EPT[Poll] MBS implementation (or not) - Page 16
| Forum Index > Closed |
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
| ||
|
ForAdun
Germany986 Posts
| ||
LosingID8
CA10830 Posts
On October 16 2007 16:42 ForAdun wrote: urban dictionary is your friendWhat exactly does "nerf" or "nerfing" mean? I can't find that word in any dictionary. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nerf | ||
GTR
51596 Posts
| ||
|
Gobol
37 Posts
On October 16 2007 13:10 mensrea wrote: ...and Bush said there would be nukes in Iraq, so there must be. And Microsoft is always saying they are at the leading edge of software innovation, so they must be. Irrelevant One of Blizzard's first public statements about SC2 was that it would be designed with competitive gaming in mind. The implementation of MBS suggests that this statement was marketroid fluff designed to generate hype. This is what we are arguing about, all you've done here is assume your position is correct and make some irrelevant conclusions off it. By assuming my side of the argument (that MBS will be good for the competitive scene) I can just as easily as say "The implementation of MBS suggests that this statement is being closely adhered to by the dev team". The conclusions reached by those against MBS implementation are based on empirical data. The pro gaming experience in Korea suggests that MBS would be more likely to diminish the game than make it better. Of course, experience is never a completely accurate indicator of future outcomes - but it's a helluva lot more sound than "well, Blizzard said the game would be better, so it must be". The proponents of MBS appear to be relying on speculation and wishful thinking disguised as rational argument. There are retarded arguments on both sides, you should ignore them rather than label them as the only arguments the pro MBS side have. The pro gaming experience in Korea doesn't suggest that, just like the pro gaming experience in China doesn't suggest that MBS would make the game better. There's way too many other factors as to why SC is so large in Korea. Blizzard is not infallible. They have fucked up royally before. Witness the sorry evolution of the War3 gaming scene in Korea - Boxer, Garimto, Yellow, all the old school SC greats tried War3 in its early release phase because they, like yours truly, thought it would be the next SC. Blizzard ended up nerfing that game to hell and everyone went back to playing SC. The void was filled by a bunch of not-good-enoughs who couldn't make it in the SC scene. The result? A professional scene that is less than 10% of SC by any metric you could care to apply. Not many people deny ROC was a steaming pile of crap. But it was not designed from the start as a competitive game. And when they got better people to work on TFT they produced a truly excellent game. Most SC players have their opinion of W3 based off ROC, which is why there is so much undeserved hate for TFT. A fairly fair metric is total prize money for tournaments in 2007. And by this metric W3 is >> 10% of SC. But, hey what about the rest of the world? Don't it matter? Should we not care about new players? No. They do not matter. The rest of the world does not matter. Korea has the most viable, most vibrant professional gaming scene by miles. Can anyone reasonably dispute this? It is the majors. That is the market you must cater to if you are serious about creating a game with professional gaming imprinted in its DNA. The focus should not be on the fucking fringes. Making a game that will succeed in Korea is what will make the game popular and LASTING in all other markets. If you care about the "new" players, then do not cater to them. They will thank you for it in the end (in sustained sales of the game). This is bullshit. So what if it has the most vibrant professional gaming scene by miles. The segregation of the SC community is a BAD thing. There's a couple of hundred korean player's that are competing for the major tournaments and for everyone else in the world there is some nothing. I don't want that and I doubt Blizzard wants that. The NBA does not change its rules to suit the shorter stature of Asians. FIFA does not alter the conventions of football because certain nations feel they make the game culturally anathema. You do not force training wheels on the professional cyclists of the Tour de France so as to avoid overwhelming the casual bicycle enthusiast. This is irrelevant again, if we were talking about adding MBS to SC then sure they are useful analogies, but this is a new game. | ||
|
ForAdun
Germany986 Posts
Only that was confusing: On October 16 2007 20:09 Gobol wrote: There are retarded arguments on both sides, you should ignore them rather than label them as the only arguments the pro MBS side have. The pro gaming experience in Korea doesn't suggest that, just like the pro gaming experience in China doesn't suggest that MBS would make the game better. There's way too many other factors as to why SC is so large in Korea. mensrea wasn't arguing why SC is so large in Korea, he was talking about competition and what Koreans think about it. As far as I know most Korean progamers have a bad feeling about MBS and some about automining, too. I haven't heard of a single progamer who says that he likes the idea of MBS, or do you have more accurate informations? PS: thx @ LosingID8 | ||
|
Wonders
Australia753 Posts
Say someone was trying to introduce a new sport, something like basketball except with shorter hoops. People say that it's like basketball, except that it's too easy to score and anyone can dunk, and they say "that's irrelevant, if we were talking about having shorter hoops in basketball then it's a useful analogy, but this is a different sport". | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On October 16 2007 20:50 Wonders wrote: Edit: to the last sentence of Gobol's post. Say someone was trying to introduce a new sport, something like basketball except with shorter hoops. People say that it's like basketball, except that it's too easy to score and anyone can dunk, and they say "that's irrelevant, if we were talking about having shorter hoops in basketball then it's a useful analogy, but this is a different sport". Well, we arent introducing mbs to starcraft, instead we are getting a new game with mbs. So instead it would be a new game, with new rules, different ball, different team sizes, different field sizes, different scoring rules and then also shorter hoops. It might shift the focus on players ability to dunk to something else wich comes from the other changes, it creates another game and it doesnt necesarily need to be easier/harder. Same thing as how soccer isnt easier than icehockey, eventhough it got bigger goals. A better comparison is the choice to play with larger table tennis balls to slow down the game since it was going to fast, wich actually happened. | ||
|
KShiduo
Korea (South)17 Posts
when in doubt, leave it up to mensrea to clean house there is still a lot of work to be done some kids just cannot think outside of the box i pity them probably not their fault they cannot think in abstract thought or cognitively, oh well. | ||
|
BlackStar
Netherlands3029 Posts
Not to mention that SC and SCII are both RTS games, both made by the same company and even by the same people under the same name who claim to just reimagine their first game rather than reinvent it. Same thing as how soccer isnt easier than icehockey, eventhough it got bigger goals. If ice hockey had to goals the size of football(soccer for americans) then yes, scoring would be too easy. Same with football having goals the size of ice hockey. So comparing the two and the effect that changing one more into what the other sport has works very very well. If having a bigger goal would make scoring harder, which would be counter intuitive, then the comparison fails and the two games are just too different in nature. | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
You say that mensrea had a predetemined conclusion. I suggest that it is you that is making this mistake. It is without question that MBS is not included for competitive reasons, and that it will not a feature most likely to be conducive to professional play. This is a point repeatedly emphasized by anyone who has posted in these forums that is any good at BW, and supported with real game examples. That is not to say MBS will definitely cause a worsening of the competitive, skill-based game. But it is most likely to do so by far. Anyone who watched the professional scene knows the immense importance of SC's mechanics upon its success. Anyone who played BW at a decent level attests to the attraction of such mechanical requirements. That you are willing to dispute this fact - without even offering real arguments to the contrary, casts doubts about your sincerity for a fair argument. You are so eager to downplay the professional scene, you say that Blizzard should not cater to them for fear of "segregating the SC community". There won't even be a respectable SC scene without the Korean professionals. There'd be a few dozen diehard fans like War2 consisting of the same people, then the mass of pathetic 13 year old money mappers. That we are more than that is completely due to the game's success professionally. That is the "SC Community" you want to favor over the Korean professionals. It is because of these few hundred Korean players that there is something for the rest of us. Mensrea's analogy to the NBA is very relevant. There may only be a few big Jordans and Magic in the NBA, but its because the game being made for them that there are thousands of kids emulating them. You must be dense if you cannot see the connection. | ||
|
[DUF]MethodMan
Germany1716 Posts
| ||
|
ForAdun
Germany986 Posts
On October 17 2007 00:35 thagozu wrote: its so ridiculous that all those newbies dont get the point Stop calling them newbies, you newbie. Show some respect. | ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On October 16 2007 23:47 Aphelion wrote: + Show Spoiler + You are so eager to downplay the professional scene, you say that Blizzard should not cater to them for fear of "segregating the SC community". There won't even be a respectable SC scene without the Korean professionals. There'd be a few dozen diehard fans like War2 consisting of the same people, then the mass of pathetic 13 year old money mappers. That we are more than that is completely due to the game's success professionally. That is the "SC Community" you want to favor over the Korean professionals. It is because of these few hundred Korean players that there is something for the rest of us. Mensrea's analogy to the NBA is very relevant. There may only be a few big Jordans and Magic in the NBA, but its because the game being made for them that there are thousands of kids emulating them. You must be dense if you cannot see the connection. I just wonder, do you really belive that the pro scene were the reason basketball grew so heavily a hundred years ago? There were no pro scene then, the pro scene comes from the mass of amateurs wanting to get better and finaly creating the pro scene. Pros are just normal people, they arent special ones going to special games or sports, they are just a bit more dedicated than the rest and probably got a better affinity for the game. The larger fanbase you have, the more and better pros you get, thats just how it is and thats why the koreans beat the shit out of the rest of the world. | ||
|
Lomin
6 Posts
| ||
|
Klockan3
Sweden2866 Posts
On October 17 2007 01:55 Lomin wrote: Just a side note: Calling someone a newbie in this forum to validate one's point is absurd, because compared to Korean pro-gamers, all posters in this thread are newbies. Yes, even hardcore sc gamers and hardcore sc spectators. Since the gap to pro-gamers is so large, it does not matter what your degree of newbiness is. With that in mind, we should concentrate on arguments rather than what the 1on1 skill of the poster is. I think that he just mocked the policy of TL to treat low count posters badly and not actually meaning it. | ||
|
Aphelion
United States2720 Posts
On October 17 2007 01:55 Lomin wrote: Just a side note: Calling someone a newbie in this forum to validate one's point is absurd, because compared to Korean pro-gamers, all posters in this thread are newbies. Yes, even hardcore sc gamers and hardcore sc spectators. Since the gap to pro-gamers is so large, it does not matter what your degree of newbiness is. With that in mind, we should concentrate on arguments rather than what the 1on1 skill of the poster is. No. There is a relative skill difference even if none of us are close to progaming level. Some are better at the game than others, and when there is a preponderence of skill on one side vs the other - that does merit consideration. Its not simply BW skill either. Respect gained over time is valued in this community - even if that may not be the norm on other forums you are used to. | ||
|
GeneralStan
United States4789 Posts
As for as sports analogies go, can we please stop including them. MBS is its own thing with its own impact on competativeness. You say MBS is like cycling with training wheels, I say MBS is like cycling with a sleek modern 21 speed bike instead of a 1 gear clunker. Any analogy made to another sport is a weak anology, and I could think of a thousand analogies that make MBS sound good and a 1000 that make it sound bad. | ||
|
mensrea
Canada5062 Posts
Gobol, your sophomoric little dissection of my post is clear evidence of your profound nescience of SC and the pro gaming scene. As is my policy, I will not try a rebuttal against silliness such as yours (my time is too valuable for that). Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain and I am unable to claim for myself anything even remotely approaching divinity. So, I will simply flame you, instead. You have neither the pedigree as a gamer nor the experience of having lived in Korea and covered the pro gaming scene to be posting anything but humbly worded questions on this particular topic. Yes, it is that obvious. If you have the itch to write on subjects that you are ill-equipped to opine on, try posting something in the General Forum where there is a higher tolerance threshold for juvenile attention-seekers wishing to publish petulant rants on topics for which little in the way of actual knowledge is required. Or, since your youth is obvious, if you simply wish to do something to vent some of your pent-up, pubescent angst, go jerk yourself a soda with one hand on your keyboard and the TL site on screen. You got off lightly, you half-witted Neanderthal. I usually just ban people who are as obviously impaired as you are. Geezus, now I remember why I left this place the first time. Where the heck are my tranquilizers when I need them. | ||
|
mensrea
Canada5062 Posts
On October 17 2007 03:24 GeneralStan wrote: Gobol's point about the PR "fluff" is spot on. The only way you can dismiss Blizzard's dedication to the competative nature of the game due to MBS is if you've already made the assumption that MBS is against competativeness, which is not an assumption that is accepted. As for as sports analogies go, can we please stop including them. MBS is its own thing with its own impact on competativeness. You say MBS is like cycling with training wheels, I say MBS is like cycling with a sleek modern 21 speed bike instead of a 1 gear clunker. Any analogy made to another sport is a weak anology, and I could think of a thousand analogies that make MBS sound good and a 1000 that make it sound bad. "You say MBS is like cycling with training wheels, I say MBS is like cycling with a sleek modern 21 speed bike instead of a 1 gear clunker." What? On what basis? Have you even been following the debate here? Good gawd, these kids are on a rampage. I am going to stop posting on this subject and start banning from now on. That is a promise. It will be no big loss. And for crissakes, I really do wish people would at least take the time to read between the lines and figure out that I am neither for nor against MBS on SC2 (because I have yet to play the game). | ||
| ||
