|
On May 13 2011 05:25 qdenser wrote:
it's kind of funny how a post titled 'the elephant in the room' has a big unmentioned flaw in the whole idea of the post: the low skill cap of sc2 won't allow for it ever to be competitive enough for even very good players to differentiate themselves much from the pack. it'll just be a random clash of build order counters until blizzard is finally done patching the game and releasing expansions, and everyone gets bored and moves on to the next shiny toy
I honestly hope your correct. Can't wait for this site to get back to BW and its former greatness
|
On May 13 2011 05:18 dangots0ul wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 05:17 Darksidius wrote:
Wow, what a douchebag-post (can't find a better word for it). What's the point exactly of this frontpage article? BW-players are better than SC2-players? Even if that is the case, what value adds the article to the community?
The whining levels of the article are comparable to the average imbalance posts, only this time you say SC2 players are underpowered compared to BW players. Because the top SC2 players are BW averages --> fails...
I'm not saying that isn't the case here, I just do not see any value in posting an article like that.
I personally believe that BW is way more difficult to master than SC2, and I agree with most of the article. But my question is this:
What does making a frontpage post saying that the best SC2 players were bad at BW add to a constructive discussion?
|
Is it sad that I find the discussion about whether you can have cake and eat it at the same time or not more interesting than the comparisons between SC2 and BW?
Basically, there isn't an answer for whether SC2 is better or worse than BW. Game has been out for a year, time to develop, biased OP, silly, fallacious logic, etc, etc.
Wait and see, and stop comparing SC2 to BW. It will have the same problems as comparing Portal 2 to original Portal. People can't see passed the original and commend a game in it's own right, they always have to have a nostalgia-fest or make a bad comparison.
|
yawn, ill be watching some gsl up/down matches later today and enjoying the hell out of them.
|
On May 13 2011 05:01 syllogism wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 05:00 Jyvblamo wrote:On May 13 2011 04:57 Chill wrote:On May 13 2011 04:53 SlimeBagly wrote:
Yeah, there's nothing 'slight' about starting of your piece with a bold headline calling something a lot of people care a lot about and have worked hard for (few as hard as Chill) a "farce." Do we need to argue about the degree of belittling now? Jesus Christ this is getting to a new level of political correctness. The belittling in this thread is a farce, just wait until the S-class belittlers join in on this discussion. I can't really take this article seriously knowing there are much better writers out there not writing for TL
Sums up the article and the thread itself.
|
On May 13 2011 05:25 moopie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 05:23 Jyvblamo wrote:On May 13 2011 05:20 Kich wrote:
This is irrelevant but can people stop using the phrase "Have your cake and eat it too."? There is a near 1:1 of "Have Cake" to "Eat it too" ratio and the phrase is incredibly meaningless in the face of such statistics. In what country is it ok to bake someone a cake and explicitly tell them they aren't allowed to have it? No no, you can definitely bake your cake and eat it too. You just can't eat your cake and also have it. Law of conservation of matter and energy, etc. Well technically you will still possess the cake in one form or another, at least for a period of 4-6 hours. Law of bowel movements, etc.
But then we come to the philosophical question of at what point does removing a grain of sand from a pile of sand make it no longer a pile? At what point along in the digestion can we conclusively say that, this is no longer cake, it's mush.
|
On May 13 2011 05:28 Jyvblamo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 05:25 Kich wrote:On May 13 2011 05:23 Jyvblamo wrote:On May 13 2011 05:20 Kich wrote:
This is irrelevant but can people stop using the phrase "Have your cake and eat it too."? There is a near 1:1 of "Have Cake" to "Eat it too" ratio and the phrase is incredibly meaningless in the face of such statistics. In what country is it ok to bake someone a cake and explicitly tell them they aren't allowed to have it? No no, you can definitely bake your cake and eat it too. You just can't eat your cake and also have it. Law of conservation of matter and energy, etc. ... Who the fuck would ever want to just have a cake sitting idly with no prospect of eating it? Seriously, the phrase needs to go. Can we go with something a bit more not-stupid like, "You can't have it both ways"? But if you have a cake, you can then eat it later. But if you eat it now, then you won't have a cake, and thus further on down the line, you won't be able to eat it. Or so they tell me, I've never been to a bakery.
You're totally missing out! Baked goods are the shit man. 
|
On May 13 2011 05:29 Darksidius wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 05:18 dangots0ul wrote:On May 13 2011 05:17 Darksidius wrote:
Wow, what a douchebag-post (can't find a better word for it). What's the point exactly of this frontpage article? BW-players are better than SC2-players? Even if that is the case, what value adds the article to the community?
The whining levels of the article are comparable to the average imbalance posts, only this time you say SC2 players are underpowered compared to BW players. Because the top SC2 players are BW averages --> fails... I'm not saying that isn't the case here, I just do not see any value in posting an article like that. I personally believe that BW is way more difficult to master than SC2, and I agree with most of the article. But my question is this: What does making a frontpage post saying that the best SC2 players were bad at BW add to a constructive discussion?
Depending on ur definition of "constructive discussion" it may not.
But its the "elephant in the room" and people want to talk about it.
|
On May 13 2011 05:01 syllogism wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 05:00 Jyvblamo wrote:On May 13 2011 04:57 Chill wrote:On May 13 2011 04:53 SlimeBagly wrote:
Yeah, there's nothing 'slight' about starting of your piece with a bold headline calling something a lot of people care a lot about and have worked hard for (few as hard as Chill) a "farce." Do we need to argue about the degree of belittling now? Jesus Christ this is getting to a new level of political correctness. The belittling in this thread is a farce, just wait until the S-class belittlers join in on this discussion. I can't really take this article seriously knowing there are much better writers out there not writing for TL
Edit this into the OP, please
|
On May 13 2011 05:26 dangots0ul wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 05:21 Mordiford wrote:On May 13 2011 05:18 dangots0ul wrote:On May 13 2011 05:17 Darksidius wrote:
Wow, what a douchebag-post (can't find a better word for it). What's the point exactly of this frontpage article? BW-players are better than SC2-players? Even if that is the case, what value adds the article to the community?
The whining levels of the article are comparable to the average imbalance posts, only this time you say SC2 players are underpowered compared to BW players. Because the top SC2 players are BW averages --> fails... And some top SC2 players never played BW, and some of the "above-averages" from BW aren't doing as well as some of the no-names. What's the fucking point? It's a different game. Some people are doing well, some aren't. The only "above-average" from BW is MVP. Don't say some cause there are only guys with less than 50% win average, washed up old pros and B-team trainer partners. saying "its a different game" doesn't auto prove shit - as your petty mind may think. Its a god damn pattern. Of the like 20-30 former BW players than went over They occupy top 8 out of 10. But i guess that means nothing because "its a different game" Please get your "fucking" point together before you try to make sense of it with content less statements. try again
Nice try, but if you want to base it on the article in particular, it makes stretches itself when it lists the "above average" BW pros, and I'm referring to the article, here being Rainbow and Ace mentioned in the article. Their success has been middling at best. There are plenty of non-BW players who are up and coming and doing well, obviously players with previous RTS experience are going to be the first to excel in the scene, there isn't some huge clear cut pattern for BW though.
In the foreign scene, some BW pros are getting beaten by players from other RTSs or even players with little RTS experience at all. Some basics carry over but it's not a 1 to 1 and there isn't even a seriously visible pattern, at the start obviously the people from BW were going to look good, but now the ones who are actually making an effort to stay relevant are staying relevant. The post actually mentions a number of successful non-BW players, but dismisses them because they don't make his point.
It's kind of silly.
|
On May 13 2011 05:30 Jyvblamo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 05:25 moopie wrote:On May 13 2011 05:23 Jyvblamo wrote:On May 13 2011 05:20 Kich wrote:
This is irrelevant but can people stop using the phrase "Have your cake and eat it too."? There is a near 1:1 of "Have Cake" to "Eat it too" ratio and the phrase is incredibly meaningless in the face of such statistics. In what country is it ok to bake someone a cake and explicitly tell them they aren't allowed to have it? No no, you can definitely bake your cake and eat it too. You just can't eat your cake and also have it. Law of conservation of matter and energy, etc. Well technically you will still possess the cake in one form or another, at least for a period of 4-6 hours. Law of bowel movements, etc. But then we come to the philosophical question of at what point does removing a grain of sand from a pile of sand make it no longer a pile? At what point along in the digestion can we conclusively say that, this is no longer cake, it's mush.
I would say that by definition, a cake after ingestion is no longer cake whereas a "pile" is much more ambiguous.
|
Why no talk of savior?
I kid I kid!
*beats dead horse*
|
On May 13 2011 05:30 Jyvblamo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 05:25 moopie wrote:On May 13 2011 05:23 Jyvblamo wrote:On May 13 2011 05:20 Kich wrote:
This is irrelevant but can people stop using the phrase "Have your cake and eat it too."? There is a near 1:1 of "Have Cake" to "Eat it too" ratio and the phrase is incredibly meaningless in the face of such statistics. In what country is it ok to bake someone a cake and explicitly tell them they aren't allowed to have it? No no, you can definitely bake your cake and eat it too. You just can't eat your cake and also have it. Law of conservation of matter and energy, etc. Well technically you will still possess the cake in one form or another, at least for a period of 4-6 hours. Law of bowel movements, etc. But then we come to the philosophical question of at what point does removing a grain of sand from a pile of sand make it no longer a pile? At what point along in the digestion can we conclusively say that, this is no longer cake, it's mush.
Obviously the pile is no longer a pile when you remove the last grain of sand that makes it a pile. I would say it's no longer a cake when the bonds that make cake cake are broken down, separated, and digested.
In regards to that having it now so that you can eat it later--in the grand scheme of things you're still both having a cake and eating it too. Eating the cake now means you had a cake and then ate it. It's just a matter of timing.
|
On May 12 2011 13:56 oXoCube wrote:
So Basically you're saying that if the best RTS players in the world started playing SC2 fiull time they would be pretty good?
Go Figure.
edit - never mind.
|
|
|
On May 13 2011 05:23 Eurekastreet wrote:
Your SC1 champions, as good as they are, would have had to adapt to SC2, and nothing is there to prove the switch would have been 100% successful. Being rather new to SC2 I don't know of the old guard but the few guys I've heard about (Nada, Boxer, July) while being good at SC2 were never more impressive than some other players.
It annoys me to constantly see ignorant SC2 fans make this mistake. Nada/Boxer/July were all outstanding players in BW during their prime, but since then, the game has developed much more and has gotten much more competitive, while their skill level had started to wane. By the end of their BW careers, Boxer and July were just washed up old stars. Same with Nada but to a lesser extent as he still had the occasional showing in proleague and even winning now and then. Boxer/July/Nada are in no way representative of the current best BW players. Flash, Jaedong, Bisu are in a completely different league and if washed up old pros (I hate calling them that but it's true) and crappy B-teamers can be this successful at SC2, there is little question as to whether or not Flash, Jaedong, Bisu would absolutely dominate the SC2 scene should they switch.
You got stats about that, but it's easy to use stats in the way that suits you, anyone could probably turn them around to prove the opposite of your point.
Hundreds of thousands of people (millions ?) are playing starcraft, if you think people like Nestea, Mvp win two consecutive GSL out of sheer luck, you got a problem adding 1+1. They're the best at what they're doing for now, period.
Dude, that's not what he's saying. He never said SC2 progamers won out of sheer luck. I highly suggest you read the article again because it seems like you're completely missing the point.
|
On May 13 2011 05:15 rei wrote:Soviethammer stop using someone else's work and brilliant to speak for your own agenda, be a man say your opinion in your own words. 
Regardless of the validity of the idea that "s-class" brood war players would dominate star-craft two players immediately if they which, I think the author misses the point of the dominate question in the community entirely.
The main issue in starcraft two at this time is not a lack of talent or "competition," clearly there have been highly competitive games between massively skilled players in nearly all the major tournaments thus far. This idea of competition as the limiting factor strikes me as a brood war issue, where strategies have had years to be hammered out and skill comes from execution.
Instead, I feel the focus of sc2 at this time is more fundamental. Instead of asking the question, "Who is better?" It is often more apt to use ask, "Who used the better strategy?" And the problem is, often we don't really know. I think the really "elephant" is that it is not truly possible to be better at starcraft 2 to the point to where to simply cannot lose to worse players, regardless if they are sent to "snipe" you or not. I don't think that just because brood war pro can play there own game at such a high level means that they will be able to overcome this.
And finally, a response to rei: I don't feel as if i was "using" anyone else's work. I was simply acknowledging that it was clever, very concise, and that I agreed with the statement it was making.
|
On May 13 2011 05:32 dangots0ul wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 05:29 Darksidius wrote:On May 13 2011 05:18 dangots0ul wrote:On May 13 2011 05:17 Darksidius wrote:
Wow, what a douchebag-post (can't find a better word for it). What's the point exactly of this frontpage article? BW-players are better than SC2-players? Even if that is the case, what value adds the article to the community?
The whining levels of the article are comparable to the average imbalance posts, only this time you say SC2 players are underpowered compared to BW players. Because the top SC2 players are BW averages --> fails... I'm not saying that isn't the case here, I just do not see any value in posting an article like that. I personally believe that BW is way more difficult to master than SC2, and I agree with most of the article. But my question is this: What does making a frontpage post saying that the best SC2 players were bad at BW add to a constructive discussion? Depending on ur definition of "constructive discussion" it may not. But its the "elephant in the room" and people want to talk about it.
People want to talk about imbalance too, does that mean it's a good idea to write a big frontpage article about why P/T are overpowered?
That's my point, nothing good can come out of this discussion, same as balance discussions.
|
On May 13 2011 05:37 DarkMatter_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 05:23 Eurekastreet wrote:
Your SC1 champions, as good as they are, would have had to adapt to SC2, and nothing is there to prove the switch would have been 100% successful. Being rather new to SC2 I don't know of the old guard but the few guys I've heard about (Nada, Boxer, July) while being good at SC2 were never more impressive than some other players. It annoys me to constantly see ignorant SC2 fans make this mistake. Nada/Boxer/July were all outstanding players in BW during their prime, but since then, the game has developed much more and has gotten much more competitive, while their skill level had started to wane. By the end of their BW careers, Boxer and July were just washed up old stars. Same with Nada but to a lesser extent as he still had the occasional showing in proleague and even winning now and then. Boxer/July/Nada are in no way representative of the current best BW players. Flash, Jaedong, Bisu are in a completely different league and if washed up old pros (I hate calling them that but it's true) and crappy B-teamers can be this successful at SC2, there is little question as to whether or not Flash, Jaedong, Bisu would absolutely dominate the SC2 scene should they switch. Show nested quote +You got stats about that, but it's easy to use stats in the way that suits you, anyone could probably turn them around to prove the opposite of your point.
Hundreds of thousands of people (millions ?) are playing starcraft, if you think people like Nestea, Mvp win two consecutive GSL out of sheer luck, you got a problem adding 1+1. They're the best at what they're doing for now, period. Dude, that's not what he's saying. He never said SC2 progamers won out of sheer luck. I highly suggest you read the article again because it seems like you're completely missing the point.
The best Brood War player to go to SC2 was intotherainbow, and he kind of sucks. There's not a 1-to-1 skill differential.
|
On May 13 2011 05:39 Ribbon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 05:37 DarkMatter_ wrote:On May 13 2011 05:23 Eurekastreet wrote:
Your SC1 champions, as good as they are, would have had to adapt to SC2, and nothing is there to prove the switch would have been 100% successful. Being rather new to SC2 I don't know of the old guard but the few guys I've heard about (Nada, Boxer, July) while being good at SC2 were never more impressive than some other players. It annoys me to constantly see ignorant SC2 fans make this mistake. Nada/Boxer/July were all outstanding players in BW during their prime, but since then, the game has developed much more and has gotten much more competitive, while their skill level had started to wane. By the end of their BW careers, Boxer and July were just washed up old stars. Same with Nada but to a lesser extent as he still had the occasional showing in proleague and even winning now and then. Boxer/July/Nada are in no way representative of the current best BW players. Flash, Jaedong, Bisu are in a completely different league and if washed up old pros (I hate calling them that but it's true) and crappy B-teamers can be this successful at SC2, there is little question as to whether or not Flash, Jaedong, Bisu would absolutely dominate the SC2 scene should they switch. You got stats about that, but it's easy to use stats in the way that suits you, anyone could probably turn them around to prove the opposite of your point.
Hundreds of thousands of people (millions ?) are playing starcraft, if you think people like Nestea, Mvp win two consecutive GSL out of sheer luck, you got a problem adding 1+1. They're the best at what they're doing for now, period. Dude, that's not what he's saying. He never said SC2 progamers won out of sheer luck. I highly suggest you read the article again because it seems like you're completely missing the point. The best Brood War player to go to SC2 was intotherainbow, and he kind of sucks. There's not a 1-to-1 skill differential.
Whaaat. At no point in time was Rainbow better than Nada, or even July. He was dipping hard even before 2008, around which time he was put on the SKT b-team. MVP and Tester were way better than Rainbow in 2009-2010, by then Rainbow had gotten kicked off SKT. Rainbow wasn't even an active player when beta came out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
