|
On June 17 2010 06:02 Misrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 06:00 xLethargicax wrote:
It's disgusting how conceited the OP is about his "flawless" argument.
Things can be both entertaining and competitive. In the end it is all subjective to how the viewer or participator believe it is. Stop trying to change the world. LOL keep with the hate sc2 forum. you come in- flame OP and then state your opinion, and then peace out! your no different from the OP!!!!!!!
So that means your OP is a flamebait, followed by a very small about of semi truth. And on to watch people react ?
|
On June 17 2010 06:00 Misrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 05:56 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 17 2010 05:53 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:50 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 17 2010 05:05 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:03 Spawkuring wrote:On June 17 2010 04:54 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 04:50 Spawkuring wrote:
The main issue I have with this essay is that it basically accuses all modern games of having "fake competition" for no real reason. What exactly does SC2 have that makes it fake? What does fake even mean? None of this is defined, but you toss it around as fact. Just because a game isn't on BW's level doesn't mean it can't still be competitive.
And what's worse is that you accuse Blizzard of sabotaging competition with no proof of it whatsoever, although I'm sure the reasons you will give will probably be something completely subjective and baseless. I mean I can understand the frustration at the over-casualization of several games, but I really don't see a reason why competition suddenly has no place. they sabotage competition by having their hand in every single aspect of competition. From no LAN, to all the other shit they are going to pull in online line 'turnies' Can you honestly tell me that they are looking to created a competitive game- when they have never taken anything the competitive community has said to them? "Never taken anything the competitive community has said to them"? Do the words "macro mechanics" ring a bell to you? A set of game mechanics added to the game purely because the hardcore community requested a way to make up the improved UI. Or perhaps the fact that they made large changes to the graphics because we complained about overly bright graphics and low readability. Or maybe the new replay features which have things like APM, something we specifically asked for. Or perhaps the fact that they have repeatedly held events, many in Korea, where they specifically ask fansites and pro-gamers to come test their game, chat with the developers face-to-face, and provide feedback. Or hell, the fact that they kept the core Starcraft gameplay the same instead of dramatically innovating it because they knew it would upset hardcores if Blizzard changed it (because casuals certainly haven't been happy about Blizzard not innovating). You also bring up taking control of tourneys, but in all honestly you have absolutely no idea how it will all work out. None of us do. Blizzard is definitely taking a HUGE risk here, but nobody can assert that they will either succeed or fail. Maybe it will crash and burn and e-Sports dies forever, or perhaps it's a massive success that expands e-Sports to the rest of the world instead of just Korea. Either way, it's far too early to assert, and it's irritating to see people act like they can see the future. Seriously, a lot of this is just you venting out steam. I understand some of the frustration, but again, it's ridiculous to be making such broad claims especially when most of them are baseless speculating. Macro mechanics are a great way for some false competition, it's nice entertainment. Hardcore requested something because the game is too easy- so blizz comes up with something on their own that will stifle the hard core, and yet still make the entertainment great for their target market. Macro mechanics are a joke- and you know it. You just can't be serious. I've read the OP and your posts throughout this thread and you sound like a moonlanding-conspiracy theorist. what? you have to really tell me frozen- you think that macro mechanics are a good substitute for the real thing? I just thought that it was funny: Sc2 is lacking in macro- so they had to make a specific mechanic because supposedly the hardcore group wined about it? Could we not just have regular macro back or what? Instead we get this gimmicky thing? It's not realistic to expect them to ignore what the entire world outside of SC considers progress (U.I enhancements). Blizzard were quite restrained in this regard, clearly conscious of the physical skill requirement, and the fact that they were actually willing to put something like the macro mechanics in... is frankly amazing. No, no we really can't have the UI of a game from 1998 in a game released in 2010, not if you want the game to succeed. Which, if you value esports, you do. You are just taking this whole thing way too far - Blizzard have made some competitively disastrous decisions in SC2, but I can almost guarantee you that competition is something that weighs many times heavier on their mind now than it did 12 years ago when they made the first game. Then i guess we will have to agree to disagree. But i am curious where sc2 will end up after a year or two on the korean circuit. If you have an opinion would you mind sharing it? I don't think it will last longer than that- that is why blizz needs to have the expansion packs, to hopefully de-fibrillate a dead game to life once and awhile to garner some more money.
SC1 needed an xpac to de-fibrillate the game as well. Pretty sure everyone of note is on record as saying that SC1 without BW would not be where it is today.
|
On June 17 2010 05:54 Misrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 05:53 Bibdy wrote:On June 17 2010 05:50 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:49 Silent`Assassin wrote:
Comparing SC -> SC2 to SSBM -> SSBB is just completely wrong. Blizzard is listening to the community and making balance changes based on many of the complaints made by TL. They even made a change to the game to make it harder to macro (remove wireframe clicking for chrono boost/inject larva).
Your argument has some truth to it, but you can't put SC2 in the same group as those other "entertainment" games you listed. It has a high skill ceiling and it is being designed to be competitive. This is pretty clear if you payed attention to any of the beta tournaments as you don't just see random people winning tournaments. I think that i have said many times that blizz is not listening... on many things. b.net comes to mind- but there is just so much more. And I think that I have thought to myself through reading every response you've made in this thread "Wow, this guy is retarded". Does that make it true, too? That's fine- you can call me a retard as much as you want. But how does that further any argument?
How does responding to "Blizzard is listening" with "I think I said they haven't several times. So there", further any argument, either?
|
But i am curious where sc2 will end up after a year or two.
Oh believe me I would be really curious to see your responce to your own statement in a year or two! Really can't wait to see it!
P.S. Although I won't really remember anything about you in a matter of hours..
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 17 2010 06:00 Misrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 05:56 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 17 2010 05:53 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:50 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 17 2010 05:05 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:03 Spawkuring wrote:On June 17 2010 04:54 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 04:50 Spawkuring wrote:
The main issue I have with this essay is that it basically accuses all modern games of having "fake competition" for no real reason. What exactly does SC2 have that makes it fake? What does fake even mean? None of this is defined, but you toss it around as fact. Just because a game isn't on BW's level doesn't mean it can't still be competitive.
And what's worse is that you accuse Blizzard of sabotaging competition with no proof of it whatsoever, although I'm sure the reasons you will give will probably be something completely subjective and baseless. I mean I can understand the frustration at the over-casualization of several games, but I really don't see a reason why competition suddenly has no place. they sabotage competition by having their hand in every single aspect of competition. From no LAN, to all the other shit they are going to pull in online line 'turnies' Can you honestly tell me that they are looking to created a competitive game- when they have never taken anything the competitive community has said to them? "Never taken anything the competitive community has said to them"? Do the words "macro mechanics" ring a bell to you? A set of game mechanics added to the game purely because the hardcore community requested a way to make up the improved UI. Or perhaps the fact that they made large changes to the graphics because we complained about overly bright graphics and low readability. Or maybe the new replay features which have things like APM, something we specifically asked for. Or perhaps the fact that they have repeatedly held events, many in Korea, where they specifically ask fansites and pro-gamers to come test their game, chat with the developers face-to-face, and provide feedback. Or hell, the fact that they kept the core Starcraft gameplay the same instead of dramatically innovating it because they knew it would upset hardcores if Blizzard changed it (because casuals certainly haven't been happy about Blizzard not innovating). You also bring up taking control of tourneys, but in all honestly you have absolutely no idea how it will all work out. None of us do. Blizzard is definitely taking a HUGE risk here, but nobody can assert that they will either succeed or fail. Maybe it will crash and burn and e-Sports dies forever, or perhaps it's a massive success that expands e-Sports to the rest of the world instead of just Korea. Either way, it's far too early to assert, and it's irritating to see people act like they can see the future. Seriously, a lot of this is just you venting out steam. I understand some of the frustration, but again, it's ridiculous to be making such broad claims especially when most of them are baseless speculating. Macro mechanics are a great way for some false competition, it's nice entertainment. Hardcore requested something because the game is too easy- so blizz comes up with something on their own that will stifle the hard core, and yet still make the entertainment great for their target market. Macro mechanics are a joke- and you know it. You just can't be serious. I've read the OP and your posts throughout this thread and you sound like a moonlanding-conspiracy theorist. what? you have to really tell me frozen- you think that macro mechanics are a good substitute for the real thing? I just thought that it was funny: Sc2 is lacking in macro- so they had to make a specific mechanic because supposedly the hardcore group wined about it? Could we not just have regular macro back or what? Instead we get this gimmicky thing? It's not realistic to expect them to ignore what the entire world outside of SC considers progress (U.I enhancements). Blizzard were quite restrained in this regard, clearly conscious of the physical skill requirement, and the fact that they were actually willing to put something like the macro mechanics in... is frankly amazing. No, no we really can't have the UI of a game from 1998 in a game released in 2010, not if you want the game to succeed. Which, if you value esports, you do. You are just taking this whole thing way too far - Blizzard have made some competitively disastrous decisions in SC2, but I can almost guarantee you that competition is something that weighs many times heavier on their mind now than it did 12 years ago when they made the first game. Then i guess we will have to agree to disagree. But i am curious where sc2 will end up after a year or two on the korean circuit. If you have an opinion would you mind sharing it? I don't think it will last longer than that- that is why blizz needs to have the expansion packs, to hopefully de-fibrillate a dead game to life once and awhile to garner some more money.
I don't think SC without Brood War would have lasted this long either, so I'm perfectly willing to hold off on judging things until the second expansion pack is out.
Yes, SC2 is currently worse than Brood War.
But I think it might be better than SC vanilla.
|
I agree that the gaming industry is changing and I do love how strongly you defend your opinions, though I do have to agree it sounds a little overboard and sounds like a conspiracy theory.
|
On June 17 2010 06:00 Misrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 05:56 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 17 2010 05:53 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:50 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 17 2010 05:05 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:03 Spawkuring wrote:On June 17 2010 04:54 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 04:50 Spawkuring wrote:
The main issue I have with this essay is that it basically accuses all modern games of having "fake competition" for no real reason. What exactly does SC2 have that makes it fake? What does fake even mean? None of this is defined, but you toss it around as fact. Just because a game isn't on BW's level doesn't mean it can't still be competitive.
And what's worse is that you accuse Blizzard of sabotaging competition with no proof of it whatsoever, although I'm sure the reasons you will give will probably be something completely subjective and baseless. I mean I can understand the frustration at the over-casualization of several games, but I really don't see a reason why competition suddenly has no place. they sabotage competition by having their hand in every single aspect of competition. From no LAN, to all the other shit they are going to pull in online line 'turnies' Can you honestly tell me that they are looking to created a competitive game- when they have never taken anything the competitive community has said to them? "Never taken anything the competitive community has said to them"? Do the words "macro mechanics" ring a bell to you? A set of game mechanics added to the game purely because the hardcore community requested a way to make up the improved UI. Or perhaps the fact that they made large changes to the graphics because we complained about overly bright graphics and low readability. Or maybe the new replay features which have things like APM, something we specifically asked for. Or perhaps the fact that they have repeatedly held events, many in Korea, where they specifically ask fansites and pro-gamers to come test their game, chat with the developers face-to-face, and provide feedback. Or hell, the fact that they kept the core Starcraft gameplay the same instead of dramatically innovating it because they knew it would upset hardcores if Blizzard changed it (because casuals certainly haven't been happy about Blizzard not innovating). You also bring up taking control of tourneys, but in all honestly you have absolutely no idea how it will all work out. None of us do. Blizzard is definitely taking a HUGE risk here, but nobody can assert that they will either succeed or fail. Maybe it will crash and burn and e-Sports dies forever, or perhaps it's a massive success that expands e-Sports to the rest of the world instead of just Korea. Either way, it's far too early to assert, and it's irritating to see people act like they can see the future. Seriously, a lot of this is just you venting out steam. I understand some of the frustration, but again, it's ridiculous to be making such broad claims especially when most of them are baseless speculating. Macro mechanics are a great way for some false competition, it's nice entertainment. Hardcore requested something because the game is too easy- so blizz comes up with something on their own that will stifle the hard core, and yet still make the entertainment great for their target market. Macro mechanics are a joke- and you know it. You just can't be serious. I've read the OP and your posts throughout this thread and you sound like a moonlanding-conspiracy theorist. what? you have to really tell me frozen- you think that macro mechanics are a good substitute for the real thing? I just thought that it was funny: Sc2 is lacking in macro- so they had to make a specific mechanic because supposedly the hardcore group wined about it? Could we not just have regular macro back or what? Instead we get this gimmicky thing? It's not realistic to expect them to ignore what the entire world outside of SC considers progress (U.I enhancements). Blizzard were quite restrained in this regard, clearly conscious of the physical skill requirement, and the fact that they were actually willing to put something like the macro mechanics in... is frankly amazing. No, no we really can't have the UI of a game from 1998 in a game released in 2010, not if you want the game to succeed. Which, if you value esports, you do. You are just taking this whole thing way too far - Blizzard have made some competitively disastrous decisions in SC2, but I can almost guarantee you that competition is something that weighs many times heavier on their mind now than it did 12 years ago when they made the first game. Then i guess we will have to agree to disagree. But i am curious where sc2 will end up after a year or two on the korean circuit. If you have an opinion would you mind sharing it? I don't think it will last longer than that- that is why blizz needs to have the expansion packs, to hopefully de-fibrillate a dead game to life once and awhile to garner some more money.
Or they want to make expansion packs to further catering to gamers. Giving them more after they see the reaction to the original. Stop trying to find a conspiracy.
|
On June 17 2010 06:04 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 06:00 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:56 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 17 2010 05:53 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:50 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 17 2010 05:05 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:03 Spawkuring wrote:On June 17 2010 04:54 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 04:50 Spawkuring wrote:
The main issue I have with this essay is that it basically accuses all modern games of having "fake competition" for no real reason. What exactly does SC2 have that makes it fake? What does fake even mean? None of this is defined, but you toss it around as fact. Just because a game isn't on BW's level doesn't mean it can't still be competitive.
And what's worse is that you accuse Blizzard of sabotaging competition with no proof of it whatsoever, although I'm sure the reasons you will give will probably be something completely subjective and baseless. I mean I can understand the frustration at the over-casualization of several games, but I really don't see a reason why competition suddenly has no place. they sabotage competition by having their hand in every single aspect of competition. From no LAN, to all the other shit they are going to pull in online line 'turnies' Can you honestly tell me that they are looking to created a competitive game- when they have never taken anything the competitive community has said to them? "Never taken anything the competitive community has said to them"? Do the words "macro mechanics" ring a bell to you? A set of game mechanics added to the game purely because the hardcore community requested a way to make up the improved UI. Or perhaps the fact that they made large changes to the graphics because we complained about overly bright graphics and low readability. Or maybe the new replay features which have things like APM, something we specifically asked for. Or perhaps the fact that they have repeatedly held events, many in Korea, where they specifically ask fansites and pro-gamers to come test their game, chat with the developers face-to-face, and provide feedback. Or hell, the fact that they kept the core Starcraft gameplay the same instead of dramatically innovating it because they knew it would upset hardcores if Blizzard changed it (because casuals certainly haven't been happy about Blizzard not innovating). You also bring up taking control of tourneys, but in all honestly you have absolutely no idea how it will all work out. None of us do. Blizzard is definitely taking a HUGE risk here, but nobody can assert that they will either succeed or fail. Maybe it will crash and burn and e-Sports dies forever, or perhaps it's a massive success that expands e-Sports to the rest of the world instead of just Korea. Either way, it's far too early to assert, and it's irritating to see people act like they can see the future. Seriously, a lot of this is just you venting out steam. I understand some of the frustration, but again, it's ridiculous to be making such broad claims especially when most of them are baseless speculating. Macro mechanics are a great way for some false competition, it's nice entertainment. Hardcore requested something because the game is too easy- so blizz comes up with something on their own that will stifle the hard core, and yet still make the entertainment great for their target market. Macro mechanics are a joke- and you know it. You just can't be serious. I've read the OP and your posts throughout this thread and you sound like a moonlanding-conspiracy theorist. what? you have to really tell me frozen- you think that macro mechanics are a good substitute for the real thing? I just thought that it was funny: Sc2 is lacking in macro- so they had to make a specific mechanic because supposedly the hardcore group wined about it? Could we not just have regular macro back or what? Instead we get this gimmicky thing? It's not realistic to expect them to ignore what the entire world outside of SC considers progress (U.I enhancements). Blizzard were quite restrained in this regard, clearly conscious of the physical skill requirement, and the fact that they were actually willing to put something like the macro mechanics in... is frankly amazing. No, no we really can't have the UI of a game from 1998 in a game released in 2010, not if you want the game to succeed. Which, if you value esports, you do. You are just taking this whole thing way too far - Blizzard have made some competitively disastrous decisions in SC2, but I can almost guarantee you that competition is something that weighs many times heavier on their mind now than it did 12 years ago when they made the first game. Then i guess we will have to agree to disagree. But i am curious where sc2 will end up after a year or two on the korean circuit. If you have an opinion would you mind sharing it? I don't think it will last longer than that- that is why blizz needs to have the expansion packs, to hopefully de-fibrillate a dead game to life once and awhile to garner some more money. I don't think SC without Brood War would have lasted this long either, so I'm perfectly willing to hold off on judging things until the second expansion pack is out. Yes, SC2 is currently worse than Brood War. But I think it might be better than SC vanilla.
If your wiling- could i ask of your opinion as is? How will sc2 fair before the expo on the korean scene? As you know i give it a year or two (but by then the next expo will be out) but what say you?
|
|
|
this is not about conspiracy, its just business. Business wants to make money. It's not a bad thing- it's what they do. It just seems that sometimes people forget that the only reason a business exists in the first place- is to make money.
User was warned for this post
|
I compeletely disagree, it is in the best interest of Blizzard to make this game competetive. Do you know what their "motto" is when it comes to game design?
Easy to learn, difficult to master.
Making games entertaining, flashy or even making the learning curve more managing for new players does not result in the game having "fake" competition. If the game ceiling is so low, why does one of the best SC2 players think its not? Do you believe yourself more qualified to make that assumption? Which you base on what exactly? Less redundant macro abilities which require no strategical choice?
Also you still havent answered with what you define as "fake" competion and why it is fake. Is it not other players you are playing against? If they are more skilled than you, dont you normally lose versus them then? How do make the logic leap that this caters to "entertainment" gamers who only wants to own noobs, when you will be matched against your skill level in most game types?
Another thing you dont seem to realize. Which rather makes much of your "evil corporate sons of bitches are ruining gaming" point moot. There is money in competitive gaming. Blizzard sees that there are oppurtunities for making money on this. Televised events. Big tournaments. That is why they are gunning for the e-sports scene. They want to make it more mainstream. They want to make a bigger market for it. They want to make money from it. Why are they then purposefully ruining their game by making it only 'fake' competitive when they have a stake in it being the exactly opposite?
/end rant
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 17 2010 06:06 Misrah wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 06:04 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 17 2010 06:00 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:56 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 17 2010 05:53 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:50 FrozenArbiter wrote:On June 17 2010 05:05 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 05:03 Spawkuring wrote:On June 17 2010 04:54 Misrah wrote:On June 17 2010 04:50 Spawkuring wrote:
The main issue I have with this essay is that it basically accuses all modern games of having "fake competition" for no real reason. What exactly does SC2 have that makes it fake? What does fake even mean? None of this is defined, but you toss it around as fact. Just because a game isn't on BW's level doesn't mean it can't still be competitive.
And what's worse is that you accuse Blizzard of sabotaging competition with no proof of it whatsoever, although I'm sure the reasons you will give will probably be something completely subjective and baseless. I mean I can understand the frustration at the over-casualization of several games, but I really don't see a reason why competition suddenly has no place. they sabotage competition by having their hand in every single aspect of competition. From no LAN, to all the other shit they are going to pull in online line 'turnies' Can you honestly tell me that they are looking to created a competitive game- when they have never taken anything the competitive community has said to them? "Never taken anything the competitive community has said to them"? Do the words "macro mechanics" ring a bell to you? A set of game mechanics added to the game purely because the hardcore community requested a way to make up the improved UI. Or perhaps the fact that they made large changes to the graphics because we complained about overly bright graphics and low readability. Or maybe the new replay features which have things like APM, something we specifically asked for. Or perhaps the fact that they have repeatedly held events, many in Korea, where they specifically ask fansites and pro-gamers to come test their game, chat with the developers face-to-face, and provide feedback. Or hell, the fact that they kept the core Starcraft gameplay the same instead of dramatically innovating it because they knew it would upset hardcores if Blizzard changed it (because casuals certainly haven't been happy about Blizzard not innovating). You also bring up taking control of tourneys, but in all honestly you have absolutely no idea how it will all work out. None of us do. Blizzard is definitely taking a HUGE risk here, but nobody can assert that they will either succeed or fail. Maybe it will crash and burn and e-Sports dies forever, or perhaps it's a massive success that expands e-Sports to the rest of the world instead of just Korea. Either way, it's far too early to assert, and it's irritating to see people act like they can see the future. Seriously, a lot of this is just you venting out steam. I understand some of the frustration, but again, it's ridiculous to be making such broad claims especially when most of them are baseless speculating. Macro mechanics are a great way for some false competition, it's nice entertainment. Hardcore requested something because the game is too easy- so blizz comes up with something on their own that will stifle the hard core, and yet still make the entertainment great for their target market. Macro mechanics are a joke- and you know it. You just can't be serious. I've read the OP and your posts throughout this thread and you sound like a moonlanding-conspiracy theorist. what? you have to really tell me frozen- you think that macro mechanics are a good substitute for the real thing? I just thought that it was funny: Sc2 is lacking in macro- so they had to make a specific mechanic because supposedly the hardcore group wined about it? Could we not just have regular macro back or what? Instead we get this gimmicky thing? It's not realistic to expect them to ignore what the entire world outside of SC considers progress (U.I enhancements). Blizzard were quite restrained in this regard, clearly conscious of the physical skill requirement, and the fact that they were actually willing to put something like the macro mechanics in... is frankly amazing. No, no we really can't have the UI of a game from 1998 in a game released in 2010, not if you want the game to succeed. Which, if you value esports, you do. You are just taking this whole thing way too far - Blizzard have made some competitively disastrous decisions in SC2, but I can almost guarantee you that competition is something that weighs many times heavier on their mind now than it did 12 years ago when they made the first game. Then i guess we will have to agree to disagree. But i am curious where sc2 will end up after a year or two on the korean circuit. If you have an opinion would you mind sharing it? I don't think it will last longer than that- that is why blizz needs to have the expansion packs, to hopefully de-fibrillate a dead game to life once and awhile to garner some more money. I don't think SC without Brood War would have lasted this long either, so I'm perfectly willing to hold off on judging things until the second expansion pack is out. Yes, SC2 is currently worse than Brood War. But I think it might be better than SC vanilla. If your wiling- could i ask of your opinion as is? How will sc2 fair before the expo on the korean scene? As you know i give it a year or two (but by then the next expo will be out) but what say you?
Well the expo will be out in a year if their previous games are any indication so we will never know. I think SC2 is a better (or at least equal) game than WC3 and WC3 only died in Korea because of the map rigging scandal and the fact that it wasn't a direct sequel to SC1.
I think the game will do fine, and I doubt very much that it will be gone in 5 years time - I don't think Blizzard will be anywhere close to having another RTS game on the market at that point, for one thing.
|
wow, i thought this would be a good post but i was wrong, and this essay became progressively worse the more i read. Misrah, you need to seriously reevaluate how you define and use terms such as 'competition' and 'entertainment'. You seem to think they are mutually exclusive when they are clearly not. Moreover, I find your analysis of the history of games and their difficulty to be completely erroneous; actually, pretty much everything you wrote is flawed or clearly wrong.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
#1 Shouldn't be in SC2 forum
#2 Monster flame bait. Nothing is being accomplished here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
744
256
243
182
146
53670
3029
442
EPT