|
2550 Posts
On August 15 2012 15:56 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2012 15:03 IshinShishi wrote:On August 15 2012 14:41 sluggaslamoo wrote:On August 15 2012 14:28 Gorlin wrote:On August 15 2012 14:14 rysecake wrote:
^that's actually one thing I don't agree on yet I'm fine with people supporting the "elephant" idea to a degree if they realize that it's not about how in a year, there will be no GSL players left. That said, would you agree that the article was silly for how much it downplayed the skill of current top SC2 players, and even if, say, Jaedong becomes the best player in the world, that doesn't show that the play before him was a "farce"? Most admit that back when the article was written the level of play was pretty bad. For some reason people don't seem to be able to put two and two together. They will post "Oh the article is a pile of crap" and then post "the skill level back then was so bad" right afterwards. That the games these days are much more entertaining than back then. At the time of the writing of the article, the average skill level of the players was a farce, I've seen hundreds of posts saying that the skill level was really bad "back then", the games are much better now than "back then". They are basically saying that the scene back then, was a farce, in lighter terms. The article is just outdated. It is no longer relevant, the Kespa players arrived very late. Had the top 300 players moved over at the time of the writing of the article, the scene would be completely different today. Not saying that the top 300 players would be the top 300 in sc2, but the scene would look completely different. Just because the games today are at a much higher level than at the time the article was written, it doesn't mean that the competition was a farse, it's akin to saying that everyone that came before Flash was a farse, that boxer, july, iloveoov, nada, etc. were all are a farse. It would be like saying the first/second year of pro-BW was a farce. Most people look back on those years and laugh at how bad everyone was, it was indeed a farce, a mockery compared to the skill level today. Imagine if someone came out with an article saying the competition was a farce back then, there would probably be an outcry, but looking back at it now, it would probably be true. It is no different for the said elephant article. Sorry but the top player of SC2 today, would absolutely dominate the top players of SC2 back then.
Hardly a fair comparison, every game during it's infancy will look like a farce. Compare Boxer-era BW to current BW era, it was a joke back then as well compared to now
|
United States8476 Posts
On August 15 2012 14:45 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2012 14:41 sluggaslamoo wrote:On August 15 2012 14:28 Gorlin wrote:On August 15 2012 14:14 rysecake wrote:
^that's actually one thing I don't agree on yet I'm fine with people supporting the "elephant" idea to a degree if they realize that it's not about how in a year, there will be no GSL players left. That said, would you agree that the article was silly for how much it downplayed the skill of current top SC2 players, and even if, say, Jaedong becomes the best player in the world, that doesn't show that the play before him was a "farce"? Most admit that back when the article was written the level of play was pretty bad. For some reason people don't seem to be able to put two and two together. They will post "Oh the article is a pile of crap" and then post "the skill level back then was so bad" right afterwards. That the games these days are much more entertaining than back then. At the time of the writing of the article, the average skill level of the players was a farce, I've seen hundreds of posts saying that the skill level was really bad "back then", the games are much better now than "back then". They are basically saying that the scene back then, was a farce, in lighter terms. The article is just outdated. It is no longer relevant, the Kespa players arrived very late. Had the top 300 players moved over at the time of the writing of the article, the scene would be completely different today. Not saying that the top 300 players would be the top 300 in sc2, but the scene would look completely different. Actually if you'll remember to when the article was written, most people and pro players agreed that the article was crap. Artosis Idra and others who were the best foreigners in BW all said the article was crap at the actual time of its writing. Guess what? The article is still crap, and the TL mods are still biased and treat the SC2 posters like red headed step children and the BW posters like privileged spoiled kids who get what they want.
Give me an example of when mods have been biased on this topic. Just because your history is full of warnings about this exact subject does not make mods biased.
|
On August 15 2012 17:44 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2012 17:25 Squeegy wrote:On August 15 2012 16:02 FataLe wrote:On August 15 2012 15:56 sluggaslamoo wrote:On August 15 2012 15:03 IshinShishi wrote:On August 15 2012 14:41 sluggaslamoo wrote:On August 15 2012 14:28 Gorlin wrote:On August 15 2012 14:14 rysecake wrote:
^that's actually one thing I don't agree on yet I'm fine with people supporting the "elephant" idea to a degree if they realize that it's not about how in a year, there will be no GSL players left. That said, would you agree that the article was silly for how much it downplayed the skill of current top SC2 players, and even if, say, Jaedong becomes the best player in the world, that doesn't show that the play before him was a "farce"? Most admit that back when the article was written the level of play was pretty bad. For some reason people don't seem to be able to put two and two together. They will post "Oh the article is a pile of crap" and then post "the skill level back then was so bad" right afterwards. That the games these days are much more entertaining than back then. At the time of the writing of the article, the average skill level of the players was a farce, I've seen hundreds of posts saying that the skill level was really bad "back then", the games are much better now than "back then". They are basically saying that the scene back then, was a farce, in lighter terms. The article is just outdated. It is no longer relevant, the Kespa players arrived very late. Had the top 300 players moved over at the time of the writing of the article, the scene would be completely different today. Not saying that the top 300 players would be the top 300 in sc2, but the scene would look completely different. Just because the games today are at a much higher level than at the time the article was written, it doesn't mean that the competition was a farse, it's akin to saying that everyone that came before Flash was a farse, that boxer, july, iloveoov, nada, etc. were all are a farse. It would be like saying the first/second year of pro-BW was a farce. Most people look back on those years and laugh at how bad everyone was, it was indeed a farce, a mockery compared to the skill level today. Imagine if someone came out with an article saying the competition was a farce back then, there would probably be an outcry, but looking back at it now, it would probably be true. It is no different for the said elephant article. Sorry but the top player of SC2 today, would absolutely dominate the top players of SC2 back then. yes but this is true no matter what game you play. the article didn't say 'the competition now is a farce, brb in a few years we'll laugh at how dumb everyone is' the article instead say 'the players at the top now are nothing to what is to come FROM BW pros' at least that was my interpretation. It singled 2 groups and chose to downplay one and praise one. It didn't draw a common ground by saying the play now is terrible, wait for a few years and everyones play will be much better which is what i think you were trying to get at. Actually the article precisely said that the competition was then a farce. That is why it said "the competition thus far has been a farce". You see, that leaves out the option that the competition will not be a farce in the future. On August 15 2012 15:03 IshinShishi wrote:On August 15 2012 14:41 sluggaslamoo wrote:On August 15 2012 14:28 Gorlin wrote:On August 15 2012 14:14 rysecake wrote:
^that's actually one thing I don't agree on yet I'm fine with people supporting the "elephant" idea to a degree if they realize that it's not about how in a year, there will be no GSL players left. That said, would you agree that the article was silly for how much it downplayed the skill of current top SC2 players, and even if, say, Jaedong becomes the best player in the world, that doesn't show that the play before him was a "farce"? Most admit that back when the article was written the level of play was pretty bad. For some reason people don't seem to be able to put two and two together. They will post "Oh the article is a pile of crap" and then post "the skill level back then was so bad" right afterwards. That the games these days are much more entertaining than back then. At the time of the writing of the article, the average skill level of the players was a farce, I've seen hundreds of posts saying that the skill level was really bad "back then", the games are much better now than "back then". They are basically saying that the scene back then, was a farce, in lighter terms. The article is just outdated. It is no longer relevant, the Kespa players arrived very late. Had the top 300 players moved over at the time of the writing of the article, the scene would be completely different today. Not saying that the top 300 players would be the top 300 in sc2, but the scene would look completely different. Just because the games today are at a much higher level than at the time the article was written, it doesn't mean that the competition was a farse, it's akin to saying that everyone that came before Flash was a farse, that boxer, july, iloveoov, nada, etc. were all are a farse. Of course not. That is why Nada's domination of BW was not a farce. You see, there are two conditions that need to be satisfied for it to be the case: the play must be bad and the competition must lack the best players. That is why Nada's domination was not a farce because at the time Nada really was the best. The best RTS gamers there were, were playing BW. Of course in retrospect we can see that the level of play evolved. Just as we see that the level of play in SC2 has evolved. That is why nobody thinks the competition in SC2 is a farce anymore. The point of the elephant, however, was not that the competition was a farce, the elephant in the room was that there are players more talented and hardworking than the top of SC2. Must you continue with your attempts at revisionist history? (the elephant article is available for everyone to see, mind you) Why would the article have been written if the intent was so benign as to merely wish to state admiration of Flash's talent and determination as a gamer? The point was that since MC and the like were dominant yet hardly good at Brood War, the competition was a farce. The level of play at the time is never mentioned in the post (from what I remember, sorry if I'm wrong), it's all about the distinct possibility that KeSPA could switch over and simply crush the scene with their superior talent and dedication. That's why it was a farce, because the competition is arbitrarily restricted from having the best players available and they live only by the grace of Flash&co not switching over. Almost all the best players of this moment were playing back then as well, (Taeja and MKP participated in the open seasons of GSL..) if it was the players that made it a farce back then it still must be now. If the elephant theory holds, then the next few months are essentially just about waiting a little bit until the KeSPA players have had enough practice in to supplant the GSL scene. Which makes this rivalry not just a friendly one, but a battle of survival where only one can come out on top. (sorry, I watched Hunger Games yesterday)
I didn't say the article was benign. I entirely agree with you that the article was really mean.
The elephant the article talks about is that the best players have not switched. The tone of the article is so hostile because the level of play was so bad, well, and I suppose annoyance at people praising the MCs and Nesteas so much. It is the combination of these things which resulted in wording such as that the competition has been a farce. If the competition was what it is now, the article could still have been written, with the exact same point, but it would have sounded very different.
Perhaps you are confusing the article elephant in the room with the actual elephant in the room. One of them written in certain context and with specific motivation. The other is the point the article is trying to get through.
|
On August 15 2012 18:06 NrGmonk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2012 14:45 hunts wrote:On August 15 2012 14:41 sluggaslamoo wrote:On August 15 2012 14:28 Gorlin wrote:On August 15 2012 14:14 rysecake wrote:
^that's actually one thing I don't agree on yet I'm fine with people supporting the "elephant" idea to a degree if they realize that it's not about how in a year, there will be no GSL players left. That said, would you agree that the article was silly for how much it downplayed the skill of current top SC2 players, and even if, say, Jaedong becomes the best player in the world, that doesn't show that the play before him was a "farce"? Most admit that back when the article was written the level of play was pretty bad. For some reason people don't seem to be able to put two and two together. They will post "Oh the article is a pile of crap" and then post "the skill level back then was so bad" right afterwards. That the games these days are much more entertaining than back then. At the time of the writing of the article, the average skill level of the players was a farce, I've seen hundreds of posts saying that the skill level was really bad "back then", the games are much better now than "back then". They are basically saying that the scene back then, was a farce, in lighter terms. The article is just outdated. It is no longer relevant, the Kespa players arrived very late. Had the top 300 players moved over at the time of the writing of the article, the scene would be completely different today. Not saying that the top 300 players would be the top 300 in sc2, but the scene would look completely different. Actually if you'll remember to when the article was written, most people and pro players agreed that the article was crap. Artosis Idra and others who were the best foreigners in BW all said the article was crap at the actual time of its writing. Guess what? The article is still crap, and the TL mods are still biased and treat the SC2 posters like red headed step children and the BW posters like privileged spoiled kids who get what they want. Give me an example of when mods have been biased on this topic. Just because your history is full of warnings about this exact subject does not make mods biased.
hahahahah hunts you just got called out
|
On August 15 2012 17:44 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2012 17:25 Squeegy wrote:On August 15 2012 16:02 FataLe wrote:On August 15 2012 15:56 sluggaslamoo wrote:On August 15 2012 15:03 IshinShishi wrote:On August 15 2012 14:41 sluggaslamoo wrote:On August 15 2012 14:28 Gorlin wrote:On August 15 2012 14:14 rysecake wrote:
^that's actually one thing I don't agree on yet I'm fine with people supporting the "elephant" idea to a degree if they realize that it's not about how in a year, there will be no GSL players left. That said, would you agree that the article was silly for how much it downplayed the skill of current top SC2 players, and even if, say, Jaedong becomes the best player in the world, that doesn't show that the play before him was a "farce"? Most admit that back when the article was written the level of play was pretty bad. For some reason people don't seem to be able to put two and two together. They will post "Oh the article is a pile of crap" and then post "the skill level back then was so bad" right afterwards. That the games these days are much more entertaining than back then. At the time of the writing of the article, the average skill level of the players was a farce, I've seen hundreds of posts saying that the skill level was really bad "back then", the games are much better now than "back then". They are basically saying that the scene back then, was a farce, in lighter terms. The article is just outdated. It is no longer relevant, the Kespa players arrived very late. Had the top 300 players moved over at the time of the writing of the article, the scene would be completely different today. Not saying that the top 300 players would be the top 300 in sc2, but the scene would look completely different. Just because the games today are at a much higher level than at the time the article was written, it doesn't mean that the competition was a farse, it's akin to saying that everyone that came before Flash was a farse, that boxer, july, iloveoov, nada, etc. were all are a farse. It would be like saying the first/second year of pro-BW was a farce. Most people look back on those years and laugh at how bad everyone was, it was indeed a farce, a mockery compared to the skill level today. Imagine if someone came out with an article saying the competition was a farce back then, there would probably be an outcry, but looking back at it now, it would probably be true. It is no different for the said elephant article. Sorry but the top player of SC2 today, would absolutely dominate the top players of SC2 back then. yes but this is true no matter what game you play. the article didn't say 'the competition now is a farce, brb in a few years we'll laugh at how dumb everyone is' the article instead say 'the players at the top now are nothing to what is to come FROM BW pros' at least that was my interpretation. It singled 2 groups and chose to downplay one and praise one. It didn't draw a common ground by saying the play now is terrible, wait for a few years and everyones play will be much better which is what i think you were trying to get at. Actually the article precisely said that the competition was then a farce. That is why it said "the competition thus far has been a farce". You see, that leaves out the option that the competition will not be a farce in the future. On August 15 2012 15:03 IshinShishi wrote:On August 15 2012 14:41 sluggaslamoo wrote:On August 15 2012 14:28 Gorlin wrote:On August 15 2012 14:14 rysecake wrote:
^that's actually one thing I don't agree on yet I'm fine with people supporting the "elephant" idea to a degree if they realize that it's not about how in a year, there will be no GSL players left. That said, would you agree that the article was silly for how much it downplayed the skill of current top SC2 players, and even if, say, Jaedong becomes the best player in the world, that doesn't show that the play before him was a "farce"? Most admit that back when the article was written the level of play was pretty bad. For some reason people don't seem to be able to put two and two together. They will post "Oh the article is a pile of crap" and then post "the skill level back then was so bad" right afterwards. That the games these days are much more entertaining than back then. At the time of the writing of the article, the average skill level of the players was a farce, I've seen hundreds of posts saying that the skill level was really bad "back then", the games are much better now than "back then". They are basically saying that the scene back then, was a farce, in lighter terms. The article is just outdated. It is no longer relevant, the Kespa players arrived very late. Had the top 300 players moved over at the time of the writing of the article, the scene would be completely different today. Not saying that the top 300 players would be the top 300 in sc2, but the scene would look completely different. Just because the games today are at a much higher level than at the time the article was written, it doesn't mean that the competition was a farse, it's akin to saying that everyone that came before Flash was a farse, that boxer, july, iloveoov, nada, etc. were all are a farse. Of course not. That is why Nada's domination of BW was not a farce. You see, there are two conditions that need to be satisfied for it to be the case: the play must be bad and the competition must lack the best players. That is why Nada's domination was not a farce because at the time Nada really was the best. The best RTS gamers there were, were playing BW. Of course in retrospect we can see that the level of play evolved. Just as we see that the level of play in SC2 has evolved. That is why nobody thinks the competition in SC2 is a farce anymore. The point of the elephant, however, was not that the competition was a farce, the elephant in the room was that there are players more talented and hardworking than the top of SC2. Must you continue with your attempts at revisionist history? (the elephant article is available for everyone to see, mind you) Why would the article have been written if the intent was so benign as to merely wish to state admiration of Flash's talent and determination as a gamer? The point was that since MC and the like were dominant yet hardly good at Brood War, the competition was a farce. The level of play at the time is never mentioned in the post (from what I remember, sorry if I'm wrong), it's all about the distinct possibility that KeSPA could switch over and simply crush the scene with their superior talent and dedication. That's why it was a farce, because the competition is arbitrarily restricted from having the best players available and they live only by the grace of Flash&co not switching over. (it reminds me of Lance Armstrong saying that the level of competition was kind of pathetic these first few years after he retired, so he would have to come back to grant legitimacy to the competition again) Almost all the best players of this moment were playing back then as well, (Taeja and MKP participated in the open seasons of GSL..) if it was the players that made it a farce back then it still must be now. If the elephant theory holds, then the next few months are essentially just about waiting a little bit until the KeSPA players have had enough practice in to supplant the GSL scene. Which makes this rivalry not just a friendly one, but a battle of survival where only one can come out on top. (sorry, I watched Hunger Games yesterday)
Although, its not just do with the players, the different types of specialist coaches (Zerg coach, Protoss coach, Terran coach, Build order coach, team manager), experienced veteran progamers, the crazy training schedules, in-house rankings, professional practice partners, and the amazing pro houses with maids and chefs and unlimited supply of equipment.
Compare that to the measly teams we had in SC2, where there was a team manager, and a bunch of b-teamers that thought they were practising too hard and wanted breaks, all practising sub optimal hours in someone's basement with little or no structure.
These days the SC2 teams are getting a lot more structure, better sponsors and more coaches, better practice environments, and the lazy/bad players have left. The SC2 teams are halfway through their transition to kespa style teams, and the kespa arrival will most likely be a catalyst because otherwise the players will start to fall behind.
So no, with each passing day, the article becomes more and more irrelevant, if not completely irrelevant already. The actual concept of the elephant in the room though, I guess, is still something to think about and we will see how the kespa players perform once they make a full transition.
|
On August 15 2012 20:13 sluggaslamoo wrote:
So no, with each passing day, the article becomes more and more irrelevant, if not completely irrelevant already. The actual concept of the elephant in the room though, I guess, is still something to think about and we will see how the kespa players perform once they make a full transition.
Wish more people realised this and stop responding to the article as if it was published yesterday. It was written over a year ago and whether or not it was true at the time is irrelevant, as it is definitely no longer true now. Back then the level of SC2 play was often atrocious, and the top SC2 players were Broodwar-rejects that would still be getting crushed by Flash if they hadn't switched. Nowadays the level of SC2 play isn't all that bad (even if it isn't as good as the best of Broodwar), and trying to discuss the top player's broodwar skills is bullshit, as there's not way to tell what level of Broodwar someone like MVP or MC would be playing if they hadn't switched. The time since MVP switched to SC2 is longer than the time it took Jaedong to go from his first Broodwar debut to best player in the world.
It's interesting to discuss and speculate about how well the KeSPA players will do compared to the established SC2 players, and the elephant is a nice symbol of the side that argues that the top KeSPA players are simply more talented and have a better training environment than everyone else and will thus rise to the top. But the original article is dated and people shouldn't keep dragging it out into discussion of the current SC2 scene.
|
Maybe beside elephants we should also introduce donkeys. I think I've seen that somewhere before...
+ Show Spoiler +
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/Krisdog/Krisdog1104/Krisdog110400018/9326220-the-democrat-and-republican-symbols-of-a-donkey-and-elephant-facing-off.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://redalertpolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Donkey-Elephant-USA.jpg)
