|
On August 12 2013 05:33 Clarity_nl wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 05:11 chatuka wrote:
arguments can be made for the superior chararcteristics of MOBA games compared to SC or RTS games. I would yet make that assertion about the superiority of MOBA until Blizzard addresses problems SC clearly possesses. Heck SC could one day even become a 4 vs 4 game if the right minds worked to create it. THat's called evolution and having a vision for the sport.
THat vision is what leads a sports league to newer heights. FOr example Baseball needs drastic changes to their rules. Replays, draft rules, free agent rules, salary cap, Steroids, the rules on how far a fence can be from the diamond. Basketball needs to address changes to that will keep the sport interesting. ( if i was the owner of an MLB team, there would be no fences, now that's is interesting baseball)
every sport needs to evolve. Tennis should be multi-player, but how are organizer going to create that infrastructure of team tennis of like a 5 vs 5? 4 vs 4? Scheduling overkill that retires a great player like Federer pre-maturely. Fans want to see A legend like Federer, and now he can't be at his prime anymore due to the hellacious schedule of the ATP. he's only 32
Hockey and soccer need more scoring IMO. that will get flack from the purists, but the game isn't about the purists. It's about the casual fan. And casual fans like scoring. Make the goal posts bigger, erase the off-side trap, would revolutionize the game. Soccer also has scheduling issues for their stars(stars decline rapidly) but the Champions League was a GREAT idea. Perhaps a super league of only the best teams in the world can play regular season games instead of round robin tournaments that lead into a champions league tournament.
Basketball could probably use a 4 point line which would drastically change the game of basketball. B-ball purists will call me an idiot. But purists hated the 3 point line and still do. Guess how more interesting the sport became because of the 3 point line? Purists are needed of course, but they can certainly make a sport irrelevant and aging if no new concepts are brought into the sport.
Football is at the apex of sport. Perhaps draft changes where the worst team gets two first rounders. the second worst team gets the 3rd and 4th pick and so on. Reduce the violence of the sport. Increase the salary cap. Make the sport international, which will be difficult. I have no idea what you're trying to say and I read your post twice.
it's very simple, Starcraft 2 needs to evolve, if it want to compete with the big MOBA games. Blizzard should feel an urgency to change the game, either make it mulitplayer, improve the balance of the game and make the gameplay more dynamic, reduce the cost of purchase of starcraft, get rid of battle.net and host of other problems that can be easily figured out if BLizzard actually Cared about improving the sport of starcraft. Also, increase the prize money through a similar compendium model found with valve. Whatever money people purchase of Starcraft, proceeds of the mone should go to a super tournament like the TI3 where the top prize gets 1 MILLLION dollars. the team would get the one million instead of the player, but still that's huge.
|
On August 12 2013 05:36 rysecake wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 05:32 chatuka wrote:On August 12 2013 05:30 Targe wrote:On August 12 2013 05:01 MVega wrote:On August 12 2013 03:03 Targe wrote:On August 10 2013 09:19 MVega wrote:
Mobas are addictive casual fun. StarCraft 2 is a strategy game with a fairly high skill ceiling and can be stressful. Dota and LoL are also free and thus more accessible than StarCraft is. Of course they're going to have more players and be more popular. Implying that Starcraft's skill ceiling is higher than dota and lol and that both dota and lol aren't stressful. I don't have to imply it, I'll outright say it. It's nearly impossible to deny that an RTS game like StarCraft has a higher skill ceiling than mobas. Just by the nature of controlling multiple things at the same time and microing and macroing versus controlling one unit. The challenge in mobas is team coordination. There are a few genres with higher skill ceilings than mobas, and that's not me talking any shit about mobas. It's not shameful that they have a much lower skill ceiling, that's part of their appeal to the casual audience, that's a huge part of why they're so popular and so easy to get into. On August 12 2013 04:48 dcemuser wrote:On August 12 2013 03:03 Targe wrote:On August 10 2013 09:19 MVega wrote:
Mobas are addictive casual fun. StarCraft 2 is a strategy game with a fairly high skill ceiling and can be stressful. Dota and LoL are also free and thus more accessible than StarCraft is. Of course they're going to have more players and be more popular. Implying that Starcraft's skill ceiling is higher than dota and lol and that both dota and lol aren't stressful. Starcraft's skill ceiling is vastly higher than DotA/LoL. There's no arguing that. It's not even possible to get remotely within reach of Starcraft's skill ceiling though, so it is sort of a moot point. Ignoring all strategy, Starcraft's raw mechanical skill ceiling is faster than any human could ever move their hands and fingers. In pure theorycrafting, pure Marine/Medievac play hard counters Muta/Ling/Bane, but in reality that is almost never true (except at like the height of MKP or other micro-based Terrans). I find that the skill ceiling argument is overused without considering the EFFECT of higher skill. For example, SC2's skill ceiling is stupidly high, but does it actually matter? That is, does skill in the game actually produce the better player as the winner often enough? That is a factor that you have to consider side by side with skill ceiling - the effect that rising skill actually has on the game. I'm not going to get into an argument because one of us will certainly get warned/banned but I'm just going to leave it that I beieve both DotA and SC2 have similar skill ceilings. it doesn't really matter who game requires more skill. The question is, if both games require simlilar skill ceilings why are players from MOBA never good enough to compete in Starcraft? Where the inverse is probably true. Jaedong could probably be a world class Dota player if he wanted to be. But players from china and Na'vi and Alliance could never become great Starcraft players. says who? nice bullshit
i have nothing against Moba. I think they LoL and Dota are going in the right direction logisically and philosophically. I do think that once Korean players play Dota, the scene will be more difficult for the other teams to win the TI4 and so on and so forth. I would also say that Naniwa would be a killer Dota player or LoL player. where the same thing can not be said for any player of any team of either LoL or Dota that tries to compete in starcraft.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On August 12 2013 05:32 chatuka wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 05:30 Targe wrote:On August 12 2013 05:01 MVega wrote:On August 12 2013 03:03 Targe wrote:On August 10 2013 09:19 MVega wrote:
Mobas are addictive casual fun. StarCraft 2 is a strategy game with a fairly high skill ceiling and can be stressful. Dota and LoL are also free and thus more accessible than StarCraft is. Of course they're going to have more players and be more popular. Implying that Starcraft's skill ceiling is higher than dota and lol and that both dota and lol aren't stressful. I don't have to imply it, I'll outright say it. It's nearly impossible to deny that an RTS game like StarCraft has a higher skill ceiling than mobas. Just by the nature of controlling multiple things at the same time and microing and macroing versus controlling one unit. The challenge in mobas is team coordination. There are a few genres with higher skill ceilings than mobas, and that's not me talking any shit about mobas. It's not shameful that they have a much lower skill ceiling, that's part of their appeal to the casual audience, that's a huge part of why they're so popular and so easy to get into. On August 12 2013 04:48 dcemuser wrote:On August 12 2013 03:03 Targe wrote:On August 10 2013 09:19 MVega wrote:
Mobas are addictive casual fun. StarCraft 2 is a strategy game with a fairly high skill ceiling and can be stressful. Dota and LoL are also free and thus more accessible than StarCraft is. Of course they're going to have more players and be more popular. Implying that Starcraft's skill ceiling is higher than dota and lol and that both dota and lol aren't stressful. Starcraft's skill ceiling is vastly higher than DotA/LoL. There's no arguing that. It's not even possible to get remotely within reach of Starcraft's skill ceiling though, so it is sort of a moot point. Ignoring all strategy, Starcraft's raw mechanical skill ceiling is faster than any human could ever move their hands and fingers. In pure theorycrafting, pure Marine/Medievac play hard counters Muta/Ling/Bane, but in reality that is almost never true (except at like the height of MKP or other micro-based Terrans). I find that the skill ceiling argument is overused without considering the EFFECT of higher skill. For example, SC2's skill ceiling is stupidly high, but does it actually matter? That is, does skill in the game actually produce the better player as the winner often enough? That is a factor that you have to consider side by side with skill ceiling - the effect that rising skill actually has on the game. I'm not going to get into an argument because one of us will certainly get warned/banned but I'm just going to leave it that I beieve both DotA and SC2 have similar skill ceilings. it doesn't really matter who game requires more skill. The question is, if both games require simlilar skill ceilings why are players from MOBA never good enough to compete in Starcraft? Where the inverse is probably true. Jaedong could probably be a world class Dota player if he wanted to be. But players from china and Na'vi and Alliance could never become great Starcraft players.
Similar level skill ceilings in different skills, that bit should be obvious.
Reply: I'm not arguing about this, people have opinions; get over it.
|
On August 12 2013 05:47 Targe wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 05:32 chatuka wrote:On August 12 2013 05:30 Targe wrote:On August 12 2013 05:01 MVega wrote:On August 12 2013 03:03 Targe wrote:On August 10 2013 09:19 MVega wrote:
Mobas are addictive casual fun. StarCraft 2 is a strategy game with a fairly high skill ceiling and can be stressful. Dota and LoL are also free and thus more accessible than StarCraft is. Of course they're going to have more players and be more popular. Implying that Starcraft's skill ceiling is higher than dota and lol and that both dota and lol aren't stressful. I don't have to imply it, I'll outright say it. It's nearly impossible to deny that an RTS game like StarCraft has a higher skill ceiling than mobas. Just by the nature of controlling multiple things at the same time and microing and macroing versus controlling one unit. The challenge in mobas is team coordination. There are a few genres with higher skill ceilings than mobas, and that's not me talking any shit about mobas. It's not shameful that they have a much lower skill ceiling, that's part of their appeal to the casual audience, that's a huge part of why they're so popular and so easy to get into. On August 12 2013 04:48 dcemuser wrote:On August 12 2013 03:03 Targe wrote:On August 10 2013 09:19 MVega wrote:
Mobas are addictive casual fun. StarCraft 2 is a strategy game with a fairly high skill ceiling and can be stressful. Dota and LoL are also free and thus more accessible than StarCraft is. Of course they're going to have more players and be more popular. Implying that Starcraft's skill ceiling is higher than dota and lol and that both dota and lol aren't stressful. Starcraft's skill ceiling is vastly higher than DotA/LoL. There's no arguing that. It's not even possible to get remotely within reach of Starcraft's skill ceiling though, so it is sort of a moot point. Ignoring all strategy, Starcraft's raw mechanical skill ceiling is faster than any human could ever move their hands and fingers. In pure theorycrafting, pure Marine/Medievac play hard counters Muta/Ling/Bane, but in reality that is almost never true (except at like the height of MKP or other micro-based Terrans). I find that the skill ceiling argument is overused without considering the EFFECT of higher skill. For example, SC2's skill ceiling is stupidly high, but does it actually matter? That is, does skill in the game actually produce the better player as the winner often enough? That is a factor that you have to consider side by side with skill ceiling - the effect that rising skill actually has on the game. I'm not going to get into an argument because one of us will certainly get warned/banned but I'm just going to leave it that I beieve both DotA and SC2 have similar skill ceilings. it doesn't really matter who game requires more skill. The question is, if both games require simlilar skill ceilings why are players from MOBA never good enough to compete in Starcraft? Where the inverse is probably true. Jaedong could probably be a world class Dota player if he wanted to be. But players from china and Na'vi and Alliance could never become great Starcraft players. Similar level skill ceilings in different skills, that bit should be obvious.
I'm not buying it. I just said that Naniwa, Huk, Stephano, Jaedong would be amazing dota players. If they transferred to Dota and gave it time, they would be absolutely amazing players. The same thing can not be said about Alliance and Na'vi. I bet they already tried Starcraft and failed. Not saying that Navi and Alliance aren't incredible players of Dota, because they are. But an argument CAN be made that Starcraft is the premier sport for strategy, and difficulty in computer games. Chess of course is absolutely on par with Starcraft probably exponentially more difficult than Starcraft due to its myriad of openings.
Kimi Raikkonen tried the WRC he was pretty darn good, not a champion but pretty darn good. Kimi was a champion level F1 driver. Juan Montoya was an excellent F1 driver transferred to NASCAR, who is now just in the middle of the pack of that circuit. However a WRC driver would not stand a chance in F1. And I believe that a Nascar driver would not stand a chance in F1. Yes, you are partly right, different sport, different outcomes and different rules. Flash and Jaedong are not dominating Sc2 like as they did in BW. but they are still pretty darn good and improving. Raikonen might not be the best WRC racer of all time, but he was pretty darn good and no WRC racer could ever compete in F1 competitively. As well good Starcraft 2 players like bogus, Life, Maru, Naniwa, Scarlett would not stand a a chance against Jangbi, Flash, Bisu, and Jaedong in Broodwar
|
well thats BS i was planning to go to columbus and see my first MLG in person not now
there's some few dollars lost that sundance gives precisely zero fucks about 
|
On August 11 2013 00:24 Wildmoon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 09:38 Luppy1 wrote:On August 10 2013 09:19 MVega wrote:
Mobas are addictive casual fun. StarCraft 2 is a strategy game with a fairly high skill ceiling and can be stressful. Dota and LoL are also free and thus more accessible than StarCraft is. Of course they're going to have more players and be more popular. What you're saying is not really conclusive. A free game that is crap will still be unable to retain its players. If the devs of the other games are not doing things right to begin with, their games wouldnt be nearly as successful. Attributing these games' success entirely to accessibility + free + casual is just unfair. Besides, the cost of getting WoL + HotS is so low as compared to getting subbed to WoW for just 1 year. If you look at the number of subs for WoW, it's evident that plenty of people are willing to pay money for games. So, please don't make it sound like having to pay for SC2 creates such a huge barrier, because if purchasing the game is worth it in the first place people will still do it. and SC2 sold well? What your point here? SC2 is the fastest selling RTS game of all time you know that right? It has sold over 6 million copies since it launch not including HotS. Don't compare RTS playerbase to MOBA or MMO. That's silly.
It's not hard to sell copies when it's the sequel to the greatest RTS game of all time. Diablo 3 became the fastest selling game of all time in a similar situation, and it was terrible.
|
I used to be a big Star1/Star2 guy until Dota 2 came along. Way better production (TI3 holy crap), way better UI (Valve GG), way better balance (Icefrog), more excitement and depth for each individual game and less rehashing of the same few builds over and over, way friendlier community... there are many reasons we see star2 being replaced, mainly because of the same old issues that blizzard failed to recognize/deal with since day 1 of WOL beta. Inability to watch other players/spectate in the client (really?), The awkwardness of the Zerg race in general and reliance on tech units rather than lower tier swarm units, warpgates having no downside but being a required early upgrade leading to gateway units having perilous balance, maps being nearly completely stagnant and boring, all other countries in the world pretty much irrelevant to the OSL/GSL, the mundane grinding of ladder games on the ghost town of battle.net 0.2.... I could go on but its pointless. Yes, Star2 is definitely the best RTS in the world still being played, however it has a lot of serious problems that still need to be addressed that 3+ years in, I really doubt are ever going to see changes. Sc2s balance still hasn't hit it's "nirvana" ala broodwar or even been at a point where balance isnt a major bitching point for basically the entire community. For Dota 2: Free to Play, the much better UI, the broodwar approach to balance (everything is OP), their extreme focus on production value and just enjoyment of the game, feedback and responsiveness to the community.... It feels like Valve's Dota 2 has no where to go but up. It definitely has taken my gaming and viewing time. SC2 might not be going anywhere, but it's definitely playing catchup in terms of overall production, game design and community these days.
|
On August 12 2013 09:44 Mr. Nefarious wrote:
I used to be a big Star1/Star2 guy until Dota 2 came along. Way better production (TI3 holy crap), way better UI (Valve GG), way better balance (Icefrog), more excitement and depth for each individual game and less rehashing of the same few builds over and over, way friendlier community... there are many reasons we see star2 being replaced, mainly because of the same old issues that blizzard failed to recognize/deal with since day 1 of WOL beta. Inability to watch other players/spectate in the client (really?), The awkwardness of the Zerg race in general and reliance on tech units rather than lower tier swarm units, warpgates having no downside but being a required early upgrade leading to gateway units having perilous balance, maps being nearly completely stagnant and boring, all other countries in the world pretty much irrelevant to the OSL/GSL, the mundane grinding of ladder games on the ghost town of battle.net 0.2.... I could go on but its pointless. Yes, Star2 is definitely the best RTS in the world still being played, however it has a lot of serious problems that still need to be addressed that 3+ years in, I really doubt are ever going to see changes. Sc2s balance still hasn't hit it's "nirvana" ala broodwar or even been at a point where balance isnt a major bitching point for basically the entire community. For Dota 2: Free to Play, the much better UI, the broodwar approach to balance (everything is OP), their extreme focus on production value and just enjoyment of the game, feedback and responsiveness to the community.... It feels like Valve's Dota 2 has no where to go but up. It definitely has taken my gaming and viewing time. SC2 might not be going anywhere, but it's definitely playing catchup in terms of overall production, game design and community these days.
So many things are wrong in this post.
|
On August 12 2013 11:04 TheSwamp wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 09:44 Mr. Nefarious wrote:
I used to be a big Star1/Star2 guy until Dota 2 came along. Way better production (TI3 holy crap), way better UI (Valve GG), way better balance (Icefrog), more excitement and depth for each individual game and less rehashing of the same few builds over and over, way friendlier community... there are many reasons we see star2 being replaced, mainly because of the same old issues that blizzard failed to recognize/deal with since day 1 of WOL beta. Inability to watch other players/spectate in the client (really?), The awkwardness of the Zerg race in general and reliance on tech units rather than lower tier swarm units, warpgates having no downside but being a required early upgrade leading to gateway units having perilous balance, maps being nearly completely stagnant and boring, all other countries in the world pretty much irrelevant to the OSL/GSL, the mundane grinding of ladder games on the ghost town of battle.net 0.2.... I could go on but its pointless. Yes, Star2 is definitely the best RTS in the world still being played, however it has a lot of serious problems that still need to be addressed that 3+ years in, I really doubt are ever going to see changes. Sc2s balance still hasn't hit it's "nirvana" ala broodwar or even been at a point where balance isnt a major bitching point for basically the entire community. For Dota 2: Free to Play, the much better UI, the broodwar approach to balance (everything is OP), their extreme focus on production value and just enjoyment of the game, feedback and responsiveness to the community.... It feels like Valve's Dota 2 has no where to go but up. It definitely has taken my gaming and viewing time. SC2 might not be going anywhere, but it's definitely playing catchup in terms of overall production, game design and community these days. So many things are wrong in this post.
So many are right, as well though TBH. However I don't follow LoL or DotA, SC2 all the way. However, there are so many things wrong with the scene it's pretty unbelievable.
|
On August 12 2013 09:44 Mr. Nefarious wrote:
I used to be a big Star1/Star2 guy until Dota 2 came along. Way better production (TI3 holy crap), way better UI (Valve GG), way better balance (Icefrog), more excitement and depth for each individual game and less rehashing of the same few builds over and over, way friendlier community... there are many reasons we see star2 being replaced, mainly because of the same old issues that blizzard failed to recognize/deal with since day 1 of WOL beta. Inability to watch other players/spectate in the client (really?), The awkwardness of the Zerg race in general and reliance on tech units rather than lower tier swarm units, warpgates having no downside but being a required early upgrade leading to gateway units having perilous balance, maps being nearly completely stagnant and boring, all other countries in the world pretty much irrelevant to the OSL/GSL, the mundane grinding of ladder games on the ghost town of battle.net 0.2.... I could go on but its pointless. Yes, Star2 is definitely the best RTS in the world still being played, however it has a lot of serious problems that still need to be addressed that 3+ years in, I really doubt are ever going to see changes. Sc2s balance still hasn't hit it's "nirvana" ala broodwar or even been at a point where balance isnt a major bitching point for basically the entire community. For Dota 2: Free to Play, the much better UI, the broodwar approach to balance (everything is OP), their extreme focus on production value and just enjoyment of the game, feedback and responsiveness to the community.... It feels like Valve's Dota 2 has no where to go but up. It definitely has taken my gaming and viewing time. SC2 might not be going anywhere, but it's definitely playing catchup in terms of overall production, game design and community these days.
Have to agree with most of this after watching TI3. The production just blew away any SC2 tournament. SC2 could really use F2P with cosmetic purchases, tournament purchases to add to the prize pool, the ability to watch tournaments in game with casting audio, etc. With Blizzard's size they should be able to push some of this stuff out in a few short weeks but they are far too slow and indecisive to react.
|
I find hard to watch any moba game. Seems fun to play, but bad to watch. They have a lot of audience because they have a ton of players.
Maybe the problem is Blizzard being too big and with various projects at same time. While Dota2 seems to be the main focus of Valve (no Half-Life 3 news for a long time...). And this is a serious problem, because it is the DNA of company that need to change, rather than just make one game better.
|
On August 12 2013 13:48 Spectreman wrote:
I find hard to watch any moba game. Seems fun to play, but bad to watch. They have a lot of audience because they have a ton of players.
Maybe the problem is Blizzard being too big and with various projects at same time. While Dota2 seems to be the main focus of Valve (no Half-Life 3 news for a long time...). And this is a serious problem, because it is the DNA of company that need to change, rather than just make one game better.
This is how I felt until I actually sat down and watched a few games. TI3 had far more exciting back and forth games, comebacks from behind, miracle wins, nail-biting games, etc. than most of SC2. I think it's just a better game to watch  Which makes me a little sad because I still love SC2.
"They have a lot of audience because they have a ton of players." is ignoring the core reasons of why so many people like the game.
|
Is possible. If a SC2 caster, like TB, start to cast Dota 2, I will try to watch for more time.
|
Edit 3:
Scott Smith @SirScoots 5m
BREAKING: Sources close to SSNN report that Red Bull has been granted a SC2 license for the same dates @MLG requested. They asked first
thank you for these edits! that makes it a lot less stressful for starcraft fans. awesome news for us!
|
On August 12 2013 17:33 Avos5 wrote:Show nested quote +Edit 3:
Scott Smith @SirScoots 5m
BREAKING: Sources close to SSNN report that Red Bull has been granted a SC2 license for the same dates @MLG requested. They asked first thank you for these edits! that makes it a lot less stressful for starcraft fans. awesome news for us! stressful?
|
On August 12 2013 05:55 chatuka wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 05:47 Targe wrote:On August 12 2013 05:32 chatuka wrote:On August 12 2013 05:30 Targe wrote:On August 12 2013 05:01 MVega wrote:On August 12 2013 03:03 Targe wrote:On August 10 2013 09:19 MVega wrote:
Mobas are addictive casual fun. StarCraft 2 is a strategy game with a fairly high skill ceiling and can be stressful. Dota and LoL are also free and thus more accessible than StarCraft is. Of course they're going to have more players and be more popular. Implying that Starcraft's skill ceiling is higher than dota and lol and that both dota and lol aren't stressful. I don't have to imply it, I'll outright say it. It's nearly impossible to deny that an RTS game like StarCraft has a higher skill ceiling than mobas. Just by the nature of controlling multiple things at the same time and microing and macroing versus controlling one unit. The challenge in mobas is team coordination. There are a few genres with higher skill ceilings than mobas, and that's not me talking any shit about mobas. It's not shameful that they have a much lower skill ceiling, that's part of their appeal to the casual audience, that's a huge part of why they're so popular and so easy to get into. On August 12 2013 04:48 dcemuser wrote:On August 12 2013 03:03 Targe wrote:On August 10 2013 09:19 MVega wrote:
Mobas are addictive casual fun. StarCraft 2 is a strategy game with a fairly high skill ceiling and can be stressful. Dota and LoL are also free and thus more accessible than StarCraft is. Of course they're going to have more players and be more popular. Implying that Starcraft's skill ceiling is higher than dota and lol and that both dota and lol aren't stressful. Starcraft's skill ceiling is vastly higher than DotA/LoL. There's no arguing that. It's not even possible to get remotely within reach of Starcraft's skill ceiling though, so it is sort of a moot point. Ignoring all strategy, Starcraft's raw mechanical skill ceiling is faster than any human could ever move their hands and fingers. In pure theorycrafting, pure Marine/Medievac play hard counters Muta/Ling/Bane, but in reality that is almost never true (except at like the height of MKP or other micro-based Terrans). I find that the skill ceiling argument is overused without considering the EFFECT of higher skill. For example, SC2's skill ceiling is stupidly high, but does it actually matter? That is, does skill in the game actually produce the better player as the winner often enough? That is a factor that you have to consider side by side with skill ceiling - the effect that rising skill actually has on the game. I'm not going to get into an argument because one of us will certainly get warned/banned but I'm just going to leave it that I beieve both DotA and SC2 have similar skill ceilings. it doesn't really matter who game requires more skill. The question is, if both games require simlilar skill ceilings why are players from MOBA never good enough to compete in Starcraft? Where the inverse is probably true. Jaedong could probably be a world class Dota player if he wanted to be. But players from china and Na'vi and Alliance could never become great Starcraft players. Similar level skill ceilings in different skills, that bit should be obvious. I'm not buying it. I just said that Naniwa, Huk, Stephano, Jaedong would be amazing dota players. If they transferred to Dota and gave it time, they would be absolutely amazing players. The same thing can not be said about Alliance and Na'vi. I bet they already tried Starcraft and failed. Not saying that Navi and Alliance aren't incredible players of Dota, because they are. But an argument CAN be made that Starcraft is the premier sport for strategy, and difficulty in computer games. Chess of course is absolutely on par with Starcraft probably exponentially more difficult than Starcraft due to its myriad of openings. Kimi Raikkonen tried the WRC he was pretty darn good, not a champion but pretty darn good. Kimi was a champion level F1 driver. Juan Montoya was an excellent F1 driver transferred to NASCAR, who is now just in the middle of the pack of that circuit. However a WRC driver would not stand a chance in F1. And I believe that a Nascar driver would not stand a chance in F1. Yes, you are partly right, different sport, different outcomes and different rules. Flash and Jaedong are not dominating Sc2 like as they did in BW. but they are still pretty darn good and improving. Raikonen might not be the best WRC racer of all time, but he was pretty darn good and no WRC racer could ever compete in F1 competitively. As well good Starcraft 2 players like bogus, Life, Maru, Naniwa, Scarlett would not stand a a chance against Jangbi, Flash, Bisu, and Jaedong in Broodwar
Are you saying me that F1 is harder than WRC? Lol. I think it otherway: wrc>f. In f1 road is always same but in wrc road is always different
Btw. Kimi have raced with rally cars whole his life. He was not "newcomer" to rally.
|
On August 12 2013 05:55 chatuka wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 05:47 Targe wrote:On August 12 2013 05:32 chatuka wrote:On August 12 2013 05:30 Targe wrote:On August 12 2013 05:01 MVega wrote:On August 12 2013 03:03 Targe wrote:On August 10 2013 09:19 MVega wrote:
Mobas are addictive casual fun. StarCraft 2 is a strategy game with a fairly high skill ceiling and can be stressful. Dota and LoL are also free and thus more accessible than StarCraft is. Of course they're going to have more players and be more popular. Implying that Starcraft's skill ceiling is higher than dota and lol and that both dota and lol aren't stressful. I don't have to imply it, I'll outright say it. It's nearly impossible to deny that an RTS game like StarCraft has a higher skill ceiling than mobas. Just by the nature of controlling multiple things at the same time and microing and macroing versus controlling one unit. The challenge in mobas is team coordination. There are a few genres with higher skill ceilings than mobas, and that's not me talking any shit about mobas. It's not shameful that they have a much lower skill ceiling, that's part of their appeal to the casual audience, that's a huge part of why they're so popular and so easy to get into. On August 12 2013 04:48 dcemuser wrote:On August 12 2013 03:03 Targe wrote:On August 10 2013 09:19 MVega wrote:
Mobas are addictive casual fun. StarCraft 2 is a strategy game with a fairly high skill ceiling and can be stressful. Dota and LoL are also free and thus more accessible than StarCraft is. Of course they're going to have more players and be more popular. Implying that Starcraft's skill ceiling is higher than dota and lol and that both dota and lol aren't stressful. Starcraft's skill ceiling is vastly higher than DotA/LoL. There's no arguing that. It's not even possible to get remotely within reach of Starcraft's skill ceiling though, so it is sort of a moot point. Ignoring all strategy, Starcraft's raw mechanical skill ceiling is faster than any human could ever move their hands and fingers. In pure theorycrafting, pure Marine/Medievac play hard counters Muta/Ling/Bane, but in reality that is almost never true (except at like the height of MKP or other micro-based Terrans). I find that the skill ceiling argument is overused without considering the EFFECT of higher skill. For example, SC2's skill ceiling is stupidly high, but does it actually matter? That is, does skill in the game actually produce the better player as the winner often enough? That is a factor that you have to consider side by side with skill ceiling - the effect that rising skill actually has on the game. I'm not going to get into an argument because one of us will certainly get warned/banned but I'm just going to leave it that I beieve both DotA and SC2 have similar skill ceilings. it doesn't really matter who game requires more skill. The question is, if both games require simlilar skill ceilings why are players from MOBA never good enough to compete in Starcraft? Where the inverse is probably true. Jaedong could probably be a world class Dota player if he wanted to be. But players from china and Na'vi and Alliance could never become great Starcraft players. Similar level skill ceilings in different skills, that bit should be obvious. I'm not buying it. I just said that Naniwa, Huk, Stephano, Jaedong would be amazing dota players. If they transferred to Dota and gave it time, they would be absolutely amazing players. The same thing can not be said about Alliance and Na'vi. I bet they already tried Starcraft and failed. Not saying that Navi and Alliance aren't incredible players of Dota, because they are. But an argument CAN be made that Starcraft is the premier sport for strategy, and difficulty in computer games. Chess of course is absolutely on par with Starcraft probably exponentially more difficult than Starcraft due to its myriad of openings. Kimi Raikkonen tried the WRC he was pretty darn good, not a champion but pretty darn good. Kimi was a champion level F1 driver. Juan Montoya was an excellent F1 driver transferred to NASCAR, who is now just in the middle of the pack of that circuit. However a WRC driver would not stand a chance in F1. And I believe that a Nascar driver would not stand a chance in F1. Yes, you are partly right, different sport, different outcomes and different rules. Flash and Jaedong are not dominating Sc2 like as they did in BW. but they are still pretty darn good and improving. Raikonen might not be the best WRC racer of all time, but he was pretty darn good and no WRC racer could ever compete in F1 competitively. As well good Starcraft 2 players like bogus, Life, Maru, Naniwa, Scarlett would not stand a a chance against Jangbi, Flash, Bisu, and Jaedong in Broodwar
select tried dota and he was fucking awful even with prior dota experience
|
On August 12 2013 17:33 Avos5 wrote:Show nested quote +Edit 3:
Scott Smith @SirScoots 5m
BREAKING: Sources close to SSNN report that Red Bull has been granted a SC2 license for the same dates @MLG requested. They asked first thank you for these edits! that makes it a lot less stressful for starcraft fans. awesome news for us!
Just in case you didnt know, MLG never asked for the license in the first place. Redbull didnt "ask first", they were the only ones that asked.
Its discussed in this thread in detail.
|
On August 12 2013 03:03 Targe wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2013 09:19 MVega wrote:
Mobas are addictive casual fun. StarCraft 2 is a strategy game with a fairly high skill ceiling and can be stressful. Dota and LoL are also free and thus more accessible than StarCraft is. Of course they're going to have more players and be more popular. Implying that Starcraft's skill ceiling is higher than dota and lol and that both dota and lol aren't stressful.
In a moba you control a single unit. In an RTS you (usually) control whole armies, production and resource management. By design, RTS games are more difficult.
On a personal level: I tried playing League of Legends and Dota2, but both games bore me to tears.
|
The game is as hard as the person you play against imo. Pretty obvious that versus the best you need countless of hours of training to even compete at highest levels. It is just bs to say that one game is harder than the other because if you want to compete vs the very best you need to give your 3000% regardless of the game you are playing. Starcraft 2 is also easy as heck if you play vs the worst bronze league hero and impossibly hard when you play vs a top korean. Also both games are so different that you can't compare, both games use different skills, but it does not mean that the one is harder then the other. If you think League of Legens is easy take your random PUG baboonteam and try winning vs TSM or something, that is as hard as trying to beat Rain or Flash, I can give you that.
On topic: Sad for SC2 but Valve is just way upping their game as they actually listen to people and the game is insanely popular because of that. An everchanging game vs a stale game where players feedback are never taken into account. yes it sold a ton but so did diablo 3 and we all know how bad that game is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
