|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On July 12 2013 15:09 lichter wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 15:02 opterown wrote:On July 12 2013 15:01 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:On July 12 2013 14:35 Lysanias wrote:I am still waiting on part two of this ... no really  Yeah really. Given how much controversy this article stirred up and how inaccurate it was, you'd think there would've been a followup now that Kespa is here. i believe some staff member said there was one planned but it never eventuated? Maybe it's Fionn's Fabled Article?
that's why i'm trying to get into sc2 staff dammit
|
On July 12 2013 15:16 opterown wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 15:09 lichter wrote:On July 12 2013 15:02 opterown wrote:On July 12 2013 15:01 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:On July 12 2013 14:35 Lysanias wrote:I am still waiting on part two of this ... no really Yeah really. Given how much controversy this article stirred up and how inaccurate it was, you'd think there would've been a followup now that Kespa is here. i believe some staff member said there was one planned but it never eventuated? Maybe it's Fionn's Fabled Article? that's why i'm trying to get into sc2 staff dammit
I wonder how many lrs you have to make to achieve that...
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On July 12 2013 15:16 opterown wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 15:09 lichter wrote:On July 12 2013 15:02 opterown wrote:On July 12 2013 15:01 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:On July 12 2013 14:35 Lysanias wrote:I am still waiting on part two of this ... no really Yeah really. Given how much controversy this article stirred up and how inaccurate it was, you'd think there would've been a followup now that Kespa is here. i believe some staff member said there was one planned but it never eventuated? Maybe it's Fionn's Fabled Article? that's why i'm trying to get into sc2 staff dammit
If I get in I will investigate
|
Got to get to the bottom of this.
|
Fionn's article is just a history of GSL and its champions
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On July 12 2013 15:21 Dodgin wrote:
Fionn's article is just a history of GSL and its champions
no there's another one
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On July 12 2013 15:21 Dodgin wrote:
Fionn's article is just a history of GSL and its champions
There's a secret one, you're just out of the loop because they don't trust you
|
It's probably about how good Polt would be at LoL
|
On July 12 2013 15:02 opterown wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 14:59 KlaCkoN wrote:On July 12 2013 13:35 SiskosGoatee wrote:On July 12 2013 11:33 FallDownMarigold wrote:On July 12 2013 11:17 stratmatt wrote:
Yeah, this article is pretty much 100% wrong. Abstract out all the petty details and a general message emerges that seems true to some extent... Kespa pros are very strong in SC2, and continue to become the best players in SC2 the more time spent playing the game. Kespa pros are the hardest and smartest practicing players and unsurprisingly are starting to fill up the ranks of the best of the best in SC2. The stuff about non-Kespa pros being "a farce" and all that stuff intended to instigate and enrage may not be perfectly true but I think there's some rightness in it So the general message of the article according to you is: "Yo, if KeSPa pros switch to StarCraft II, they will be even with the original pros, just like the WC II pros, and the people who never played BW professionally like Leenock?" Like "Gee, I got this big elephant in the room for you, this big uncomfortable truth that no one wants to talk about, when KeSPA pros switch, they will do reasonably okay!" Maybe you should actually read it, no one who is criticising the article asserts that it is wrong to belief that the KeSPA pros will do reasonably well. Do you honestly think anyone could ever think that? No, the article is about how the lowest of the lowest of the KeSPA pros could come to SC2 at any time and dominate on the level of Mvp, that's the idea people critical of the article are claiming. Do you honestly think there is anyone out there who believes 'Gee, if these people switch to SC2. THey wouldn't do okay at all. Maybe one of them would reach code A but that's it.' Looking through the list of GSL winners for people who never played broodwar professionally for a kespa team now: All the people who won gold more than once played for kespa at one point. Half the people who won once did. Both people who won silver more than once played for kespa, more than half of the people who won once did. Dunnu seems like they did more than pretty well considering the huge influx of competition from completely different games like wc3 of CoH. But yeah turned out that _among_ the people with the RTS talent and drive to succeed at professional bw there wasn't any particular correlation between bw success and sc2 success. But there is most certainly a very strong correlation between sc2 success and "having played bw for kespa at one point". Much more so than for other games or other organisations. that's the korean factor coming into play, not the BW factor lol i.e. if you're good at s2, you're probably a korean. if you're a korean who games, you've probably played BW at some point. not particularly strong causation
i disagree. why is it still in contention that the kespa training regimen and the mechanical skill required to play broodwar were primarily responsible for kespa doing as well as they did in sc2? when kespa first switched, kespa players were taking games and even winning vs people who have played the game for far longer based purely on their mechanics and familiarity with basic rts strategies in spite of not having sc2-specific experience and knowledge. about the training, even alive mentioned specifically in an interview that 'they' were at a disadvantage because kespa players train much more than them. sure, it didn't lead to results as drastic as this article predicted, but to completely dismiss these points is just absurd.
|
Why is this thread still alive >.>?
|
United States97276 Posts
On July 12 2013 15:26 Dodgin wrote:
It's probably about how good Polt would be at LoL
The real 2nd elephant in the room article. MOBAs
|
On July 12 2013 15:26 SafeWord wrote:
Why is this thread still alive >.>?
Because elephants are cute?
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On July 12 2013 15:26 theMagus wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 15:02 opterown wrote:On July 12 2013 14:59 KlaCkoN wrote:On July 12 2013 13:35 SiskosGoatee wrote:On July 12 2013 11:33 FallDownMarigold wrote:On July 12 2013 11:17 stratmatt wrote:
Yeah, this article is pretty much 100% wrong. Abstract out all the petty details and a general message emerges that seems true to some extent... Kespa pros are very strong in SC2, and continue to become the best players in SC2 the more time spent playing the game. Kespa pros are the hardest and smartest practicing players and unsurprisingly are starting to fill up the ranks of the best of the best in SC2. The stuff about non-Kespa pros being "a farce" and all that stuff intended to instigate and enrage may not be perfectly true but I think there's some rightness in it So the general message of the article according to you is: "Yo, if KeSPa pros switch to StarCraft II, they will be even with the original pros, just like the WC II pros, and the people who never played BW professionally like Leenock?" Like "Gee, I got this big elephant in the room for you, this big uncomfortable truth that no one wants to talk about, when KeSPA pros switch, they will do reasonably okay!" Maybe you should actually read it, no one who is criticising the article asserts that it is wrong to belief that the KeSPA pros will do reasonably well. Do you honestly think anyone could ever think that? No, the article is about how the lowest of the lowest of the KeSPA pros could come to SC2 at any time and dominate on the level of Mvp, that's the idea people critical of the article are claiming. Do you honestly think there is anyone out there who believes 'Gee, if these people switch to SC2. THey wouldn't do okay at all. Maybe one of them would reach code A but that's it.' Looking through the list of GSL winners for people who never played broodwar professionally for a kespa team now: All the people who won gold more than once played for kespa at one point. Half the people who won once did. Both people who won silver more than once played for kespa, more than half of the people who won once did. Dunnu seems like they did more than pretty well considering the huge influx of competition from completely different games like wc3 of CoH. But yeah turned out that _among_ the people with the RTS talent and drive to succeed at professional bw there wasn't any particular correlation between bw success and sc2 success. But there is most certainly a very strong correlation between sc2 success and "having played bw for kespa at one point". Much more so than for other games or other organisations. that's the korean factor coming into play, not the BW factor lol i.e. if you're good at s2, you're probably a korean. if you're a korean who games, you've probably played BW at some point. not particularly strong causation i disagree. why is it still in contention that the kespa training regimen and the mechanical skill required to play broodwar were primarily responsible for kespa doing as well as they did in sc2? when kespa first switched, kespa players were taking games and even winning vs people who have played the game for far longer based purely on their mechanics and familiarity with basic rts strategies in spite of not having sc2-specific experience and knowledge. about the training, even alive mentioned specifically in an interview that 'they' were at a disadvantage because kespa players train much more than them. sure, it didn't lead to results as drastic as this article predicted, but to completely dismiss these points is just absurd.
i don't disagree with what you said, i think that's the primary reason why they are doing better now, but that was not my argument at all to the other guy lolol
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On July 12 2013 15:26 Shellshock1122 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 15:26 Dodgin wrote:
It's probably about how good Polt would be at LoL The real 2nd elephant in the room article. MOBAs
We're gonna need more animals with SC2, HoN, Dota2 players going into LoL for the moneys
|
On July 12 2013 15:29 opterown wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 15:26 theMagus wrote:On July 12 2013 15:02 opterown wrote:On July 12 2013 14:59 KlaCkoN wrote:On July 12 2013 13:35 SiskosGoatee wrote:On July 12 2013 11:33 FallDownMarigold wrote:On July 12 2013 11:17 stratmatt wrote:
Yeah, this article is pretty much 100% wrong. Abstract out all the petty details and a general message emerges that seems true to some extent... Kespa pros are very strong in SC2, and continue to become the best players in SC2 the more time spent playing the game. Kespa pros are the hardest and smartest practicing players and unsurprisingly are starting to fill up the ranks of the best of the best in SC2. The stuff about non-Kespa pros being "a farce" and all that stuff intended to instigate and enrage may not be perfectly true but I think there's some rightness in it So the general message of the article according to you is: "Yo, if KeSPa pros switch to StarCraft II, they will be even with the original pros, just like the WC II pros, and the people who never played BW professionally like Leenock?" Like "Gee, I got this big elephant in the room for you, this big uncomfortable truth that no one wants to talk about, when KeSPA pros switch, they will do reasonably okay!" Maybe you should actually read it, no one who is criticising the article asserts that it is wrong to belief that the KeSPA pros will do reasonably well. Do you honestly think anyone could ever think that? No, the article is about how the lowest of the lowest of the KeSPA pros could come to SC2 at any time and dominate on the level of Mvp, that's the idea people critical of the article are claiming. Do you honestly think there is anyone out there who believes 'Gee, if these people switch to SC2. THey wouldn't do okay at all. Maybe one of them would reach code A but that's it.' Looking through the list of GSL winners for people who never played broodwar professionally for a kespa team now: All the people who won gold more than once played for kespa at one point. Half the people who won once did. Both people who won silver more than once played for kespa, more than half of the people who won once did. Dunnu seems like they did more than pretty well considering the huge influx of competition from completely different games like wc3 of CoH. But yeah turned out that _among_ the people with the RTS talent and drive to succeed at professional bw there wasn't any particular correlation between bw success and sc2 success. But there is most certainly a very strong correlation between sc2 success and "having played bw for kespa at one point". Much more so than for other games or other organisations. that's the korean factor coming into play, not the BW factor lol i.e. if you're good at s2, you're probably a korean. if you're a korean who games, you've probably played BW at some point. not particularly strong causation i disagree. why is it still in contention that the kespa training regimen and the mechanical skill required to play broodwar were primarily responsible for kespa doing as well as they did in sc2? when kespa first switched, kespa players were taking games and even winning vs people who have played the game for far longer based purely on their mechanics and familiarity with basic rts strategies in spite of not having sc2-specific experience and knowledge. about the training, even alive mentioned specifically in an interview that 'they' were at a disadvantage because kespa players train much more than them. sure, it didn't lead to results as drastic as this article predicted, but to completely dismiss these points is just absurd. i don't disagree with what you said, i think that's the primary reason why they are doing better now, but that was not my argument at all to the other guy lolol
i reread your post. i believe you were actually arguing that indirectly. you said 'korean factor' and not 'broodwar factor'. you don't acknowledge that these players' experience in playing bw competitively, with kespa training regimen no less, played a major role in developing their skills and fundamentals for sc2, hence leading to their outstanding results. is this correct?
|
On July 12 2013 15:33 lichter wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 15:26 Shellshock1122 wrote:On July 12 2013 15:26 Dodgin wrote:
It's probably about how good Polt would be at LoL The real 2nd elephant in the room article. MOBAs We're gonna need more animals with SC2, HoN, Dota2 players going into LoL for the moneys
Or at least have them not move back/retire after failing to start a career in LoL (Looking at you Coca and Inori)
|
Intrigue wrote this article in May of 2011. Back then the competition was still young. MVP, Nestea and MC had won 6 of the 7 GSLs between them in convincing fashion. They were significantly better than the rest of the field. Intrigue's contention was that if the bw pros had switched then that it would have been a matter of months before they dominated the entire scene. He was probably right. Between the infrastructure of the teams, the coaching staff and the hours spent practicing, the KeSPA pros would have been at a significant advantage. This says nothing about the skill of eSF players, it's just a question of support and money.
Today, the KeSPA pros have caught up to the eSF players and everyone is playing at a much higher level. The best eSF players still make up about 50% of the ro32's, which is probably surprising to a lot of the supporters of this thread. Will it continue? Who knows. The eSF field has gotten stronger with more young talent and many of the former greats of bw are getting older. There's a generational change for both sides. The MVPs and Storks are slowly fading and the Dears, Lifes and sOs' are in the ascendant.
Ultimately we'll never know whether KeSPA would have dominated in the early life of WoL. The change never happened and it's pointless to look at the scene in the recent past and say "See! It's been almost a year and they're not at some 3:1 ratio!" because the scene is different. Intrigue was speaking about the level of competition then, he never said that the players would dominate at any and every stage in the future. Was he caustic and provocative? Yes. But was he wrong? Probably not. But as I said, we can only hypothesise and continuing to use this article to beat each other over the head is pointless. Both sides need to let it go.
TL;DR
The article was written in 05/11, the scene was young then and times have changed. There's a rise of younger talent for both eSF and KeSPA. We'll never know if Intrigue was right or wrong because the switch never happened and everyone's play is better today. There's no need for partisans of either group to keep coming back to this article with malicious glee every time one of their players dominates.
|
I like how so many articles on TL are so wrong :D
The proleague preview, this one... they always want to tell us they actually know what is going to happen and they are always wrong :D
The Kespa players joined up very quickly. Not more.
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
On July 12 2013 15:40 theMagus wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 15:29 opterown wrote:On July 12 2013 15:26 theMagus wrote:On July 12 2013 15:02 opterown wrote:On July 12 2013 14:59 KlaCkoN wrote:On July 12 2013 13:35 SiskosGoatee wrote:On July 12 2013 11:33 FallDownMarigold wrote:On July 12 2013 11:17 stratmatt wrote:
Yeah, this article is pretty much 100% wrong. Abstract out all the petty details and a general message emerges that seems true to some extent... Kespa pros are very strong in SC2, and continue to become the best players in SC2 the more time spent playing the game. Kespa pros are the hardest and smartest practicing players and unsurprisingly are starting to fill up the ranks of the best of the best in SC2. The stuff about non-Kespa pros being "a farce" and all that stuff intended to instigate and enrage may not be perfectly true but I think there's some rightness in it So the general message of the article according to you is: "Yo, if KeSPa pros switch to StarCraft II, they will be even with the original pros, just like the WC II pros, and the people who never played BW professionally like Leenock?" Like "Gee, I got this big elephant in the room for you, this big uncomfortable truth that no one wants to talk about, when KeSPA pros switch, they will do reasonably okay!" Maybe you should actually read it, no one who is criticising the article asserts that it is wrong to belief that the KeSPA pros will do reasonably well. Do you honestly think anyone could ever think that? No, the article is about how the lowest of the lowest of the KeSPA pros could come to SC2 at any time and dominate on the level of Mvp, that's the idea people critical of the article are claiming. Do you honestly think there is anyone out there who believes 'Gee, if these people switch to SC2. THey wouldn't do okay at all. Maybe one of them would reach code A but that's it.' Looking through the list of GSL winners for people who never played broodwar professionally for a kespa team now: All the people who won gold more than once played for kespa at one point. Half the people who won once did. Both people who won silver more than once played for kespa, more than half of the people who won once did. Dunnu seems like they did more than pretty well considering the huge influx of competition from completely different games like wc3 of CoH. But yeah turned out that _among_ the people with the RTS talent and drive to succeed at professional bw there wasn't any particular correlation between bw success and sc2 success. But there is most certainly a very strong correlation between sc2 success and "having played bw for kespa at one point". Much more so than for other games or other organisations. that's the korean factor coming into play, not the BW factor lol i.e. if you're good at s2, you're probably a korean. if you're a korean who games, you've probably played BW at some point. not particularly strong causation i disagree. why is it still in contention that the kespa training regimen and the mechanical skill required to play broodwar were primarily responsible for kespa doing as well as they did in sc2? when kespa first switched, kespa players were taking games and even winning vs people who have played the game for far longer based purely on their mechanics and familiarity with basic rts strategies in spite of not having sc2-specific experience and knowledge. about the training, even alive mentioned specifically in an interview that 'they' were at a disadvantage because kespa players train much more than them. sure, it didn't lead to results as drastic as this article predicted, but to completely dismiss these points is just absurd. i don't disagree with what you said, i think that's the primary reason why they are doing better now, but that was not my argument at all to the other guy lolol i reread your post. i believe you were actually arguing that indirectly. you said 'korean factor' and not 'broodwar factor'. you don't acknowledge that these players' experience in playing bw competitively, with kespa training regimen no less, played a major role in developing their skills and fundamentals for sc2, hence leading to their outstanding results. is this correct?
i disagree that kespa training was a factor for sc2 results before kespa actually switched. the scene was very lax then, koreans got away with very little practice.
|
On July 12 2013 15:41 Subversive wrote:
...
TL;DR
The article was written in 05/11, the scene was young then and times have changed. There's a rise of younger talent for both eSF and KeSPA. We'll never know if Intrigue was right or wrong because the switch never happened and everyone's play is better today. There's no need for partisans of either group to keep coming back to this article with malicious glee every time one of their players dominates.
I disagree. The article had not grounds when it was published and has proven wrong over time. I like this to pop up every few weeks though 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
