EPTYour BW and SC2 pros and cons - Page 2
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
raga4ka
Bulgaria5679 Posts
| ||
CaucasianAsian
Korea (South)11584 Posts
+ladder scene +chatrooms +defined professional scene +huge skill curve +more community oriented +easily to understand what is going on +high land advantage +tricks like stacking mutas, hold lurkers, etc... +storm drops actually do damage Cons for BW -Blizzard doesn't care about the professional scene -Foreigners suck -The scene is dying out Pros for SC2 +Blizzard cares about the ladder, and getting rid of hackers +Blizzard cares about the professional scene Cons for SC2 -Noob friendly -Less of a skill curve, easy for a noob to compete against really good players -Fog of War (you can see the entire map, even before you scout it) -Units clump together -Very flashy/lasers that do little damage -Less need for really good mechanics (1 or 2 base play is the norm.) -No chat rooms -No LAN capability -Auto-mine / Multiple Building Selection makes it too easy -No Cross Realm Play -No Private Ladders -SC:BW nubs can do well BroodWar is by far the better game! | ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
 | ||
|
Kyuukyuu
Canada6263 Posts
That and blobs of zerg on creep just look stupid and indistinguishable from each other. -Fog of War (you can see the entire map, even before you scout it) What's wrong with this, exactly? | ||
|
nK)Duke
Germany936 Posts
| ||
|
kXn
254 Posts
On October 12 2010 03:56 CaucasianAsian wrote: Cons for BW -The scene is dying out Cons for SC2: -Noob friendly Mutually exclusive? | ||
|
puppykiller
United States3137 Posts
On October 12 2010 03:22 paulinepain wrote: I don't like sc2, though I don't see the point stating why, also I don't see the point explaining why i love bw, so I'm just gonna say what i don't like. I believe siege tank deal too much damage, particularly with the upgrades, it should have been nerf, it would have made players such as Flash, iloveoov or even Nada more interesting to watch and lessen Terran domination. I highely doubt that very many people would call Nada boring. The power of the siege tank does no only help defensive late game macro terran, but harass terran (like Fantasy Nada) and aggressive terran (Iris Skyhigh) and timing push terran (Hiya Forgg). This is realy only an argument about tvp becuase the siege tank wasnt used as a bread and butter unit in tvz until flash came along and even with a nerf on the tank, tvt would likely still have the same unit composition. Really, a nerf would probably just make it take longer for terrans to move out due to the fact that their units would suck until a huge mass is accumulated. Harass is good but you can't usually win a full game off of it and timing pushes are sweet so long as your tanks are strong and the protoss is not prepared for timing push. pros: sc2 campaign cinematics new terran units cons: sc2 for some reason boring to watch noob comentators pros: sc1 fun $20 cons: sc1 unapealing to "casual gamers" no foreign scene at the moment T.T | ||
|
buhhy
United States1113 Posts
On October 12 2010 03:57 Piy wrote: Almost all of these problems are due to how old BW is and how new SC2 is. Although how bad Bnet2 is is pretty unforgivable I'd love it if BW is recreated with higher resolution, better sprites, better large unit AI and a better looking UI. | ||
|
awu25
United States2003 Posts
now imagine that you played SC2 for about 10 years and then all of sudden BW was released most of the complaints would be reversed (people would complain that the game was all of sudden too hard, etc.) I feel like the people complaining about SC2 are the ones who were pretty good at BW, but now since SC2 is more newb friendly, instead of practicing to get into tournaments, they just say "omg that game is too easy, i'm gonna stick to BW" i guess the point i was trying to make is that there will always be people who don't want to embrace change the only way you could compare these games if they were released at the same time | ||
|
mprs
Canada2933 Posts
| ||
|
Rakanishu2
United States475 Posts
On October 12 2010 03:09 kXn wrote: I've been discussing this with few players on iCCup, because when I say I play both BW and SC2, I generally receive the "F*ck sc2" reply. I want to make this thread so that everyone here can list their pros and cons about BW and SC2. no flame wars please Here is what I think of both games SC2: + Match making system + User interface + Mechanically easier + More beginner friendly - Current balance between races - Bnet 2.0 lacking (no chat channels, no replay sharing and many other minor details are lacking) - Terrible ladder maps - Cliche voice acting for most units BW: + Brilliant balance between races + Maps + Races more aesthetically distinct from each other when playing (clear units and colours, no such mess as in sc2) + Maps + Great voice acting + Did I say maps? - Pathing - Unit control - The UI needs an upgrade - Compability problems Overall I love both games equally, but I want to hear your opinions too.  I wonder where the OPs loyalties lie. Oh wait, no I don't. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5656 Posts
On October 12 2010 04:08 awu25 wrote: imagine a world where SC2 came before the release of BW now imagine that you played SC2 for about 10 years and then all of sudden BW was released most of the complaints would be reversed (people would complain that the game was all of sudden too hard, etc.) I feel like the people complaining about SC2 are the ones who were pretty good at BW, but now since SC2 is more newb friendly, instead of practicing to get into tournaments, they just say "omg that game is too easy, i'm gonna stick to BW" i guess the point i was trying to make is that there will always be people who don't want to embrace change the only way you could compare these games if they were released at the same time That wouldn't have happened since nobody would've sticked with SC2 for so long. T___T Definitely not me (quit beta after a couple of months). It's not about not embracing change per se - it's about not embracing change for the worse. | ||
|
Bean54
United States85 Posts
And BW is not "harder" than SC2, yes you will have more trouble playing on icccup than on bnet but thats because iccup has the people who have been playing BW for 12 years and are for the most part pretty hardcore BW gamers whereas SC2 is new and full of people new to strategy games so youll find it "easier" to win I guess, at least early on. That doesn't make the game itself any easier or harder. The only thing thats easy or hard is your opponent. Take for example chess, the games rules, set up, mechanics etc are rather simple compared to BW or SC2, yet if youre facing bobby fisher the game is not going to be easy. And if you just simply can't make the argument graphics are better in BW. That argument doesnt even pass the laugh test. You can also modify the graphics in SC2 to make the units more distinguishable and simplistic or make it more realistic and seamless. Just keep in mind SC2 and bnet2.0 are still developing (including the newly announced introduction of chat channels) so people need to be a little less averse to change, alot of BW posters here seem like Luddites and refuse to accept that there could possibly be something more fun or more entertaining than their "perfect BW" | ||
|
deafhobbit
United States828 Posts
On October 12 2010 04:28 Bean54 wrote: And if you just simply can't make the argument graphics are better in BW. That argument doesnt even pass the laugh test. You can also modify the graphics in SC2 to make the units more distinguishable and simplistic or make it more realistic and seamless. Just keep in mind SC2 and bnet2.0 are still developing (including the newly announced introduction of chat channels) so people need to be a little less averse to change, alot of BW posters here seem like Luddites and refuse to accept that there could possibly be something more fun or more entertaining than their "perfect BW" You can make the argument, rather easily. That the models in SC2 might be shinier and have smaller pixels than the ones in BW is true, but that doesn't make them better. "Better" is a judgement of quality, not quantity, and many of us prefer the look of BW to SC2 even if SC2's graphic are, from a purely technical standpoint, superior. Literally, my first reaction upon seeing footage of SC2 was "God damn those Protoss buildings are ugly as shit," an impression which hasn't changed with time and which makes me have no real interest in SC2. | ||
|
CaucasianAsian
Korea (South)11584 Posts
On October 12 2010 04:28 Bean54 wrote: In a game where you want a unit to go diagonal and it has to make an L shaped path(BW), the pathing is pretty primitive. Not to say it was just poorly programmed, but the game is old, it is just limited. And BW is not "harder" than SC2, yes you will have more trouble playing on icccup than on bnet but thats because iccup has the people who have been playing BW for 12 years and are for the most part pretty hardcore BW gamers whereas SC2 is new and full of people new to strategy games so youll find it "easier" to win I guess, at least early on. That doesn't make the game itself any easier or harder. The only thing thats easy or hard is your opponent. Take for example chess, the games rules, set up, mechanics etc are rather simple compared to BW or SC2, yet if youre facing bobby fisher the game is not going to be easy. And if you just simply can't make the argument graphics are better in BW. That argument doesnt even pass the laugh test. You can also modify the graphics in SC2 to make the units more distinguishable and simplistic or make it more realistic and seamless. Just keep in mind SC2 and bnet2.0 are still developing (including the newly announced introduction of chat channels) so people need to be a little less averse to change, alot of BW posters here seem like Luddites and refuse to accept that there could possibly be something more fun or more entertaining than their "perfect BW" BW is perfect. if you haven't had the opportunity to play it at a highly competitive level, you are surely missing out! + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Ideas
United States8143 Posts
greatest professional esports scene in the world huge map variety with many new excellent maps being introduced every few months unbelievably balanced at almost all levels huge layer of finesse for almost every unit (every unit takes a lot of time to learn how to control optimally) hard mechanics give a great rewarding feeling for performing well (IE controlling a huge lategame army well or macroing well etc) ever-evolving metagame with matchups changing a lot every year beautiful unit designs that interact with other units almost perfectly cons for BW: stagnant player base since SC2 beta came out (a bit harder to find games on ICCUP) flash and jaedong might be too good right now I dont really think it's that bad since it applies to every race basically equally, but poor pathfinding makes it frustrating for many new players to get into the game (and yea it kinda sucks but then to me that just adds to the fun of the game (must be more careful with unit control on maps where pathfinding bugs out a lot)). pros for SC2 protoss have a lot of really cool stuff that actually makes them cooler than they were in BW matchmaking makes it easier to find games all my friends play it macro mechanics are generally pretty cool huge player base and a stupidly large amount of tournaments cons for SC2 almost all SC2 tournaments suck no one is good at the game yet and so it's really boring to watch it seems that 1 out of every 5 SC2 players wants to be a caster and they all suck no high ground advantage maps suck reveal mechanic is still in the game (all CCs get destroyed and then your buildings are revealed) tons of unbelievably frustrating and stupid unit designs (almost all terran units, mothership, all zerg units except for queen) almost no notable micro (almost no learning curve for any unit) allow me to reiterate: they completely assraped everything that i loved about BW Zerg. it's not even close to playing or feeling like the same race complete lack of all the little micro battles and nuances that made BW so great (scourge vs vessel, lurkerling vs MnM armies, muta harass, reaver/shuttle harass, observer scourging, etc) I think that's about the gist of it. | ||
|
Sandrosuperstar
Sweden525 Posts
- Compability problems - battle net issues (iccup only place where you can play with lan latency) - no competitive foreign scene anymore these are all the issues i have with bw, i stopped playing because my new comp is a win7 | ||
|
Kal_rA
United States2925 Posts
plus bw is SO balanced. however, for me: bw is just way more serious and takes more concentration and focus so for new fun and fresh play i go play some sc2... 2v2s, 3v3s, 4v4s or just for dicking around lol when im serious i go to ic | ||
|
Ideas
United States8143 Posts
| ||
|
ToFu.
331 Posts
yes there is strategy, BUT the other half of the name means that there should be for lack of a better phrase, athletic ability (so long as we are constrained to using physical means to input data: mouse, keyboard). is there no strategy in tennis if not everybody can run as quickly? i will admit that BW is very challenging for me to play (i have never broken 200 apm..), but it is a good balance of physical and mental dexterity. | ||
| ||
