|
On January 08 2011 01:43 Armsved wrote:
They are a business and they are milking it, but only by making this game competetive E-sport can they truly make it a cashcow.
You have got to be joking. Whether there was a GSL or not is completely irrelevant. I believe SC2 has already sold 3 million copies in the first month, without any promises on whether a GSL would actually happen or not. So what is the big deal about this "scene", especially with an inferior game?
If Blizzard intended SC2 to be competitive, then where is your rating dear sir? Where exactly do you stand in your region?
|
I haven't been watching. Honestly the map pool is so static that it isn't interesting anymore. The players are all unknowns, and the games usually play out exactly the same. Terrans all in way too much, and it just isn't as interesting as it used to be.
I also hear that koreans hate the gomtv casters, so that probably has something to do with it.
|
the metagame is at an incredibly boring stage at the moment. nobody wants to watch GSL because they're basically seeing what they get on ladder every day. there aren't really elite players performing things that we lower level players can't do. for the most part they're mechanically solid players, just like any high diamond player performing the latest abusive build, with very few exceptions.
you go to see brood war matches to see the kinds of incredibly complex, high level play that you can only see in those matches. when i watched GSL3, i felt for the most part that i could get basically the same games by just going to play ladder. there are some very good, fun-to-watch players like MC and Jinro, but then we have guys like Rain getting to the finals. if starcraft 2 is going to be successful, we can't have guys like Rain getting to the finals of the biggest tournament. these guys should have to earn their way to the top. they can't be allowed to get to the top with abusive build orders and sheer luck.
what sc2 needs, REALLY REALLY NEEDS is bigger maps. if we had longer games where players had more opportunities to prove their skill, then GSL would be more exciting. but instead what we have is short maps where the games don't last long enough to show that a terran knows there are any buildings beyond barracks tech.
|
On January 08 2011 00:55 kaisr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 00:36 tdt wrote:
Maybe it's just not as accessible to people in South Korea
-System requirements are pretty high
-Cost of game is pretty high, no spawning
-Need cost of internet to play, no LAN
etc..
none of these are the reasons sc2 isn't popular in south korea
Agree with kaisr.
I imagine that they have better equipment and faster and more accessible(cheaper) Internet Connection over there than we do in Europe and/or USA.
Jinro FIGHTING!!!
|
I feel like BW turned out to be "balanced" and "competitive" by complete mistake, not by careful planning by blizzard. It was just dumb luck, but look now we've ruined another thread comparing BW to SC2.
|
On January 08 2011 01:46 optical630 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 01:05 shadymmj wrote:
I don't even see the need for it to "survive". All SC2 has to do is to sell, and I'd say it's doing pretty well. For those who still have not figured it out, Blizzard is milking you, period. They had 10 years to produce SC2, come up with ideas, improve on BW, and they've given us a half-assed game. By half-assed I mean they haven't even managed to come up with most of the story, threw about 12 filler missions into the singleplayer so it wouldn't be so short, screwed up BNET2 and we still don't know our real rating.
However, they've done a pretty good job at attracting the casual playerbase. The story, however shallow, will satisfy most people, and the graphics are shiny and all. And that is what matters - the game sells, and will continue to sell.
We should NOT have to fork out more cash to have a "complete" game. It's just bullshit. They've had 10 years to make it complete. I'm tired of waiting for the competitive aspect of the game to grow. In fact, whether SC2 has a scene or not is nearly irrelevant, because SC2 was not designed to be a competitive RTS for the general public. Not every RTS has to be competitive. Don't agree? Well, what's your rating, then? actually they designed it to be a competetive esports, they said this themselves
Well then. Assuming that we all are not satisfied with current state of the gameplay, I guess this means that either Blizzard:
1. half-assed SC2
2. Fully tried, but were incompetent.
3. Intended the game to be what it should be only after the last expansion, so they can get shit ton of money by selling 2 half-assed games(WoL and HotS).
I think most SC2 fans are hopes it's option 3 and not 1 or 2.
|
Noob question. Why is such a big event like GSL using blizzard maps? Like , can't they just use custom maps however they want?
|
On January 08 2011 01:05 shadymmj wrote:
I don't even see the need for it to "survive". All SC2 has to do is to sell, and I'd say it's doing pretty well. For those who still have not figured it out, Blizzard is milking you, period. They had 10 years to produce SC2, come up with ideas, improve on BW, and they've given us a half-assed game. By half-assed I mean they haven't even managed to come up with most of the story, threw about 12 filler missions into the singleplayer so it wouldn't be so short, screwed up BNET2 and we still don't know our real rating.
However, they've done a pretty good job at attracting the casual playerbase. The story, however shallow, will satisfy most people, and the graphics are shiny and all. And that is what matters - the game sells, and will continue to sell.
We should NOT have to fork out more cash to have a "complete" game. It's just bullshit. They've had 10 years to make it complete. I'm tired of waiting for the competitive aspect of the game to grow. In fact, whether SC2 has a scene or not is nearly irrelevant, because SC2 was not designed to be a competitive RTS for the general public. Not every RTS has to be competitive. Don't agree? Well, what's your rating, then?
I take it you think quake 3 arena was a half-assed game as well... I think it fits all your criteria.
|
On January 08 2011 01:50 shadymmj wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 01:43 Armsved wrote:
They are a business and they are milking it, but only by making this game competetive E-sport can they truly make it a cashcow. You have got to be joking. Whether there was a GSL or not is completely irrelevant. I believe SC2 has already sold 3 million copies in the first month, without any promises on whether a GSL would actually happen or not. So what is the big deal about this "scene", especially with an inferior game? If Blizzard intended SC2 to be competitive, then where is your rating dear sir? Where exactly do you stand in your region?
While the last point is pretty good  but you can argue about that endless. The system actually does promote being competetive more than 1 big ladder would (or atleast make it feel that way).
Blizzard still promotes tourneys under the news section etc. I really think they want this game to be a competetive E-sport and I do belive that when they say they want it to be they truly mean it.
They have already said they wont care about D3 (at the D3 Q&A) as an E-sport and the game wont be balanced for PvP. Why would they say that? To make more money?
To sum it up. I dont think they are lying when they say they want it to be an E-sport. Only time will tell wether they are competent or not. And IF they are competent enough to make it an E-sport and make the playerbase stay, then trust me, activision will find tons of ways to milk it. But as long as they fail at making it an E-sport they will never be able to milk it.
So yeah, I think there is a big intrest in having Sc2 becoming a big E-sport. Get a big loyal playerbase and a game with huge exposure. Once they have that, then they can truly start milking. Marketing, buying skins/avatars onling etc. etc. Endless possibilities for activision.
|
The original GSL format was just so much better, you show up one night and get to see 6-10 top level players going at it, now it's maybe 1-2 top, and a handful of lower class players. Also BO1 lacks the drama of a series.
|
I think overall people need to stop over analyzing it and just relax. Starcraft 1 is still very popular in Korea (Obviously) and has a established Meta-Game and Player base. Why would anyone that loves Starcraft start watching Starcraft 2? Because it has shiny new Graphics? While I do think Star 2 is a great game, and is exciting to watch, in Korea Star 1 still has that role. I think until the game has been out for a bit longer, and becomes more stable most Koreans will not make the switch.
I don't blame them at all. Star 2 for me, just has a much bigger scene here in North America.
|
hm, i dont really mind if sc2 has problems in korea, people watch what they like, if koreans dont like it so be it. i for one still enjoy the game from time to time and to be honest, watching osl/msl is so much more fun for me cause the quality of the games provided is much more higher.
|
Too much top-down, too little bottom-up.
There was an interview posted a while ago with a Korean manager/LAN cafe owner who made this complaint about GSL. You can't force popularity with a brute force top-down approach where one big tournament is all there is.
|
On January 08 2011 02:17 dizzy101 wrote:
Too much top-down, too little bottom-up.
There was an interview posted a while ago with a Korean manager/LAN cafe owner who made this complaint about GSL. You can't force popularity with a brute force top-down approach where one big tournament is all there is.
This.
Sooo many people said last year that shoving esport down Korea's throat will not work.
They were right.
|
i guess the gsl could survive for european and american audience only, just think about what money they make with the season ticket they LOWERED the price for and improved the servers HUGELY! im not in the "main target audience" as an european, but i can view hd vods. They do have money, they do have success, they just dont have the live audience.
|
I don't know why, but Code S is just boring to watch (and more so Code A).
Maybe because it's only Bo1s (which is stupid), maybe because we don't want to watch "pros" anymore who do nothing but all-ins and cannon shit that anyone can learn within 2 days. I think the maps are one of the main reasons why SC2 is so boring and dull to watch. It is unbelievable what kind of noobs get to play in the semi-finals (like TSL_Rain to name only one) while others get knocked out due to bullshit that shouldn't even be viable (bigger maps).
|
On January 08 2011 01:52 Leviwtf wrote:
I feel like BW turned out to be "balanced" and "competitive" by complete mistake, not by careful planning by blizzard. It was just dumb luck, but look now we've ruined another thread comparing BW to SC2.
Even if what you say is true, you can't deny the fact that the game was (and still IS) fun to watch. It was also fun to play. War3 was fun to play and watch, right now SC2 is neither fun to play nor to watch. I play protoss and trust me when I say 90% of my games are boring. Looking at youtube commentaries and replays isn't fun either. I can't name one memorable game in SC2, but I can tell you stories about games in BW or War3. It's still a new game, that is true, but Blizz should have evolved a bit and perfected the already established game mechanic. I remain optimistic about the expansion, but only time will tell.
|
i came to this thread to support the complaint about the map pool still being bad. i'm still doing that, but i realized how tired i am of making that complaint and also reading about it. can't tell if blizzard is acting extremely slowly or just doesn't know how important maps are.
i hope that closer to this game's first release anniversary, steppes of war and other undesirable maps will have been removed from the ladder, or the tournaments will have seriously made moves towards implementing a custom map system. or both.
|
On January 08 2011 02:00 Xswordy wrote:
Noob question. Why is such a big event like GSL using blizzard maps? Like , can't they just use custom maps however they want? Because pros ladder on the blizzard ladder. The maps are official and that's half the story right there. I think the other half is because Blizzard gave GOM exclusive rights to SC2 so they have to use their maps. I'm not too sure about the latter point (someone with more experience please confirm/correct) but the first point is a huge factor. Laddering is an easy way to practice against people who are roughly your skill level. If the maps you're laddering on aren't the maps you're going to be playing in the tournament it's not very helpful since your strategies changed based on the map.
On January 08 2011 02:44 taintmachine wrote:
i came to this thread to support the complaint about the map pool still being bad. i'm still doing that, but i realized how tired i am of making that complaint and also reading about it. can't tell if blizzard is acting extremely slowly or just doesn't know how important maps are.
i hope that closer to this game's first release anniversary, steppes of war and other undesirable maps will have been removed from the ladder, or the tournaments will have seriously made moves towards implementing a custom map system. or both.
I think everyone is giving Blizzard less credit than they deserve. They've been doing pretty well with the balance changes in the overall picture. With patch 1.2 and chat channels there will be a huge explosion in the popularity of custom melee maps due to players being able to easily organize games in SC2. Then we can really judge if the custom maps that are out there are any better than Blizzard maps.
Edit: Added response to taintmachine.
|
On January 08 2011 01:51 universalwill wrote:
the metagame is at an incredibly boring stage at the moment. nobody wants to watch GSL because they're basically seeing what they get on ladder every day. there aren't really elite players performing things that we lower level players can't do. for the most part they're mechanically solid players, just like any high diamond player performing the latest abusive build, with very few exceptions.
you go to see brood war matches to see the kinds of incredibly complex, high level play that you can only see in those matches. when i watched GSL3, i felt for the most part that i could get basically the same games by just going to play ladder. there are some very good, fun-to-watch players like MC and Jinro, but then we have guys like Rain getting to the finals. if starcraft 2 is going to be successful, we can't have guys like Rain getting to the finals of the biggest tournament. these guys should have to earn their way to the top. they can't be allowed to get to the top with abusive build orders and sheer luck.
what sc2 needs, REALLY REALLY NEEDS is bigger maps. if we had longer games where players had more opportunities to prove their skill, then GSL would be more exciting. but instead what we have is short maps where the games don't last long enough to show that a terran knows there are any buildings beyond barracks tech.
This, this, THIS..
GSL for me is also simply just watching a "televised" + casted ladder match. Theres hardly any game that stands out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
