EPTStarcraft Declining in Korea - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Alizee-
United States845 Posts
| ||
|
anch
United States5457 Posts
Nothing lasts forever =/ Tournament and leagues are doing big favor for Blizzard, they need some mutuality. | ||
|
FusionCutter
Canada974 Posts
| ||
|
moebius_string
United States264 Posts
On May 21 2008 09:40 anch wrote: Hanbit is the worst team to watch, no one is surprised. Nothing lasts forever =/ Tournament and leagues are doing big favor for Blizzard, they need some mutuality. I think Activision/Blizzard may have it the other way around. The proof is in the pudding. We have two things to wait for: 1.)beta 2.)activision/blizzard esport business strategy AKA-big picture | ||
|
Wizard
Poland5055 Posts
On May 21 2008 09:06 Last Romantic wrote: Personalities are decidedly lacking. I cannot find it within me to cheer for Lucifer instead of Nal_rA, 815 instead of YellOw, Violet instead of Reach - ok, maybe Lucifer's interesting, and yeah, 815 pulls some nice moves - but they're just not the charismatic star-types. I agree: look at the scene right now and show me what good player right now has charisma. there we go - none. We have good players, such as Flash, but they are boring. The overall talent is stagnating, or so it seems, along with it the awesome personalities that we associate with pro's. Think about it; once you think about a dominant player right now, who comes to your mind? Flash. That's it. True, there's Jaedong and there's Mind, Jangbi, etc. Are these players that good? compare at their prime iloveoov, Nada, sAviOr, Nal_rA. These progamers had skill, they had charisma: they were exciting to watch. I can't say the same right now. "oh, Flash is playing. ok, macro terran -> win." That wasn't aimed to be a negative comment at Flash, macro style, or terran, but the point is, players are so boring now. True, they win - but it's so predictable. Perhaps it's something that comes along with the game being around ten years: there is still innovation but not to the degree we used to see. I'm sure some people will try to quote me and prove me wrong, but there's no denying it: sc pro-gaming isn't as exciting anymore as it used to be. ^ that was disorganized but w/e | ||
|
d.arkive
United States843 Posts
| ||
|
Zzoram
Canada7115 Posts
It's definitely fun for the fans to see a single unit rack up the kills, and narrowly evade death time and time again. | ||
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
| ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
Korea IS Starcraft. And right now they sense that the sequel is close by. so by pure instinct they stop watching sc1 and slowly awaits SC2. or something close to it  | ||
|
ZergZoul
Mexico408 Posts
hahaha naive | ||
|
il0seonpurpose
Korea (South)5638 Posts
| ||
|
kyjori
371 Posts
On May 21 2008 07:42 Woyn wrote: Ive felt for the last year/year and a half SC was missing something that 05/06 had. Something about those times was just fantastic was it not? its missing HIM, the Emperor himself, IT IS MISSING BOXER~~ | ||
|
frankbg
Canada335 Posts
On May 21 2008 07:25 gwho wrote: "Counterstrike and Halo just don't cut it for spectators." the reason is because it's an FPS only RTS's have the strategic depth on top of the action No. Just no. FPS's can have as much if not more strategic depth to them. Maybe not Halo but Counter-Strike sure does. The thing is those strategical things don't translate into visuals. It goes on through voice communication between teammates and a good 75% of pro-level Counter-Strike is the mind game. You're basically doing just like a SC noob saying that Starcraft is just a clickfest because it's too fast. There are many many things in high level CS that make it as competitive as SC, it's just that you have to have been competitive to know about them. | ||
|
Wizard
Poland5055 Posts
On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote: No. Just no. FPS's can have as much if not more strategic depth to them. Maybe not Halo but Counter-Strike sure does. The thing is those strategical things don't translate into visuals. It goes on through voice communication between teammates and a good 75% of pro-level Counter-Strike is the mind game. You're basically doing just like a SC noob saying that Starcraft is just a clickfest because it's too fast. There are many many things in high level CS that make it as competitive as SC, it's just that you have to have been competitive to know about them. No. Just no. don't even try to compare sc to a shoooter. | ||
|
Zzoram
Canada7115 Posts
On May 21 2008 10:41 Wizard wrote: No. Just no. don't even try to compare sc to a shoooter. It doesn't matter. You can't see it in a shooter, even if it's there. Starcraft is fun to watch because you can see strategy, and clearly see who is winning what battles at what times. The amount of HP you have in CS doesn't really indicate how you are doing, since you can die in 1 shot at any moment to a good player. | ||
|
frankbg
Canada335 Posts
On May 21 2008 10:41 Wizard wrote: No. Just no. don't even try to compare sc to a shoooter. Yeah, that's why Counter-Strike is the biggest esports WORLDWIDE while Starcraft is only big in Korea. You obviously haven't played competitive Counter-Strike therefore I don't even see how you can negate my argument. Oh and playing in a public server with horrids is not "competitive". It's like playing fastest or BGH on bnet. | ||
|
OakHill
United States168 Posts
On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote: No. Just no. FPS's can have as much if not more strategic depth to them. Maybe not Halo but Counter-Strike sure does. The thing is those strategical things don't translate into visuals. It goes on through voice communication between teammates and a good 75% of pro-level Counter-Strike is the mind game. You're basically doing just like a SC noob saying that Starcraft is just a clickfest because it's too fast. There are many many things in high level CS that make it as competitive as SC, it's just that you have to have been competitive to know about them. Can you fill us in then? I hope you're just not talking about teamwork. | ||
|
Pellucidity
Netherlands377 Posts
On May 21 2008 10:47 frankbg wrote: Yeah, that's why Counter-Strike is the biggest esports WORLDWIDE while Starcraft is only big in Korea. You obviously haven't played competitive Counter-Strike therefore I don't even see how you can negate my argument. Oh and playing in a public server with horrids is not "competitive". It's like playing fastest or BGH on bnet. How is Counterstrike a mind game? It can't even be played 1v1. Or well it can but both players would camp until one GG'd. As for team-related Counterstrike. There are team SC matches aswell. Which without a doubt require more skill. I'm not saying CS takes no skill or sucks, nor am I saying I am any good at it. I'm just saying SC is on a whole other level. A level CS will never reach because it lacks depth and strategy (having 5 strategies per map does not qualify lal). | ||
|
Wizard
Poland5055 Posts
On May 21 2008 10:47 frankbg wrote: Yeah, that's why Counter-Strike is the biggest esports WORLDWIDE while Starcraft is only big in Korea. You obviously haven't played competitive Counter-Strike therefore I don't even see how you can negate my argument. Oh and playing in a public server with horrids is not "competitive". It's like playing fastest or BGH on bnet. I wasn't comparing gameplay. I'm 100% sure cs is an exciting and great game to play. What I was talking about is that sc is a spectator sport while cs isn't. When a random person watches sc and sees a big TvP battle with the toss storming all the tanks, etc. and the toss army winning he will know that the toss army won. It's obvious on the screen. While he/she may not know how or why, he will know who. This isn't the case in counter-strike. The competitive aspect (voice communication and mind games) don't translate into good visual stimuli. | ||
|
frankbg
Canada335 Posts
On May 21 2008 10:49 OakHill wrote: Can you fill us in then? I hope you're just not talking about teamwork. There are 2 aspects that don't translate into visuals within CS and 1 that does. The 1 that does is obviously aiming and positionning, as well as angle play. Even that, is hard for people who don't play to notice. Good players don't just stand in random spots, they stand in the spot that gives them the optimal shooting angle on a certain spot while being covered from other angles at all times. The angle and direction in which they move is also calculated and comes from years of experience and thousands of scrims (5v5 practice games with league rules). Another thing people see but often overlook as a bit "random" is spamming (shooting walls) and grenade use. Spamming is barely ever random, only certain specific spots are spammable (just like certain spots like ledges and such in SC give you an advantage, given you know them well). You have to use sound to determine your opponent's position as well as your spamming accuracy (there are ways to tell if you hit soemone through a wall). Grenade use on the other hand is also a pretty skill-demanding thing. Try to do accurate nades 100% of the time, dodge flashbangs and never get caught with a nade out by a player who has his gun out. There are many other things that do show visually but are overlooked by non-cs players. The 2 aspects that don't translate into visuals are teamwork and individual gameplay. Teamwork is a combination of many things. Years of experience in counter-strike, playing within a team as well as the time spent with the current 5 man team you are playing with. Chemistry is easily 30-40% of the result of a competitive game. Often teams with superior individual skills will fall to a team with good chemistry. There is also practice, whether it be the strats you run or the positionning to hold certain areas. Communication is also very important within a team. The 4 other players are your ears and eyes around the rest of the map and no one will attain the highest level of play with 4 players working toghether and 1 guy going rambo by himself. Once again, within the "teamwork" side of things, I could name many other aspects that most people don't know about (boosts, angle cover, crossfires, fakes/counter-fakes, money management, reading the other team's money to predict the type of strat they will use, and the list goes on) Individual gameplay is not your aim, but the way you think (if that makes sense). Some would call it "game sense". It's what allows a player to do his mechanics without thinking, so his mind can focus on the "mindgame". Outplaying opponents with flanks requires you to know what route is cleared (based on where your team is/was, calls from teammates as well as well as various other tells like footsteps, grenades, what they did past rounds and such). Watching your angles and certain camping spot is also vital, as well. The thing is there are so many things that factor on your play style that doesnt show on screen but goes on in your mind and can only be spotted by decent players. PLUS, you have to do all this thinking while keeping your aim focused and moving around the map (rotating to a diff bombsite on a teammates call or switching position to adapt to a certain strat the other team is pulling). Actually, I will get alot of flames for this, but I have played at some of the highest levels in Counter-Strike and I will state that it requires more than SC. I know people who have played for 9-10 years and are merely middle-tier players (could compare to C/B on iccup). The skill gap is immense. One thing I will give to SC that puts it on the same level for me is the fact that it is easily accessible for viewers. Most things translate into visuals and anyone can understand the basics and enjoy a high level game (BOs, macro/micro, gamesense, map knowledge and tricks). Flame away~~ (although flaming without putting a smart argument will basically prove me right) | ||
| ||
