|
|
|
That poll asked if cheese was *bm*, but the general sentiment I gathered was that if you wanted to really *match up your skill* you needed to *get into the macro phase* with the other player. In my opinion, this stifled pride and motivation towards developing a cheesy bag of tricks that could not be ousted.
"Oh, cool, he's just using cheese though. No skill."
Just look at the comments, "guy who uses it 24/7 on ladder is pretty sad", "as long ppl don't base their whole play on it..". Seriously, hilarious stuff.
Whining doesn't win wars. If you have a strong bag of cheese plays, even if you have nothing else, more power to you my man.
|
On August 10 2017 08:42 KungKras wrote:www.teamliquid.net This was during the beta and the guy still hit the nail on the head. Goes to show that some people (not me) did see the fundamental mechanical problems of SC2.
meh this post is really vague. Saying that sc2 consists only of a-move is objectively wrong. Seems to me like just another kind of shitpost.
I am guessing it is just another jab at unlimited selection. Do people really believe if you implement a unit selection limit in the game that sc2 will become so much more enjoyable and better? I stopped playing sc2 for many reasons but the unlimited selection was not one of them. I can guarantee you if tomorrow a patch hits that you can only select 12 units in sc2, it would be even more dead and BW players would still refuse to give it a try. At this rate you can argue that custom hotkeys wrecked sc2 lul.
This entire thing of trying to make sc2 more like BW is what brought us macro mechanics like (mules, chronoboost, inject) in the first place, which in my opinion ultimately only harmed the game flow tremendously since the release of the game.
EDIT:
yeah, even at that time that post was garbage ^^. Anyone trying to argue that Collossi are cooler than reavers needs to show me the micro potential of a collossus compared to a reaver.
|
On August 10 2017 05:41 SnowfaLL wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2017 05:32 ReachTheSky wrote:On August 10 2017 05:25 ROOTFayth wrote:On August 10 2017 02:25 ReachTheSky wrote:On August 09 2017 23:38 ROOTFayth wrote:
Seems like a flawed argument, you're saying since there are alternatives they shouldn't try to make a better product? The reason Dota, LoL and CS are so popular is because it's much more of a social game which is what we were advocating for SC2, they failed us
the actual game is whatever, some like it, some don't, I personally think WoL was better than the expansions but I think the lonely experience of SC2 is what was its biggest downfall I think you greatly overestimate how important a social aspect is in a game. Not a single gamer is sitting there saying a social aspect of a computer game is the deciding factor. Not a single gamer is thinking "well, i like this game, but it's just not social enough!, i think i'll play something else". seriously. Social aspects of computer/console games will never be the deciding factor, why? Because if a gamer valued social aspects over gameplay, they'd be out and about and not behind a computer playing a game. It's like basic logic. Dota/lol/cs are more popular because they are just flat out better games. That's all their is to it. They have design teams that actually care and have a vision. The company that put the game out actually cares about the success of it. Blizzard got our money and tried to do as little as possible to keep us happy. They did a poor job in my opinion and hopefully they've learned a lesson that they can apply to their future games. so you think these games would be as popular if they were single player games? That's not what I said or think and you are going to the extreme. You could remove the ability to talk to your opponents at all and if the game is good, people will play it. Games are primarily about gameplay, not social aspects. If social aspects were the most important thing to gamers, they wouldn't be gamers, they'd be somewheres in the outside world doing something other than sitting behind a computer. Ya, looking at SC2 in 2017, I wish there was a function to not have any chat in games, I think that might make me come back to the game (being a Protoss player, I know every win I get will be met with "omg you cheat" just like it did when I last played in 2013, sadly even at GM level with people like Avilo and Nathanias running aound..) and I find it worked really good in Heroes - not having the opposite team talking made it more enjoyable. Dota has it too now, but unfortunately most of dota's issues comes from your own team, so muting them is an issue (as communication is key) but I still win more games with my whole team muted than not. Muting players is the only way to really distance yourself from the toxicity in gaming these days, because lets face it, everyone eventually gets sick of being badmouthed (especially as a high masters/above Protoss in SC2) and it hurts your overall gaming experience. Hell, I'd give a serious try at Smash bros offline tournaments if I wasn't so used to the manner at RTS tournaments (cause lets face it, normally people are quite nice in real life RTS tournies) but the Smash scene is based on "popping off" and shit talking your opponents, again heavily influenced by their top caster and his comments in the scene. Its a whole different world that play fighting games. I dunno if I could handle the bad mannered-ness in real life without starting a fight.
being badmouthed is the most fun part about competing online rofl
|
All I've learned after 33 pages is that everyone knew SC2 was doomed to fail. 
|
LOL this is the most hilariously delusional view yet: there are people who play my game who complain about my game in a different way from how I complain about my game. They must be from the other game! These old guard other game people are ruining my game!
|
On August 10 2017 09:12 404AlphaSquad wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2017 08:42 KungKras wrote:www.teamliquid.net This was during the beta and the guy still hit the nail on the head. Goes to show that some people (not me) did see the fundamental mechanical problems of SC2. meh this post is really vague. Saying that sc2 consists only of a-move is objectively wrong. Seems to me like just another kind of shitpost. I am guessing it is just another jab at unlimited selection. Do people really believe if you implement a unit selection limit in the game that sc2 will become so much more enjoyable and better? I stopped playing sc2 for many reasons but the unlimited selection was not one of them. I can guarantee you if tomorrow a patch hits that you can only select 12 units in sc2, it would be even more dead and BW players would still refuse to give it a try. At this rate you can argue that custom hotkeys wrecked sc2 lul. This entire thing of trying to make sc2 more like BW is what brought us macro mechanics like (mules, chronoboost, inject) in the first place, which in my opinion ultimately only harmed the game flow tremendously since the release of the game. EDIT: yeah, even at that time that post was garbage ^^. Anyone trying to argue that Collossi are cooler than reavers needs to show me the micro potential of a collossus compared to a reaver.
I've yet to see any strategic battles/engagements. I've seen no use of flanking/trapping maneuvers and I've seen no use/benefit of map control. I've seen some micro, especially in early game situations with small groups of units fighting it out, but nothing compared to what we saw in BW, especially in mid/late game scenarios.
How the fuck is this vague?
Arent you the vague here saying that unlimited unit selection has nothing to do with it?
The pathetic part here is the responses. The responses consist of closing the eyes, not looking at what they see, finding excuses. Instead of being optimistic like they were they should have been more criticized about the experience THEY WERE HAVING.
Important lesson for the future.
|
On August 10 2017 07:20 Jealous wrote:
@ReachTheSky I honestly think you're way off base here. Perhaps those "elitist" old guard players knew something you didn't? For example, that a macro game doesn't just appear out of thin air at the high level, it comes from a system of information gathering and consequent decision making? Or the fact that people didn't mind the fact that many games in BW started with relatively fast expansions, or perhaps the fact that BW in its infancy was also cheesy because people were still figuring the game out and were bad at it so cheeses were more effective, and thus Macro games were a result of people improving?
To have the nerve to shit on a small subset of the SC2 population, who if I am understanding you correctly are community figures with a lot more history and many more contributions to the scene than you, is really childish and frames your whole opinion with a petulant air.
Who are you what is your history with sc2? It sounds like you are just piecing together theory hoping to sound logical.
What I said is literally all legitimate feedback. Real experiences that happened. Real things i've watched over and over. On event streams, personal streams, IN PERSON AT MLG etc etc
The old guard - All of the old us bw pros as i've stated.
No one is shitting on anyone, i'm calling it for what it is. They fucked up interacting with the rest of the community and tried to shame people who didn't want to go along with what they wanted.
It doesn't matter what someone's contributions are, that doesn't give someone the right to operate that way. It's toxic behavior.
|
The thread you linked with the survey about cheesing proves nothing. You can't even see who voted.
Every single thing i've said is legitimate feedback. Things that turned me and many others away from wanting to be apart of the sc2 community/playing the game.
|
One more thing that created a divide in the community.
Invitationals.
So many players kept getting free rides into tournaments based early performances. Had there been open enrollment into all the tournaments, the community would have felt included and apart of something. In addition, you would have seen many more up and coming players/new blood. Everyone would have had to earn their keep. no free rides. Instead this allowed a small group of individuals to always be labeled as pro gamers and protect their status while minimizing opportunities for new comers.
|
On August 10 2017 05:28 Aberu wrote:
The community and interface of SC2 wasn't as good at fostering growth as other RTS games I have played in the past were. Elitism, closed-mindedness to certain strategies, a lot of big egos... Even the pros were mostly insufferable personalities in my opinion.
Blizzard finally came around and gave people what they wanted with regards to balance, but it was too late. But so long without guilds, so long without in-game tournament support, etc... There was no excuse for this. WC3 had it for years and years. They know how to do it, they've done it before. They literally were just lazy with SC2 on things that matter.
Guilds are way overrated outside of MMOs. I don't forsee Remastered falling on its flat because of the lack of automated tournaments/clan features. I don't think there's a correlation of the more popular games out now, and clans/automated tournaments. Hell, most popular games do completely fine without chatrooms. I think other stuff mentioned in this thread are more notable.
|
I haven't read the majority of the thread, I was just pulled browsing the sidebar and figured I'd chip my two cents.
I just want to say that SC2 was/is an amazing RTS phenomenon globally and before SC2, I didn't see TeamLiquid Logos on headphone boxes in Gamestop. I know that has a lot to do with LoL, but SC2 has a major part in that history too.
For SC2 to do as well as it has done and continues to do is almost beyond belief. It pretty much single handedly shouldered the burden of bringing the RTS genre into this decade. I was as upset as any 2010 BW fanatic to see BW go away, but I have a huge amount of respect for the game, the community behind it, and the players of it.
TL:DR, SC2 didn't get wrecked, because the only thing you can really compare it to is itself and BW.
|
|
|
On August 09 2017 22:51 ReachTheSky wrote:
Sc2 was great early on. Why? Because it was always action early game. 1-3 units pushes in tvp. it made the game action packed. You guys turned it into a boring god damn game to watch where nothing happens for the first several minutes because any race can just safely expand due to all the balance changes. Bring back the early rushes. Make the game action packed. Buff sentry attack damage again and bring back the early zealot/sentry gateway aggro openings from the beta. The old guard was probably the most negative influence on this game pushing it into what I like to refer it as "sim city". You build up for 10 minutes and the game is decided in 2 battles. It's fucking stupid. You should have to fight for your life to expand. viewership declined because the game became boring as shit to watch. No this isn't me hating on the game, i've loved starcraft 1 and 2 since they both came out. I won't even play sc2 anymore because of the direction it went in. I play bw from time to time just for nostalgia.
This is the most confusing post I have read for a long time. With half of this I can completely agree (whining and balance beeing bad for developement), but with other half I completely disagree (SC2 beeing good to watch in early days. On contrary, I find SC2 in it's infacy extremely boring to watch and that was why I was mad when all that Blizz/Kespa debate started).
I think in one thing you are absolutely right. Guys who whine becouse of cheese tactics are the worst, and its not only in SC2, but in BW or CoH too. And the constant balance patching may harm the game in the long run.
|
On August 10 2017 14:10 ReachTheSky wrote:
One more thing that created a divide in the community.
Invitationals.
So many players kept getting free rides into tournaments based early performances. Had there been open enrollment into all the tournaments, the community would have felt included and apart of something. In addition, you would have seen many more up and coming players/new blood. Everyone would have had to earn their keep. no free rides. Instead this allowed a small group of individuals to always be labeled as pro gamers and protect their status while minimizing opportunities for new comers.
There are very few players that I felt were undeserving of these free rides. Making everything an open tournament also brings in the flaw of not being able to build up storylines around popular players in case they either underperform or are outclassed by new talent.
|
On August 10 2017 16:55 Jumperer wrote:
They tried to make it so that everything was fair and balance which makes for a boring game. it's why overwatch is also dying.
Overwatch? Dying? PAHAHAHAHAHA!
Overwatch is far from dead. Much like Call of Duty and League of Legends it's a huge cash cow that every multi-game tournament organiser wants to include in their lineup because it's big money, sells well and brings in large audiences. To be honest Jeff Kaplan has also been doing a phenomenal job with balancing the game and bringing in new content, aside from a few hiccups like nerfing Roadhog to uselessness quite recently.
|
On August 10 2017 20:58 Clbull wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2017 14:10 ReachTheSky wrote:
One more thing that created a divide in the community.
Invitationals.
So many players kept getting free rides into tournaments based early performances. Had there been open enrollment into all the tournaments, the community would have felt included and apart of something. In addition, you would have seen many more up and coming players/new blood. Everyone would have had to earn their keep. no free rides. Instead this allowed a small group of individuals to always be labeled as pro gamers and protect their status while minimizing opportunities for new comers.
There are very few players that I felt were undeserving of these free rides. Making everything an open tournament also brings in the flaw of not being able to build up storylines around popular players in case they either underperform or are outclassed by new talent.
It actually provides more opportunity for storylines instead of the same shit over and over. If someone gets outclassed by new talent, that's a new story line. What you said just only protects the status of those players while not giving others the opportunity to compete/build their own story line.
|
I think one main reason that wrecked sc2 is that it got fragmented into expansions. Dividing the single player campaign and the story is ok. Dividing the multiplayer was a total bullshit. Because they always had to cut out some units that hurted the races, the gameplay and the balance. And the whole game is a patch fest, because with every new expansion they just started a never ending patch spree. After a few years of patches where the game finally got into a more or less balanced state, a new expansion always came out literally resetting the whole process, and it had to be restarted again and again. Sometimes i imagine if we had lurkers, disruptors, adepts, cyclones, hellbats, vipers etc. from the very beginning in what shape this game could have been. I am 100% certain much better, than the current shape of the game.
|
On August 10 2017 16:55 Jumperer wrote:
They tried to make it so that everything was fair and balance which makes for a boring game. it's why overwatch is also dying.
Wot? I am doing this now on my phone so forgive my presentation.
+ Show Spoiler +
Overwatch is currently number 2 in pc bangs in korea, after league of legends. Brood War is number 6. With about 1/5th of overwatchs popularity. On twitch without any event going on it is stable on 8th place.
Tell me in what fantasy world do you live in to call this game "dying" without declaring Brood War dead in the same sentence. Overwatch is doing fine in every way atm so please explain how you get the idea that the game is dying.
And trying to undermine jeff kaplans balancing work in this game is just a fucking insult. He has done an amazing job so far and also keeps the community informed by regular updates through vlogs. It is quite the strong contrast on how much they praise kaplan on reddit compared to how much people hate dkim and dbrowder.
My guess is that you dont even know who this is and just wanted an opportunity to shit at another game like alot of BW circlejerkers nowadays. In fact, BW players would dream to achieve the numbers Overwatch has currently.
|
On August 10 2017 08:42 KungKras wrote:www.teamliquid.net Again coming from the future this makes me sad.
This one makes me feel all fuzzy inside. Long live brood war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/295615314337595395/345215671644323840/image.png)
![[image loading]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/295615314337595395/345215681916043264/image.png)
