Razzia of the Blizzsters - Page 3

On April 11 2015 20:53 ETisME wrote:
whole thing is way too objective so I will just leave my comments out.

There is a huge mistake in the WE NEED MORE BUTTONS! Graph

if you want to present the bw to lotv time line, you can use a line graph, but putting moba there at the end makes no sense.

You should keep it as sc to BW
Wol to hots to lotv
And then moba (which is difficult to do because of their item system)

but then we would see how horrible your graph is.
Because it would appear all there races are getting close to moba which is the most viewers and most popular genre now (implying sc2 is heading the right direction)

On April 11 2015 21:07 TheDwf wrote:

This graph is sarcastic Or rather, semi-sarcastic. You understood the main point, even if your interpretation is not mine. I didn't add SC to BW because there was no significant change in the ratio. You can even see that from WoL to LotV, the ratio for Terran and Zerg is actually very stable and does not raise.

And I was kind with Protoss, I didn't count Hallucination or Phase Mode from the Prism + I counted the Oracle as a pure spellcaster (3 active abilities). So the phenomenon I am talking about is even bigger.

I like that facetious graph. I'm sure many people will hate it because it's "manipulative"! ("Horrible" as you put it.)

On April 11 2015 22:06 ETisME wrote:

I think the biggest problem I have with it is that why even putting MOBA at the end?
Why not MMORPG then?

The graph would be sarcastic if MOBA (having most abilities of all) has the worst viewership performance of all (or other measurable indicators), implying a relationship that is getting worse.

It can be manipulative but it must make sense if you know what I mean.

On April 11 2015 22:13 KeksX wrote:
I think your post loses his effect simply because it's so large and unstructured. It could use a proper structure and table of contents so that people can address certain points more easily instead of just writing "Yeah good post"!

On April 11 2015 22:36 Startyr wrote:
The cacophony of verse, the indiscriminate colligation and cogitation obfuscates the inherent connotation
as well as acting to thoroughly discombobulate all fellow interlocutors.

There are far to many assumptions, simplifications and generalisations and whether it is intended or not the actual points being made are hidden from view.

To take the example of a car race. Lets say every car has a top speed of 30km/h and the race track has no sharp turns.
Every participant can essentially stay at their top speed for the whole race and no one would be able to overtake anyone else. From the image in the original post, if the star on the left of the image represents the amount of skill of a pro player the star on the right is the amount of skill they can actually use if time is contracted.
Likewise if the star on the right is the amount of time available then the star on the left is the amount of skill needed to be able to succeed in that limited time.

Whatever our opinions may be, blizzard is at the forefront of developing rts as a game as well as an e-sport, they may replicate what has come before but they are also forging new paths.
The game needs to be complex enough for players, even the best in the world, to make mistakes and for their opponents to be able to force mistakes out of each other this is part of virtually every long standing competition and contributes to what makes them interesting to play, and why they can still hold an audiences attention for many decades without drastically changing the rules.

It is established knowledge that it takes approximately 10 years of focused dedicated practice to develop the expertise necessary to become considered among the best in the world. For Starcraft 2 it is still relatively new, when legacy of the void is released it will act in some respects to level the playing field once again. This is also why it is silly to argue about imbalance based on previously 'weak' players beating stronger players as everyone has to learn over what is actually 'good'. I would liken the beta to the tuning of a musical instrument. Deliberately tuning a note over or under the intended place in order to better identify where it is actually supposed to be.

I would recommend reading the academic studies and published papers associated with skill of which there are many, such as this book:
The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance
Here is an extract from it: https://hbr.org/2007/07/the-making-of-an-expert

"There is little transfer from high-level proficiency in one domain to proficiency in other domains - even when the domains seem, intuitively, very similar." ~Paul Fletovich, Michael Prietula, and Anders Ericsson, p47

"Automaticity is central to the development of expertise, and practice is the means to automaticity [...] Through the act of practice (with appropriate feedback, monitoring, etc.), the character of cognitive operations changes in a manner that
(a) improves the speed of the operations, (b) improves the smoothness of the operations, and (c) reduces the cognitive demands of the operations, thus releasing cognitive (e.g. attentional) resources for other (often higher)
functions (e.g. planning, self-monitoring)." ~Paul Fletovich, Michael Prietula, and Anders Ericsson, p53

On April 11 2015 23:01 nkr wrote:
So much word vomit made it hard to get much out of it. The important parts get lost

On April 11 2015 23:01 nkr wrote:
So much word vomit made it hard to get much out of it. The important parts get lost

On April 11 2015 23:13 TheDwf wrote:

I like your metaphor. Vomitting is what happens when you can't digest something. You, as a reader, felt nauseous in front of what you perceive as logorrhea. But is it because the food was bad, or because you ate too fast? Wasn't your indigestion too a time razzia? Who forced you to read everything all in one piece? I certainly didn't. Maybe the food was poisoned, maybe you overestimated the strength of your stomach. Contraction of time works in mysterious ways!

WoL started as a one base fest; LotV is now going down the route of starting with 3 bases by default. Maybe there is a middle ground between those two extremes? Why would diversity be an issue? If early game was deemed as problematic—but who decreed that, and on whose authority?—exactly why would the necessary cure be its removal? Next time your arm is itching, remember not ever to fetch a Blizzard physician: their solution would be to amputate. Surely this way of thinking sounds very advanced for the Ostrogoth medicine at the height of the fifth century, but about what 2015?