EPTAll these new RTS, are they taking away from SC2?
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
CicadaSC
United States1982 Posts
| ||
|
Balnazza
Germany1337 Posts
A good chunk of SC2 players (including Serral even) played the game at some point. But since it never truely found traction, I don't think any active SC2-pro switched over. I think the only exception is Demu(slim), who might cast less now that he is a AoE 4 pro for Liquid, but I'm not even sure about that. Leenock was also the case of a player who switched over, but eventually quit both games. It was however cool to see a lot of the Aussies play it, including names like Iaguz, Azure and Seither. Kelazhur also played AoE 4 quite a bit, but I think that was during the break between two EPT Seasons. As soon as SC2 got more "serious" again, he eventually stayed with us. SC2 players who are still very invested into AoE 4 are VortiX and LucifroN, but of course they are retired from SC2 for quite a while. they even had a career in Heroes in the meantime As for AoE 4 vs. AoE 2: AoE 4 apparently attracted some of the AoE 1 and 3 players over, but the bulk of AoE 2 players stayed. Sure, Viper, Hera and co. all played AoE 4 int he beginning, but eventually, they all made the decision to only compete in one game - AoE 2. I think some of the russians still play both games though. So I don't think more RTS that aren't really working would hurt SC2 that match. On their release-weeks for sure, ladder will probably be slower, pros will stream the new games a lot etc. But if there isn't enough hype, viewership and prizemoney, I will assume that no SC2 pro will actually stay. There is of course the possibility that a few of the lower-tier players would go if the money is good enough that they can earn more of it with the new game instead of being in the Top 50+ of SC2, but that would be a minority. | ||
|
NoobSkills
United States1603 Posts
| ||
|
lestye
United States4228 Posts
And with Blizzard not supporting SC2, I think that people want. New shiny game for new, young people to jump onto, and older fans who want something fresh. | ||
|
Gescom
Canada3513 Posts
| ||
|
NoobSkills
United States1603 Posts
On July 01 2024 13:07 lestye wrote: I mean, probably. I think people go into SC2 because of its modern take on the RTS genre with new controls, netcode, presentation and support. And with Blizzard not supporting SC2, I think that people want. New shiny game for new, young people to jump onto, and older fans who want something fresh. netcode? Sc2? You mean the product that is inferior to the previous title's private servers made near 2 decades ago? Controls - sure Presentation - pretty graphics, but poorly optimzed? Support - Lol? | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7350 Posts
Ragnarok already said GSL is coming to an end with a high probability. If price money around the globe takes another cut, who knows | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27250 Posts
On July 01 2024 13:31 NoobSkills wrote: netcode? Sc2? You mean the product that is inferior to the previous title's private servers made near 2 decades ago? Controls - sure Presentation - pretty graphics, but poorly optimzed? Support - Lol? Is SC2 poorly optimised? I first started playing it on my iMac that was a couple of years old when WoL came out, one of the few vaguely contemporary games I got decent performance out of. As was generally the case with Blizz games and our family’s various Macs over the years. There’s perhaps some well-known issues that the wider community have had over the years that I’m unaware of and perhaps it does have some issues, but they’d be new to me. Whether their support was always the right support, I mean sure that’s a reasonable discussion. But the core game got plenty of love over a pretty long period, plus ofc the pro scene so I dunno if I’d totally laugh off that element | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12491 Posts
| ||
|
lestye
United States4228 Posts
On July 01 2024 13:31 NoobSkills wrote: netcode? Sc2? You mean the product that is inferior to the previous title's private servers made near 2 decades ago? Controls - sure Presentation - pretty graphics, but poorly optimzed? Support - Lol? Yeah netcode. Battle.net's netcode was pretty awful....hence why people went onto private servers. I don't think SC2 was "poorly optimized". I'd love to see if you have a review from 2010-2012 that remarked on "poorly optimized". And yeah, support. Blizzard wasn't really putting out much content or patches with Starcraft or WC3 on or around 2010. They put millions of dollars into prize money into SC's pro scene, whereas before 2010, Blizzard might put up like maybe 20-40k figures for a showmatch in a given year. | ||
|
Biedrik
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
Die4Ever
United States17744 Posts
 | ||
|
luxon
United States117 Posts
so Serral wont switch because sc2 $ > new rts $, but a lot of tier 2 pros will because for them new rts $ > sc2 $. this was true for sc1 -> sc2 too, for almost the entirety of WoL, only the tier 2 broodwar pros moved over. true now for tennis too, you'll never see Djokovic picking up a pickleball paddle, but a ton of tier 2 tennis players have moved over because they can make more playing pickleball. as for the casual scene, yeah player base will be split, but that's just how games work. studios are always trying to make bigger and better games and it's a good thing. if these new games dont pull any players from sc over, no studio will ever make an rts again. Well they took Parting away from us Yeah this really bummed me out as a parting fan, but this is also because parting played thousands of games upon his return and couldn't break 6.1k, and he is the top stormgate player right now by a massive mmr margin, so it's better $ for him. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17735 Posts
On July 01 2024 18:10 lestye wrote: Yeah netcode. Battle.net's netcode was pretty awful....hence why people went onto private servers. I don't think SC2 was "poorly optimized". I'd love to see if you have a review from 2010-2012 that remarked on "poorly optimized". Ya, that awesome gamespy netcode is why C&C3 and 4 were so popular for so long and no one bothered with SC2 in 2010. Relative to its competitors SC2 was superior. That is why it outsold everything from August 2010 onwards. SC2 , including multiplayer, was incredible in 2010. If the game was garbage in 2010 relative to other RTS games then it would not sell after July ends. The game was great and it sold great. | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3531 Posts
| ||
|
SmoKim
Denmark10305 Posts
And i still fail to see any upcomming RTS even getting close to SC2 flow, patchfinding, graffics/art design and responsives design etc. And i think many competitve RTS fans feel the same. Unless a player is "done" with SC2, i don´t see many "move on" for good. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
Especially those who didn't hesitate to throw us under the bus for saudi $$$. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27250 Posts
On July 04 2024 15:23 Cyro wrote: It's my opinion that the dudes propping up the rotting corpse of sc2 like a scarecrow are taking away from those new games - and much more importantly, the RTS scene as a whole. Especially those who didn't hesitate to throw us under the bus for saudi $$$. People may still prefer the 14 year old rotting corpse to its competitors, which is the crux of the problem really. Hell I’ve not just spiritually kept with SC2, I’ve decided to say fuck it, Reforged was a bloody mess but I kinda wanna play WC3 again. If I’m not left in a scenario where veterans are just brutalising me I’m more enthused by the prospect of relearning that game after 15+ years of absence than some of these new titles. Agreed on the bolded though | ||
Waxangel
United States33672 Posts
If any of these successor games achieve some kind of 'real' success, then the story changes. | ||
|
lestye
United States4228 Posts
On July 04 2024 03:36 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Ya, that awesome gamespy netcode is why C&C3 and 4 were so popular for so long and no one bothered with SC2 in 2010. Relative to its competitors SC2 was superior. That is why it outsold everything from August 2010 onwards. SC2 , including multiplayer, was incredible in 2010. If the game was garbage in 2010 relative to other RTS games then it would not sell after July ends. The game was great and it sold great. By netcode I was referring to the person I was quoting talking about BW/WC3's netcode, which had the built in delay because they were built for dial-up modems in mind. Hence why those communities had to go outside of battle.net and use plugins like LatencyChanger. SC2 was the first Blizzard RTS without such restrictions. | ||
|
MegaBuster
167 Posts
Then the game bombs into the fucking ground after release. With everyone watching. Yea I'm just using my imagination but if there was a company like they would probably do a ton of damage. If I was an investment firm person I'd probably be citing a catastrophe like that for the rest of my career and I would make sure to not get involved in funding anything like that game. I also can imagine if there was a company like that they could also do some damage by freezing any problem solving in the StarCraft community for 4 years while everyone waited for the company which was pretending to have the answers. Ah gosh then meanwhile what if it turns out the company is a bunch of rank amateurs who spend half their time teaching themselves Unreal from fucking Udemy courses. That would suck! Or like what if a company did multiple fundraising campaigns at scale which siphoned giant amounts of financial resources off from the culture they said they were going to serve. That would be bad. Or like what if the people from that company tried to pitch a new RTS internally at Blizzard and failed but knew they were going to try to start another company so they set up StarCraft to fail by installing a non-StarCraft playing oaf to run things— in effect destabilizing their main competitor for the foreseeable future. That one would definitely fuck up StarCraft. Oh gosh what if this company incubated a toxically positive community like one of those NFT ones and all these people who thought they were doing the right thing buzzed around fucking up the culture and the discourse. That might be bad. Or what if the game the new company made was such an abhorrent parody of the genre that it deeply demoralized people about the possibilities of future RTS games and their ability to experience joy from them. Damn any of these things could be really bad individually, I hope no one does all of them at once! Anyways this is why its nice that Uncapped just quietly made Battle Aces, pushed it out to people a few weeks after announcing it while running their business politely and responsibly. Conversely, as I've imagined here, there are many things a company could do to damage things if they only cared about themselves and their own success. And I didn't even use my full imagination in order to keep this short— believe it or not! | ||
| ||
