Esports vs SC2 - Page 10

On June 19 2011 01:08 Nqsty wrote:


Also, can someone explain why LoL is so much easier than HoN ? High level ELO seems pretty strategic to me, and I've never played HoN fyi so I'm genuinely curious.

On June 19 2011 01:08 Nqsty wrote:
Its quite simple.

1- I love LoL.
2- Never seen competitive LoL or any kind of interaction with high level players.
3- Very rare to get the opportunity to watch such a stream.
4- Saturday afternoon.
5- Raining outside.

Its very difficult to view high level play in LoL due to the design's limitations, no replays, VoDs etc; hence the second everyone can grab some insight on how high level matchs work, they jump on it, I myself have had the stream on all day.

Compare that to SC2 where no-one gives a sh*t about watching live because you can get all the replays and/or commentaries the next day.

Boom, there's your 150k viewers.

Also, can someone explain why LoL is so much easier than HoN ? High level ELO seems pretty strategic to me, and I've never played HoN fyi so I'm genuinely curious.

On June 18 2011 18:56 GizmoPT wrote:
Its a free and easier game off course it will attract more people than starcraft xD

On June 19 2011 01:22 Snorkle wrote:
If LoL competitive scene is so amazing, why isn't it taking over as the flagship game for tournaments like SC2 did for MLG? Why is there only one tournament (besides WCG which has laughable games in its lineup such as Lost Sage) that is sponsored by Riot, the game developer? Something just seems a little quirky with their always extremely high viewership numbers and yet lack of a real tournament scene and/or sponsorship outside of the company itself.

On June 19 2011 01:20 Kira__ wrote:
When battle.net starts linking to streams from the main menu, we'll start seeing 100k viewers on streams. Right now, if you aren't on team liquid or reddit, you probably have no idea when tournaments are being played and where to watch them.

On June 19 2011 01:09 Earll wrote:
Kind of annoys me that everyone is calling LoL Casual. What does that even mean? How does one qualify a game as 'casual'? Because they removed some of the more annoying\harder to control mechanics from Dota, such as denying, LoL is suddenly a casual game and not worthy of the hardened e-sports core?

I Would actually goes as far as to say by my definition of casual, Starcraft (2) is a lot more geared towards casual, and more 'casual' friendly, than LoL. Not that that is a bad thing, it just is what it is. To learn a MOBA/Dota game like LoL and get past the level of complete "WTF I have no idea what just happened" you basically need to learn all the heroes, and all their 4 abilities + 1 passive, and there are like what 50+ heroes and a ton of items, so getting over the initial learning curve for LoL is a lot harder than Sc2 where you need to know the fewer and simpler units.

Obviously Sc2 has probably more depth strategically, and has like a looooooooooooooooooooottttttttt more room in terms of mechanics, but that does not make LoL casual friendly. Moba games are always very casual unfriendly in my opinion because of the way the community and the games work, and any new player is flamed and wished death upon for every game they enter.

That being said, LoL is still far from any form players performing perfectly, or any form of skill cap, and as other casual friendlygames ( take WoW Arena as an example) that tons of esports veterans flame, and throw away as 'jokes' because they are not as mechanically challenging as an FPS or a RTS, still will Never ever ever have any lone/single player reaching the 'skill cap' always playing perfectly and never making a mistake. Add that to the fact that this is not a single playing game, but the most important part of it is team play not the performance of a single player, and the "skillcap" is even more impossible to reach.

Looking at the games casted today, all of these players are the top of the LoL community basically, many of which practice several hours a day (Like several.) and there are still tons of mistakes being made, and some teams simply dominate others because they are better, even though they are both good teams\players. So are you saying absolutely all of the LoL players are just worse overall gamers than Starcraft players, and if a half decent starcraft player decided to move to LoL he would just instantly crush face and become the top of all brackets and tournaments? If this is the case then why dont 'you' just start A LoL team and dominate the world, I mean dreamhack is just 1 event\tournament and it has a 100k(?) prizepool.





Just throwing out a guess here but i think probably like 70-80+% of the people watching the streams are watching them more for entertainment value than to get insight on how high level matchs works (e.g more educational value), no?

On June 19 2011 01:21 InvXXVII wrote:



It's free and easier, and that is why it will not attract more people than SCII. It requires less commitment and mental stimulation, and that is exactly why people will tend to be less passionate towards this game. And given that it is easier to play, I have found that it is also easier to get bored while playing it.

On June 19 2011 01:29 Greem wrote:


I call the game casual when to learn it and be able to compete in high level you'll need around a week or even few days. I would qualify LoL as one of those games. For example in SC2 in 1 week you'd still be in bronze league, even after month of playing you won't pass diamond level, its takes time, patience and a lot of practice. I got nothing against LoL , or any other game, if you like it, go play it. You simply cannot compare the difficulty of SC2 to LoL, where you control a unit with 4 abilities i mean , do you really need to hear why ? "Sc2 has probably more depth strategically" Probably ? It definitively got more depth, its RTS for a reason. As i said if you like the game , go ahead play it.But comparing LoL and SC2 its like comparing chess and checkers.

On the other hand i don't really care if numbers are real, i'd like to see DH total numbers from all the stream from all the games, because in the end that what matters for eSports to continue to grow.

On June 19 2011 01:29 Greem wrote:


I call the game casual when to learn it and be able to compete in high level you'll need around a week or even few days. I would qualify LoL as one of those games. For example in SC2 in 1 week you'd still be in bronze league, even after month of playing you won't pass diamond level, its takes time, patience and a lot of practice. I got nothing against LoL , or any other game, if you like it, go play it. You simply cannot compare the difficulty of SC2 to LoL, where you control a unit with 4 abilities i mean , do you really need to hear why ? "Sc2 has probably more depth strategically" Probably ? It definitively got more depth, its RTS for a reason. As i said if you like the game , go ahead play it.But comparing LoL and SC2 its like comparing chess and checkers.

On the other hand i don't really care if numbers are real, i'd like to see DH total numbers from all the stream from all the games, because in the end that what matters for eSports to continue to grow.

On June 19 2011 01:33 Legatus Lanius wrote:


if thats true, then why has sc2 attracted more people than bw despite requiring less commitment?

On June 19 2011 01:43 R0YAL wrote:

SC2 has more depth with a single race than all of the characters of LoL combined. I played LoL until a few months ago and after I played all of the characters it got real boring real fast. Just having 4 abilities is a huge limiting factor esports wise. LoL would need you to control all 5 of the characters 1v1 instead of 5v5 for it to be able to compete with sc2.

On June 19 2011 01:43 R0YAL wrote:

SC2 has more depth with a single race than all of the characters of LoL combined. I played LoL until a few months ago and after I played all of the characters it got real boring real fast. Just having 4 abilities is a huge limiting factor esports wise. LoL would need you to control all 5 of the characters 1v1 instead of 5v5 for it to be able to compete with sc2.