|
On July 27 2017 09:17 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 09:11 Ancestral wrote:
The only problem with the 1v1 argument is Conor McGregor is about to make 7 figures for one fight in a 1v1 sport he has never competed in professionally merely because he's good a shit-talking.
So there are layers to everything.
the entire UFC is worth billions less than the New York Yankees+Los Angeles Dodgers. There are still another 28 teams. This year's baseball attendance will be over 60 million. MLB is the #3 sport in the USA.
How many Yankees players make as much per year as McGregor is making in this one fight? How many make more than Mayweather has averaged for his past 10? How many TOTAL baseball players make more than what Mayweather has averaged for his last 10?
|
http://www.totalsportek.com/most-popular-sports/ made a top 25 list of most popular sports in the world.
In the top 10 we have Four singleplayer sports. Boxing, tennis, athletics and formula 1. Since iam biased i wanna say that at #11 spot we had golf.
In the whole top 25, i counted 14 singleplayer sports. Those above + Horse racing, skiing, wrestling, table tennis, swimning, cycling, badminton, MOTO gp, MMA and golf.
Up for debate weather some of these sports should be considdered teambased as well(such as 2v2 badminton). Frankly i know table tennis 1v1 is way more popular than 2v2, but for the other sports i dont really know.
Still with this list and if the site is correct, this whole "teambased games are the way to go" is pure bullshit.
Also this whole "subjective" bullshit as well. Not everything is subjective here, and arguments do still matter.
@SC2
So many things wrong with this game. The start is to slow, to much buildup. You fight yourself for several minutes.
Fights vs fights are usually uninteresting, and when a player can micro its usually a one sided micro. The fights end to fast, and not possible to retreat mostly without receiving tons of damage.
Strategy is based upon building correct unit, unless you wanna go all-in or cheese, then those strategies we do see aswell.
Tactics are used to little in a game like this. The unit interractions are worse than in broodwar when it should have been alot better.
Deathballs are just 100% not fitting in a game like this, when time is of the essence. Real Time Strategy.
Even so, i would be able to enjoy this game if units such as collosus were removed, and fights were more even in general, so the game felt liek a true macro vs macro war where your units counts even if you didnt build a "hardcounter" unit such as is the case in the game now.
|
On July 27 2017 09:26 Ancestral wrote:
How many Yankees players make as much per year as McGregor is making in this one fight? How many make more than Mayweather has averaged for his past 10? How many TOTAL baseball players make more than what Mayweather has averaged for his last 10?
Mayweather isn't a boxer. Mayweather is the head of a promotion company who happens to box. Now, if Hal Steinbrenner hit lead off and played 2nd base we could make a comparison.
Baseball makes more money than boxing.
On July 27 2017 09:46 Foxxan wrote: formula 1.
auto racing is a team sport.
when u watch auto racing it is almost never 2 cars on the track.
|
On July 27 2017 09:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 09:26 Ancestral wrote:
How many Yankees players make as much per year as McGregor is making in this one fight? How many make more than Mayweather has averaged for his past 10? How many TOTAL baseball players make more than what Mayweather has averaged for his last 10? Mayweather isn't a boxer. Mayweather is the head of a promotion company who happens to box. auto racing is a team sport. when u watch auto racing it is almost never 2 cars on the track.
Lmao one of the unarguable best boxers in history "isn't a boxer." Surely promotion is all that matters, so any two-bit fighter could easily make as much per fight as Mayweather...
Also, Mayweather is an idiot. He's rich despite his business savvy, not because of it. He has spent his whole life boxing, and he's good. That's why he's rich.
Also, F1 is less of a team sport than cycling. Two cars per team? You think that constitutes a team sport? Find an F1 fan who is a fan of a team rather than a driver...
You are extremely wrong. Although generally I adviser against such blatant wrongness, the fact that you're ignoring obvious evidence that your argument is weak and desperately looking for the most minute slivers within said evidence that could be maliciously misconstrued to support your argument indicates your a pro at this. So it's 13/25 instead of 14/25. Shows over folks, 1v1 sports are only 52% rather than 56% of the top 25! Nothing to see here.
And Mayweather makes more than baseball players do.
|
On July 27 2017 09:55 Ancestral wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 09:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:26 Ancestral wrote:
How many Yankees players make as much per year as McGregor is making in this one fight? How many make more than Mayweather has averaged for his past 10? How many TOTAL baseball players make more than what Mayweather has averaged for his last 10? Mayweather isn't a boxer. Mayweather is the head of a promotion company who happens to box. On July 27 2017 09:46 Foxxan wrote: formula 1. auto racing is a team sport. when u watch auto racing it is almost never 2 cars on the track. Lmao one of the unarguable best boxers in history "isn't a boxer." Surely promotion is all that matters, so any two-bit fighter could easily make as much per fight as Mayweather... Also, Mayweather is an idiot. He's rich despite his business savvy, not because of it. He has spent his whole life boxing, and he's good. That's why he's rich. Also, F1 is less of a team sport than cycling. Two cars per team? You think that constitutes a team sport? Find an F1 fan who is a fan of a team rather than a driver... You are extremely wrong. Although generally I adviser against such blatant wrongness, the fact that you're ignoring obvious evidence that your argument is weak and desperately looking for the most minute slivers within said evidence that could be maliciously misconstrued to support your argument indicates your a pro at this. So it's 13/25 instead of 14/25. Shows over folks, 1v1 sports are only 52% rather than 56% of the top 25! Nothing to see here.
and Mayweather is worth less than Hal Steinbrenner. Hal is a bigger idiot than Floyd.
If Mayweather didn't own the promotion company he'd be in the same financial position as Mike Tyson.
none of this matters though because baseball draws much more revenue than boxing. and baseball is #3. the NBA and NFL make more than baseball.
|
On July 27 2017 09:56 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 09:55 Ancestral wrote:On July 27 2017 09:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:26 Ancestral wrote:
How many Yankees players make as much per year as McGregor is making in this one fight? How many make more than Mayweather has averaged for his past 10? How many TOTAL baseball players make more than what Mayweather has averaged for his last 10? Mayweather isn't a boxer. Mayweather is the head of a promotion company who happens to box. On July 27 2017 09:46 Foxxan wrote: formula 1. auto racing is a team sport. when u watch auto racing it is almost never 2 cars on the track. Lmao one of the unarguable best boxers in history "isn't a boxer." Surely promotion is all that matters, so any two-bit fighter could easily make as much per fight as Mayweather... Also, Mayweather is an idiot. He's rich despite his business savvy, not because of it. He has spent his whole life boxing, and he's good. That's why he's rich. Also, F1 is less of a team sport than cycling. Two cars per team? You think that constitutes a team sport? Find an F1 fan who is a fan of a team rather than a driver... You are extremely wrong. Although generally I adviser against such blatant wrongness, the fact that you're ignoring obvious evidence that your argument is weak and desperately looking for the most minute slivers within said evidence that could be maliciously misconstrued to support your argument indicates your a pro at this. So it's 13/25 instead of 14/25. Shows over folks, 1v1 sports are only 52% rather than 56% of the top 25! Nothing to see here. and Mayweather is worth less than Hal Steinbrenner. Hal is a bigger idiot than Floyd. If Mayweather didn't own the promotion company he'd be in the same financial position as Mike Tyson
Are you making the worst possible arguments as a joke?
Mark Cuban is really rich so let's use him as an example of how much basketball players make in an argument about how much athletes make.
Nice you made a one line comment ignoring the total destruction of your argument the posted link performed.
|
I think there are some important points here.
Social: Starcraft is mainly 1v1 and it is ok, but that doesn't mean you have to be alone. There has to be encouragement to socialize and a big part of coming home and play starcraft is to feel you belong to something. Like, Blizzard should make mandatory to belong to a clan and rank clans instead of players. Just an idea. But I know people who didn't play Starcraft anymore because of not being social at all.
Gameplay: This should not be an issue. SC2 and BW are different games and different ideas. If you like one, play it. Rules are different for every game, whether be SC, CSGO, LoL, esport, traditional sport.
RTS being unpopular: I really think MOBAs and Shooters are way more famous, there's also a lot of games in these generes, and I think this is the main issue. People need to get into the genere, but you can't revive a genere with just one game. You have to make it with a few of them. If we have the greatest RTS games ever(BW, WC3, SC2) why aren't we using that triad to gain crowd. There should be a Blizzard RTS mega tournament with the three major RTSs beforementioned, not a TL thread about which one is better. UNITY people.
|
On July 27 2017 09:59 Ancestral wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 09:56 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:55 Ancestral wrote:On July 27 2017 09:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:26 Ancestral wrote:
How many Yankees players make as much per year as McGregor is making in this one fight? How many make more than Mayweather has averaged for his past 10? How many TOTAL baseball players make more than what Mayweather has averaged for his last 10? Mayweather isn't a boxer. Mayweather is the head of a promotion company who happens to box. On July 27 2017 09:46 Foxxan wrote: formula 1. auto racing is a team sport. when u watch auto racing it is almost never 2 cars on the track. Lmao one of the unarguable best boxers in history "isn't a boxer." Surely promotion is all that matters, so any two-bit fighter could easily make as much per fight as Mayweather... Also, Mayweather is an idiot. He's rich despite his business savvy, not because of it. He has spent his whole life boxing, and he's good. That's why he's rich. Also, F1 is less of a team sport than cycling. Two cars per team? You think that constitutes a team sport? Find an F1 fan who is a fan of a team rather than a driver... You are extremely wrong. Although generally I adviser against such blatant wrongness, the fact that you're ignoring obvious evidence that your argument is weak and desperately looking for the most minute slivers within said evidence that could be maliciously misconstrued to support your argument indicates your a pro at this. So it's 13/25 instead of 14/25. Shows over folks, 1v1 sports are only 52% rather than 56% of the top 25! Nothing to see here. and Mayweather is worth less than Hal Steinbrenner. Hal is a bigger idiot than Floyd. If Mayweather didn't own the promotion company he'd be in the same financial position as Mike Tyson Are you making the worst possible arguments as a joke? Mark Cuban is really rich so let's use him as an example of how much basketball players make in an argument about how much athletes make.Nice you made a one line comment ignoring the total destruction of your argument the posted link performed.
you respond too fast.
baseball makes more than boxing.
participation and attendance and revenue in baseball events dwarfs boxing events.
|
On July 27 2017 09:55 Ancestral wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 09:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:26 Ancestral wrote:
How many Yankees players make as much per year as McGregor is making in this one fight? How many make more than Mayweather has averaged for his past 10? How many TOTAL baseball players make more than what Mayweather has averaged for his last 10? Mayweather isn't a boxer. Mayweather is the head of a promotion company who happens to box. On July 27 2017 09:46 Foxxan wrote: formula 1. auto racing is a team sport. when u watch auto racing it is almost never 2 cars on the track. Lmao one of the unarguable best boxers in history "isn't a boxer." Surely promotion is all that matters, so any two-bit fighter could easily make as much per fight as Mayweather... Also, Mayweather is an idiot. He's rich despite his business savvy, not because of it. He has spent his whole life boxing, and he's good. That's why he's rich. Also, F1 is less of a team sport than cycling. Two cars per team? You think that constitutes a team sport? Find an F1 fan who is a fan of a team rather than a driver... You are extremely wrong. Although generally I adviser against such blatant wrongness, the fact that you're ignoring obvious evidence that your argument is weak and desperately looking for the most minute slivers within said evidence that could be maliciously misconstrued to support your argument indicates your a pro at this. So it's 13/25 instead of 14/25. Shows over folks, 1v1 sports are only 52% rather than 56% of the top 25! Nothing to see here.
You are extremely wrong on F1... Most people side with teams and not the drivers. The team is not the 2 drivers. It's the entire team of mechanics and engeneers. Actually the 2 drivers have separate teams. It's a technological sport and without a good car even Schumacher can't win. Cycling is 100% team sport, too - talking about the road cycling that is. I don't know how it is in track.
Otherwise that argument is dumb... The most popular sports are team sports. And that has nothing to do with SC2 and BW being not popular. They are not sports. 
|
On July 27 2017 05:24 skzlime wrote:
it was cultural marxism
So good to see you <3
|
On July 27 2017 10:02 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 09:59 Ancestral wrote:On July 27 2017 09:56 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:55 Ancestral wrote:On July 27 2017 09:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:26 Ancestral wrote:
How many Yankees players make as much per year as McGregor is making in this one fight? How many make more than Mayweather has averaged for his past 10? How many TOTAL baseball players make more than what Mayweather has averaged for his last 10? Mayweather isn't a boxer. Mayweather is the head of a promotion company who happens to box. On July 27 2017 09:46 Foxxan wrote: formula 1. auto racing is a team sport. when u watch auto racing it is almost never 2 cars on the track. Lmao one of the unarguable best boxers in history "isn't a boxer." Surely promotion is all that matters, so any two-bit fighter could easily make as much per fight as Mayweather... Also, Mayweather is an idiot. He's rich despite his business savvy, not because of it. He has spent his whole life boxing, and he's good. That's why he's rich. Also, F1 is less of a team sport than cycling. Two cars per team? You think that constitutes a team sport? Find an F1 fan who is a fan of a team rather than a driver... You are extremely wrong. Although generally I adviser against such blatant wrongness, the fact that you're ignoring obvious evidence that your argument is weak and desperately looking for the most minute slivers within said evidence that could be maliciously misconstrued to support your argument indicates your a pro at this. So it's 13/25 instead of 14/25. Shows over folks, 1v1 sports are only 52% rather than 56% of the top 25! Nothing to see here. and Mayweather is worth less than Hal Steinbrenner. Hal is a bigger idiot than Floyd. If Mayweather didn't own the promotion company he'd be in the same financial position as Mike Tyson Are you making the worst possible arguments as a joke? Mark Cuban is really rich so let's use him as an example of how much basketball players make in an argument about how much athletes make.Nice you made a one line comment ignoring the total destruction of your argument the posted link performed. you respond too fast. baseball makes more than boxing. participation and attendance and revenue in baseball events dwarfs boxing events.
Show me the numbers. You haven't posted numbers supporting your arguments.
This has baseball above boxing, but there are still plenty of individual sports, and tennis is above baseball.
http://www.biggestglobalsports.com/worlds-biggest-sports/4580873435
And note, *Brood War was a team sport* in the team leagues, even though the matches were 1 on 1. And there were 2v2s. AND if team games were more popular, they'd be played more and RTSs would be as big as MOBAs!
AND, the third game on that list is an individual or doubles game (like professional Brood War was).
All the evidence says the reason SC is so much smaller than the top games right now is NOT because of team vs. individual, because the gap is actually *too large.*
Finally, there are plenty of individual games that are single player beating individual games that are multiplayer. SCII beats Overwatch, for example, though that is surely going to change it seems.
https://www.esportsearnings.com/history/2017/games
It's not like the list is all multiplayer games first and then all single player games with no mixed results. All of this data, and any you will find, is only partial data.
But the bottom line is your one-dimensional explanation obviously doesn't cut it.
|
Is it actually wrecked? Still lots of tournaments, prize money.... However I do agree its not as good as it could be and its player base will keep diminishing.
The main reason is the design team simply didn't make the game fun for new players. Whether that be chat channels, easy to access arcade, ability to host own games, ease of play, maybe fairness of play (both SC2 and BW are hard, but SC2 you lose a lot more games where the lose seems arbitrary rather than being outplayed). The reason the golden age of BW lasted so long was that the pros kept being replaced by up and comers. We can see now in SC2 that there are hardly any new pro players, which is why the game seems stagnant. And the reason there are no new pro players is because Bliz didn't do a good enough job getting 12 year-olds hook on this game 5 years ago. I think it has little to do with certain patches or nerfs.... Sure a couple people will get annoyed and quit (this happens in a lot of games!), but if the game caters to new players these people will be replaced.
They should have made the game fun, before fair, before spectator friendly etc.
|
On July 27 2017 10:04 Pr0wler wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 09:55 Ancestral wrote:On July 27 2017 09:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:26 Ancestral wrote:
How many Yankees players make as much per year as McGregor is making in this one fight? How many make more than Mayweather has averaged for his past 10? How many TOTAL baseball players make more than what Mayweather has averaged for his last 10? Mayweather isn't a boxer. Mayweather is the head of a promotion company who happens to box. On July 27 2017 09:46 Foxxan wrote: formula 1. auto racing is a team sport. when u watch auto racing it is almost never 2 cars on the track. Lmao one of the unarguable best boxers in history "isn't a boxer." Surely promotion is all that matters, so any two-bit fighter could easily make as much per fight as Mayweather... Also, Mayweather is an idiot. He's rich despite his business savvy, not because of it. He has spent his whole life boxing, and he's good. That's why he's rich. Also, F1 is less of a team sport than cycling. Two cars per team? You think that constitutes a team sport? Find an F1 fan who is a fan of a team rather than a driver... You are extremely wrong. Although generally I adviser against such blatant wrongness, the fact that you're ignoring obvious evidence that your argument is weak and desperately looking for the most minute slivers within said evidence that could be maliciously misconstrued to support your argument indicates your a pro at this. So it's 13/25 instead of 14/25. Shows over folks, 1v1 sports are only 52% rather than 56% of the top 25! Nothing to see here. You are extremely wrong on F1... Most people side with teams and not the drivers. The team is not the 2 drivers. It's the entire team of mechanics and engeneers. Actually the 2 drivers have separate teams. It's a technological sport and without a good car even Schumacher can't win. Cycling is 100% team sport, too - talking about the road cycling that is. I don't know how it is in track. Otherwise that argument is dumb... The most popular sports are team sports. And that has nothing to do with SC2 and BW being not popular. They are not sports.
They are, however, ESPORTS, and there are plenty of analogies to be made. You're absolutely right about the good cars, which is why fans of Alonso had a very low opinion of Ferrari (although they ironically got much better right when he left). People who are fans of teams are fans more because of where they are from, whereas the best competitors are popular across bounds. In cycling Italians definitely liked Liquigas, and Spaniards (especially Basques) liked Esukaltel-Euskadi.
I raced for my university for four years, I know cycling is a team sport, hence why I said "less of." However, equipment matters less in cycling because all the best companies are very equivalent. So Chris Froome could go anywhere with a big budget and still be a contender.
But, I actually agree with Jim Raynor on this one - ESPORTS are close enough to sports. And there are plenty of sports which are so passive in their physical requirements there's barely a difference. So the analogy is strong enough for an argument to be made one way or another.
The reason definitely includes both trends (MOBAs especially are popular) and the fact that Blizzard fucked up, a lot. All of the criticism of SCII in this thread is valid, and there are criticisms at the social features, balance, TOO MANY balance patches changing the metagame, the metagame itself, social features, just about everything. MOBAs would probably be winning now anyway but SCII did not do the best possible job of fulfilling BWs legacy.
|
On July 27 2017 10:17 Ancestral wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 10:02 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:59 Ancestral wrote:On July 27 2017 09:56 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:55 Ancestral wrote:On July 27 2017 09:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:26 Ancestral wrote:
How many Yankees players make as much per year as McGregor is making in this one fight? How many make more than Mayweather has averaged for his past 10? How many TOTAL baseball players make more than what Mayweather has averaged for his last 10? Mayweather isn't a boxer. Mayweather is the head of a promotion company who happens to box. On July 27 2017 09:46 Foxxan wrote: formula 1. auto racing is a team sport. when u watch auto racing it is almost never 2 cars on the track. Lmao one of the unarguable best boxers in history "isn't a boxer." Surely promotion is all that matters, so any two-bit fighter could easily make as much per fight as Mayweather... Also, Mayweather is an idiot. He's rich despite his business savvy, not because of it. He has spent his whole life boxing, and he's good. That's why he's rich. Also, F1 is less of a team sport than cycling. Two cars per team? You think that constitutes a team sport? Find an F1 fan who is a fan of a team rather than a driver... You are extremely wrong. Although generally I adviser against such blatant wrongness, the fact that you're ignoring obvious evidence that your argument is weak and desperately looking for the most minute slivers within said evidence that could be maliciously misconstrued to support your argument indicates your a pro at this. So it's 13/25 instead of 14/25. Shows over folks, 1v1 sports are only 52% rather than 56% of the top 25! Nothing to see here. and Mayweather is worth less than Hal Steinbrenner. Hal is a bigger idiot than Floyd. If Mayweather didn't own the promotion company he'd be in the same financial position as Mike Tyson Are you making the worst possible arguments as a joke? Mark Cuban is really rich so let's use him as an example of how much basketball players make in an argument about how much athletes make.Nice you made a one line comment ignoring the total destruction of your argument the posted link performed. you respond too fast. baseball makes more than boxing. participation and attendance and revenue in baseball events dwarfs boxing events. Show me the numbers. You haven't posted numbers supporting your arguments. This has baseball above boxing, but there are still plenty of individual sports, and tennis is above baseball. http://www.biggestglobalsports.com/worlds-biggest-sports/4580873435And note, *Brood War was a team sport* in the team leagues, even though the matches were 1 on 1. And there were 2v2s. AND if team games were more popular, they'd be played more and RTSs would be as big as MOBAs! AND, the third game on that list is an individual or doubles game (like professional Brood War was). All the evidence says the reason SC is so much smaller than the top games right now is NOT because of team vs. individual, because the gap is actually *too large.* Finally, there are plenty of individual games that are single player beating individual games that are multiplayer. SCII beats Overwatch, for example, though that is surely going to change it seems. https://www.esportsearnings.com/history/2017/gamesIt's not like the list is all multiplayer games first and then all single player games with no mixed results. All of this data, and any you will find, is only partial data. But the bottom line is your one-dimensional explanation obviously doesn't cut it.
you've shown me no numbers that indicate boxing makes more than baseball. it ain't close man. but if u want to get silly ... here you go.
http://mmapayout.com/2017/01/2016-the-year-in-boxing/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2016/12/05/mlb-sees-record-revenues-approaching-10-billion-for-2016/#463947b17088
tonight there are approximately 3000 pro baseball players playing in baseball games in the USA.
of those 3000 more than 750 of them make a minimum of $0.5 Million per year.
how many are playing NCAA baseball tonight under a full scholarship? thousands?
how many do you think are boxing tonight?
there are baseball fields all over the city and suburbs where i live. i can count on 1 hand the # of boxing clubs there are.
|
On July 27 2017 10:32 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2017 10:17 Ancestral wrote:On July 27 2017 10:02 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:59 Ancestral wrote:On July 27 2017 09:56 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:55 Ancestral wrote:On July 27 2017 09:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On July 27 2017 09:26 Ancestral wrote:
How many Yankees players make as much per year as McGregor is making in this one fight? How many make more than Mayweather has averaged for his past 10? How many TOTAL baseball players make more than what Mayweather has averaged for his last 10? Mayweather isn't a boxer. Mayweather is the head of a promotion company who happens to box. On July 27 2017 09:46 Foxxan wrote: formula 1. auto racing is a team sport. when u watch auto racing it is almost never 2 cars on the track. Lmao one of the unarguable best boxers in history "isn't a boxer." Surely promotion is all that matters, so any two-bit fighter could easily make as much per fight as Mayweather... Also, Mayweather is an idiot. He's rich despite his business savvy, not because of it. He has spent his whole life boxing, and he's good. That's why he's rich. Also, F1 is less of a team sport than cycling. Two cars per team? You think that constitutes a team sport? Find an F1 fan who is a fan of a team rather than a driver... You are extremely wrong. Although generally I adviser against such blatant wrongness, the fact that you're ignoring obvious evidence that your argument is weak and desperately looking for the most minute slivers within said evidence that could be maliciously misconstrued to support your argument indicates your a pro at this. So it's 13/25 instead of 14/25. Shows over folks, 1v1 sports are only 52% rather than 56% of the top 25! Nothing to see here. and Mayweather is worth less than Hal Steinbrenner. Hal is a bigger idiot than Floyd. If Mayweather didn't own the promotion company he'd be in the same financial position as Mike Tyson Are you making the worst possible arguments as a joke? Mark Cuban is really rich so let's use him as an example of how much basketball players make in an argument about how much athletes make.Nice you made a one line comment ignoring the total destruction of your argument the posted link performed. you respond too fast. baseball makes more than boxing. participation and attendance and revenue in baseball events dwarfs boxing events. Show me the numbers. You haven't posted numbers supporting your arguments. This has baseball above boxing, but there are still plenty of individual sports, and tennis is above baseball. http://www.biggestglobalsports.com/worlds-biggest-sports/4580873435And note, *Brood War was a team sport* in the team leagues, even though the matches were 1 on 1. And there were 2v2s. AND if team games were more popular, they'd be played more and RTSs would be as big as MOBAs! AND, the third game on that list is an individual or doubles game (like professional Brood War was). All the evidence says the reason SC is so much smaller than the top games right now is NOT because of team vs. individual, because the gap is actually *too large.* Finally, there are plenty of individual games that are single player beating individual games that are multiplayer. SCII beats Overwatch, for example, though that is surely going to change it seems. https://www.esportsearnings.com/history/2017/gamesIt's not like the list is all multiplayer games first and then all single player games with no mixed results. All of this data, and any you will find, is only partial data. But the bottom line is your one-dimensional explanation obviously doesn't cut it. you've shown me no numbers that indicate boxing makes more than baseball. it ain't close man. but if u want to get silly ... here you go. http://mmapayout.com/2017/01/2016-the-year-in-boxing/https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2016/12/05/mlb-sees-record-revenues-approaching-10-billion-for-2016/#463947b17088tonight there are approximately 3000 pro baseball players playing in baseball games in the USA. of those 3000 more than 750 of them make a minimum of $0.5 Million per year. how many are playing NCAA baseball tonight under a full scholarship? thousands? how many do you think are boxing tonight?
At every boxing gym in the entire world (since you included NCAA, and note baseball teams tend to lose money, as do most NCAA sports periods outside of very successful teams)? A lot. How many people pay $150 a month to be in a boxing gym? See how many boxing gyms are in the nearest big city to you.
Baseball is big in two countries.
But it's all moot, because I'm not even arguing against "baseball is bigger." I just want to see numbers. Even my own link says baseball is bigger. It has Tennis above boxing, though. So again, the argument cannot be "team sports are necessarily bigger," because at least some individual sports are bigger than at least some team sports. And, the top lists are littered with individual sports.
The richest boxers are extremely rich, was what I started out saying, and it's true. And it's an important metric but not the only important metric.
Nor did you respond to any other part of the argument, especially (1) BW was a team sport at it's peak in that there was a team league, and (2) RTSs can be multiplayer. But 4v4 RTS is not bigger than 1v1. And, the technology is all there for 4v4 RTS.
|
United States1655 Posts
I've only played WoL, so my opinions are probably way outdated.
But why I personally ended up quitting SC2 was that it was simply unfun and in some cases restricting. A lot of the new spells that Blizzard implemented ended up restricting micro instead of creating more interesting micro scenarios.
For example, back then the most used spells I remember were Force Field, Fungal Growth, and Concussive Shells, which would trap/slow your units to the point where they pretty much couldn't even move, let alone escape. This made the game extremely boring because once your unit got hit by that spell, it was just like, "well no point in microing it since I can't even move". For example, if your units got hit by Fungal Growth, it was pretty much a death sentence since they would just cast it again as soon as it wore off.
Compare the aforementioned spells to common Brood War spells like Plague, Stasis Field, or Irradiate. Even when plagued, your units can still move away and fight back. Even though Stasis Field stops your units from moving, they are invincible so the enemy can't kill them either. This allows for players to set up attacks and flanks at the right moment when stasis wears off. Even irradiate, which will inevitably kill any Zerg unit, gives Defilers enough time to consume to cast Dark Swarm or Plague. In Brood War's cases, the majority of spells still allow for micro and can create more exciting scenarios, rather than lock you down and just watch your units die.
Other things that killed SC2 for me were already touched on, such as Battlenet 0.2 being absolutely horrible in terms of a social experience and the custom map community.
|
I played SC2 casually for about a year with friends back in 2011-2012. It's a great casual game, but like most games, it gets old after a while. 2v2 was really fun, but even that mode eventually lost its charm. 1v1 was less entertaining to play (and has always been a snoozefest to watch) but for me it became unplayably repetitive and dull after about 1 month of playing (roughly the time it took me to get from not-knowing-anything-about-the-game gold league placement to master league, having played BW at a low level [D/D+ iccup]). Most of my friends, who were anywhere from bronze to master league, did not play the game for more than a year. To put it bluntly, people keep trying to hype SC2 up as a esport or timeless classic when it's really just an okay RTS taken by itself, and nothing more than that. You don't see people on message boards asking why Warcraft 3 or Age of Empires 3 aren't still big esports.
BW on the other hand is way too exhausting for me to want to play regularly with my low-ass apm and general gaming ability, but it will always be fun to watch. The game is simply much better suited as a spectator sport.
|
Lack of attention and balance patches from developers.
Aka 1.5 yrs of broodlord infestor, 1.5 yrs of swarmhosts, now LOTV which is all-in after all-in, and gimmick after gimmick. 12 worker start and economy had entirely adverse effects on the game.
12 worker start = short games like Command and Conquer + more build order wins/coin flips. Games get underway faster at the expense of you having no fucking clue if your opening build is getting mega hard countered by a proxy or random bullshit build from the opponent. By the time you scout their build and attack or all-in in LOTV it's already to your base with ZERO reaction time. You have to have already countered whatever it is they are doing or you lose.
In WOL/HOTS you had time to scout the all-in, and then another 30-45 seconds to prepare and react to the opponent. This created skill gameplay where the better player always will win. LOTV is not skill gameplay - it's coinflip / bullshit gameplay where a worse player can beat a better player through blind aggression.
To make the above point worse - removing 1500 mineral patches at each base again makes it so whoever blindly suicides units into worker lines and attack, attack, attacks gets the free advantage of expanding regardless if their attacks are stopped and held or not. This is terrible gameplay and allows worse players a chance to beat better players WHICH IS NOT HOW A SKILL GAME IS SUPPOSED TO BE.
Now we get to balance patches again. They are non-existent since the game's inception. We have developers that for some reason refuse to fix things like adepts, swarmhosts, 8 armor ultras for almost 1+ yr at a time while these things completely ruin the game and dry up the player base that gets fed up with non-sense being in the game.
As of right now - swarmhosts, ravens, carriers, pylon cannon under the ramp, invincible nydus worms...are just a list of a FEW of the things that should require balance patches and are either ignored since LOTV launch or the devs simply do not care or acknowledge that they are issues at this point.
HOTS games lasted on average 25 minutes to 35 minutes i would say, for a very good macro game between two good players. This allowed viewers to open up a stream, and tune into the game most likely as it is getting underway or already is into the action.
LOTV games last on average 8-15 minutes, and often times end abruptly from the most random bullshit like adepts+WP or 10 workers getting murdered or a huge doom drop. This means a viewer that tunes into the game is already too late to watch the damn game. You open the stream and the game is either already over or a new one just started at the very beginning. The likelihood for you to open a stream and be already in the thick of things is just naturally less likely due to the average gamelength being artificially decreased by Blizzard entertainment. I still do not know why so few people acknowledge this or bring it up.
I remember getting 6000-7000 viewers on my stream during 3 hr swarmhost qualifier games. LONG GAMES BRING IN VIEWERS, SUSTAIN VIEWERS, AND ALLOW FOR PEOPLE TO TUNE INTO THE GAMES. WHY DO YOU THINK MOBA GAMES DO SO WELL? MOBA games on average last 25 minute to 45 minutes...JUST LIKE WOL/HOTS GAMES LASTED.
Region locking...this is a droplet of water in the pool compared to LACK OF BALANCE PATCHES/DESIGN patches and LACK OF ITERATION from Blizzard in regards to SC2. Arguments can be made for or against region locking, and peopel can argue what it's impacts had or didn't have from doing or not doing it. At the end of the day it does not matter if the core gameplay of the game we all know and love is dogshit from imbalance like mass infestors or swarmhosts.
The community of SC2, the SJW types, are also responsible for SC2's decline because these fucks out there won't ever acknowledge the issues that SC2 has in any meaningful type of discussion. These are the people on reddit, forums everywhere, even some here on TL - that try to stifle any discussion related to SC2 balance or design and immediately start to spout the:
"It's a perfect balanced game, stop saying stuff is imbalanced, nothing needs to change, our game is great."
No it's not. It's not 2011. It's 2017 and there are currently swarmhosts in the game that entirely negate mech play. There are carriers that have no counter when lategame is reached. There are hydra/bane buffs that pushed Zerg over the edge in the most recent patches. There is 3 rax reaper that has been busted since LOTV launch.
When myself or other people try to bring these things up there's either a vocal amount of people that always say "the game is fine" and don't want to push Blizzard to balance patch.
Meanwhile, LoL is getting a balance patch every 2weeks/month and massive content patches bi-weekly.
Skins were requested 3+ yrs ago by now? I still remember the post Destiny made on the SC2 reddit essentially listing a lot of stuff Blizzard could do to make SC2 grow more. And here we are today, years later finally some things are implemented.
But anyways, there's a lot i'm missing probably. But tbh none of it matters at all other than one thing as i said: BALANCE / DESIGN PATCHES. Until this happens on a consistent basis, SC2 will never grow again, and the game is indeed pretty dead and we'll stay at around the level we're at. Which maybe some people are OK with, but honestly i'd like to SC2 rise again to where it belongs.
|
I don't think we should be asking "what wrecked SC2?" but rather "why was it ever an esport to begin with?". I think the main reasons are:
1) marketing on the part of Blizzard (a big, famous game company)
2) non-Korean former BW players/casters/websites (as well as lower level Korean BW players) finally being able "make it" in some iteration of StarCraft that's superficially similar to BW
3) fans who care what country a player is from finally having a chance to root for non-Koreans
4) players/viewers who have never actually played and watched BW and thus don't realize how superfluous SC2 progaming is
|
A few people have said there are too many balance patches. Other people have said the balance patches are too frequent, i.e. Broodwar really grew after the last balance patch.
Some people say SC2 isn't more popular because it's harder than MOBAs. Some people are saying it's because it's less mechanically demanding than BW.
Obviously the two pairs above are mutually exclusive, but regardless there are obviously problems. It could be that the patches are just the wrong patches, and like others have said, force certain playstyles rather than allowing map-makers and players come up with them.
But people pretty consistently say it's "too random," as in, too many BO losses, too many hard counters, balanced on a razors edge the whole time where one mistake costs the game. That's definitely the impression I've gotten. The winrates are obviously not balanced but BW went through several such periods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
