Do We Want the Game Harder? - Page 10

On January 24 2012 01:20 thesums wrote:



I dont really see GSL being won through consistent good performance other than MVP. Here are some inconsistencies that show that skill cap not being high enough, and the volatility of the game at the moment. Too much of the game is based on luck of build order prepared.

- Jakji being a darkhorse winning the GSL recently.
- Oz to semi-finals
- Nestea drop to UpAndDown (after he recently winning GSL)
- MC drop to UpAndDown (after recently winning GSL)
- MVP drop to UpAndDown (after previously winning GSL)
- MKP struggling to stay in Code S
- Inca in GSL finals....
- OgsFIN, ForGG winning Code A yet knocked out in GSL groups in 4th place too

On January 24 2012 01:16 perestain wrote:

The whole SC2 is easier than BW talk is nothing more than the whining of people who are butthurt that their skills in one game dont transfer completely to another game.

Sorry to break it to you, but you actually never lose on ladder to someone "obviously below your skill level". Your skill is your ability to win in this game, nothing more, nothing less. If you lose, the other guy was better, at least for that one game, everything else is delusional.

On January 23 2012 21:20 aTnClouD wrote:

It's not proven that the SC2 success in the west comes from that. It's most likely just the fact it has been marketed on a larger scale as a game and eSport, and since we are way more superficial than asians we think graphic matters a lot. We can just make speculations but my eyes bleed whenever somebody take for granted that SC2 success is most likely given by the fact the game is easier than SCBW.

On January 24 2012 01:24 Dalavita wrote:


Wat? If you want consistency you check win ratios, where you'll see a lot of the higher level players at 65%+s (which incidentally mean that they lose 35% of their games). People get better, some people get worse. Everyone have off days and do mistakes.

Also the strength you give to plays doesn't mean that the game is flawed when they can't live up to your standards.

On January 24 2012 01:24 thesums wrote:


Disagree, I never played much SC1, I play much more SC2 because it is easier. Many people feel that as well. Why is it a lot of foreigners play SC2? When SC1 started foreigners also participated (in Korea), but soon the majority left and why is that? The mechanics of the game is harder. I wish it was not, but the fact is it really is... And the skills really transfer because the more successful BW players (not counting old players that already retired) are more successful here. MVP was an A teamer and he is the best player atm, too good to be a coincidence right? Even with carpel tunnel syndrome

On January 23 2012 21:34 Tobberoth wrote:
The important factor isn't that it should be harder / more difficult to play. I don't think anyone seriously wants 12 unit selection back. We want to keep all of those aspects which make the game more playable, and instead make the strategy more complex and important.

For example, defenders advantage. In BW, you had a lesser chance to hit your opponent when firing up a cliff, even if you had vision. In SC2, it's all about vision, nothing else matters. Is this easier? Not really, but it's simpler. THAT'S what most people who laud BW want to get into SC2: Make the game more complex without making it harder to physically play.

While micro skills and macro skills are more appreciated in BW because they are harder to perform physically, it's the higher level we want to enjoy. Seeing two 200/200 armies bash into each other for 4 seconds and then seeing a winner is boring, even if there was some nice drop play in the middle of it. What we want are long games which are constantly back and forth with minor engagements, zoning and multitasking, and a game which is complex enough to support this and discourage people from A-moving everything for the win.

On January 24 2012 01:24 CakeSauc3 wrote:
The game is only as hard as the competition, and since human beings aren't perfect, the skill cap on SC2 will never be reached. Therefore, the game doesn't need to get harder. There will always be someone who can play better than the level at which the game is currently being played. This goes for sc2 as well as sc:bw. I've played both games, bw far more than sc2, but I can say that they both take a such a high level of play that I could never master either game. And guess what? The pros never will, either. As someone else stated earlier, even Flash still misses depots. Why would we want sc2 to be harder mechanically when even the best of the best can't play sc:bw perfectly? Playing an impossible game isn't fun for anyone.

If hitting a home run was so impossibly hard that no one could do it, even the best of the best, I'd never have any desire to play or watch baseball. Keep sc2 how it is (generally)- it's better this way. (I'm not opposed to the adding/changing of units and timings.)

On January 24 2012 01:26 scDeluX wrote:
Skillcap isn't the real problem of sc2. I was an avid BW follower and kinda dropped it when sc2 came out. What sc2 really miss is those AWWW moments. Not enough clutch strom drops, reaver harass and stop lurkers epicness for me.