EPTWhy Esports Will Fail - Page 7
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Benjef
United Kingdom6921 Posts
| ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On May 28 2011 06:39 Sernyl wrote: I'm sorry ,but you're saying anyone can play a sport casualy ,even if they're bad ,but nobody can play SC2 casually ,because they can't micro their mutas?Wait...What? "You can play football (any kind) if you get enough people together. You can play and have fun. You can play basketball, tennis, golf, etc. You may not be very good, but you can play it. The games are very accessible. Even boardgames like Chess and Go are very accessible." I really don't understand your logic.Starcraft 2 basically pits you up against people of the same skill level.You don't need muta micro to play SC2 casually and you don't need any other "bug" abuse to play any game casually.How exactly is microing your units a BUG abuse (besides the patrol part ,but that only gave you an edge up to a point).The way you stated your argument ,i can come to a conclusion that you can't play football ,unless you can run for over an hour back and forth across a football stadium ,chasing a ball.You can't play basketball ,unless the court you're playing in has the same dimensions as the real deal and unless you can keep your stamina up for another few hours.You can't play chess casually unless you can make a move every 1sec and tap the timer.Bug abuse?Players simply use the game design to their advantage ,yes you can call that bug abuse ,but every sport has a niche in it's rules that you can as easaly "abuse". (chess and basketball would be great examples) Are you stating that games are hard to learn?You can easaly pick up Counter-strike or quake or CoD and play casualy.You can easaly do the same for any RTS. You are right; it is incorrect to say that advanced techniques are necessary at the casual level. However, there is something with "bug abuse" that is very casual unfriendly. "Bug abuse" is very different from advanced tactics in chess or advanced movements in sports. It is the difference between bunny hopping and rocket jumping. Rocket jumping is the inevitable outgrowth of three rules about many FPS games: 1: Explosions (created by rockets) push players around. 2: Rockets can be fired in any direction. 3: Explosions do some quantity of damage, rather than instantly killing you. That is, a rocket is survivable at jumping range. If a game has these three rules, rocket jumping works. Always (unless some other rules interfere). You can discover rocket jumping in a game without even playing it just by knowing the rules. You can sit down and work out that this will work, then test it in-game and find that it works. Bunny hopping doesn't work that way. It is an outgrowth of a number of subtle game engine related concepts. It is the result of a physics system that is failing to mimic reality. You cannot discover bunny hopping without playing the game. You have to be playing the game and just trying stuff in order to figure out that you can do it. Neither of these things make sense in reality, of course. But rocket jumping is a natural outgrowth of the game's rules; it makes sense in the context of the game world's rules. It's similar to how pieces in chess tend to be more powerful in the center of the board than at the outside. This is not stated directly in the rules, but it is implicit based on the interactions of the rules. Bunny hopping is something that happens because of how the game's rules are implemented. You can make a version of Quake without bunny hopping that, from a basic rule perspective, worked exactly the same way. You cannot "fix" rocket jumping without changing one of the three rules or adding a fourth rule that somehow causes it to fail (like, "your rockets always instantly kill you"). And that fourth rule will generally stick out like a sore thumb (see the fix for the Archon-Toilet for a prime example). The most unfair part of this kind of bug abuse is that it is not discoverable. A casual player can discover rocket jumping by seeing someone do it, by accident, or by thinking about the rules of the world and figuring it out. A casual player can only discover bunny hopping by being told about it or by stumbling across it. Even seeing someone doing it won't tell them how to do it, as it requires a seemingly magical combination of keypresses and mouse movement. To put it another way, with rocket jumping, the game tells you that it exists. It doesn't tell you directly, but the information is there for all to see. With bunny hopping, the game doesn't tell you that you can do this. And it certainly doesn't tell you how. When a casual player sees rocket jumping for the first time, they think, "hey, why didn't I think of that?" When a casual player sees bunny hopping for the first time, they think, "hey, he's hacking the game!" This is due to a basic miscommunication. If two human beings sit down for a board game, they both know what the rules are. There's no third-party that can spring new rules on them. In a videogame, there are what the player thinks the rules are, and what the game says they are. In a well-designed game, these two are the same. In a poorly-designed game, the game tells the player one thing, but also allows for some other things that it doesn't say are possible. Because a videogame's rules are hidden, the player (particularly the casual player) is relying on the game to properly and accurately communicating the totality of its ruleset. Techniques like wavedashing, bunny-hopping, Muta-micro (particularly stacking and patrol-micro), and so forth are all based on the game not properly communicating with the player. This kind of thing won't necessarily prevent casuals from watching games, but all it takes is losing one or two games to these tactics to prevent casuals from playing the game. | ||
|
tobi9999
United States1966 Posts
On May 28 2011 07:54 SlapMySalami wrote: we shall make it 10 times harder huhuhuhuhhuu If only =( On topic though, you're absolutely right, the rate at which new video games are produced dwarfs the rate at which new sports are being created and this causes many problems for what we call esports. This is just something that is unavoidable, it's not like you can tell the world "stop making games" and then notice a lurking gem amidst the hundreds of thousands if not millions of games that have already been created. Brood War is the pinnacle of what we can call esports, and while no other game can outmatch it, it will die simply because it has been "outdated" by SC2. Sports are entertaining to many people because they are easy to partake in. Billions have played the things we know as "sports" and have found them fun and because of that it ensures that when turned into a professional sport there will be viewers, parents will pass these sports onto children, while the same will probably not be done with StarCraft. Brood War cannot revive because unfortunately SC2 players who have never touched will never comprehend it, in effect cutting off new players from entering the game. After another decade (probably less if Blizzard is in need of money), SC3 will come out, possibly, no probably much shallower than SC2, which was much shallower than Brood War. In succession each one will cut or slow players entering into the previous game, and when SC 4 or 5 sucks ass, then StarCraft will die completely. However, I could be wrong and the future can hold StarCraft as the "best esport" and esports can be held as something widely accepted and liked. | ||
|
Vindicate
United States169 Posts
| ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On May 28 2011 08:13 YaySC42 wrote: Incidentally NASL's top 10 was an awesome move towards mass appeal; that's something where I can send a link to friends and some of them will think its pretty sweet. Highlights are a staple of "real" sports so I hope we see more of this. Although it was packaged nicely. When I finally finished watching the top ten plays from the NASL I was like, "Well, is that it?" They really didn't seem that special at all, except for BoxeR's nuke a lot of them were stupid misplays and dull as fuck. | ||
|
cyclone25
Romania3344 Posts
I don't mind getting a new Starcraft every 10 years. The basics are the same and the top players will always be at the top no matter of patches, add-ons or even new games. I indeed hate the fact that Blizzard is balancing SC2 so slowly and that the luck factor is higher than it should be, but this will probably be fixed soon too. The main issues I see with eSports at the moment is the US leagues like NASL and IPL promoting the new trend of broadcasting from replays or recorded broadcasts instead of live games. This is unacceptable in any sport and if European or Korean leagues broadcast the games live they should be able to do it too. Also let's not forget Warcarft 3 who had all the big online tournaments casted live! Instead we see NASL and IPL treating SC2 as a "product" (similar to a movie/ TV series) instead of treating it as a sports competition where viewers can get involved more into matches by following them live. How does IPL think I can get hyped about a match that was actually played 2 weeks in advance ??? There is a huge difference between watching the football Champions League Final live or recorded the second day. This should be true for Starcraft 2 too - and it saddens me to see some people blindly defending these leagues and saying it's no big deal if it's live or casted from replays. These are people who probably never experienced a live sport event and they just look at SC2 matches with the same interest as watching a movie. | ||
|
Philo
United States337 Posts
On May 28 2011 02:43 Try wrote: But that's just the point. It won't stay consistent. The scene will boom, and with the next new flashy game everyone will leave and move on to the new shiny. Starcraft 2 is the game we all love and play and Its gaining a ton of popularity and will very likely surpass brood war in the long term as Blizzard puts so much effort into making it grow worldwide. But at the end of the day Starcraft 2 does not equal E-sports. E-Sports was around before Starcraft 2 in more forms than just Brood War and as Starcraft 2 grows and other games get to share its spotlight, more games and their communities will be recognized and have Olympic opportunities. I hope that no gamer lets their bias for sc cloud the fact that whats good for any up-and-coming Esport is good for us. | ||
|
drewcifer
United States192 Posts
On May 28 2011 02:43 Try wrote: But that's just the point. It won't stay consistent. The scene will boom, and with the next new flashy game everyone will leave and move on to the new shiny. So the point is e-sports will be replaced by e-sports. I am not disappointed by this news master prophet. It's always cute to see someone with the confidence to predict the future. I'd imagine if I was a girl I would be wet right now. | ||
|
Chilliman
United States12 Posts
| ||
|
Shamrock_
South Africa276 Posts
As gaming advances, computers advance. It'll become so widespread that even third world countries will be decked out with computers and internet access -- not any time soon, but sure enough, it'll happen. I live in South Africa and keep close tabs on bordering and other African countries and the amount of internet usage in a place like Ghana or Congo is ridiculous considering that their running water and electricity is fucked. So yeah, games are gonna become huge, much bigger than a sport like soccer where it's Dependant upon your personal preference in style. What can't be argued is that video games are gonna become huge thanks to computers. If anyone has an argument I'd love to hear it. What that means is bigger markets. Much bigger markets. It'll appeal to many more people than other traditional sports, though that'll take time. You see eSports getting bigger and it's not like that hype is going to wind down and retract, it'll slowly grow and grow and grow. | ||
|
Coolwhip
927 Posts
| ||
|
Baarn
United States2702 Posts
| ||
|
Fraidnot
United States824 Posts
On May 28 2011 08:26 cyclone25 wrote: Stability and the low skill cap aren't as big of a issue as the OP makes it look. I don't mind getting a new Starcraft every 10 years. The basics are the same and the top players will always be at the top no matter of patches, add-ons or even new games. I indeed hate the fact that Blizzard is balancing SC2 so slowly and that the luck factor is higher than it should be, but this will probably be fixed soon too. The main issues I see with eSports at the moment is the US leagues like NASL and IPL promoting the new trend of broadcasting from replays or recorded broadcasts instead of live games. This is unacceptable in any sport and if European or Korean leagues broadcast the games live they should be able to do it too. Also let's not forget Warcarft 3 who had all the big online tournaments casted live! Instead we see NASL and IPL treating SC2 as a "product" (similar to a movie/ TV series) instead of treating it as a sports competition where viewers can get involved more into matches by following them live. How does IPL think I can get hyped about a match that was actually played 2 weeks in advance ??? There is a huge difference between watching the football Champions League Final live or recorded the second day. This should be true for Starcraft 2 too - and it saddens me to see some people blindly defending these leagues and saying it's no big deal if it's live or casted from replays. These are people who probably never experienced a live sport event and they just look at SC2 matches with the same interest as watching a movie. The difference between live and delayed is a big thing, but this is a community that's built off of vods. Everyone's sort of accustomed to watching stuff at their leisure and the live aspect is not going to make or brake it. Honestly with NASL and these other tourneys you forget that they actually aren't live after awhile. | ||
|
Trajan98
Canada203 Posts
| ||
|
teamsolid
Canada3668 Posts
| ||
|
Razzah
United States35 Posts
| ||
|
scaban84
United States1080 Posts
RTS games are all we have in E-Sports but it only appeals to the strategy enthusiasts or hardcore. I Tried to get my brother into SC2 and he just couldn't get into it, and he is a big time gamer. Adding complexity also does not increase competition. Why is it that Total Annihilation was not as successful as Starcraft when there was obviously more depth to that game? Same situation with SC2 and Supreme Commander FA. We can't make E-Sports mainstream we can only hope to appeal to more intelligent people. There are many brainiacs out there who love strategy games (including many middle-aged adults) but will not enter the E-sports culture as long as it has this pre-pubescent geek aesthetic attached to it. | ||
|
snow2.0
Germany2073 Posts
Saying "low skill unknowns" (who will typically be playing a lot anyway) can still win stuff doesn't take its sport-nature away. | ||
|
Cold-Blood
United States200 Posts
On May 28 2011 02:41 Mailing wrote: Nobody watches professional track and field outside of the Olympics, and it has been around for thousands of years and will continue to be played. This is a very foolish, uninformed and plain out stupid statement which should not be considered for argument. As it is fully incorrect and poorly thought out. | ||
|
WillyReturnStroke
United States73 Posts
| ||
| ||
