|
On January 08 2011 18:15 CreepCrepe wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 17:25 Jarhead wrote:
Oh, and how does difficult macro make BW boring rather than more exciting?
Imagine watching a world class runner lose to a fat guy on a bike. Which racer is more impressive?
Now imagine watching Flash macro out of 7+ barracks vs an SC2 plat player out of 7 rax. Sure, they both get the same job done, but somehow Flash is more interesting to watch.
Edit: Sorry for the rant. SC2 has a lot of potential and I hope it lasts long enough to grow like BW has, but it is irritating when people claim that the world's most resilient esport is "boring." Fat dude on a bike. Imagine the shit that good players are going to be able to put off from 4 bases, when they don't have to devote 400 APM to shitty macro mechanics.
when you take out the difference in macro skill between an amateur and a progamer, you inevitably put more emphasis on micro and BUILDS.
HOWEVER, starcraft is NOT like chess in which you can just read your opponent for every move. there is a reason why even the top bw progamers have only like 60% win rate. it's because inevitably, you are going to start out with an inferior build (i.e. 4 pool) sometimes. this is the NATURE of the game. if someone 4 pools you, there is no way of knowing whether he/she will 4 pool you beforehand. this is why we have a BO5/7.
BW had an extremely high ceiling for skill level in both macro and micro. this allowed people to have a chance of coming back even with a disadvantaged build sometimes. hence what I am trying to say is since SC2 lowered the ceiling for macro skills, the game is much more dependent on micro and that much more on prepared builds, which is a crapshoot to say the least.
lowering the skillset requirements of a game does not make a game more attractive. there would be no reason for a pro scene if the pro scene level of play does not really exude "pro"ness. such a scene would be no different from watching the streams of decent-level players on teamliquid streaming their own games.
|
Why hasn't Blizzard implemented a test server again? They did it for that recent patch and got some results of what people did and didn't like.
Also, why not play with the numbers a bit more? Break everything. Remove upgrades and give them to units from the get-go. Double something's damage. Halve something's damage. Make ultralisks spawn 2 at a time. Let zerglings fly. Give the raven a short-range EMP and remove it from the ghost. Make nukes take 5 seconds to land. Bring back dark archons. Give all zerg units burrow immediately. Make the psi storm AoE bigger.
Just fuckin' do SOMETHING instead of sitting here with a broken game for months upon months hoping for the player's skill to somehow enhance an incredibly bland and boring game.
|
The funny thing is, to casual spectators of the game, SC2 is far more appealing than BW. It's got better graphics for starters. Additionally it's got more complex possibilities due to the lessening of the prior emphasis on perfect mechanics in BW.
The game is more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it to begin with. I think esports is ever to really takeoff, it needs to appeal to a wide variety of interest levels and not solely people that really really understand the mechanics of the game.
People have pointed things out like "Seeing Flash at 400 APM on 7 rax is far better than seeing a scrub in SC2 on 7 rax (because of how much harder I know it is for the former)". Well, did it occur to you that the casual viewer probably doesn't care how difficult it was for those 7 raxes to be managed? No. The more casual viewer is more interested in the action.
And finally to strengthen the point above, I agree that free TV coverage is necessary for something to gain ample attention on a very large scale. The more people see it free, the bigger the pool of casual viewers grows, and so on. That is where SC2 takes the cake. It's much more appealing to the more casual viewer that doesn't understand mechanics and so on.
|
And again, the spectator loses nothing by watching BW and not knowing about macro.
The observers don't sit and watch players robotically sending SCVs to minerals, they watch the big flashy battles.
As far as excitement, BW at this moment still 'takes the cake' in every way except for its 1999 graphics.
|
On January 08 2011 18:53 FallDownMarigold wrote:
The funny thing is, to casual spectators of the game, SC2 is far more appealing than BW. It's got better graphics for starters. Additionally it's got more complex possibilities due to the lessening of the prior emphasis on perfect mechanics in BW.
The game is more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it to begin with. I think esports is ever to really takeoff, it needs to appeal to a wide variety of interest levels and not solely people that really really understand the mechanics of the game.
So if some company releases a dumbed down version of SC2 that has even better graphics and is even more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it some years from now, it will be a better esport than SC2 and SC2 will go away?
|
On January 08 2011 18:53 FallDownMarigold wrote:
The funny thing is, to casual spectators of the game, SC2 is far more appealing than BW. It's got better graphics for starters. Additionally it's got more complex possibilities due to the lessening of the prior emphasis on perfect mechanics in BW.
The game is more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it to begin with. I think esports is ever to really takeoff, it needs to appeal to a wide variety of interest levels and not solely people that really really understand the mechanics of the game.
People have pointed things out like "Seeing Flash at 400 APM on 7 rax is far better than seeing a scrub in SC2 on 7 rax (because of how much harder I know it is for the former)". Well, did it occur to you that the casual viewer probably doesn't care how difficult it was for those 7 raxes to be managed? No. The more casual viewer is more interested in the action.
And finally to strengthen the point above, I agree that free TV coverage is necessary for something to gain ample attention on a very large scale. The more people see it free, the bigger the pool of casual viewers grows, and so on. That is where SC2 takes the cake. It's much more appealing to the more casual viewer that doesn't understand mechanics and so on.
This post is incorrect because you assume that the korean's focus in on people's bases and orgasm repeatedly over units coming out of a barracks.
They don't.
They like the action just as much as anybody else. The difference between Brood War and SC2 is that the battle's in Brood War are on a scale that you never see in SC2. Even having zero understanding of how difficult each game is, the positioning, the movement, the almost artful dancing that units do to flank, surround, or outmaneuver their opposition is great to watch. Sure, Tasteless and Artosis praise some players for their "beautiful" forcefields or "micro," but in the back of our heads, we all know it's just a front. "Oh, look a wall appeared behind so-and-so's army and his units are completely slaughtered." "Oh, my god, those marauders moved away from his enemy in a big ball, BUT THEY ARE STOPPING TO ATTACK! THEY ARE MOVING AWAY AGAIN!! But, what's this!? THEY ARE ATTACKING AGAIN!!? MY GOD THE BEAUTIFUL MICRO."
It's not as fun to watch as a wave of zerglings perfectly surrounding a group of MM or those same MM dancing to avoid lurkers, a unit who is supposed to fucking RAPE them.
I... I don't even know what to say from this point on
|
On January 08 2011 18:51 kwkwookw wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 18:15 CreepCrepe wrote:On January 08 2011 17:25 Jarhead wrote:
Oh, and how does difficult macro make BW boring rather than more exciting?
Imagine watching a world class runner lose to a fat guy on a bike. Which racer is more impressive?
Now imagine watching Flash macro out of 7+ barracks vs an SC2 plat player out of 7 rax. Sure, they both get the same job done, but somehow Flash is more interesting to watch.
Edit: Sorry for the rant. SC2 has a lot of potential and I hope it lasts long enough to grow like BW has, but it is irritating when people claim that the world's most resilient esport is "boring." Fat dude on a bike. Imagine the shit that good players are going to be able to put off from 4 bases, when they don't have to devote 400 APM to shitty macro mechanics. when you take out the difference in macro skill between an amateur and a progamer, you inevitably put more emphasis on micro and BUILDS. HOWEVER, starcraft is NOT like chess in which you can just read your opponent for every move. there is a reason why even the top bw progamers have only like 60% win rate. it's because inevitably, you are going to start out with an inferior build (i.e. 4 pool) sometimes. this is the NATURE of the game. if someone 4 pools you, there is no way of knowing whether he/she will 4 pool you beforehand. this is why we have a BO5/7. BW had an extremely high ceiling for skill level in both macro and micro. this allowed people to have a chance of coming back even with a disadvantaged build sometimes. hence what I am trying to say is since SC2 lowered the ceiling for macro skills, the game is much more dependent on micro and that much more on prepared builds, which is a crapshoot to say the least. lowering the skillset requirements of a game does not make a game more attractive. there would be no reason for a pro scene if the pro scene level of play does not really exude "pro"ness. such a scene would be no different from watching the streams of decent-level players on teamliquid streaming their own games.
if 4 pool result in 100% sure win to its executer, why not everyone just does it and thus could have 100% win rate?
|
Lol thank you, pie.
Not to mention, the 'casual' audience, viewers who don't bother to learn anything about the game (including difficulty of actions), will probably not make much of a permanent fanbase.
|
On January 08 2011 16:27 ZeroChrome wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 16:24 KillerPlague wrote:On January 07 2011 08:06 Puosu wrote:On January 07 2011 08:03 Boblhead wrote:
If i'm correct GSL is broadcast through tv's so many koreans must prefer to watch from the comfort of their own home. Finals are around 5-7pm and i would assume most ppl are eating dinner. It's not on TV, Koreans have to watch on the internet just like foreigners unless it has changed recently. BW tournaments have been televized for ten years yet they get significantly bigger audiences for the important matches and even the less important ones. The biggest BW tournament finals have attracted tens of thousands of spectators many a time. It's a difficult situation, most people in Korea seem to prefer BW and the scene behind the game over SC2, but if that doesn't change soon it can affect the growth of esports immensely. I guess we should all hope that the foreign viewers are enough for Gretech to continue hosting the GSL for years to come and that the korean majority jumps in at some point. if this is the case why is it that the GSL has been able to raise so much more money to host their tournaments than any bw tournament? not saying you're wrong, just interesting that they would throw away that much money if they aren't getting viewers.. the reason that the GSL has a huge prizepool is to attract more viewers.
Business works the other way around. You NEED a large viewer pool to support good sponsors + large prize pool. And you need the prize pool to get the good players.
|
Imagine for a second if your favorite sports team played in town every weekday. Imagine... do you even have the time to attend all of that even if it were free? Then again they said they couldn't even pack the gymnasium to half capacity for last seasons finals.
Overall, SC2 doesn't have to hinge on Korea. But however, out of MLG, ESL and w/e GSL are by far the most organized. Very easy to find VODs and in order too. Commentary is a bit immature, but w/e.
On January 07 2011 08:23 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2011 08:21 tree.hugger wrote:On January 07 2011 08:11 pfods wrote:
I think korea needs to look outwards if it wants to survive as the mecca of starcraft and esports. They can only live on broodwar for so long, especially with so many of the pros switching over to starcraft 2. For one, a revision of how GOM presents the GSL to the west would be great. I know a lot of people that would watch if it weren't on at 4 in the morning. It's nice to have a livestream and all, but perhaps a delayed stream per each timezone would be better. Guaranteed to attract more viewers, and if they put ads in the stream, they would acquire revenue to promote themselves and the game more than they do now.
That said, I know blizzard wants starcraft 2 to succeed in esports(at least I hope they do). If korea fails to deliver, I can easily see blizzard stepping up and hosting a GSL like tournament. Korea has the interest, infrastructure, and legacy; they're nowhere near getting supplanted as the worldwide mecca of ESPORTS. If Sc2 fails as an ESPORT in Korea, then it will have failed as an ESPORT period. Success at the occasional big lan and WCG is nowhere near the kind of exposure or success that the Korean BW model has achieved. Plenty of games fit into the Western model, but the goal all along has been for Sc2 to aspire to something higher than that. And I'm less convinced than you are that Blizzard cares about the future of ESPORTS. I'm pretty positive that they're either completely incompetent, or they don't care in the slightest. Although I disagree that we need Korea for E-sports to work, I do have to agree that my faith has been shaken in Blizzard caring about E-Sports.
Shaken? Since when should anyone have any faith? Stubborn to change the ladder pool and attempting to balance this game off poor maps. eSports events are rarely shown on their blog and I think their recent "GSL is starting" announcement was 3 days late and they never even posted about GSL finals, but did mention Jinro (after he's eliminated of course). They don't even promote their own events (or more appropriately their "partners") in their eSports forum. Instead we get a lot of promos for licensed merchandise on their front page.
I guess Blizzard should have at least SOME interest as a business to help promo SC2 eSports since they get royalties? Their Blizzcon coverage was pretty shitty.
|
1. More Blizzard involvement in promotions and possibly map's.
It helps if it can get the word out and really I agree that Blizzard isn't promoting it's sc2 as well as it could. Of course even if they did something like toss GOM TV SC2 GSL TOURNAMENT on the WoW Login screen you'd have an issue of live streams at 4-5 am.
2. Streams need to be on at prime time for everyone. AND ON TV for Korea.
Rebroadcast the stream, just like MLG did. I really can't keep up with a 5 am schedule and if you want larger viewership from people not in the Timezone you need to do this or realize they'll just not bother or go elsewhere. Yes tv matters, it needs to be on tv in Korea. You can't compete with the remote.
3. Maps that are new.
As has been stated before you need more maps, I don't really care if they are in the ladder or not they don't need to be. People will play it if it's a good map and is shown off in a tournament. I really appreciate the work of people from ICCUP but yeah.. obviously they are trying to promote the product they have and I really don't want to see Brood War remake maps. I know they have original stuff but I just want it to be clear the game needs new macroish maps.
4. A scene of excitement.
Even as a non Korean I notice the excitements the rivaly, the pagantry of the games of BW. Players like MC who has a wonderful kind of showmen ship to his out of game play. Anyone can get into BW because it get's exciting the commentators are yelling the scene is set for it and you know player A is a rising star but player b is a stalwart vet wanting to prove he's not out of his prime just yet. Right now, yeah for a lot of players I am just not getting that vibe. I think that's a problem if I am not the only one.
Just some of the things that could use improving. Also, I love both and will continue to watch both.
|
On January 08 2011 19:07 Foxt wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 18:51 kwkwookw wrote:On January 08 2011 18:15 CreepCrepe wrote:On January 08 2011 17:25 Jarhead wrote:
Oh, and how does difficult macro make BW boring rather than more exciting?
Imagine watching a world class runner lose to a fat guy on a bike. Which racer is more impressive?
Now imagine watching Flash macro out of 7+ barracks vs an SC2 plat player out of 7 rax. Sure, they both get the same job done, but somehow Flash is more interesting to watch.
Edit: Sorry for the rant. SC2 has a lot of potential and I hope it lasts long enough to grow like BW has, but it is irritating when people claim that the world's most resilient esport is "boring." Fat dude on a bike. Imagine the shit that good players are going to be able to put off from 4 bases, when they don't have to devote 400 APM to shitty macro mechanics. when you take out the difference in macro skill between an amateur and a progamer, you inevitably put more emphasis on micro and BUILDS. HOWEVER, starcraft is NOT like chess in which you can just read your opponent for every move. there is a reason why even the top bw progamers have only like 60% win rate. it's because inevitably, you are going to start out with an inferior build (i.e. 4 pool) sometimes. this is the NATURE of the game. if someone 4 pools you, there is no way of knowing whether he/she will 4 pool you beforehand. this is why we have a BO5/7. BW had an extremely high ceiling for skill level in both macro and micro. this allowed people to have a chance of coming back even with a disadvantaged build sometimes. hence what I am trying to say is since SC2 lowered the ceiling for macro skills, the game is much more dependent on micro and that much more on prepared builds, which is a crapshoot to say the least. lowering the skillset requirements of a game does not make a game more attractive. there would be no reason for a pro scene if the pro scene level of play does not really exude "pro"ness. such a scene would be no different from watching the streams of decent-level players on teamliquid streaming their own games. if 4 pool result in 100% sure win to its executer, why not everyone just does it and thus could have 100% win rate?
He said that the other person could begin in a disadvantageous situation depending on their chosen build. They can also scout the 4-pool. They can still react. They can stop it if they are better than their opponent. More often than not in SC2 if you lose the rock-paper-scissors for build orders, it's not a disadvantage; it's an assured defeat. In no place did he say that 4-pooling somebody was an assured victory.
God the quality of these forums. Does anybody read anything before posting anymore.
|
On January 08 2011 18:20 ChApFoU wrote:edit :Also do you want me to remember how beautifully balanced the game and the maps were in the early age of BW ? Please, do remember. As far as i Remember, Lost Temple was very well balanced, modern, epic macro game supporting Starcraft map already in 1998 when the game came out.
|
On January 08 2011 18:53 FallDownMarigold wrote:
The funny thing is, to casual spectators of the game, SC2 is far more appealing than BW. It's got better graphics for starters. Additionally it's got more complex possibilities due to the lessening of the prior emphasis on perfect mechanics in BW.
The game is more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it to begin with. I think esports is ever to really takeoff, it needs to appeal to a wide variety of interest levels and not solely people that really really understand the mechanics of the game.
People have pointed things out like "Seeing Flash at 400 APM on 7 rax is far better than seeing a scrub in SC2 on 7 rax (because of how much harder I know it is for the former)". Well, did it occur to you that the casual viewer probably doesn't care how difficult it was for those 7 raxes to be managed? No. The more casual viewer is more interested in the action.
And finally to strengthen the point above, I agree that free TV coverage is necessary for something to gain ample attention on a very large scale. The more people see it free, the bigger the pool of casual viewers grows, and so on. That is where SC2 takes the cake. It's much more appealing to the more casual viewer that doesn't understand mechanics and so on.
The funny thing is, to casual spectators of the game, CoD and Halo are far more appealing than sc2. Its got better graphics for starters, Additionally it's got more complex possibilities due to the lessening of the prior emphasis on perfect 1 base play in sc2.
The game is more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it to begin with. I think esports is ever to really takeoff, it needs to appeal to a wide variety of interest levels and not solely people that really really understand the mechanics of the game.
People have pointed things out like "seeing marineking at 200 apm with only marines is far better than seeing a scrub in sc2 with only marines (because of the marine split)". Well, did it occur to you that the casual viewer probably doesn't care how difficult it was for those marines to be split? No. The more casual viewer is more interested in the action.
And finally to strengthen the point above, I agree that free TV coverage is necessary for something to gain ample attention on a very large scale. The more people see it free, the bigger the pool of casual viewers grows, and so on. That is where CoD and Halo takes the cake. It's much more appealing to the more casual viewer that doesn't understand mechanics and so on.
|
On January 08 2011 19:20 frodoguy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 18:53 FallDownMarigold wrote:
The funny thing is, to casual spectators of the game, SC2 is far more appealing than BW. It's got better graphics for starters. Additionally it's got more complex possibilities due to the lessening of the prior emphasis on perfect mechanics in BW.
The game is more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it to begin with. I think esports is ever to really takeoff, it needs to appeal to a wide variety of interest levels and not solely people that really really understand the mechanics of the game.
People have pointed things out like "Seeing Flash at 400 APM on 7 rax is far better than seeing a scrub in SC2 on 7 rax (because of how much harder I know it is for the former)". Well, did it occur to you that the casual viewer probably doesn't care how difficult it was for those 7 raxes to be managed? No. The more casual viewer is more interested in the action.
And finally to strengthen the point above, I agree that free TV coverage is necessary for something to gain ample attention on a very large scale. The more people see it free, the bigger the pool of casual viewers grows, and so on. That is where SC2 takes the cake. It's much more appealing to the more casual viewer that doesn't understand mechanics and so on. The funny thing is, to casual spectators of the game, CoD and Halo are far more appealing than sc2. Its got better graphics for starters, Additionally it's got more complex possibilities due to the lessening of the prior emphasis on perfect 1 base play in sc2. The game is more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it to begin with. I think esports is ever to really takeoff, it needs to appeal to a wide variety of interest levels and not solely people that really really understand the mechanics of the game. People have pointed things out like "seeing marineking at 200 apm with only marines is far better than seeing a scrub in sc2 with only marines (because of the marine split)". Well, did it occur to you that the casual viewer probably doesn't care how difficult it was for those marines to be split? No. The more casual viewer is more interested in the action. And finally to strengthen the point above, I agree that free TV coverage is necessary for something to gain ample attention on a very large scale. The more people see it free, the bigger the pool of casual viewers grows, and so on. That is where CoD and Halo takes the cake. It's much more appealing to the more casual viewer that doesn't understand mechanics and so on.
Although you missed my point and instead chose to play word games/troll, I'll humor you:
Correct. If Halo or COD were to be marketed and presented to the correct fanbase in the same manner in which BW is, you'd get a lot more viewers in my opinion. And by "presented" I mean... the teams... the drama... everything. Pump all that uniqueness into a visually more appealing and dynamic game - then watch how many casual fans pick up the habit of viewing. Don't be an elitist and assume that beautiful/difficult game mechanics are what generate fans. That is responsible for
true fans of gameplay, but not for mere casual viewers. Like it or not, casual viewers make up the large majority of viewers of most prominent sports/activities.
|
On January 08 2011 19:16 xarthaz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 18:20 ChApFoU wrote:edit :Also do you want me to remember how beautifully balanced the game and the maps were in the early age of BW ? Please, do remember. As far as i Remember, Lost Temple was very well balanced, modern, epic macro game supporting Starcraft map already in 1998 when the game came out.
Your memory needs work. LT had notorious issues. It was popular as BGH was popular.
|
On January 08 2011 19:08 Jarhead wrote:
Lol thank you, pie.
Not to mention, the 'casual' audience, viewers who don't bother to learn anything about the game (including difficulty of actions), will probably not make much of a permanent fanbase.
The 'casual viewers' are the majority, and they generate a large fraction of the revenue. Who cares if each individual casual viewer isn't a hardcore permanent fan. As a whole - regardless of the consistency of each individual viewer - the casual crowd is important to the entertainer/businessman.
|
On January 08 2011 19:01 don_kyuhote wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 18:53 FallDownMarigold wrote:
The funny thing is, to casual spectators of the game, SC2 is far more appealing than BW. It's got better graphics for starters. Additionally it's got more complex possibilities due to the lessening of the prior emphasis on perfect mechanics in BW.
The game is more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it to begin with. I think esports is ever to really takeoff, it needs to appeal to a wide variety of interest levels and not solely people that really really understand the mechanics of the game.
So if some company releases a dumbed down version of SC2 that has even better graphics and is even more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it some years from now, it will be a better esport than SC2 and SC2 will go away?
Probably yes if you haven't noticed games like wow and cod are very popular and so are sports like soccer. Things grow if they are easy accessible for the casual viewer and very easy to understand. Sc bw isn't going to attract more viewers outside Korea because of it's complexity ( and graphics ).
And to the people that say they have to broadcast it on tv please think a bit before posting. It's not up to gom to get it broadcasted it's up to the tv channels and they aren't very willing to broadcast unpopular stuff especially not if it is a competitor of sc bw that they also broadcast ( most people aren't going to watch sc2 and bw if they both get broadcasted because the games are to similar and they will pick one of the 2 ).
And to people saying blizzard throws so much money into sc 2 can I get a source for that? Because as far as I know they only sponsor gsl and since there are so many viewers it's quite a good investment I'd say
|
On January 08 2011 19:36 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2011 19:01 don_kyuhote wrote:On January 08 2011 18:53 FallDownMarigold wrote:
The funny thing is, to casual spectators of the game, SC2 is far more appealing than BW. It's got better graphics for starters. Additionally it's got more complex possibilities due to the lessening of the prior emphasis on perfect mechanics in BW.
The game is more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it to begin with. I think esports is ever to really takeoff, it needs to appeal to a wide variety of interest levels and not solely people that really really understand the mechanics of the game.
So if some company releases a dumbed down version of SC2 that has even better graphics and is even more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it some years from now, it will be a better esport than SC2 and SC2 will go away? Probably yes if you haven't noticed games like wow and cod are very popular and so are sports like soccer. Things grow if they are easy accessible for the casual viewer and very easy to understand. Sc bw isn't going to attract more viewers outside Korea because of it's complexity ( and graphics ).
Precisely my point - thank you for clarifying. SC:BW may have a unique niche within the Korean esport subculture, but outside of that...well, notsomuch. My argument is that should an esport seek to excel, it should seek to win over the mind of the casual viewer. I don't know much about Korean gamer subculture - or any Korean trends - but I saw a post by a Korean (alleged) a few posts back here describing the general interest among Korean fans directed towards difficult things to appreciate like impeccable mechanics, which is not something the casual viewer happens to value as highly.
Don't underestimate the revenue-generating power behind the casual viewer base.
|
On January 08 2011 18:53 FallDownMarigold wrote:
The funny thing is, to casual spectators of the game, SC2 is far more appealing than BW. It's got better graphics for starters. Additionally it's got more complex possibilities due to the lessening of the prior emphasis on perfect mechanics in BW.
The game is more suited to people that aren't as in-tuned with it to begin with. I think esports is ever to really takeoff, it needs to appeal to a wide variety of interest levels and not solely people that really really understand the mechanics of the game.
People have pointed things out like "Seeing Flash at 400 APM on 7 rax is far better than seeing a scrub in SC2 on 7 rax (because of how much harder I know it is for the former)". Well, did it occur to you that the casual viewer probably doesn't care how difficult it was for those 7 raxes to be managed? No. The more casual viewer is more interested in the action.
And finally to strengthen the point above, I agree that free TV coverage is necessary for something to gain ample attention on a very large scale. The more people see it free, the bigger the pool of casual viewers grows, and so on. That is where SC2 takes the cake. It's much more appealing to the more casual viewer that doesn't understand mechanics and so on.
In korea numbers would prove otherwise. Using the "it has better graphics; thus, it's more appealing" isn't a genuine argument. SC2 is failing in Korea for a reason, keep that in mind.
I've seen parents take their children to watch Broodwar games. Not to mention many folks who probably don't understand the full mechanics of BW go to big events. Heck, I saw elderly people in the crowd on numerous occasions. Are these people not casual? I'm pretty sure they went there to be entertained. All I see in SC2 are blobs attacking each other. Yeah that's really entertaining stuff, it's so full of action! I stood up one night to watch the GSL2 Finals and not once did I find myself being awed by the player's skill. I know little about SC2, so I guess that would make me a casual spectator watching SC2, knowing nothing of its mechanics. I wasn't entertained. More people watch BW in Korea because it's ENTERTAINING.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
