|
Also with artosis's dislike of this article i would love to see a well thought out response to this get front page attention, so that newer members don't feel such a bitter bias.
|
On May 13 2011 09:36 xarthaz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 09:31 reg0ner wrote:On May 13 2011 09:11 d_so wrote:On May 13 2011 09:02 manloveman wrote:
I dont know who is worse. The bitter vets sperging bw>sc2 (including OP) or the sc2 noobs who is actually trying to argue against OP's logic.
While OP is very solid in his arguments, there is one thing he is dead wrong about. The sc2 scene is not a farce. While its top korean players where nobody in bw, and the game itself is a lot less mechanical, dare I say more casual, they still represent the best there is in the current sc2 scene. They are still competing and I'm still entertained and following.
If you wonna watch super skilled gameplay that the sc2 scene is still working its towards, then fine with me. Just dont belittle the ones that just wonna see the current best of the game they play and enjoy. I agree with you that they do represent the best of the current sc2 scene. But that's irrelevant to whether they are a farce or not. The farce aspect comes because there may be better players out there who, for whatever reasons, refuse to play sc2. This makes sc2 look like a minor league. (whether it's true or not doesn't matter, since that's the public perception in korea, and perception is what drives advertising sales). So in the mind of BW fans, two questions arise: 1.) why would i want to watch minor league players? and 2.) why are they getting paid so much money? I raised this earlier in the thread but i'm going to bring it up again. SC2 feels like Guitar Hero, while BW feels like real guitar played by geniuses. This may or may not be true. But when a product imitates an already popular product, the burden of proof lies on the newcomer to show beyond all doubt not only that they are the superior product, but they can attract buyers as well. (See: Motorola Xoom vs. Ipad 2. Xoom may have superior stats but no one buys it.) 1.) why would i want to watch minor league players? Because less than 10% of the total Starcraft scene still cares about BW and a good 8% of those are in Korea. 2.) why are they getting paid so much money? Because Sponsors are backing a much much much much much better game that is visually stunning and appealing to everyone. Everyone. Not just Korea. Why do sponsors get behind new games? Because they require better computers. So when a company like Intel gets behind players and events, its because they want you to buy their products to play this game. Salaries like Jaedungs and Flush won't last long. Companies want you to splurge on new computers. It's not pretty but its the truth. Uhh its the other way around. Sponsors get behind games that they think will have a lot of viewers on the games so a large audience to show their products to. and guess what, in korea that audience is the mmo's. and brood war, as far as esports are concerned. sc2 is significantly smaller, hence the argument of OP.
I am an idiot. T_T
|
On May 13 2011 09:11 d_so wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 09:02 manloveman wrote:
I dont know who is worse. The bitter vets sperging bw>sc2 (including OP) or the sc2 noobs who is actually trying to argue against OP's logic.
While OP is very solid in his arguments, there is one thing he is dead wrong about. The sc2 scene is not a farce. While its top korean players where nobody in bw, and the game itself is a lot less mechanical, dare I say more casual, they still represent the best there is in the current sc2 scene. They are still competing and I'm still entertained and following.
If you wonna watch super skilled gameplay that the sc2 scene is still working its towards, then fine with me. Just dont belittle the ones that just wonna see the current best of the game they play and enjoy. I agree with you that they do represent the best of the current sc2 scene. But that's irrelevant to whether they are a farce or not. The farce aspect comes because there may be better players out there who, for whatever reasons, refuse to play sc2. This makes sc2 look like a minor league. (whether it's true or not doesn't matter, since that's the public perception in korea, and perception is what drives advertising sales). So in the mind of BW fans, two questions arise: 1.) why would i want to watch minor league players? and 2.) why are they getting paid so much money? I raised this earlier in the thread but i'm going to bring it up again. SC2 feels like Guitar Hero, while BW feels like real guitar played by geniuses. This may or may not be true. But when a product imitates an already popular product, the burden of proof lies on the newcomer to show beyond all doubt not only that they are the superior product, but they can attract buyers as well. (See: Motorola Xoom vs. Ipad 2. Xoom may have superior stats but no one buys it.)
Agree. Skill-wise, the little-league analogy is good. Sc2 are no where near as solid, nor pull off extreme micro / macro power moves that are common on bw top level. Even I, who hardly played any bw, can see that (from watching bw matches before playing sc2). To the questions
1: Why would you watch said little league games? As a bw fan, you probably wouldnt. As a sc2 (as me), why wouldnt I watch it. I could care less about the skill level being higher in bw, its not my game.
2: Why are they getting payed so much money? I would expect there are a lot of sc2 fans, so naturally money follow the viewers, not the skill level.
For the second part of you post. Sc2 dont have to prove anything. If you like bw / bw scene more, just stick to it.
I would say a lot people must be watching sc2 scene. Im basing this guess at the rapid expansion of the scene. New big turneys / lans pop up all the time. So if this is the case, how can it be a farce.
I would even speculate that outside korea, the sc2 scene is bigger than the bw, so some people, like myself, must believe they are doing somthing right.
|
On May 13 2011 09:31 s3raph wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 09:28 FragKrag wrote:On May 13 2011 09:21 s3raph wrote:On May 13 2011 09:17 Synwave wrote:
You forget s3raph it supposedly was discussed fully in house... Supposedly doesn't mean that the decision is perfect. I fully contemplate the consequences of killing someone (as an extreme example), and the decision can still be wrong, inadequate, inefficient, or simply bad. I'm simply stating that if there was as much internal discussion as was suggested (and as we are believed to understand giving TL.net's standards), then I would have expected much higher editing standards regarding the tone, which a lot of people have talked about. I'm not responding to content. I'm responding to an inflammatory article published on a site I like to visit and, supposedly, actually takes into account forumite opinions when appropriate. That's all. Inflammatory? It's a well written article which is well researched. Also an opinion piece, as clearly stated at the beginning of the article. Are you saying that TL should degrade itself to only posting what it thinks everybody will love instead of actually featuring genuine content on the site? I'm sorry but I can't possibly agree with that sentiment. How is that statement even REMOTELY similar to what I said. I even said I'm not commenting on content, just on tone. I also noted (although not in that post) that the article is too easily misrepresented. Yes, of course I know it's an opinion, but the sheer fact that many community members have misunderstood has to be considered at some point. I believe it should have been considered during the editing process and the tone modified. I am not at all talking about content. Please don't put words in my mouth. My only comment is that a) the tone of the article is inflammatory, b) the article is too easily misconstrued despite any level of disclaimer, and c) the staff should have anticipated these potential consequences and adjusted their editing appropriately in this one instance. I'm certainly not commenting on overall site management either. Please don't misunderstand.
You are commenting on site management when you are talking about 'TL.net's Standards'.
I don't think people have misunderstood the message. I think they understand the message and simply disagree, which should be acceptable, no? You don't have to agree with an opinion, and it doesn't represent TL.net.
On May 13 2011 09:31 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 09:28 FragKrag wrote:On May 13 2011 09:21 s3raph wrote:On May 13 2011 09:17 Synwave wrote:
You forget s3raph it supposedly was discussed fully in house... Supposedly doesn't mean that the decision is perfect. I fully contemplate the consequences of killing someone (as an extreme example), and the decision can still be wrong, inadequate, inefficient, or simply bad. I'm simply stating that if there was as much internal discussion as was suggested (and as we are believed to understand giving TL.net's standards), then I would have expected much higher editing standards regarding the tone, which a lot of people have talked about. I'm not responding to content. I'm responding to an inflammatory article published on a site I like to visit and, supposedly, actually takes into account forumite opinions when appropriate. That's all. Inflammatory? It's a well written article which is well researched. Also an opinion piece, as clearly stated at the beginning of the article. Are you saying that TL should degrade itself to only posting what it thinks everybody will love instead of actually featuring genuine content on the site? I'm sorry but I can't possibly agree with that sentiment. Why can't a well-written and well-researched article be inflammatory?
I didn't say that it can't.
|
On May 13 2011 09:46 FragKrag wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 09:31 s3raph wrote:On May 13 2011 09:28 FragKrag wrote:On May 13 2011 09:21 s3raph wrote:On May 13 2011 09:17 Synwave wrote:
You forget s3raph it supposedly was discussed fully in house... Supposedly doesn't mean that the decision is perfect. I fully contemplate the consequences of killing someone (as an extreme example), and the decision can still be wrong, inadequate, inefficient, or simply bad. I'm simply stating that if there was as much internal discussion as was suggested (and as we are believed to understand giving TL.net's standards), then I would have expected much higher editing standards regarding the tone, which a lot of people have talked about. I'm not responding to content. I'm responding to an inflammatory article published on a site I like to visit and, supposedly, actually takes into account forumite opinions when appropriate. That's all. Inflammatory? It's a well written article which is well researched. Also an opinion piece, as clearly stated at the beginning of the article. Are you saying that TL should degrade itself to only posting what it thinks everybody will love instead of actually featuring genuine content on the site? I'm sorry but I can't possibly agree with that sentiment. How is that statement even REMOTELY similar to what I said. I even said I'm not commenting on content, just on tone. I also noted (although not in that post) that the article is too easily misrepresented. Yes, of course I know it's an opinion, but the sheer fact that many community members have misunderstood has to be considered at some point. I believe it should have been considered during the editing process and the tone modified. I am not at all talking about content. Please don't put words in my mouth. My only comment is that a) the tone of the article is inflammatory, b) the article is too easily misconstrued despite any level of disclaimer, and c) the staff should have anticipated these potential consequences and adjusted their editing appropriately in this one instance. I'm certainly not commenting on overall site management either. Please don't misunderstand. You are commenting on site management when you are talking about 'TL.net's Standards'. I don't think people have misunderstood the message. I think they understand the message and simply disagree, which should be acceptable, no? You don't have to agree with an opinion, and it doesn't represent TL.net. Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 09:31 Doodsmack wrote:On May 13 2011 09:28 FragKrag wrote:On May 13 2011 09:21 s3raph wrote:On May 13 2011 09:17 Synwave wrote:
You forget s3raph it supposedly was discussed fully in house... Supposedly doesn't mean that the decision is perfect. I fully contemplate the consequences of killing someone (as an extreme example), and the decision can still be wrong, inadequate, inefficient, or simply bad. I'm simply stating that if there was as much internal discussion as was suggested (and as we are believed to understand giving TL.net's standards), then I would have expected much higher editing standards regarding the tone, which a lot of people have talked about. I'm not responding to content. I'm responding to an inflammatory article published on a site I like to visit and, supposedly, actually takes into account forumite opinions when appropriate. That's all. Inflammatory? It's a well written article which is well researched. Also an opinion piece, as clearly stated at the beginning of the article. Are you saying that TL should degrade itself to only posting what it thinks everybody will love instead of actually featuring genuine content on the site? I'm sorry but I can't possibly agree with that sentiment. Why can't a well-written and well-researched article be inflammatory? I didn't say that it can't.
You clearly implied it.
|
People are forgetting the most important part (IMO) of the article, work ethics. I believe that if J/F decided to for instance play tetris competetively they would still win a lot (Probably not as much as in an RTS though) since they just have that mentality, doesnt matter if their BW skills will translate to SC2 (Which they will anyways) they will still dominate. If they switch that is.
|
On May 13 2011 09:46 FragKrag wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 09:31 s3raph wrote:On May 13 2011 09:28 FragKrag wrote:On May 13 2011 09:21 s3raph wrote:On May 13 2011 09:17 Synwave wrote:
You forget s3raph it supposedly was discussed fully in house... Supposedly doesn't mean that the decision is perfect. I fully contemplate the consequences of killing someone (as an extreme example), and the decision can still be wrong, inadequate, inefficient, or simply bad. I'm simply stating that if there was as much internal discussion as was suggested (and as we are believed to understand giving TL.net's standards), then I would have expected much higher editing standards regarding the tone, which a lot of people have talked about. I'm not responding to content. I'm responding to an inflammatory article published on a site I like to visit and, supposedly, actually takes into account forumite opinions when appropriate. That's all. Inflammatory? It's a well written article which is well researched. Also an opinion piece, as clearly stated at the beginning of the article. Are you saying that TL should degrade itself to only posting what it thinks everybody will love instead of actually featuring genuine content on the site? I'm sorry but I can't possibly agree with that sentiment. How is that statement even REMOTELY similar to what I said. I even said I'm not commenting on content, just on tone. I also noted (although not in that post) that the article is too easily misrepresented. Yes, of course I know it's an opinion, but the sheer fact that many community members have misunderstood has to be considered at some point. I believe it should have been considered during the editing process and the tone modified. I am not at all talking about content. Please don't put words in my mouth. My only comment is that a) the tone of the article is inflammatory, b) the article is too easily misconstrued despite any level of disclaimer, and c) the staff should have anticipated these potential consequences and adjusted their editing appropriately in this one instance. I'm certainly not commenting on overall site management either. Please don't misunderstand. You are commenting on site management when you are talking about 'TL.net's Standards'. I don't think people have misunderstood the message. I think they understand the message and simply disagree, which should be acceptable, no? You don't have to agree with an opinion, and it doesn't represent TL.net. Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 09:31 Doodsmack wrote:On May 13 2011 09:28 FragKrag wrote:On May 13 2011 09:21 s3raph wrote:On May 13 2011 09:17 Synwave wrote:
You forget s3raph it supposedly was discussed fully in house... Supposedly doesn't mean that the decision is perfect. I fully contemplate the consequences of killing someone (as an extreme example), and the decision can still be wrong, inadequate, inefficient, or simply bad. I'm simply stating that if there was as much internal discussion as was suggested (and as we are believed to understand giving TL.net's standards), then I would have expected much higher editing standards regarding the tone, which a lot of people have talked about. I'm not responding to content. I'm responding to an inflammatory article published on a site I like to visit and, supposedly, actually takes into account forumite opinions when appropriate. That's all. Inflammatory? It's a well written article which is well researched. Also an opinion piece, as clearly stated at the beginning of the article. Are you saying that TL should degrade itself to only posting what it thinks everybody will love instead of actually featuring genuine content on the site? I'm sorry but I can't possibly agree with that sentiment. Why can't a well-written and well-researched article be inflammatory? I didn't say that it can't.
If I have to use legalese all the time.... my comment about 'standards' was 'standards as I understand them,' not 'empirical standards of behavior.' I apologize if that is being misconstrued as me definitively stating whether TL.net is expected to do or not do something beyond the scope of my personal opinion. I'm not being definitive; I'm being as clear as possible that my comments only constitute an opinion, not a critique/etc.
As for your other comment, my general read from this thread (going through most of the pages) is that many people are more offended by the tone than by the argument itself. Hence, once again, my constant lack of commenting on the content of the article. I could, however, be mistaken.
The divisiveness that the article has fed into, however, is I believe to be detrimental not because discussion or dialogue between sides is bad, but because it's done on this forum in what believe to be a destructive manner. Instead of generating new ideas or insight, the arguments lead to segregation, lack of knowledge generation, and elitism.
*goes back to lurking*
|
What was with all the snide remarks at SC2 in the article? They didn't belong and made the article feel extremely unprofessional and as if it was a waste of time to even read.
|
On May 13 2011 09:32 NikonTC wrote:
The issue I have with this editorial is that it is just not very good. It's all very well saying "It provokes a response", but is that really a good thing? Tabloid journalism is designed to provoke a response. And to my mind, that's what this article is. A piece of tabloid style "news" with spurious facts and a heavy dose of opinion thrown in.
I'm not suggesting that ever article on TL should be an academic paper of publishable quality, I'd just prefer not to see people like the OP and others start judging their "success" based on the amount of discussion they provoke, and creating more articles of this quality.
Why is it not good?
I think provoking a response is a good thing. It's better than posting something that no one replies to.
And Im confused why you would think provoking discussion isnt success to some extent. I like quality articles, what is wrong with an article of this quality? Just because it does not fit your tastes does not mean it isnt 'good' in the abstract sense. It's miles above 99% of anything else I see here on TL.
|
On May 13 2011 09:36 xarthaz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 09:31 reg0ner wrote:On May 13 2011 09:11 d_so wrote:On May 13 2011 09:02 manloveman wrote:
I dont know who is worse. The bitter vets sperging bw>sc2 (including OP) or the sc2 noobs who is actually trying to argue against OP's logic.
While OP is very solid in his arguments, there is one thing he is dead wrong about. The sc2 scene is not a farce. While its top korean players where nobody in bw, and the game itself is a lot less mechanical, dare I say more casual, they still represent the best there is in the current sc2 scene. They are still competing and I'm still entertained and following.
If you wonna watch super skilled gameplay that the sc2 scene is still working its towards, then fine with me. Just dont belittle the ones that just wonna see the current best of the game they play and enjoy. I agree with you that they do represent the best of the current sc2 scene. But that's irrelevant to whether they are a farce or not. The farce aspect comes because there may be better players out there who, for whatever reasons, refuse to play sc2. This makes sc2 look like a minor league. (whether it's true or not doesn't matter, since that's the public perception in korea, and perception is what drives advertising sales). So in the mind of BW fans, two questions arise: 1.) why would i want to watch minor league players? and 2.) why are they getting paid so much money? I raised this earlier in the thread but i'm going to bring it up again. SC2 feels like Guitar Hero, while BW feels like real guitar played by geniuses. This may or may not be true. But when a product imitates an already popular product, the burden of proof lies on the newcomer to show beyond all doubt not only that they are the superior product, but they can attract buyers as well. (See: Motorola Xoom vs. Ipad 2. Xoom may have superior stats but no one buys it.) 1.) why would i want to watch minor league players? Because less than 10% of the total Starcraft scene still cares about BW and a good 8% of those are in Korea. 2.) why are they getting paid so much money? Because Sponsors are backing a much much much much much better game that is visually stunning and appealing to everyone. Everyone. Not just Korea. Why do sponsors get behind new games? Because they require better computers. So when a company like Intel gets behind players and events, its because they want you to buy their products to play this game. Salaries like Jaedungs and Flush won't last long. Companies want you to splurge on new computers. It's not pretty but its the truth. Uhh its the other way around. Sponsors get behind games that they think will have a lot of viewers on the games so a large audience to show their products to. and guess what, in korea that audience is the mmo's. and brood war, as far as esports are concerned. sc2 is significantly smaller, hence the argument of OP.
There is a point though. You dont need a new intel cpu to play bw.
Also while bw is still dominant in korea (the esports capital), korea is a very small market compared to us + eu where sc2 is more dominant, and esports are very much on the rise.
|
Im out of this discussion. There have been really articulate responses on both sides and I appreciate that alot.
I don't credit the OP with these responses however. These same articulate responses have existed for quite sometime in a number of threads (see description of dead horse, not elephant in room) but I do credit the OP for creating a wonderful bonfire which Im sure the OP was aware of from the beginning.
The majority of the responses (and at this point nearly all) are circular reasoning, fanboyism, or just putting words in others mouths.
TLDR: The OP created a thesis statement that offends, backed it up with concepts that make sense, and ended it with more offense. The crowd reacted appropriately.
|
When the money move, the BW pro's move after... I have no doubt in my mind that SC2 at some point will see a high influx of fast learning former BW-players. The top contenders will probably be the BW players who are still young.
Kisses&hugs to all the legends of brood war: Boxer, Nada, Yell0w, iloveoov, julyzerg, chojja, xellos and of course the foreign heroes Elky and Grrrr...  We need SC2 legends now!
|
On May 13 2011 09:21 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 09:11 d_so wrote:On May 13 2011 09:02 manloveman wrote:
I dont know who is worse. The bitter vets sperging bw>sc2 (including OP) or the sc2 noobs who is actually trying to argue against OP's logic.
While OP is very solid in his arguments, there is one thing he is dead wrong about. The sc2 scene is not a farce. While its top korean players where nobody in bw, and the game itself is a lot less mechanical, dare I say more casual, they still represent the best there is in the current sc2 scene. They are still competing and I'm still entertained and following.
If you wonna watch super skilled gameplay that the sc2 scene is still working its towards, then fine with me. Just dont belittle the ones that just wonna see the current best of the game they play and enjoy. I agree with you that they do represent the best of the current sc2 scene. But that's irrelevant to whether they are a farce or not. The farce aspect comes because there may be better players out there who, for whatever reasons, refuse to play sc2. This makes sc2 look like a minor league. (whether it's true or not doesn't matter, since that's the public perception in korea, and perception is what drives advertising sales). So in the mind of BW fans, two questions arise: 1.) why would i want to watch minor league players? and 2.) why are they getting paid so much money? I raised this earlier in the thread but i'm going to bring it up again. SC2 feels like Guitar Hero, while BW feels like real guitar played by geniuses. This may or may not be true. But when a product imitates an already popular product, the burden of proof lies on the newcomer to show beyond all doubt not only that they are the superior product, but they can attract buyers as well. (See: Motorola Xoom vs. Ipad 2. Xoom may have superior stats but no one buys it.) You really need to fill me in on why you made the advertising sales point.
perception --> viewing preferences + residual positivity towards advertisers --> decision by corporation to sponsor or advertise. Korean companies have come on time and time again to explain they don't advertise in expectations of increased revenue but to improve the public perception of their companies
|
As my first ever post on TeamLiquid, I'd firstly like to say I have been in the shadows looking at all the fancy links and articles for quite some time now, and love the stream list on the side of my screen for when I have nothing else to do :D
However, when I see an editorial like this one, with inflammatory and incendiary language that just begs for both attention and to incite debate (like this one has), I cannot simply let it pass by. As a lover of eSports, to see an article simply dismiss an entire proscene as a "farce" is completely ridiculous. You have invalidated hundreds of peoples' livelihoods, not just the players, but managers of teams, people who are technicians for leagues, sponsers, etc.
To love SC: BW is a great thing, but you have to remember how BW started as well. The ridiculous one basing with poor micro was the way BW started, if you recall. Now that BW has been going strong for over a decade we now see some incredible skill achieved by the best of the best S-class players (and even some of the better A-class players).
SCII has been out for a year. Including the beta. I can tell that you love BW, as BW is truly an amazing thing to watch (I always played it casually with the campaign, and LANs among my friends in addition to the occasional fastest map ever  ), to see first person views of S-class players like JD and Flash is actually just insane, as my meager brain cannot really keep up with the insane speed at which these players do their business. EVEN SO, of course the level of play in SC2 will not be as good; it is a new game, with constant flux between racial balance as well as numerous small patch changes (although 1.3.3., as a P player, has certainly been a pain in my BOs :-P and begs to be more of a medium patch change to say the least....).
Truly, a divisive article like this is not what anyone in eSports should endorse, and is certainly not what eSports needs right now. The flourishing foreigner scene in SC2 is why I came to love this game that I play, and I love BW just as much. If you don't enjoy SC2 and would rather watch BW, do that. BW is not going anywhere. But again, to dismiss a pro scene with thousands of people involved both in and out of Korea is needless and petty.
|
On May 13 2011 09:54 Slakter wrote:
People are forgetting the most important part (IMO) of the article, work ethics. I believe that if J/F decided to for instance play tetris competetively they would still win a lot (Probably not as much as in an RTS though) since they just have that mentality, doesnt matter if their BW skills will translate to SC2 (Which they will anyways) they will still dominate. If they switch that is.
yeah this needs to be emphasized more. guemichi's statement and the like have all been ignored
|
On May 13 2011 09:57 Divinek wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 09:32 NikonTC wrote:
The issue I have with this editorial is that it is just not very good. It's all very well saying "It provokes a response", but is that really a good thing? Tabloid journalism is designed to provoke a response. And to my mind, that's what this article is. A piece of tabloid style "news" with spurious facts and a heavy dose of opinion thrown in.
I'm not suggesting that ever article on TL should be an academic paper of publishable quality, I'd just prefer not to see people like the OP and others start judging their "success" based on the amount of discussion they provoke, and creating more articles of this quality.
Why is it not good? I think provoking a response is a good thing. It's better than posting something that no one replies to. And Im confused why you would think provoking discussion isnt success to some extent. I like quality articles, what is wrong with an article of this quality? Just because it does not fit your tastes does not mean it isnt 'good' in the abstract sense. It's miles above 99% of anything else I see here on TL.
Calling someone an asshat is going to provoke a response as well and a silk tongues can still be wrong. It's not good because it's a poorly reasoned article based on speculation. That's the complaint you see raised time and time again here.
|
Canada5565 Posts
|
So people are having issues with the god damn tone of an editorial? Really? Seems like people are hurt that the article sheds a truthful light on one view of the state of SC2.
Example: Pick up a Sports Illustrated magazine, flip to the last page where the weekly editorials are, and observe the tone of the writer. Very very frequently (and I've been a subscriber to SI for a very long time) the articles have a very sarcastic, almost offensive type of tone. I love it, and so does the rest of normal society that doesn't have skin the thickness of silk. It makes you question the writer, makes you think, makes you mad, makes you sad. It's good read.
I genuinely feel bad, and in the same vein have a lot of respect, for the mods that have to go through and read the utterly disgusting, vaginal sand infested posts people love to post today. Sure, post your opinions. Share your feelings. But you know what? When there is just a constant stream of statements like "I don't appreciate the tone, it's offensive, snarf snarf", it takes a shit on other genuinely constructive posts that have merit.
GG.
|
I would have liked to see a final edit held to a higher standard of writing and research though instead of just going out to provoke maximum response from either side. Very poorly written in comparison to other final edits, the other fe's could easily be articles in any magazine while this one just screams amateur that found tlpd.
|
On May 13 2011 09:44 manloveman wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 09:11 d_so wrote:On May 13 2011 09:02 manloveman wrote:
I dont know who is worse. The bitter vets sperging bw>sc2 (including OP) or the sc2 noobs who is actually trying to argue against OP's logic.
While OP is very solid in his arguments, there is one thing he is dead wrong about. The sc2 scene is not a farce. While its top korean players where nobody in bw, and the game itself is a lot less mechanical, dare I say more casual, they still represent the best there is in the current sc2 scene. They are still competing and I'm still entertained and following.
If you wonna watch super skilled gameplay that the sc2 scene is still working its towards, then fine with me. Just dont belittle the ones that just wonna see the current best of the game they play and enjoy. I agree with you that they do represent the best of the current sc2 scene. But that's irrelevant to whether they are a farce or not. The farce aspect comes because there may be better players out there who, for whatever reasons, refuse to play sc2. This makes sc2 look like a minor league. (whether it's true or not doesn't matter, since that's the public perception in korea, and perception is what drives advertising sales). So in the mind of BW fans, two questions arise: 1.) why would i want to watch minor league players? and 2.) why are they getting paid so much money? I raised this earlier in the thread but i'm going to bring it up again. SC2 feels like Guitar Hero, while BW feels like real guitar played by geniuses. This may or may not be true. But when a product imitates an already popular product, the burden of proof lies on the newcomer to show beyond all doubt not only that they are the superior product, but they can attract buyers as well. (See: Motorola Xoom vs. Ipad 2. Xoom may have superior stats but no one buys it.) Agree. Skill-wise, the little-league analogy is good. Sc2 are no where near as solid, nor pull off extreme micro / macro power moves that are common on bw top level. Even I, who hardly played any bw, can see that (from watching bw matches before playing sc2). To the questions 1: Why would you watch said little league games? As a bw fan, you probably wouldnt. As a sc2 (as me), why wouldnt I watch it. I could care less about the skill level being higher in bw, its not my game. 2: Why are they getting payed so much money? I would expect there are a lot of sc2 fans, so naturally money follow the viewers, not the skill level. For the second part of you post. Sc2 dont have to prove anything. If you like bw / bw scene more, just stick to it. I would say a lot people must be watching sc2 scene. Im basing this guess at the rapid expansion of the scene. New big turneys / lans pop up all the time. So if this is the case, how can it be a farce. I would even speculate that outside korea, the sc2 scene is bigger than the bw, so some people, like myself, must believe they are doing somthing right.
it's a farce in Korea. outside of korea, there is no ulterior motive to compete against BW. SC2 has no competition in the foreign world, so they can do things more organically, which i like.
What's going on in Korea -- the amount of prize money, the lawsuits, the inferior players -- is ridiculous. people don't care about sc2 here, but blizzard is trying to make them care and in turn care less about BW. Or at least, that's what it felt like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
