell I guess. I know I love the game but that has very little to do with whether or not it will ever become an "empire" like BW was back in the day. I really hope it grows and flourishes over the next few years but who knows?
|
On May 30 2012 04:17 Niska wrote:
Great interview, always nice to hear what a old time coach has to say.
I have to say it is interesting to hear what people are saying about the comparison of sc and sc2. Most of it being subjective, including what I am saying. However as time has been going on and more SC pros are trying out SC2 they are saying the opposite what most of you are saying. The macro is easier to control but that does not mean that it is easier. If you have two pros playing each other they both have the same macro advantage vs regular sc. This is a competitive game vs people so your are looking at people's skills as well as mechanics. That being said the micro is harder than SC. And before all you say that it is not lets look at the latest interviews from Jaedong, Bisu, and Flash. They all agree that the micro is harder in SC2. Unless you guys think you have more insight than them I suggest you let your walls down a little and give it a chance.
Its like trying to write a program from scratch. Or building something using only primitive tools. Of course some aspects are going to be harder but your end goal is not going to be as beautiful. Do not be so naive to think that it is easier becaues the tools are more primitive. In SC2 you can be doing things constantly and as the game goes on you can expand and macro much faster than SC so it goes out of control way faster. The pros also say how the game is smoother. This does not mean it is easier either. Both players with have the smoothness advantage. This just means that you can be more accurate,precise, and faster. You can argue that these things can make it harder because we are optimizing peoples reaction time. Perhaps battles seem clumped and ball'd up armies are often seen because it is hard to be efficent.
The games are simliar in some ways but are different in many. In the end it comes down to the strategic mind of the player and the time they sacrifice. I think SC2 has catered to the faster paced decision making that will ultimately lead to a more advanced game.
Nice straw man argument. Nowhere did he claim that SC2 was easier to play than BW.
|
On May 30 2012 01:59 Cejotas wrote:
Great interview.
Every matchup without protoss it's fun to watch in SC2, high level TvZ is awesome.
PvZ> Nexus, hatch, hatch. Roaches vs ball transitioning to BL/festor vs Mothership/ball.
PvT> Protoss tries to ball, Terran tries to avoid it.
PvP> Worst matchup for many reasons, no extra bases for example.
In my opinion protoss race has to be completely redesigned.
I like all the matchups in BW, including ZvZ
PvP is actually at least 2 base now.
|
On May 30 2012 02:42 haitike wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 01:59 Cejotas wrote:
Great interview.
Every matchup without protoss it's fun to watch in SC2, high level TvZ is awesome.
PvZ> Nexus, hatch, hatch. Roaches vs ball transitioning to BL/festor vs Mothership/ball.
PvT> Protoss tries to ball, Terran tries to avoid it.
PvP> Worst matchup for many reasons, no extra bases for example.
In my opinion protoss race has to be completely redesigned.
I like all the matchups in BW, including ZvZ Yes, the game would be better without Prostoss
I would have to agree, I don't watch brood war, but in SC2 protoss makes games a lot of the time kinda "meh", because useally its either 1-2 base all ins from protoss in all matchups, or waiting for 30 minutes to have 1 vortex either fail or end it all.
This isn't the case with EVERY protoss matchup, but the vast majority, maybe Protoss needs an overall change? maybe they just haven't developed fully yet? I don't enjoy watching Protoss as much, but sometimes it can be amazing, like the recent GSL finals which featured some dull games, and some amazing games.
But a lot in sports is also the story, sure some people enjoy watching the game for merely the games, but the stories are probably the most exciting part, of any sport, SC2, BW or anything else.
But what I don't quite understand is if BW is doing so amazingly well, why didn't they keep going? from my point of view, it looks like they don't get enough viewers, and want to expand to SC2, I don't think their hybrid league is a good idea but yeah.
A lot of whats said in the interview is the personal opinion of the coach.
I feel like for me who was never into BW and first entered the scene with SC2, it just doesn't seem like there is any appeal to BW, sure there is a lot of people with bad microphones commentating the game, but the only reason I can understand somewhat of what happens in BW is because of my SC2 knowledge.
Maybe BW is easier to watch if the commentator is good and speaks a language you understand. I also think one of the problems with SC2 is not the game but a lot of commentators just didn't but the effort in.
There is 3 things that can get me to watch SC2 -
- The storyline of a tournament or player.
- The casters.
- The players.
For the big BW fans, would you watch a BW game commentated by people who don't know the game and players well? While the players playing isn't any big names just some random B teamers.
If your a massive BW fan, I can see why its hard to watch SC2 because you don't know the stories behind the player or you ran into a bad caster, which there is plenty of in SC2 (many are improving though).
Also I believe that while there is "amazing micro" and all that in SC2, it is probably less than in BW, I think a lot of SC2 is decision making, watching the great decisions displayed by players is amazing and its useally very tense.
I wont say "let SC2 grow and it will be as amazing" as long as the BW fans don't say "The evolution of BW over 10 years is what makes it great". I believe I came out with some good opinions and possibly facts, but I think that if your a big BW fan, you will have a hard time switching to SC2 because you dont know the players, the storylines and so forth.
|
On May 30 2012 01:59 Cejotas wrote:
Great interview.
Every matchup without protoss it's fun to watch in SC2, high level TvZ is awesome.
PvZ> Nexus, hatch, hatch. Roaches vs ball transitioning to BL/festor vs Mothership/ball.
PvT> Protoss tries to ball, Terran tries to avoid it.
PvP> Worst matchup for many reasons, no extra bases for example.
In my opinion protoss race has to be completely redesigned.
I like all the matchups in BW, including ZvZ
i feel like i'm reading a post from months ago
|
On May 30 2012 06:15 Hiea wrote:
For the big BW fans, would you watch a BW game commentated by people who don't know the game and players well? While the players playing isn't any big names just some random B teamers.
BW isn't some sort of fancy movie for me, I rather like to see good games than stories. If I was into those, I'd read a book or watch some hollywood flick about sports. In the past there were numerous streams with not-too good commentators, including broadcasts of major events (I remember Day9 telling something about those in his 100th show?).
Ironically, a really bad commentator can make a cast good again, coming from the other side of the spectrum, if the viewer already knows the game. That's a whole different story though. Language and knowledge really don't matter too much, ilovev aka yoda might be the best example. It either catches your attention and entertains you or it doesn't - simple as that.
It's a game, not some thing you need to construct first. No need to make a science out of it or do what-if plays to measure the amount of fun it will have has output. That just won't work.
My answer is: yes most definitely I would.
|
On May 30 2012 06:26 Gecko[Xp] wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 06:15 Hiea wrote:
For the big BW fans, would you watch a BW game commentated by people who don't know the game and players well? While the players playing isn't any big names just some random B teamers. BW isn't some sort of fancy movie for me, I rather like to see good games than stories. If I was into those, I'd read a book or watch some hollywood flick about sports. In the past there were numerous streams with not-too good commentators, including broadcasts of major events (I remember Day9 telling something about those in his 100th show?). Ironically, a really bad commentator can make a cast good again, coming from the other side of the spectrum, if the viewer already knows the game. That's a whole different story though. Language and knowledge really don't matter too much, ilovev aka yoda might be the best example. It either catches your attention and entertains you or it doesn't - simple as that. It's a game, not some thing you need to construct first. No need to make a science out of it or do what-if plays to measure the amount of fun it will have has output. That just won't work. My answer is: yes most definitely I would.
I have to agree with you.
In fact, most bw foreigners have a preference for korean commentators. I like watching replays, even when they are not from BoxeR. I started watching foreign bw not knowing anyone.
I also have a very deep problem with people who say they enjoy bw/sc2 for the "histories". I used to be a bit like that, and I don't mind some hype trashtalk between the players, but I think this idea really goes too far sometimes.
If bw wasn't as deep strategically, I don't think I would still be watching it.
|
I don't think neither sc2 or bw is fun to watch, unless you know the game. At least the tech structure and basics.
But sc2 is way too hard for my eyes, BW had clear bright graphics, and no unit clumping.
|
On May 30 2012 01:47 0neder wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2012 23:57 Gebus wrote:On May 29 2012 23:32 stevewch wrote:
what's the problem if people want to stay with the better one?
a change is always welcome, but it has to be a change to better, not a change to worse. the problem is things like this- "Even if I returned, I know the kingdom of E-sports from the glory days will never return." and "When compared to BW, the biggest difference is that SC2 just isn't fun to watch" he has no proof to say things like that, just assuming that because he doesn't like watching sc2 that it will never become as popular as brood war. He does have proof that it's harder to understand. For example, he talked about legibility directly relating to enjoyment, and cited WC3 as an example of a competitive game that wasn't really successful in terms of casual fans. Almost all SC2 spells don't have casting animations - that makes it harder to understand and enjoy. Additionally, there are LOTS of abilities, almost one or more per unit. Remind you of WC3? I hold out hope, but he seems to be more of a realist.
Except he doesn't explain why War3 was hard to understand. War3 was hard to watch for casual viewers because literally battles boiled down to subtle positioning and spells. There were so many times where battles were decided because hero X was 2 steps too close or far relative to the enemy. You can't really explain that to casual viewers.
That isn't the case in SC2. I haven't played a single game of SC2, only have a basic understanding of game dynamics, and I enjoy watching the games.
|
|
|
Awesome interview! Thank you so much.
|
True, SC2 just ain't fun to watch or play. And it's missing that feeling of accomplishing something when you beat your opponent.
Coach Jung Soo-yeong forever in <3
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
