EPTYou had me at Spaghettification.
Razzia of the Blizzsters - Page 24
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Warning for everyone in this thread: I WILL moderate your posts very harshly from now on if you can't have a civil discussion. | ||
|
xtorn
4060 Posts
You had me at Spaghettification. | ||
|
NukeD
Croatia1612 Posts
On April 19 2016 03:05 The_Red_Viper wrote: The article i linked didn't change the game no, but at least it got a response out of blizzard because it was written in a way people can actually discuss the arguments presented without having to interprete a lot of poor wording (in the context of such an article, this type of prose is simply bad for the purpose this text maybe had) Nothing to do with "mature" or not, if you wanna rgue that presentation isn't important than you are simply wrong. Coherent structure and language is extremely important, we don't wanna read flowery and abstract wording for an article which is about game design, that stuff belongs in other forms of literature. Not even pointing out the problems of his argumentation itself, it's all in this thread already, no need to start from the beginning again. As i said before there are better blogs/articles/posts about sc2's problems and these weren't presented in the most narcissistic way possible (and usually they had more meat as well), which is why they are far superior. But yeah sure, if you are going into this with the mindset of "blizzard sucks anyway", you probably can have fun with it i guess. When I read the OP I also felt the urge be a smartass about his writing but I decided not to and because, to be honest with myself, it is probably because I am jealous of his great writing skill and I get the feeling this is exactly why you are somewhat triggered by it. Do I think he could have been more down to earth with this article? Yeah I do, but why I do find it a great post nevertheless is because he does bring a new perspective to where the game fails and he does have something intelligent to say, unlike a lot of pretentious people here that just want to show off their writing skills and present nothing of substance. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On April 19 2016 03:17 Incognoto wrote: The thing is that you and many other skeptics are going into this with the mindset of "this post sucks anyway". The style and form is admittedly very dry and harsh, that's how the author wants to convey his points. If you're attacking the form more than the actual content, then that to me indicates that you don't understand (or don't want to understand) the content in the first place. If you're writing a protest article (which is what this is), you aren't going to sugar coat what you're saying, are you? The content itself has some pretty solid general points, though if you want to choose to completely ignore them, then why are you even in this thread? Read again what i wrote, i actually said he has some points, but because of his abstract style there isn't a lot of meat to it in any form. He likes his wording a little bit noo much, it's self-defeating for the actual purpose of articles about game design. The thing is that you and many other skeptics are going into this with the mindset of "this post sucks anyway" That's nonsense, why should anybody do that? The post "sucks" because it has a lot of words in it without saying a lot at the same time. I would maybe enjoy his prose when it would actually benefit the topic, it doesn't here. If you're attacking the form more than the actual content, then that to me indicates that you don't understand (or don't want to understand) the content in the first place The "content" presented in this post was presented far superior in other blogs/articles/posts. In these the author didn't try to look smart, he/she just presented evidence for the thesis and argued with actual points. Dwf does this to some extent as well, but never as precise and cohesive as it should be. As i said before, i won't go into detail why a lot of his points aren't even that good to begin with because a lot of people already did it in this very thread, no need to start from the beginning here. On April 19 2016 03:34 NukeD wrote: When I read the OP I also felt the urge be a smartass about his writing but I decided not to and because, to be honest with myself, it is probably because I am jealous of his great writing skill and I get the feeling this is exactly why you are somewhat triggered by it. Do I think he could have been more down to earth with this article? Yeah I do, but why I do find it a great post nevertheless is because he does bring a new perspective to where the game fails and he does have something intelligent to say, unlike a lot of pretentious people here that just want to show off their writing skills and present nothing of substance. I don't agree with this. There os nothing particularly new about this post, it simply collects a lot of ideas which were brought up countless times before and presents it in the most narcissistic way possible. It's almost like he thinks he is an sc2 philosopher. Is there some substance to be found in this mess? Yeah sure but any really skilled writer would have needed a third of the words to convey the points and that probably with more actual meat for the arguments as well. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On April 19 2016 03:40 The_Red_Viper wrote: There os nothing particularly new about this post, it simply collects a lot of ideas which were brought up countless times before and presents it in the most narcissistic way possible. I don't understand why you seem to be reading narcissism into the post. Does his word choice strike you as pretentious, therefore you extend that and take it as narcissism? I see a collection of well-explained comcepts, but I see the OP talk about himself at no point in the article, because it's not about him, it's about the game. Tell me where I'm wrong, because I simply don't see what you're seeing. When you finally get over the narcissism you read into his text, feel free to come back and discuss the content itself, but you don't seem particularly interested in it, you seem perfectly content to get upset about how someone words his phrases. This post is a good one not because it says something nobody has said before, but because it collects all these things people have been saying throughout the years, and puts it all together in one place. I've tried writing posts about all the things I feel are wrong with SC2, and I can only ever think of a handful of things at once, the OP has managed to take all these different things and take the time to compile them, that's huge. It lets me point to one thread, and one thread alone, and say "here's what I don't like about the way SC2 is headed". Put form aside, address the content. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
Using your own norm of how it should be written to sell this article as worthless just shows that you're superficially adopting a posture in order not to see the points made in the article. | ||
|
iloveav
Poland1478 Posts
On April 18 2016 18:45 OtherWorld wrote: I think that's what would happen if/when Blizzard stops throwing money at SC2 to sustain its pro scene Oh dont worry, they will stop. By now Blizzard most likely is not thinking "how can we get SC2 to become popular again", but rather "How do we make more money from it?" At least that seems to be the case for Nova cover ops missions. | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24193 Posts
On April 19 2016 05:57 OtherWorld wrote: Back when this article came out I didn't understand how people could have major issues with this article, and I still don't understand how. Yes, it's not written like a scientific article, we all get that, and, guess what, I'm pretty sure it wasn't intended to be written like a scientific article. Yes, it's not based on analyzing numbers and doing pretty graphs ; it's based on more or less abstract ideas, based on what's beyond the numbers that other articles could analyze. Nonetheless, this has a logical construction, valid points, and is frankly not that hard to read : arguments are clearly expressed and logical links are most of the time well explained. Using your own norm of how it should be written to sell this article as worthless just shows that you're superficially adopting a posture in order not to see the points made in the article. The article still holds up very well and is -to my taste- pleasant to read. But reading the thread again I could understand why some people would dismiss TheDwf as an arrogant brat  . | ||
|
marttorn
Norway5211 Posts
| ||
|
mikedebo
Canada4341 Posts
On April 19 2016 06:42 marttorn wrote: As long as you agree with most of the points I don't see why the tone would be a problem. I agree with the points and I think the article is straight garbage. It reads like someone in their first year read Romantic-era literature after subsisting solely on diet of Dragonlance for their entire childhood... and decided that it was the pinnacle of modern literature and of course we'll sound so dignified if we write like that. For 100000 paragraphs more than necessary. Anyhow, I didn't realize TheDwf had poofed. "oh well" | ||
|
B-royal
Belgium1330 Posts
On April 19 2016 03:14 InfCereal wrote: @BronzeKnee You've clearly never worked in software development. Do me a favor, go try to build something. Doesn't matter what. Tell me when you start so I can start spewing vitriol every step of the way. See how motivated you are to keep working on your product. Blizzard is not a person. There are people behind that title, and they have to sludge through all this negative shit about their game any time they go online. Developing is so largely mental, and without motivation your productivity is going to drop fucking 80% or more. Why in the world would someone want to put their 120% into a game seemingly no one enjoys in the least? Of course they're demoralized. Starcraft is a fucking great game, but no one ever says that. Everyone has their own dream version of the game, and they're not even remotely happy with the game until it reaches that fantasy. The only positive feed back you see from the community are "This is so much better than hots", followed by "Here's why it's still shit". Yeah, good luck keeping your head above the water in that environment. They don't even have the luxury of being a top esport anymore for that ego boost. LOL. They're a multimillion dollar company. They get PAID appropriately to deliver the best RTS in the world. If the current team isn't up to the challenge, hire a better one! If there's so much vitriol, maybe it's time to actually start listening. They could of course also just give it another 5 years, by which time these fervent people's passion will have dwindled down to all but nothing. | ||
|
nick00bot
326 Posts
| ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15929 Posts
| ||
|
imre
France9263 Posts
| ||
|
riotjune
United States3393 Posts
| ||
|
ZerglingSoup
United States346 Posts
| ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5217 Posts
On April 19 2016 03:14 InfCereal wrote: @BronzeKnee You've clearly never worked in software development. Do me a favor, go try to build something. Doesn't matter what. Tell me when you start so I can start spewing vitriol every step of the way. See how motivated you are to keep working on your product. Blizzard is not a person. There are people behind that title, and they have to sludge through all this negative shit about their game any time they go online. Developing is so largely mental, and without motivation your productivity is going to drop fucking 80% or more. Why in the world would someone want to put their 120% into a game seemingly no one enjoys in the least? Of course they're demoralized. Starcraft is a fucking great game, but no one ever says that. Everyone has their own dream version of the game, and they're not even remotely happy with the game until it reaches that fantasy. The only positive feed back you see from the community are "This is so much better than hots", followed by "Here's why it's still shit". Yeah, good luck keeping your head above the water in that environment. They don't even have the luxury of being a top esport anymore for that ego boost. Hey bro, I work in software development, not that that matters, and I'm going to school for a masters in IT. Want to play one of my games? Want to see how I deal with criticism? See it, first hand: http://www.diplomunion.com/index.php?forums/coth/ A lot of people criticize COTH endlessly, but I enjoy it and encourage and thank them for it because it makes the game better. SC2 isn't about the design team and their egos, just like COTH isn't about me, it is about the game so criticism is a good thing. And who cares how it is is presented. No one cares, you can't hurt my feelings and I don't need endless kind comments, I'm a big boy. And a good idea is a good idea, so it makes the cut, no matter how it is presented. Because that is what is required to make a good game, don't give me this demotivating garbage. That is an excuse people use to justify failure, they blame someone else for why they failed. I don't believe in failure. And far less people play COTH, but I don't need a certain number of people to play to do a good job. I created what I wanted to play, and it just so happens a lot of people love it too. So go to my forum, and spit whatever you want. Anyone successful in life leaves a path of losers and haters in their wake, and you can join the club if you want, I honestly don't care what you do. To do anything great in the world, you only have to care about a single opinion, your own. And then you go and make something great. You cannot demotivate me, at all. It's impossible, I'm too proud to let you control me. Because I control me, and honestly I don't care at all what you think. What you say changes nothing, because I decide how I feel, at all times. That is called mental fortitude, it is the attitude you have to have to be a champion at anything. Everyone who becomes a champion in anything becomes one in their own mind first, then goes out and shows the world. Ask one. Or better yet, read Mind Gym: http://www.amazon.com/Mind-Gym-Athletes-Guide-Excellence/dp/0071395970 So visit my forum, I get plenty of statements that would demotivate Blizzard, but this is also the kind of feedback I get: "Bronze you are a f*cking genius you know that." But I knew that before I made the game, because I am a champion in my own mind. And nothing you or anyone says or does is going to change that. | ||
|
NukeD
Croatia1612 Posts
You also sound very dramatic in your post, like reading a selfhelp book. Funny but I agree. | ||
|
AbouSV
Germany1278 Posts
The idea is that most of you have to stop with numbers and 'precise data' that are actually much more wrong than explained ideas as given here. And also On April 19 2016 03:34 NukeD wrote: When I read the OP I also felt the urge be a smartass about his writing but I decided not to and because, to be honest with myself, it is probably because I am jealous of his great writing skill and I get the feeling this is exactly why you are somewhat triggered by it. Do I think he could have been more down to earth with this article? Yeah I do, but why I do find it a great post nevertheless is because he does bring a new perspective to where the game fails and he does have something intelligent to say, unlike a lot of pretentious people here that just want to show off their writing skills and present nothing of substance. This have been proven true several time between your post and mine already... | ||
|
Penev
28475 Posts
On April 19 2016 06:42 marttorn wrote: The article is actually really excellent in my opinion, I'm glad it was bumped so I could find it. As long as you agree with most of the points I don't see why the tone would be a problem. If you disagree, I guess you're more likely to use the tone/style as an excuse to dismiss it. The truth is, it's a pretty thorough and very reasonable critique of SC2 as a whole. The italics part appears to be true but it shouldn't be, I wish more people weren't so closed minded. Even if you disagree with everything in an article like this (including style) you could still learn from it, widen your own view about arguments discussed. Some people seem to take opinions of others they don't agree with as personal attacks which is, well, disappointing. | ||
|
Toxi78
966 Posts
some of the points made are really misleading though, such as what was said about football: there is a huge survival bias in the sports/hobbies that have survived from a few hundred years ago. history (and time) is the greatest producer of "intelligent design", through tinkering and trial-and-error. it is however impossible to adopt this approach on a MICRO scale, that is, creating the best game YOU want to. on the other hand, there is no doubt it is the same process that decides which games are popular when it comes to the entire market. the points about the game: I don't see the point in writing a 20 page essay about the alpha version of an expansion, of course everything is changing! and cherry-picking that ONE demuslim game destroys the post, who the hell is gonna cheese and practitce early timings in a beta version? it's totally stupid, you want to get a feel for the economy and late game before anyone else, not for the stupid cheese that will be patched if it's too strong... a lot of the post only holds if you accept that "contraction" idea. 1 year down the road we see that this is simply not true, the only difference is that we get to the same situation as we used to but more or less 10 minutes earlier. trust me, this really isn't hard on pros mechanically... talking about "strategy" and "mechanics" in an abstract way serves little purpose, there is no metric to compare these in and across games: you can't prove your point. one can made the opposite point and say that what looks like mechanics is mostly just a result of the strategy, if one guy has "much more stuff", it's often the result of his really good decisions. thinking you can just 1A at the highest level of the game is dillusional. even in masters league really... | ||
| ||
