|
On February 22 2012 04:35 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 04:31 MCDayC wrote:On July 13 2011 14:25 Primadog wrote:
This article is terrible.
It is terrible because it consists entirely of conjectures and false analogies with no evidence or data to back it up. The central premise: that the skill ceiling is low, completely counters all existing tournament results everywhere. The one "evidence" you point to, that foreigners are beating koreans (on rare occasions), relies on a false pretext that all koreans necessarily are better than all foreigners.
Elephant was bad, but this was infinitely worse. There are plenty of resources available if you know or bother to look to which to back your assertions, but no effort were made. Shame on you. Had it nailed in the first page. There is no evidence that top players in SC2 aren't as dominant as the top players in BW. This whole thing is conjecture. Have you watched any broodwar pro FPVOD? I have watched in_Dove play broodwar on stream when Mr.Bitter tweeted and all the Broodwar memories came back to me. He played fantastic. Just, fantastic. And than I switched to my usual streams of SC2. WOW the difference. Not in the game, but in the way it is played by a progamer. It actually looked easier. So again, If you think SC2 is as hard as Broodwar, watch some FPVODS.
If anyone can point to a skill ceiling in SC2 that would be great. Saying it looked harder in BW does not mean that there is a low skill ceiling in SC2. It will take a lot more time before anything like a skill ceiling is reached. Also the BW FPVOD's kick ass, but what can you compare that to? A pro-gamer ladder stream where they're not going to be putting it all on the line and not showing off like they try to at the GSL? There is no equivalent (yet) of the BW FPVODs, so I'm not really sure what you can compare to.
Not to mention they're different games. I hate these elephant/rhino articles and they always seem to be people just crapping all over starcraft 2 
Edit: And I think strategy takes a lot of skill as well... a lot of prep work goes into strats as well as being able to think creatively and act quickly on the fly. The game isn't just mechanics, which is why I like the game so much.
|
|
|
tbh as a hardcore RTS viewer, sc2 is vastly less entertaining than BW to watch (and i watch both ALOT)
|
On February 22 2012 05:04 Clarity_nl wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 04:21 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 22 2012 04:18 KimJongChill wrote:
The last of broodwar can't be compared with the first of sc2. More time~ You can it give as much time as you want, a bad design will not be fixed. Only balance can and that's not the issue. And again, in this era of the game industry you don't need 10 years to achieve a perfect result, only money. And Blizzard has money. Yes you're absolutely right. Money creates balance, not time. Maybe if we all pay progamers more they'll figure out how to play perfectly faster. /sarcasm
A very smart post.
/sarcasm
Read my post.
|
On February 22 2012 05:44 1st_Panzer_Div. wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 04:35 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 22 2012 04:31 MCDayC wrote:On July 13 2011 14:25 Primadog wrote:
This article is terrible.
It is terrible because it consists entirely of conjectures and false analogies with no evidence or data to back it up. The central premise: that the skill ceiling is low, completely counters all existing tournament results everywhere. The one "evidence" you point to, that foreigners are beating koreans (on rare occasions), relies on a false pretext that all koreans necessarily are better than all foreigners.
Elephant was bad, but this was infinitely worse. There are plenty of resources available if you know or bother to look to which to back your assertions, but no effort were made. Shame on you. Had it nailed in the first page. There is no evidence that top players in SC2 aren't as dominant as the top players in BW. This whole thing is conjecture. Have you watched any broodwar pro FPVOD? I have watched in_Dove play broodwar on stream when Mr.Bitter tweeted and all the Broodwar memories came back to me. He played fantastic. Just, fantastic. And than I switched to my usual streams of SC2. WOW the difference. Not in the game, but in the way it is played by a progamer. It actually looked easier. So again, If you think SC2 is as hard as Broodwar, watch some FPVODS. If anyone can point to a skill ceiling in SC2 that would be great. Saying it looked harder in BW does not mean that there is a low skill ceiling in SC2. It will take a lot more time before anything like a skill ceiling is reached. Also the BW FPVOD's kick ass, but what can you compare that to? A pro-gamer ladder stream where they're not going to be putting it all on the line and not showing off like they try to at the GSL? There is no equivalent (yet) of the BW FPVODs, so I'm not really sure what you can compare to. Not to mention they're different games. I hate these elephant/rhino articles and they always seem to be people just crapping all over starcraft 2 Edit: And I think strategy takes a lot of skill as well... a lot of prep work goes into strats as well as being able to think creatively and act quickly on the fly. The game isn't just mechanics, which is why I like the game so much.
Yeah the fact that foreigners even with good practice couldn't even get close to B teamers in brood war, not to mention code A or even S teamers. If you basically didn't practice SC1 8 hours or more a day you had no chance of winning basically in a competitive game, just no way.
Now I see casual players who play 2 or 3 hours 5 days in the week competing strongly with even the best pro players!
|
On February 22 2012 05:52 jackdaniels wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 05:44 1st_Panzer_Div. wrote:On February 22 2012 04:35 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 22 2012 04:31 MCDayC wrote:On July 13 2011 14:25 Primadog wrote:
This article is terrible.
It is terrible because it consists entirely of conjectures and false analogies with no evidence or data to back it up. The central premise: that the skill ceiling is low, completely counters all existing tournament results everywhere. The one "evidence" you point to, that foreigners are beating koreans (on rare occasions), relies on a false pretext that all koreans necessarily are better than all foreigners.
Elephant was bad, but this was infinitely worse. There are plenty of resources available if you know or bother to look to which to back your assertions, but no effort were made. Shame on you. Had it nailed in the first page. There is no evidence that top players in SC2 aren't as dominant as the top players in BW. This whole thing is conjecture. Have you watched any broodwar pro FPVOD? I have watched in_Dove play broodwar on stream when Mr.Bitter tweeted and all the Broodwar memories came back to me. He played fantastic. Just, fantastic. And than I switched to my usual streams of SC2. WOW the difference. Not in the game, but in the way it is played by a progamer. It actually looked easier. So again, If you think SC2 is as hard as Broodwar, watch some FPVODS. If anyone can point to a skill ceiling in SC2 that would be great. Saying it looked harder in BW does not mean that there is a low skill ceiling in SC2. It will take a lot more time before anything like a skill ceiling is reached. Also the BW FPVOD's kick ass, but what can you compare that to? A pro-gamer ladder stream where they're not going to be putting it all on the line and not showing off like they try to at the GSL? There is no equivalent (yet) of the BW FPVODs, so I'm not really sure what you can compare to. Not to mention they're different games. I hate these elephant/rhino articles and they always seem to be people just crapping all over starcraft 2 Edit: And I think strategy takes a lot of skill as well... a lot of prep work goes into strats as well as being able to think creatively and act quickly on the fly. The game isn't just mechanics, which is why I like the game so much. Yeah the fact that foreigners even with good practice couldn't even get close to B teamers in brood war, not to mention code A or even S teamers. If you basically didn't practice SC1 8 hours or more a day you had no chance of winning basically in a competitive game, just no way. Now I see casual players who play 2 or 3 hours 5 days in the week competing strongly with even the best pro players!
There was a time when WhiteRa beating Boxer meant something.
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
On February 22 2012 04:35 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 04:31 MCDayC wrote:On July 13 2011 14:25 Primadog wrote:
This article is terrible.
It is terrible because it consists entirely of conjectures and false analogies with no evidence or data to back it up. The central premise: that the skill ceiling is low, completely counters all existing tournament results everywhere. The one "evidence" you point to, that foreigners are beating koreans (on rare occasions), relies on a false pretext that all koreans necessarily are better than all foreigners.
Elephant was bad, but this was infinitely worse. There are plenty of resources available if you know or bother to look to which to back your assertions, but no effort were made. Shame on you. Had it nailed in the first page. There is no evidence that top players in SC2 aren't as dominant as the top players in BW. This whole thing is conjecture. Have you watched any broodwar pro FPVOD? I have watched in_Dove play broodwar on stream when Mr.Bitter tweeted and all the Broodwar memories came back to me. He played fantastic. Just, fantastic. And than I switched to my usual streams of SC2. WOW the difference. Not in the game, but in the way it is played by a progamer. It actually looked easier. So again, If you think SC2 is as hard as Broodwar, watch some FPVODS.
Nothing to do with what I meant. I meant that, Flash aside, win rates, predictability of top results, consistency of pros is basically the same among top BW pros as in top SC2 pros. So the original article saying that SC2 was more chance based is wrong. It's the same as the thread saying the SC2 was more unpredictable. It's not.
What you are saying is just opinion, in_Dove played fantastic. What does that even mean?
|
On February 22 2012 05:52 jackdaniels wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 05:44 1st_Panzer_Div. wrote:On February 22 2012 04:35 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 22 2012 04:31 MCDayC wrote:On July 13 2011 14:25 Primadog wrote:
This article is terrible.
It is terrible because it consists entirely of conjectures and false analogies with no evidence or data to back it up. The central premise: that the skill ceiling is low, completely counters all existing tournament results everywhere. The one "evidence" you point to, that foreigners are beating koreans (on rare occasions), relies on a false pretext that all koreans necessarily are better than all foreigners.
Elephant was bad, but this was infinitely worse. There are plenty of resources available if you know or bother to look to which to back your assertions, but no effort were made. Shame on you. Had it nailed in the first page. There is no evidence that top players in SC2 aren't as dominant as the top players in BW. This whole thing is conjecture. Have you watched any broodwar pro FPVOD? I have watched in_Dove play broodwar on stream when Mr.Bitter tweeted and all the Broodwar memories came back to me. He played fantastic. Just, fantastic. And than I switched to my usual streams of SC2. WOW the difference. Not in the game, but in the way it is played by a progamer. It actually looked easier. So again, If you think SC2 is as hard as Broodwar, watch some FPVODS. If anyone can point to a skill ceiling in SC2 that would be great. Saying it looked harder in BW does not mean that there is a low skill ceiling in SC2. It will take a lot more time before anything like a skill ceiling is reached. Also the BW FPVOD's kick ass, but what can you compare that to? A pro-gamer ladder stream where they're not going to be putting it all on the line and not showing off like they try to at the GSL? There is no equivalent (yet) of the BW FPVODs, so I'm not really sure what you can compare to. Not to mention they're different games. I hate these elephant/rhino articles and they always seem to be people just crapping all over starcraft 2 Edit: And I think strategy takes a lot of skill as well... a lot of prep work goes into strats as well as being able to think creatively and act quickly on the fly. The game isn't just mechanics, which is why I like the game so much. Yeah the fact that foreigners even with good practice couldn't even get close to B teamers in brood war, not to mention code A or even S teamers. If you basically didn't practice SC1 8 hours or more a day you had no chance of winning basically in a competitive game, just no way. Now I see casual players who play 2 or 3 hours 5 days in the week competing strongly with even the best pro players!
Wait, so who is in Code S or Code A that is playing 10-15 hours a week?
|
On February 22 2012 05:52 jackdaniels wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 05:44 1st_Panzer_Div. wrote:On February 22 2012 04:35 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 22 2012 04:31 MCDayC wrote:On July 13 2011 14:25 Primadog wrote:
This article is terrible.
It is terrible because it consists entirely of conjectures and false analogies with no evidence or data to back it up. The central premise: that the skill ceiling is low, completely counters all existing tournament results everywhere. The one "evidence" you point to, that foreigners are beating koreans (on rare occasions), relies on a false pretext that all koreans necessarily are better than all foreigners.
Elephant was bad, but this was infinitely worse. There are plenty of resources available if you know or bother to look to which to back your assertions, but no effort were made. Shame on you. Had it nailed in the first page. There is no evidence that top players in SC2 aren't as dominant as the top players in BW. This whole thing is conjecture. Have you watched any broodwar pro FPVOD? I have watched in_Dove play broodwar on stream when Mr.Bitter tweeted and all the Broodwar memories came back to me. He played fantastic. Just, fantastic. And than I switched to my usual streams of SC2. WOW the difference. Not in the game, but in the way it is played by a progamer. It actually looked easier. So again, If you think SC2 is as hard as Broodwar, watch some FPVODS. If anyone can point to a skill ceiling in SC2 that would be great. Saying it looked harder in BW does not mean that there is a low skill ceiling in SC2. It will take a lot more time before anything like a skill ceiling is reached. Also the BW FPVOD's kick ass, but what can you compare that to? A pro-gamer ladder stream where they're not going to be putting it all on the line and not showing off like they try to at the GSL? There is no equivalent (yet) of the BW FPVODs, so I'm not really sure what you can compare to. Not to mention they're different games. I hate these elephant/rhino articles and they always seem to be people just crapping all over starcraft 2 Edit: And I think strategy takes a lot of skill as well... a lot of prep work goes into strats as well as being able to think creatively and act quickly on the fly. The game isn't just mechanics, which is why I like the game so much. Yeah the fact that foreigners even with good practice couldn't even get close to B teamers in brood war, not to mention code A or even S teamers. If you basically didn't practice SC1 8 hours or more a day you had no chance of winning basically in a competitive game, just no way. Now I see casual players who play 2 or 3 hours 5 days in the week competing strongly with even the best pro players!
BW as an eSport never took off in the EU/NA like SC 2 did, so the comparison there isn't quite fair. There was no one practicing like that because there was no career in it. No MLGs, IPLs, NASLs, etc., and nothing comparable to the pro-leagues and individual leagues in Korea.
In SC 2, there is a much larger group of pros in the EU/NA, who do take the game seriously, and who does see it as their career. That this has led to a smaller skill gap isn't much to write home about.
As far as the raw mechanics are concerned, I do think SC 2 requires less of it. But this doesn't mean there is no way for players to distinguish themselves. Competition in SC 2 is more cerebral, less mechanical, which is not to say that it's a thinking man's game, but it is to say that you no longer have to have Flash's skills for clicking very fast in order to be successful.
|
On February 22 2012 05:58 MCDayC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 04:35 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 22 2012 04:31 MCDayC wrote:On July 13 2011 14:25 Primadog wrote:
This article is terrible.
It is terrible because it consists entirely of conjectures and false analogies with no evidence or data to back it up. The central premise: that the skill ceiling is low, completely counters all existing tournament results everywhere. The one "evidence" you point to, that foreigners are beating koreans (on rare occasions), relies on a false pretext that all koreans necessarily are better than all foreigners.
Elephant was bad, but this was infinitely worse. There are plenty of resources available if you know or bother to look to which to back your assertions, but no effort were made. Shame on you. Had it nailed in the first page. There is no evidence that top players in SC2 aren't as dominant as the top players in BW. This whole thing is conjecture. Have you watched any broodwar pro FPVOD? I have watched in_Dove play broodwar on stream when Mr.Bitter tweeted and all the Broodwar memories came back to me. He played fantastic. Just, fantastic. And than I switched to my usual streams of SC2. WOW the difference. Not in the game, but in the way it is played by a progamer. It actually looked easier. So again, If you think SC2 is as hard as Broodwar, watch some FPVODS. Nothing to do with what I meant. I meant that, Flash aside, win rates, predictability of top results, consistency of pros is basically the same among top BW pros as in top SC2 pros. So the original article saying that SC2 was more chance based is wrong. It's the same as the thread saying the SC2 was more unpredictable. It's not. What you are saying is just opinion, in_Dove played fantastic. What does that even mean?
When the goal is winning, the game is only as hard as the opponent.
|
On February 22 2012 05:58 MCDayC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 04:35 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 22 2012 04:31 MCDayC wrote:On July 13 2011 14:25 Primadog wrote:
This article is terrible.
It is terrible because it consists entirely of conjectures and false analogies with no evidence or data to back it up. The central premise: that the skill ceiling is low, completely counters all existing tournament results everywhere. The one "evidence" you point to, that foreigners are beating koreans (on rare occasions), relies on a false pretext that all koreans necessarily are better than all foreigners.
Elephant was bad, but this was infinitely worse. There are plenty of resources available if you know or bother to look to which to back your assertions, but no effort were made. Shame on you. Had it nailed in the first page. There is no evidence that top players in SC2 aren't as dominant as the top players in BW. This whole thing is conjecture. Have you watched any broodwar pro FPVOD? I have watched in_Dove play broodwar on stream when Mr.Bitter tweeted and all the Broodwar memories came back to me. He played fantastic. Just, fantastic. And than I switched to my usual streams of SC2. WOW the difference. Not in the game, but in the way it is played by a progamer. It actually looked easier. So again, If you think SC2 is as hard as Broodwar, watch some FPVODS. Nothing to do with what I meant. I meant that, Flash aside, win rates, predictability of top results, consistency of pros is basically the same among top BW pros as in top SC2 pros. So the original article saying that SC2 was more chance based is wrong. It's the same as the thread saying the SC2 was more unpredictable. It's not. What you are saying is just opinion, in_Dove played fantastic. What does that even mean?
Don't you know what fantastic means? I know what it means and so does my 10 year old cousin. You should consult a dictionary.
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
On February 22 2012 06:12 Squeegy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 05:58 MCDayC wrote:On February 22 2012 04:35 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 22 2012 04:31 MCDayC wrote:On July 13 2011 14:25 Primadog wrote:
This article is terrible.
It is terrible because it consists entirely of conjectures and false analogies with no evidence or data to back it up. The central premise: that the skill ceiling is low, completely counters all existing tournament results everywhere. The one "evidence" you point to, that foreigners are beating koreans (on rare occasions), relies on a false pretext that all koreans necessarily are better than all foreigners.
Elephant was bad, but this was infinitely worse. There are plenty of resources available if you know or bother to look to which to back your assertions, but no effort were made. Shame on you. Had it nailed in the first page. There is no evidence that top players in SC2 aren't as dominant as the top players in BW. This whole thing is conjecture. Have you watched any broodwar pro FPVOD? I have watched in_Dove play broodwar on stream when Mr.Bitter tweeted and all the Broodwar memories came back to me. He played fantastic. Just, fantastic. And than I switched to my usual streams of SC2. WOW the difference. Not in the game, but in the way it is played by a progamer. It actually looked easier. So again, If you think SC2 is as hard as Broodwar, watch some FPVODS. Nothing to do with what I meant. I meant that, Flash aside, win rates, predictability of top results, consistency of pros is basically the same among top BW pros as in top SC2 pros. So the original article saying that SC2 was more chance based is wrong. It's the same as the thread saying the SC2 was more unpredictable. It's not. What you are saying is just opinion, in_Dove played fantastic. What does that even mean? Don't you know what fantastic means? I know what it means and so does my 10 year old cousin. You should consult a dictionary.
First TL comment that has made me genuinely rage, if only slightly, and for a moment. Well done.
|
i belive the focus of sc2 is more of a thinking mans game u are more able to explore all the avenues availible to you.
you can better micro. drop. harass. position and defend more! because your more free to do so .
|
On February 22 2012 05:47 Sated wrote:
Players are still failing to spot drops and still mis-rallying units. They're still reacting badly to the information they gain. They're still being tricked into believing Banshees aren't coming when they blatantly are. Protoss still clump their spellcasters. Zerg still clump their Broodlords when Motherships are floating around. Terrans still haven't worked out how to use Mech even though it is super awesome Terrans still stand in storms/try to engage Colossus balls and wonder why their armies melt. Players still haven't figured this game out and they sure as shit ain't at a skill ceiling.
EDIT:
BW is definitely harder to play. You're not just fighting against your opponent, you're fighting against the dumb as fuck AI and you're fighting against a UI that is ancient and out-dated. Some people find that fun, and that's cool, and it definitely makes the game harder. However, to then say SC2 is at a skill-ceiling is silly; SC2 might have a lower ceiling, but it's still higher than anyone can reach.
I like the first part, its funny that you can win against a zerg that is better then you, by putting your army in front of their natural and intercept all reinforcements from their other bases, because they just use one rally point. (or wait until a hatch is full of eggs and then kill it, so the rallys are gone)
In sc2 you also fight against the ai even more then in bw in some cases. (ranged army vs colossus, a moving into lurkers isn't that bad). And while you aren't fighting the UI, you fight your own lazyness in sc2.
I like the example of the lil ling army sniping a nexus, the toss moves in with blink stalkers and just when in range, blinks their whole stalker blob ontop of zerg. and all stalkers attack damaged ling with 3 hp and then all stalkers attack the damaged ling at 10 health etc. If you call that a unit friendly AI ^^. (and yes i damaged some of my units on purpose to increase overkill)
There are tons more of examples. For example patroling an overlord in and out of the thors air range.
In bw people learned to live with their ai and ui and even learned to use it.
In sc2 blizzard put in alot of things that can be used, but people are to lazy to use those, except magic boxing on air units only (because it takes no apm), ground unit magic boxing is something unheared and you see those perfectly splitted marines clump together again even though there is still this infestor around.
I am curious why it takes so long to pick this stuff up like magic boxing, or autofollow. It makes microing way easier and increases the effectiveness of your army incredibly.
Back to the ai, its really good for units that deal instant damage, so mostly melee and some ranged. But it gets worse and worse the slower a unit projectile moves, but blizzard did an okay job at balancing around this. Just the melee aoe relationship is a bit bad, because of auto surround.
My impression on sc2 in comparsion to bw has always been, easier to play and harder to master. Why harder, the only reason is because sc2 was made faster to make up for the easier mechanics, that make the game easier to get into at the same time. But comparing bw and sc2 really isn't somthing you should do. BW is so much more macro oriented, while sc2 went way more into the micro. But micro is often neglected, but you can see what happens to units if they are microed. Marines, blink stalkers. But you can also see the opposite examples, range 5 immortals. (i never had problem with the immortal using mechanics that s2 had.)
The sc2 and bw thing is just my personal experience (not that i ever was good at bw only played cish friends), i know that most have another opinion on this, but i never really saw arguments to one or the other statement, that changed my mind. So for me Blizzard achieved what they aimed for and i like playing both games still.
For me it is as unlikely that someone reaches the skill ceiling in sc2 then someone reaching it in bw. But it would nice if the skillbar would reach new heights.
I don't want to see a code S terran, split his marines up at a wide ramp fending of a zerg with baneling and infestor, close to an expansion hatch, just to a move in having all of his marines clump again, get fungaled and killed. (using a magic box move would have taken 2 more clicks). If this is to much to, then i guess sc2 is way harder then bw.
Until the bw a temers switched over and sc2 isn't used to its max, no side will lose ground anyway and i guess even if flash would switch over (will not happen anyway), no side would give up ground at this discussion.
And as long as everyone plays sc2 like it would be bw, i will stay in master, winning against people, that are 10 times better then me, but make silly mistakes like clumping casters. (it takes 16 clicks to spread 8 sentries emp proof without worrying about them until you forcefield.)
Sorry about the wall of text ... but i get a bit carried away when talking over game mechanics >.< .
|
On February 22 2012 06:52 koonst wrote:
i belive the focus of sc2 is more of a thinking mans game u are more able to explore all the avenues availible to you.
you can better micro. drop. harass. position and defend more! because your more free to do so .
But you don't have to worry about macroing things in tic-tac-toe either. If game requires less mechanical skill, it does not follow that it requires more strategical skill.
|
On February 22 2012 06:03 dsousa wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 05:58 MCDayC wrote:On February 22 2012 04:35 ceaRshaf wrote:On February 22 2012 04:31 MCDayC wrote:On July 13 2011 14:25 Primadog wrote:
This article is terrible.
It is terrible because it consists entirely of conjectures and false analogies with no evidence or data to back it up. The central premise: that the skill ceiling is low, completely counters all existing tournament results everywhere. The one "evidence" you point to, that foreigners are beating koreans (on rare occasions), relies on a false pretext that all koreans necessarily are better than all foreigners.
Elephant was bad, but this was infinitely worse. There are plenty of resources available if you know or bother to look to which to back your assertions, but no effort were made. Shame on you. Had it nailed in the first page. There is no evidence that top players in SC2 aren't as dominant as the top players in BW. This whole thing is conjecture. Have you watched any broodwar pro FPVOD? I have watched in_Dove play broodwar on stream when Mr.Bitter tweeted and all the Broodwar memories came back to me. He played fantastic. Just, fantastic. And than I switched to my usual streams of SC2. WOW the difference. Not in the game, but in the way it is played by a progamer. It actually looked easier. So again, If you think SC2 is as hard as Broodwar, watch some FPVODS. Nothing to do with what I meant. I meant that, Flash aside, win rates, predictability of top results, consistency of pros is basically the same among top BW pros as in top SC2 pros. So the original article saying that SC2 was more chance based is wrong. It's the same as the thread saying the SC2 was more unpredictable. It's not. What you are saying is just opinion, in_Dove played fantastic. What does that even mean? When the goal is winning, the game is only as hard as the opponent.
Flag football may be equally difficult for 8-year-olds to play against 8-year-olds as it is for adults to play NFL against other pro-NFL adults but that doesn't make Flag football an equally difficult or competitive game.
|
Ehh. Personally I've come to the conclusion that the SC2 skill ceiling isn't necessarily lower. Let's face it, no one will ever actually hit the skill ceiling of the two games (unless they are a robot), but...
I think the skill ceiling is more maniputable in SC2.
In BW, let's say A+B=C for a specific strategy. There might be other combinations like A+D+E=C, but A+B=C is considerably easier and more efficient.
In SC2, it might be the same, in A+B=C, however, it might also be possible to achieve C with A+.5B+E, or some other combination. (Ignore the letters themselves, just think about the concept). And in this case E is a lot easier to do than .5B.
Of course this leads to the question of why doesn't every body just do A+.5B+E if they want to achieve C, and the answer is they can't. Things like hardcounters/unit AI/auto casting/smart casting, etc lead to random situations that sometimes reward not necessarily based on skill.
Why else does the dominance in SC2 fluctuate so much? MVP maintained it for a while because of his mechanics, but once everybody caught up he slowed down. Can anybody honestly tell me who the best player in SC2 is right now?
I don't think they could, and thats why I think blizzard needs to stop focusing on flash and start focrusing on oppurtunity if they want SC2 to suceed.
|
On July 13 2011 14:12 iYiYi wrote:
How about we all just watch the game and enjoy it.
User was warned for this post
Gotta say I lol'd at this. Is pure enjoyment too much to ask for?
|
Reason why sc2 is worse than bw as a spectator is sc2 has no fun units.No units that give you excitement.Sc2 is all about
making a huge army and get better position than your opponent.Usually only one fight decides the winner.
On the other hand BW has units that turn the tide of game instantly if used cleverly.It is always great to see a protoss
killing 10 15 workers with single reaver shot.It s great to see perfect storms against zergs.These units are exciting units.Even
though you are behind you can always come back if you cast the perfect storm or if you use your reavers perfectly.These
things give BW more much value than SC2.
SC2 is so dull to watch compared to BW.
|
I do believe that sc2 DOES have a lower skill ceiling, but it has not been reached yet. I do like how players can focus more on tactics, makes the viewing experience much better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
