|
IDEA
Blizzard sponsors Brood War: Last Stand Ladder
PLAN
-Allocate 250? beta keys
-Ladders last one month each?
-Broken up into 3 seperate ladders. One starts on day x, the next one two weeks later, third ladder a month later etc.+ Show Spoiler +This maximizes hype and levels the playing field. Once you win a key you can't enter the other ladders.
-Top 250? spots in a battle.net ladder get keys.
TELOS
+ Show Spoiler +Gamers get some keys by playing the game. Yes, a contest which involves playing BW to get spot testing its sequel S][C + Show Spoiler +Why the fuck does a "great" comic artist deserve the privilege to test the damn sequel and test the game in BETA when BW players are left to squirm.
The Beta planners should be offering contests to attract all walks of Starcraft life. A closed beta full of theme park designers and comic artists is what we are facing right now. Artists, and creative writers are certainly wanted in a Beta but so are gamers. So are graphic designers. Betas, especially closed tests, require a certain mix of hardcore gamers, yes?
That something like this is not in planning or already in motion baffles me.
|
Then noobs like me wouldn't have a chance. Not fair.
|
On February 25 2009 20:53 Kunty wrote:
Why the fuck does a "great" comic artist deserve the privilege to test the damn sequel and test the game in BETA when BW players are left to squirm.
What appart from the thousands of BroodWar players who went to BlizzCon last year...
I agree that all the competitions being art based sucks however.
Wolf.
|
Blizzard is terrible at running ladders. They don't know what maps to use and they suck at regulating hackers/abusers.
|
I don't think it's gonna happen. They'd have to accept iCCup pretty much, and they're never gonna do that. T___T
|
u seriously think that sc2 needs more hype than it already has? And if your gonna have some dumb ladder to give out keys, just go ahead and give it to the koreans. Lame
|
This is probably not happening, at least not in a ladder form, because of the amount of work they'd have to go through as they probably wouldn't like using already established private ladders for this because of them being against their own rules.
They'd have to create a ladder of their own, no, the old one wouldn't work because of lack of any kind of anti-hack and ladder admin crew, the whole procedure would be too much of a hassle for them to make it worth it.
This is probably exactly why they're having these comic and art contest, its just that much easier to manage one compared to the work that is having a ladder up and making sure nothing unfair is going on.
|
Most importantly for Betas you´d rather want maximum variety in Players/Testers, not only the best. The point of the beta is to brace the game against "real" gameplay NOT simply "hardcore".
|
On February 25 2009 22:31 Unentschieden wrote:
Most importantly for Betas you´d rather want maximum variety in Players/Testers, not only the best. The point of the beta is to brace the game against "real" gameplay NOT simply "hardcore".
Exactly. There's a reason they're choosing the most 'creative' fans for the beta. There's no doubt they're trying to have every aspect of the game tried out, and what better way than to pick up people who look outside the box everyday.
They're saving the 'hardcore gaming' for retail.
|
Yeah, and end up with an imba game? T__________T
|
On February 25 2009 23:02 maybenexttime wrote:
Yeah, and end up with an imba game? T__________T
The game is supposed to be balanced ALL the time not only on Hardcore level.
|
On February 25 2009 23:02 maybenexttime wrote:
Yeah, and end up with an imba game? T__________T
an "imba game"?
first of all, games cannot be classified as imbalanced. rather, races, maps and units within the game may become exploited and prove to be "imba"lanced. a beta test with skilled players allows all aspects of each unit to come out. "imba"ness happens from a lack of experience with testers so that when the game hits retail some units remain imbalanced.
|
is awesome32269 Posts
what about hack / abusing?
|
On February 25 2009 23:41 Unentschieden wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2009 23:02 maybenexttime wrote:
Yeah, and end up with an imba game? T__________T The game is supposed to be balanced ALL the time not only on Hardcore level.
Newbs can't tell what is balanced and what isn't because they can vastly improve every single thing in their play. ;;
|
Yeah, basically, as everyone has said, this idea is unrealistic.
|
On February 25 2009 22:56 Tsumi wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2009 22:31 Unentschieden wrote:
Most importantly for Betas you´d rather want maximum variety in Players/Testers, not only the best. The point of the beta is to brace the game against "real" gameplay NOT simply "hardcore". They're saving the 'hardcore gaming' for retail.
No. Not really, its obvious that the top-BW players already have 100% access to the beta because Blizzard will make sure they will get them, I'm sure every single one of the korean pro-gaming teams will receive enough keys for all of their players for example.
So when you already have the most skilled players theres really no need for anything else but random testers from here and there and its better to make them do something for it rather than just randomly pick from a pool of names.
|
Even though this would not help me at all since I am a noob, I think this is a good idea. I would rather have competitive gamers testing beta than just random shmoes or people who happen to live close enough to Blizz headquarters to go to Blizzcon.
So I support this idea.
|
On February 26 2009 00:45 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2009 23:41 Unentschieden wrote:On February 25 2009 23:02 maybenexttime wrote:
Yeah, and end up with an imba game? T__________T The game is supposed to be balanced ALL the time not only on Hardcore level. Newbs can't tell what is balanced and what isn't because they can vastly improve every single thing in their play. ;;
They can tell - they don´t actually have to be objectivly right, a percieved imbalance is still a imbalance. Betas are about more than just balance, the point is that often, especially with less than hardcore players, balance hardly matters for enjoyment.
The question isn´t "can they improve?" but " do they want to?".
|
250? Should be more than that.. Blizzard gave away tens of thousands of keys at BlizzCon alone. In which, 90% of those are World of WarCraft players anyways.
|
If blizzard cared about the competitive gaming theyd hold three ladder teams and give the top 100 betas. 1 for asia and austrailia, 1 for europe and africa, 1 for north and south america. Granted it would somewhat suck that china would not get any sort of keys considering their skill and it would just be unfurtunate, I dunno..... now that I think about it its gonna be unfair for the group in asia. I am just rambling at this point but the ladders for europe and the americas had a ladder.
|
Good idea. Would get people who actually know something doing the beta. Casual people wouldn't matter, since they're buying and forgetting about the game in a few months.
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
On February 26 2009 00:03 IntoTheWow wrote:
what about hack / abusing?
yeah lets reward them lol.. my thoughts too
mind u in all honesty if there was a theoretical no hack pipe dream ladder, Kunty, ur idea has great appeal!
btw if ur not just some troll trying to piss off Chinese ask for a name change man..
|
i'm sure that most of the balance is already done and/or will be continued through mainly korean testers, i think beta will be minor glitch reports and stress tests on the new b.net but mainly hype
|
Seriously, all of you are completely missing what Blizzard is hoping to achieve during beta.
Their goal is not to get the game perfectly balanced before it hits shelves like so many of you are implying, they know that the time it would take to get it even close would delay the game another year. They would have to have all the top skilled players playing as competitively as BW is being played now for over a year to get it close and even then it would not get there.
If they were to give all the top BW players keys and have a long closed beta, it could destroy the size of the competitive scene because then anyone considering to try to play competitively would find out they are a year behind.
Any game you think was perfectly balanced when it was released probably wasn't popular enough to be evolved into it's potential imbalances.
It takes time.
So no, they won't be giving all the proteams beta keys and they won't be having a BW ladder for beta keys.
The goal of beta is to find the BUGS, and make any balance changes that are obvious and can greatly reduce a users experience.
It seems like their goal is to get it out to creative people who will try fucked up shit like the things you have to do to slide a CC, float a drone, cloak a zergling...
Wanting their game to significantly evolve towards it's competitive peak before it's out is retarded
|
Germany2896 Posts
I like the idea. Just having hackers is a problem -_-
On February 26 2009 06:09 Physician wrote:
ask for a name change man..
He already got one 
On June 25 2008 22:18 Hot_Bid wrote:Cunty is now Kunty.
|
10387 Posts
On February 26 2009 01:09 Puosu wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2009 22:56 Tsumi wrote:On February 25 2009 22:31 Unentschieden wrote:
Most importantly for Betas you´d rather want maximum variety in Players/Testers, not only the best. The point of the beta is to brace the game against "real" gameplay NOT simply "hardcore". They're saving the 'hardcore gaming' for retail. No. Not really, its obvious that the top-BW players already have 100% access to the beta because Blizzard will make sure they will get them, I'm sure every single one of the korean pro-gaming teams will receive enough keys for all of their players for example.
I doubt that
|
On February 26 2009 00:45 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2009 23:41 Unentschieden wrote:On February 25 2009 23:02 maybenexttime wrote:
Yeah, and end up with an imba game? T__________T The game is supposed to be balanced ALL the time not only on Hardcore level. Newbs can't tell what is balanced and what isn't because they can vastly improve every single thing in their play. ;;
Well obviously they can; the last balance-changing patch was 1.08, released in 2001. There hardly was anything like a pro-scene back then, but the game still turned out balanced, even if all the requests for changes were made by casuals.
The game won't be released balanced - not a chance. The metagame will change rapidly, and there'll be a couple of years until most things are sorted out. With further expansions and new units, this'll take a while. And since betatesting is very much about sorting out bugs, I don't think only pros would be a good thing - they'd probably start exploiting some of those bugs so much they'd make it into the final product, even if they weren't meant to be there. ;P
|
8748 Posts
considering blizzard's concern about the game as an e-sport, the beta will have e-sports players to test it as an e-sport. no korean players have good enough english to provide any feedback. they'd only be good for providing replays of their play.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
Blizzard has a korean division though :p. And i know the head of esports for blizzard is korean.
|
On February 25 2009 20:53 Kunty wrote:IDEABlizzard sponsors Brood War: Last Stand LadderPLAN-Allocate 250? beta keys -Ladders last one month each? -Broken up into 3 seperate ladders. One starts on day x, the next one two weeks later, third ladder a month later etc. + Show Spoiler +This maximizes hype and levels the playing field. Once you win a key you can't enter the other ladders. -Top 250? spots in a battle.net ladder get keys. TELOS + Show Spoiler +Gamers get some keys by playing the game. Yes, a contest which involves playing BW to get spot testing its sequel S][C + Show Spoiler +Why the fuck does a "great" comic artist deserve the privilege to test the damn sequel and test the game in BETA when BW players are left to squirm. planners should be offering contests to attract all walks of Starcraft life. A closed beta full of theme park designers and comic artists is what we are facing right now. Artists, and creative writers are certainly wanted in a Beta but so are gamers. So are graphic designers. Betas, especially closed tests, require a certain mix of hardcore gamers, yes? That something like this is not in planning or already in motion baffles me.
I said it before, creative people result in creative strategies...
|
8748 Posts
but it's the developers they need to communicate with. if they have everything translated back and forth it could work. i imagine the bilingual employees don't have enough spare time to take on such a task. i doubt they'd hire temporary translators. and im 90% sure that the koreans wouldnt be interested in providing feedback and if they did it'd be heavily biased. they'd just be hoping to get a step ahead of the competition and/or they'd suggest changes that they want without thinking what's best for the game. being professionals under the scrutiny of a coach/sponsor makes them much less reliable beta testers. if koreans from pro teams get in the beta test, then when they're playing it, they'd be working for their team/sponsor and for blizzard, and blizzard would be the lower priority.
|
8748 Posts
btw, the idea that blizzard wants creative people in their beta test is cute. the largest amount of keys they've given away is to people who would pay $100 for a ticket and travel to a blizzard event. if you want to conclude anything about what kind of people they want their beta full of, it's probably best to say it's full of people passionate about blizzard games. the amateur players who would top a BW ladder 10 years after its release have shown a lot more passion for the game than paying $100 and going to anaheim
|
Um you can't test a game as an esport in 3 months no matter who's playing it.
|
On February 26 2009 05:34 likeaboss wrote:
If blizzard cared about the competitive gaming theyd hold three ladder teams and give the top 100 betas. 1 for asia and austrailia, 1 for europe and africa, 1 for north and south america. Granted it would somewhat suck that china would not get any sort of keys considering their skill and it would just be unfurtunate, I dunno..... now that I think about it its gonna be unfair for the group in asia. I am just rambling at this point but the ladders for europe and the americas had a ladder.
this is kinda what i was getting at. the logistics can be worked out, e.g. numbers of keys, how many ladders, regions, hack abuse... im just trying to spit some ideas out there.
creative people make creative strats. yes. i am a gamer, musician, translator. but i don't have experience with photoshop so i can't make a comic and designing a blizzard theme park is repulsive on many levels. there is much more to "creativity" than making sarcastic comic strips and roller coaster rides with blizzard IP.
nony's comment about koreans being unable to provide feedback is worth mentioning. i left this out of the OP cuz i figured some simpletons would call me racist.
inreach mentioned that BETA are to fix bugs. this is 100% true. beta is not to balance for competitive play. i don't see how this detracts from my position that a ladder is a great idea for betakey giveaway.
how can anyone fail to see the epicness of this idea. the final BW ladder. international. all levels of play. the top 100 spots in 3-4 different ladders would include pretty much all notable foreign amateurs plus numerous lesser knowns who practiced hard and made the top 100. a true retrospective. it could even feature old school maps or whatever. i don't see this happening but it's just such a huge idea that would bring the whole community together to give BW a final swan song and usher in the new era of SC2.
master of chaos? you changed my name? the k is really awful and more offensive than the c. could i have another name change? if so then "rice_dream" please.
|
8748 Posts
On February 26 2009 10:53 inReacH wrote:
Um you can't test a game as an esport in 3 months no matter who's playing it.
why not? a game can't be balanced in 3 months. all the bugs can't be fixed in 3 months. it's about making progress that couldnt be made without the simple power of large numbers of people. designing the game to be a successful e-sport is a goal that the developers have kept in mind during alpha and it has played a huge role in the changes they've made. having people in the beta focused on that objective is certain to be productive
|
On February 25 2009 21:27 Centric wrote:
Blizzard is terrible at running ladders. They don't know what maps to use and they suck at regulating hackers/abusers.
uhh have u forgetten about wc3? their ladder still runs...
and i think this is fun way to get beta keys. not only does this let the pros test out their future career but its just fun to play bw 
|
On February 26 2009 11:37 Liquid`NonY wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2009 10:53 inReacH wrote:
Um you can't test a game as an esport in 3 months no matter who's playing it. why not? a game can't be balanced in 3 months. all the bugs can't be fixed in 3 months. it's about making progress that couldnt be made without the simple power of large numbers of people. designing the game to be a successful e-sport is a goal that the developers have kept in mind during alpha and it has played a huge role in the changes they've made. having people in the beta focused on that objective is certain to be productive
It's not at all what they should be focusing on, you really shouldn't have the competitive scene already developing before the game is out.
I personally have a beta key from blizzcon and I still think it would be pretty lame for all the people that don't to go buy the game and then be 3 months behind all the people who were given betas because they were good in BW. It's just going to compound their advantage which could really stifle the potential for many competitive players.
They should have the competitive scene as undeveloped as possible until the games release, it should be an as level playing field for people without beta keys
Maybe it's not that big a deal but I'm sure it will turn off some peoples considerations of competitive aspirations.
They are developing an entire new BNET and obviously with that will be a very simple patching method so that they can patch things quickly when they obviously need to be changed. The game is going to be patched a TON, the true competitive 'truths' won't even be able to be unraveled until the game has most of it's major changes behind it.
|
8748 Posts
the beta isn't about the competitive scene. it's about making a game that'll be good as an e-sport. who cares about the sandy vaginas that think missing beta ruins their chances to be a good player. that's completely wrong. after release, reps will be everywhere because every sc2 site knows that they need to have a good rep section to stand a chance of survival. anyone with a good RTS mind and handspeed will be able to learn the popular strats in a week and get a very comfortable feel for the game within a month. the only thing that'll hinder the scene is having to ignore the blabbering idiots who swear they would've been #1 if they'd just played the beta. if the game is a good e-sport, then it'll last for years and anyone with skill and dedication will have their chance regardless of beta.
blizzard can much more comfortably make big changes during beta than after release. it's true that they can and will make changes after release, but i think the scope will change.
having a group of good BW players with good english providing good feedback who each put 500+ hours of playtime in is enough to provide meaningful insight on the game's capacity as an e-sport
|
On February 25 2009 21:27 Centric wrote:
Blizzard is terrible at running ladders. They don't know what maps to use and they suck at regulating hackers/abusers.
they could get puertorican to do it.
|
make this happen Blizzard.. i cant go to blizzcon and get a beta key.. becasue SC tournaments like WCG wont announce the Date till the week before.. which a competitive gamer like me, cant pass up. ~
but if they had a ladder i could get me one :D
been playing this game for 8 years.. 4 years competitively~ shouldnt i be getting one?? instead of WoW gamers who pay 100$ and get a beta key 
only seems fair ^.^
|
On February 26 2009 12:50 inReacH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2009 11:37 Liquid`NonY wrote:On February 26 2009 10:53 inReacH wrote:
Um you can't test a game as an esport in 3 months no matter who's playing it. why not? a game can't be balanced in 3 months. all the bugs can't be fixed in 3 months. it's about making progress that couldnt be made without the simple power of large numbers of people. designing the game to be a successful e-sport is a goal that the developers have kept in mind during alpha and it has played a huge role in the changes they've made. having people in the beta focused on that objective is certain to be productive It's not at all what they should be focusing on, you really shouldn't have the competitive scene already developing before the game is out. I personally have a beta key from blizzcon and I still think it would be pretty lame for all the people that don't to go buy the game and then be 3 months behind all the people who were given betas because they were good in BW. It's just going to compound their advantage which could really stifle the potential for many competitive players. They should have the competitive scene as undeveloped as possible until the games release, it should be an as level playing field for people without beta keys Maybe it's not that big a deal but I'm sure it will turn off some peoples considerations of competitive aspirations. They are developing an entire new BNET and obviously with that will be a very simple patching method so that they can patch things quickly when they obviously need to be changed. The game is going to be patched a TON, the true competitive 'truths' won't even be able to be unraveled until the game has most of it's major changes behind it.
what nony said + you contradict yourself
last paragraph you talk about how the game will be changing a ton and and nothing will be set until the major changes are done (and if its like bw alot of it wont be set 5 years after the major changes are done). now if thats the case how does playing 3 months on a beta give players a competitive edge, when everythings gonna change with every balance patch? give the new players a week after the release to get comfortable with the interface and then it'll be a level playing field after the next balance patch.
|
On February 26 2009 13:56 Liquid`NonY wrote:
the beta isn't about the competitive scene. it's about making a game that'll be good as an e-sport. who cares about the sandy vaginas that think missing beta ruins their chances to be a good player. that's completely wrong. after release, reps will be everywhere because every sc2 site knows that they need to have a good rep section to stand a chance of survival. anyone with a good RTS mind and handspeed will be able to learn the popular strats in a week and get a very comfortable feel for the game within a month. the only thing that'll hinder the scene is having to ignore the blabbering idiots who swear they would've been #1 if they'd just played the beta. if the game is a good e-sport, then it'll last for years and anyone with skill and dedication will have their chance regardless of beta.
blizzard can much more comfortably make big changes during beta than after release. it's true that they can and will make changes after release, but i think the scope will change.
having a group of good BW players with good english providing good feedback who each put 500+ hours of playtime in is enough to provide meaningful insight on the game's capacity as an e-sport
Hmm well I was under the impression that they would be able to change almost anything in the game even after release.
I know they removed units in wc3 after release etc, I'm sure they can rework how Terran mules work etc if they want to.
If they can't then you've convinced me but if their ability to make drastic changes remains after release then I really think the beta should mainly be for debugging.
You can't argue that in 3 months testers will basically only get one chance to set up a couple waves of initial matchup trends which will definitely change drastically in the coming years. I don't know that they should be making so many huge competitive decision based on a relatively small group of gamers in such a short time-span.
I'm sure we at least agree that it would be best if blizzard can change almost anything they want even after release.
I basically just think the portions are too small to be able to come to reliable decisions about many important things.
Too few players, too few months.
I mean after release, when people are complaining about something being imbalanced, blizzard isn't going to patch it immediately. You have to give things time to make sure they actually need to be fixed and people aren't just whining.
It's fine though, I see your points, I just think it's more risky to do it that way and has some other undesirable side effects.
|
there is not some kind of impenetrable barrier between the beta and the release, the fact that its only 3 months, or however long, is irrelevant. its just getting a head start on the process that will continue through the release. and the limited number of players is also irrelevant because that limited number is gonna include basically every competitive rts player or everyone worthwhile involved in the rts community who wants to play it, you're gonna get far more out of a concentrated group of players like that than a big watered down community of the competitive players... and a bunch of people who dont know what theyre doing.
also you say it should be for bug testing, dont your arguments apply to that as well? if we only have 3 months and a limited player pool to look for bugs we'll never fix them all in time! better just wait for the release. doesnt make much sense does it?
|
On February 26 2009 14:51 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2009 12:50 inReacH wrote:On February 26 2009 11:37 Liquid`NonY wrote:On February 26 2009 10:53 inReacH wrote:
Um you can't test a game as an esport in 3 months no matter who's playing it. why not? a game can't be balanced in 3 months. all the bugs can't be fixed in 3 months. it's about making progress that couldnt be made without the simple power of large numbers of people. designing the game to be a successful e-sport is a goal that the developers have kept in mind during alpha and it has played a huge role in the changes they've made. having people in the beta focused on that objective is certain to be productive It's not at all what they should be focusing on, you really shouldn't have the competitive scene already developing before the game is out. I personally have a beta key from blizzcon and I still think it would be pretty lame for all the people that don't to go buy the game and then be 3 months behind all the people who were given betas because they were good in BW. It's just going to compound their advantage which could really stifle the potential for many competitive players. They should have the competitive scene as undeveloped as possible until the games release, it should be an as level playing field for people without beta keys Maybe it's not that big a deal but I'm sure it will turn off some peoples considerations of competitive aspirations. They are developing an entire new BNET and obviously with that will be a very simple patching method so that they can patch things quickly when they obviously need to be changed. The game is going to be patched a TON, the true competitive 'truths' won't even be able to be unraveled until the game has most of it's major changes behind it. what nony said + you contradict yourself last paragraph you talk about how the game will be changing a ton and and nothing will be set until the major changes are done (and if its like bw alot of it wont be set 5 years after the major changes are done). now if thats the case how does playing 3 months on a beta give players a competitive edge, when everythings gonna change with every balance patch? give the new players a week after the release to get comfortable with the interface and then it'll be a level playing field after the next balance patch.
Hmm I didn't mean it would actually have a huge negative impact on people trying to go pro, I just meant it would be a big turn off to buy the game and then be 3 months behind and it might prompt some people to just go UMS.
Yes, I agree 3 months is not a very large chunk of time to overcome in an RTS.
Sorry for my poor wording.
|
On February 26 2009 15:03 IdrA wrote:
there is not some kind of impenetrable barrier between the beta and the release, the fact that its only 3 months, or however long, is irrelevant. its just getting a head start on the process that will continue through the release. and the limited number of players is also irrelevant because that limited number is gonna include basically every competitive rts player or everyone worthwhile involved in the rts community who wants to play it, you're gonna get far more out of a concentrated group of players like that than a big watered down community of the competitive players... and a bunch of people who dont know what theyre doing.
also you say it should be for bug testing, dont your arguments apply to that as well? if we only have 3 months and a limited player pool to look for bugs we'll never fix them all in time! better just wait for the release. doesnt make much sense does it?
Every competitive RTS player?
Everyone worthwhile in the RTS community?
Ummm.. no they aren't.
I'm not hard disagreeing with nony here, I just don't like the potential effects of having a group of competitive players begin the games evolution without the rest of the community.
And the difference is in bug finding it is much more obvious when something needs to be changed.
Balancing is much more complex than debugging, as well as needing much more time to make confident decisions.
|
Sorry I know I'm triple posting but I want makes sure this gets read.
Idra from your posts it sounds like you think the competitive community can't grow by a large amount when sc2 comes out, I really think and hope you are wrong and I think beginning evolution of competitive play before new players get their hands on the game could make this true.
|
On February 26 2009 15:07 inReacH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2009 14:51 IdrA wrote:On February 26 2009 12:50 inReacH wrote:On February 26 2009 11:37 Liquid`NonY wrote:On February 26 2009 10:53 inReacH wrote:
Um you can't test a game as an esport in 3 months no matter who's playing it. why not? a game can't be balanced in 3 months. all the bugs can't be fixed in 3 months. it's about making progress that couldnt be made without the simple power of large numbers of people. designing the game to be a successful e-sport is a goal that the developers have kept in mind during alpha and it has played a huge role in the changes they've made. having people in the beta focused on that objective is certain to be productive It's not at all what they should be focusing on, you really shouldn't have the competitive scene already developing before the game is out. I personally have a beta key from blizzcon and I still think it would be pretty lame for all the people that don't to go buy the game and then be 3 months behind all the people who were given betas because they were good in BW. It's just going to compound their advantage which could really stifle the potential for many competitive players. They should have the competitive scene as undeveloped as possible until the games release, it should be an as level playing field for people without beta keys Maybe it's not that big a deal but I'm sure it will turn off some peoples considerations of competitive aspirations. They are developing an entire new BNET and obviously with that will be a very simple patching method so that they can patch things quickly when they obviously need to be changed. The game is going to be patched a TON, the true competitive 'truths' won't even be able to be unraveled until the game has most of it's major changes behind it. what nony said + you contradict yourself last paragraph you talk about how the game will be changing a ton and and nothing will be set until the major changes are done (and if its like bw alot of it wont be set 5 years after the major changes are done). now if thats the case how does playing 3 months on a beta give players a competitive edge, when everythings gonna change with every balance patch? give the new players a week after the release to get comfortable with the interface and then it'll be a level playing field after the next balance patch. Hmm I didn't mean it would actually have a huge negative impact on people trying to go pro, I just meant it would be a big turn off to buy the game and then be 3 months behind and it might prompt some people to just go UMS. Yes, I agree 3 months is not a very large chunk of time to overcome in an RTS. Sorry for my poor wording.
'i agree its irrelevant'
'but it would still turn people off'
?
no, if its irrelevant it wont turn anyone off.
|
On February 26 2009 15:13 inReacH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2009 15:03 IdrA wrote:
there is not some kind of impenetrable barrier between the beta and the release, the fact that its only 3 months, or however long, is irrelevant. its just getting a head start on the process that will continue through the release. and the limited number of players is also irrelevant because that limited number is gonna include basically every competitive rts player or everyone worthwhile involved in the rts community who wants to play it, you're gonna get far more out of a concentrated group of players like that than a big watered down community of the competitive players... and a bunch of people who dont know what theyre doing.
also you say it should be for bug testing, dont your arguments apply to that as well? if we only have 3 months and a limited player pool to look for bugs we'll never fix them all in time! better just wait for the release. doesnt make much sense does it?
Every competitive RTS player? Everyone worthwhile in the RTS community? Ummm.. no they aren't.
aaaand what makes you believe this?
I'm not hard disagreeing with nony here, I just don't like the potential effects of having a group of competitive players begin the games evolution without the rest of the community.
And the difference is in bug finding it is much more obvious when something needs to be changed.
Balancing is much more complex than debugging, as well as needing much more time to make confident decisions.
if its much more complex then it is much more important to have people who know what theyre doing. if you think competitive players are gonna bitch and whine over something being imbalanced instead of finding a solution for it, how well do you think its gonna work out with casual players?
|
On February 26 2009 15:24 inReacH wrote:
Sorry I know I'm triple posting but I want makes sure this gets read.
Idra from your posts it sounds like you think the competitive community can't grow by a large amount when sc2 comes out, I really think and hope you are wrong and I think beginning evolution of competitive play before new players get their hands on the game could make this true.
of course it can grow, but the new people in the competitive community are not going to be competitive right away. people who were good at sc, or war3, or any other competitive rts' are gonna have a significant leg up from the start. everyone was a newbie at some point, and their opinion was essentially worthless while they were. the new players who are going to add to the competitive community are still going to be new players.
|
On February 26 2009 15:55 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2009 15:07 inReacH wrote:On February 26 2009 14:51 IdrA wrote:On February 26 2009 12:50 inReacH wrote:On February 26 2009 11:37 Liquid`NonY wrote:On February 26 2009 10:53 inReacH wrote:
Um you can't test a game as an esport in 3 months no matter who's playing it. why not? a game can't be balanced in 3 months. all the bugs can't be fixed in 3 months. it's about making progress that couldnt be made without the simple power of large numbers of people. designing the game to be a successful e-sport is a goal that the developers have kept in mind during alpha and it has played a huge role in the changes they've made. having people in the beta focused on that objective is certain to be productive It's not at all what they should be focusing on, you really shouldn't have the competitive scene already developing before the game is out. I personally have a beta key from blizzcon and I still think it would be pretty lame for all the people that don't to go buy the game and then be 3 months behind all the people who were given betas because they were good in BW. It's just going to compound their advantage which could really stifle the potential for many competitive players. They should have the competitive scene as undeveloped as possible until the games release, it should be an as level playing field for people without beta keys Maybe it's not that big a deal but I'm sure it will turn off some peoples considerations of competitive aspirations. They are developing an entire new BNET and obviously with that will be a very simple patching method so that they can patch things quickly when they obviously need to be changed. The game is going to be patched a TON, the true competitive 'truths' won't even be able to be unraveled until the game has most of it's major changes behind it. what nony said + you contradict yourself last paragraph you talk about how the game will be changing a ton and and nothing will be set until the major changes are done (and if its like bw alot of it wont be set 5 years after the major changes are done). now if thats the case how does playing 3 months on a beta give players a competitive edge, when everythings gonna change with every balance patch? give the new players a week after the release to get comfortable with the interface and then it'll be a level playing field after the next balance patch. Hmm I didn't mean it would actually have a huge negative impact on people trying to go pro, I just meant it would be a big turn off to buy the game and then be 3 months behind and it might prompt some people to just go UMS. Yes, I agree 3 months is not a very large chunk of time to overcome in an RTS. Sorry for my poor wording. 'i agree its irrelevant' 'but it would still turn people off' ? no, if its irrelevant it wont turn anyone off.
Sorry you're just wrong, you really think that everyone who could be an added and valued member of the competitive community will immediately realize that it is irrelevant.
I know from experience it is VERY common for people to dismiss playing competitively because they feel like they are too late or missed the boat.
I can't imagine you disagreeing unless you have a very narrow view of human behavior.
As much as I agree with NoNy that they are 'whining sandy vaginas', it's still something that would be nice to avoid.
|
no its not that theyre sandy vaginas
anyone who thinks theyre too far behind cuz of 3 months of beta testing is fucking retarded, and fucking retarded people dont tend to be very valuable for anything.
|
On February 26 2009 15:56 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2009 15:13 inReacH wrote:On February 26 2009 15:03 IdrA wrote:
there is not some kind of impenetrable barrier between the beta and the release, the fact that its only 3 months, or however long, is irrelevant. its just getting a head start on the process that will continue through the release. and the limited number of players is also irrelevant because that limited number is gonna include basically every competitive rts player or everyone worthwhile involved in the rts community who wants to play it, you're gonna get far more out of a concentrated group of players like that than a big watered down community of the competitive players... and a bunch of people who dont know what theyre doing.
also you say it should be for bug testing, dont your arguments apply to that as well? if we only have 3 months and a limited player pool to look for bugs we'll never fix them all in time! better just wait for the release. doesnt make much sense does it?
Every competitive RTS player? Everyone worthwhile in the RTS community? Ummm.. no they aren't. aaaand what makes you believe this? Show nested quote +
I'm not hard disagreeing with nony here, I just don't like the potential effects of having a group of competitive players begin the games evolution without the rest of the community.
And the difference is in bug finding it is much more obvious when something needs to be changed.
Balancing is much more complex than debugging, as well as needing much more time to make confident decisions.
if its much more complex then it is much more important to have people who know what theyre doing. if you think competitive players are gonna bitch and whine over something being imbalanced instead of finding a solution for it, how well do you think its gonna work out with casual players?
Ok well I don't want to get into the whole who qualifies as a worthwhile member of the RTS community but I'm sure most of TL(of which I would agree not all are worthwhile) who aren't getting beta keys would disagree with you.. I personally know a lot of people who would be great help in the beta who aren't being given one by blizzard.
I admittedly know very few who are being given one, what indications do you have that many people who are merely 'worthwhile members of the RTS community' are going to be given one?
As far as the difference between balancing and debugging..
They aren't comparable. Once a bug is found it can be determined whether a change needs to be made by a single person, balancing needs many people to agree that something has to change.
This sect of our conversation started with you falsely comparing the two so I won't bother continuing with it..
If I do I might end up pointing out a certain competitive player who bitches and whines and bring this conversation somewhere I really don't want it to go.
|
On February 26 2009 16:18 IdrA wrote:
no its not that theyre sandy vaginas
anyone who thinks theyre too far behind cuz of 3 months of beta testing is fucking retarded, and fucking retarded people dont tend to be very valuable for anything.
Dude.. no.. You say that because you know and have many examples of that kind of thing being overcome all around you all the time.
You don't have to be so critical to people for misjudging something that is so obvious to you.
Have you ever heard people talking about missing the boat on poker and that's why they aren't interested? Well it's the same thing, yes it could be overcome but it's a certain degree harder and everyone's threshold is somewhere.
I agree with you that it's dumb to think that way but that doesn't make them retarded or reduce the validity of their potential competitive goals.
|
On February 26 2009 16:23 inReacH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2009 15:56 IdrA wrote:On February 26 2009 15:13 inReacH wrote:On February 26 2009 15:03 IdrA wrote:
there is not some kind of impenetrable barrier between the beta and the release, the fact that its only 3 months, or however long, is irrelevant. its just getting a head start on the process that will continue through the release. and the limited number of players is also irrelevant because that limited number is gonna include basically every competitive rts player or everyone worthwhile involved in the rts community who wants to play it, you're gonna get far more out of a concentrated group of players like that than a big watered down community of the competitive players... and a bunch of people who dont know what theyre doing.
also you say it should be for bug testing, dont your arguments apply to that as well? if we only have 3 months and a limited player pool to look for bugs we'll never fix them all in time! better just wait for the release. doesnt make much sense does it?
Every competitive RTS player? Everyone worthwhile in the RTS community? Ummm.. no they aren't. aaaand what makes you believe this?
I'm not hard disagreeing with nony here, I just don't like the potential effects of having a group of competitive players begin the games evolution without the rest of the community.
And the difference is in bug finding it is much more obvious when something needs to be changed.
Balancing is much more complex than debugging, as well as needing much more time to make confident decisions.
if its much more complex then it is much more important to have people who know what theyre doing. if you think competitive players are gonna bitch and whine over something being imbalanced instead of finding a solution for it, how well do you think its gonna work out with casual players? As far as the difference between balancing and debugging.. They aren't comparable. Once a bug is found it can be determined whether a change needs to be made by a single person, balancing needs many people to agree that something has to change.
really?
theres still disagreement about some 'bugs' 10 years after bw release.
This sect of our conversation started with you falsely comparing the two so I won't bother continuing with it..
If I do I might end up pointing out a certain competitive player who bitches and whines and bring this conversation somewhere I really don't want it to go.
oh noes the horror
i might have to quote some of your replies in the inflation thread. i think that would be a bit more effective.
|
On February 26 2009 16:27 inReacH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2009 16:18 IdrA wrote:
no its not that theyre sandy vaginas
anyone who thinks theyre too far behind cuz of 3 months of beta testing is fucking retarded, and fucking retarded people dont tend to be very valuable for anything. Dude.. no.. You say that because you know and have many examples of that kind of thing being overcome all around you all the time. You don't have to be so critical to people for misjudging something that is so obvious to you. Have you ever heard people talking about missing the boat on poker and that's why they aren't interested? Well it's the same thing, yes it could be overcome but it's a certain degree harder and everyone's threshold is somewhere. I agree with you that it's dumb to think that way but that doesn't make them retarded or reduce the validity of their potential competitive goals.
?
3 months of a TESTING PHASE.
if that holds a 'competitive player' back from a game thats gonna be the biggest thing esports has ever seen then yes, they are literally retarded.
if you mean people who might eventually become competitive players, but arent now, why would they care about a head start if they arent already interested in playing competitively?
|
I'm done..
For the record, publicly humiliating yourself(not talking about the games) when everyone is watching is not as bad as me pointing out that people didn't think he was trolling?
I don't even know what you would possibly say about that thread.. That guy trolled.. I called him a troll.. and then people started defending him like I was just calling him a troll to burn him.
Yeah. I'm sure that will have the same effect on me as what you did to yourself will have on you.
F91 won't even give you a re and talked down about you like your this idiot who needs special treatment so you don't further fuck up your perception of the world and what it means to be a professional. And he would be right if you weren't so clearly beyond help.
Ok, 1 more thing... it's not that they don't think they can overcome the disadvantage, it's just that it is VERY VERY VERY easy to just say "ugh whatever these fags got to play all during beta and now I'm behind"
Again, it's not that they think they can't, it's just they feel jipped and that can lead to dismissiveness.
And I'm not saying it's not wrong to think that I'm just saying it will have a negative impact on the size of the community.
God wtf happened in this thread, I got to start off talking to a rational nony and ended up in this debate with someone who literally doesn't know the difference between right and wrong as far as social and professional conduct goes.
|
On February 26 2009 17:07 inReacH wrote:
I'm done..
For the record, publicly humiliating yourself(not talking about the games) when everyone is watching is not as bad as me pointing out that people didn't think he was trolling?
I don't even know what you would possibly say about that thread.. That guy trolled.. I called him a troll.. and then people started defending him like I was just calling him a troll to burn him.
Yeah. I'm sure that will have the same effect on me as what you did to yourself will have on you.
F91 won't even give you a re and talked down about you like your this idiot who needs special treatment so you don't further fuck up your perception of the world and what it means to be a professional. And he would be right if you weren't so clearly beyond help.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=87765
dumbass
Ok, 1 more thing... it's not that they don't think they can overcome the disadvantage, it's just that it is VERY VERY VERY easy to just say "ugh whatever these fags got to play all during beta and now I'm behind"
Again, it's not that they think they can't, it's just they feel jipped and that can lead to dismissiveness.
well once again if they are already competitive players then theyre basically giving up on rts esports for god knows how long because of.. 3 months that are barely relevant to the game. once again theyre as retarded as you if that holds them back.
And I'm not saying it's not wrong to think that I'm just saying it will have a negative impact on the size of the community.
ok? but it wont. if they arent already competitive players theyre not gonna care about a little headstart, if they are already competitive players then theyre gonna be playing sc2 regardless of anything.
God wtf happened in this thread, I got to start off talking to a rational nony and ended up in this debate with someone who literally doesn't know the difference between right and wrong as far as social conduct goes.
nope comments that were perfectly rational were shown to an ignorant community that i didnt want to see them, big difference there.
|
On February 26 2009 17:18 IdrA wrote:
dumbass
ZING GOOD ONE LOL YOU WIN
|
nothing more is needed to address someone like you
to be clear, you have no idea what you're talking about and no rational response to what im saying so you attempt to drive the discussion off into personal insults to obscure the real argument.
|
"nope comments that were perfectly rational were shown to an ignorant community that i didnt want to see them, big difference there."
Just for anyone who didn't catch that,
IdrA = rational
Rekrul and 30 pages of comments and opinions = ignorant.
|
30 pages of people who didnt address anything i said and simply focused on the fact that it was wrong for me to 'discredit' f91s win, when i in fact purposefully said nothing in public or to f91.
and for anyone who didnt catch that,
inreach=incapable of rational discussion
go back to practicing war3 so you can own up sc2.
|
Lol I'm playing games in between posts no jokes!
And I do remember more than one person laughing at your "If I make one too many bunkers I autolose" analysis.
No one needed to discredit your quotes further because rekrul did it perfectly in the OP.
Has the thought even crossed your mind once that maybe, just maybe, rekrul is almost perfectly on point with his thoughts on your conduct?
Is he an idiot piece of shit too like everyone else?
|
I dont understand why this thread is linked to F91 match Vs IdrA. This is about sc2 not about IdrA or inReacH... and inReacH what u write is obvious I dont think we need to discuss this more...30 pages! forget it already.
|
On February 26 2009 18:34 ffswowsucks wrote:
I dont understand why this thread is linked to F91 match Vs IdrA. This is about sc2 not about IdrA or inReacH... and inReacH what u write is obvious I dont think we need to discuss this more...30 pages! forget it already.
Yes, you are right. My apologies.
(not sarcasm)
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Hrm, I guess I need to start reading this forum again 
|
Sweden33719 Posts
By request I'm re-opening this.. But stay on the ORIGINAL topic - IdrA vs F91 has nothing to do with it, nor does the inflation..
|
When the scales of becoming professional at a game range in the years, then 3 months of beta testing doesn't one-up, or benefit anyone who plans on playing competitively.
Also, considering that Starcraft II won't reach some sort of 'finality' in the first year, or second, or even third, makes a 3-month beta testing key pointless to discuss.
There are many things that could be analyzed about how Blizzard is proceeding, but it's not productive whining about every little insignificunt detail.
|
I highly doubt inreach started playing BW when it first came out anyways and here heis arguing about the difficulty of competitive gaming. You probably got into BW 6 or 7 years too late anyways and you were able to deliciously eat up rep after rep and vods of polished gameplay. Consider yourself lucky
Only a tiny fraction of users will have a beta key. It's always been like that and it always will be like that. Deal rofl.
|
Personally, I don't want a beta key. Maybe I'm lazy, or just not a "team player", but I'd rather wait for the actual game to release.
I guess the size of my penis isn't based on whether or not I beta tested SC2.
|
Back on the original topic:
So the problems with an open ladder are:
1) hackers/abusers
2) foreigners don't stand a chance
3) massive number of players
That said, I do like the idea of some official large tournament for keys that involves the community. Perhaps Blizzard could allocate a "pot" of 1000 beta keys and organize a tournament between the different communities (Sandlot style) and award more keys to communities that do well in the tournament. This would still fuel the hype machine while involving the community and if the tournament were offline, the hacking/abuse problem would be mitigated. Also, Blizzard could restrict how many communities per country can enter so that koreans don't just win all the keys. Finally, it prevents sc2bestfriends.com from taking away precious keys from teamliquid.
Just to throw out some more ideas:
Before the offline final tournament, Blizzard could have elimination style tournaments to determine which communities make it to the final tournament. These could be streamed live Liquibition/TLA/TSL style. If it were official and casted well, I think that it would introduce high-level SC play to people who haven't been following SC's evolution and find pro-gaming a bit daunting (You could be this gosu too! Just buy our game and play it a lot!).
|
Progamers probably need not worry. At least the most prominent ones are very likely to get beta keys well before beta testing starts. They allowed some of them access to the game in Alpha, so I cannot imagine them withdrawing access for Beta. Plus, Blizzard can set up tournaments at their events and have Beta keys as prizes.
By the way, the average Blizzard beta lasts roughly 4 months. Considering how much is at stake with StarCraft II, I would not be suprised if the beta would last even longer.
|
Well, they allowed random WoW addicts access the game in alpha too. T____T
Not saying progamers won't get the keys but you're reasoning is a bit off, imo. (I hope you're not one of those who believe Blizzard hired (ex-)progamers as testers.)
Also, I thought WC3 beta lasted 5-6 months. ;;
|
On February 28 2009 03:26 maybenexttime wrote:Well, they allowed random WoW addicts access the game in alpha too. T____T Not saying progamers won't get the keys but you're reasoning is a bit off, imo. (I hope you're not one of those who believe Blizzard hired (ex-)progamers as testers.) Also, I thought WC3 beta lasted 5-6 months. ;;
They held a special event for progamers in Korea to test the game and give their opinions on the current build, I believe that is what he means.
|
Ya, but regular players had plenty of opportunities, so letting progamers play for couple of hours isn't a big deal, imo.
|
again, the whole idea is just a kernel which should give us thoughts as to how such a tournament/ladder would be undertaken. koreans wouldnt get all the keys as some have suggested but rather x amount would where x is the amount lotted to the various korea ladders. there would have to be massive organization and planning to run several ladders in different countries but it would nonetheless be an epic event.
of course progamers will get keys. duh. that is not this thread's focus. pros play SC they do not beta test for bugs. end of discussion. over. they will have beta keys for fun and to test. some will do serious testing. like b teamers and maybe one high profile veteran like will spend sometime delivering feedback but that is irrelevant.
this idea is not about setting up the most perfect beta test possible. its about public relations, epicness, community, and giving BW a proper farewell (internationally, that is. BW will stick around korea for sometime).
|
On February 26 2009 16:27 inReacH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2009 16:18 IdrA wrote:
no its not that theyre sandy vaginas
anyone who thinks theyre too far behind cuz of 3 months of beta testing is fucking retarded, and fucking retarded people dont tend to be very valuable for anything. Dude.. no.. You say that because you know and have many examples of that kind of thing being overcome all around you all the time. You don't have to be so critical to people for misjudging something that is so obvious to you. Have you ever heard people talking about missing the boat on poker and that's why they aren't interested? Well it's the same thing, yes it could be overcome but it's a certain degree harder and everyone's threshold is somewhere. I agree with you that it's dumb to think that way but that doesn't make them retarded or reduce the validity of their potential competitive goals.
Yes, because no one is getting into poker anymore because it's so difficult and there's not different limits and skill levels that separate players.
How the hell do you manage to be wrong about everything that you post on this website??
|
I think if you have 10000 plus pub games/Iccup games they should just pm you a beta key
|
On February 28 2009 02:11 MiniRoman wrote:
I highly doubt inreach started playing BW when it first came out anyways and here heis arguing about the difficulty of competitive gaming. You probably got into BW 6 or 7 years too late anyways and you were able to deliciously eat up rep after rep and vods of polished gameplay. Consider yourself lucky
Only a tiny fraction of users will have a beta key. It's always been like that and it always will be like that. Deal rofl.
Um not only do I have a beta key, you are agreeing with me.
|
On February 28 2009 04:57 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2009 16:27 inReacH wrote:On February 26 2009 16:18 IdrA wrote:
no its not that theyre sandy vaginas
anyone who thinks theyre too far behind cuz of 3 months of beta testing is fucking retarded, and fucking retarded people dont tend to be very valuable for anything. Dude.. no.. You say that because you know and have many examples of that kind of thing being overcome all around you all the time. You don't have to be so critical to people for misjudging something that is so obvious to you. Have you ever heard people talking about missing the boat on poker and that's why they aren't interested? Well it's the same thing, yes it could be overcome but it's a certain degree harder and everyone's threshold is somewhere. I agree with you that it's dumb to think that way but that doesn't make them retarded or reduce the validity of their potential competitive goals. Yes, because no one is getting into poker anymore because it's so difficult and there's not different limits and skill levels that separate players. How the hell do you manage to be wrong about everything that you post on this website??
God.. of course people still get into poker but what I mentioned does happen in poker, people are more hesitant because of how developed the game has become and how much more difficult it is online than it used to be. All I said was this kind of thinking will have an effect, not that it would mean no new players would be entering the competitive scene.
Why are you taking one mild and obvious thing that I said and implying that I'm making this huge, broad ridiculous statement?
|
On February 28 2009 03:26 maybenexttime wrote:
Well, they allowed random WoW addicts access the game in alpha too. T____T
Yes, but progamers were still able to test the game much longer then your average fan, who usually got half an hour. Plus, as mentioned before, they also had more ocassions to try the game.
Plus, what does the fact that WoW players were allowed to try the game have to do with anything? Considering the large demographic of WoW players, it would honestly suprise me if not even one of them had some experience in RTS gaming. Besides, StarCraft, Diablo and *faked gasp* even WarCraft III players were allowed to try the game. Still, none of them except the press and progamers did not get any special treatment.
Lastly, who is more fitting to test the effectiveness of new macro mechanics then *drumroll* progamers?
Not saying progamers won't get the keys but you're reasoning is a bit off, imo.
Nothing off about it. They got access to alpha (and more of it). No reason to believe that it will be any different in beta.
(I hope you're not one of those who believe Blizzard hired (ex-)progamers as testers.)
Personally, I believe they are currently just testing the game among themselves. Whether or not Blizzard employs any ex-progamers (testers or otherwise) I have no idea. But it would be nice if they hired  GARIMTO (who also dabbles in game design, if I recall correctly from his interview).
Also, I thought WC3 beta lasted 5-6 months. ;;
And you would be correct. The WarCraft III beta lasted 5 months. My point was that the average Blizzard beta lasts around 4 months. Obviously there have been deviations from that. For example, the longest Blizzard beta was the WoW beta which lasted for 9 months.
|
On February 28 2009 06:20 inReacH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2009 04:57 Hawk wrote:On February 26 2009 16:27 inReacH wrote:On February 26 2009 16:18 IdrA wrote:
no its not that theyre sandy vaginas
anyone who thinks theyre too far behind cuz of 3 months of beta testing is fucking retarded, and fucking retarded people dont tend to be very valuable for anything. Dude.. no.. You say that because you know and have many examples of that kind of thing being overcome all around you all the time. You don't have to be so critical to people for misjudging something that is so obvious to you. Have you ever heard people talking about missing the boat on poker and that's why they aren't interested? Well it's the same thing, yes it could be overcome but it's a certain degree harder and everyone's threshold is somewhere. I agree with you that it's dumb to think that way but that doesn't make them retarded or reduce the validity of their potential competitive goals. Yes, because no one is getting into poker anymore because it's so difficult and there's not different limits and skill levels that separate players. How the hell do you manage to be wrong about everything that you post on this website?? God.. of course people still get into poker but what I mentioned does happen in poker, people are more hesitant because of how developed the game has become and how much more difficult it is online than it used to be. All I said was this kind of thinking will have an effect, not that it would mean no new players would be entering the competitive scene. Why are you taking one mild and obvious thing that I said and implying that I'm making this huge, broad ridiculous statement?
Because it's wrong? Because you're an idiot? Because the concept that you're pushing from the start is stupid as shit?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On February 28 2009 06:20 inReacH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2009 04:57 Hawk wrote:On February 26 2009 16:27 inReacH wrote:On February 26 2009 16:18 IdrA wrote:
no its not that theyre sandy vaginas
anyone who thinks theyre too far behind cuz of 3 months of beta testing is fucking retarded, and fucking retarded people dont tend to be very valuable for anything. Dude.. no.. You say that because you know and have many examples of that kind of thing being overcome all around you all the time. You don't have to be so critical to people for misjudging something that is so obvious to you. Have you ever heard people talking about missing the boat on poker and that's why they aren't interested? Well it's the same thing, yes it could be overcome but it's a certain degree harder and everyone's threshold is somewhere. I agree with you that it's dumb to think that way but that doesn't make them retarded or reduce the validity of their potential competitive goals. Yes, because no one is getting into poker anymore because it's so difficult and there's not different limits and skill levels that separate players. How the hell do you manage to be wrong about everything that you post on this website?? God.. of course people still get into poker but what I mentioned does happen in poker, people are more hesitant because of how developed the game has become and how much more difficult it is online than it used to be. All I said was this kind of thinking will have an effect, not that it would mean no new players would be entering the competitive scene. Why are you taking one mild and obvious thing that I said and implying that I'm making this huge, broad ridiculous statement?
The poker example is not bad I don't think, although there's a key difference here: Poker was MORE profitable in the past (or perhaps I should say, it was easier to make a good bit of money, the absolute top money might have been less) where as for SC (and SC2) the opposite is probably gonna hold true.. The more the scene develops, the better for anyone looking to play competitively..
Making money in Poker in 2001 as compared to now: Easier
Making money in SC in 2001 as compared to now: Harder.
I belong in the camp that thinks as many of the top SC and WC3 players should be given keys, I don't think the deterrent would be that big - you wouldn't even have to come out and say anything about it, just do it.
On February 28 2009 06:52 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2009 06:20 inReacH wrote:On February 28 2009 04:57 Hawk wrote:On February 26 2009 16:27 inReacH wrote:On February 26 2009 16:18 IdrA wrote:
no its not that theyre sandy vaginas
anyone who thinks theyre too far behind cuz of 3 months of beta testing is fucking retarded, and fucking retarded people dont tend to be very valuable for anything. Dude.. no.. You say that because you know and have many examples of that kind of thing being overcome all around you all the time. You don't have to be so critical to people for misjudging something that is so obvious to you. Have you ever heard people talking about missing the boat on poker and that's why they aren't interested? Well it's the same thing, yes it could be overcome but it's a certain degree harder and everyone's threshold is somewhere. I agree with you that it's dumb to think that way but that doesn't make them retarded or reduce the validity of their potential competitive goals. Yes, because no one is getting into poker anymore because it's so difficult and there's not different limits and skill levels that separate players. How the hell do you manage to be wrong about everything that you post on this website?? God.. of course people still get into poker but what I mentioned does happen in poker, people are more hesitant because of how developed the game has become and how much more difficult it is online than it used to be. All I said was this kind of thinking will have an effect, not that it would mean no new players would be entering the competitive scene. Why are you taking one mild and obvious thing that I said and implying that I'm making this huge, broad ridiculous statement? Because it's wrong? Because you're an idiot? Because the concept that you're pushing from the start is stupid as shit?
-_- Sigh. This can lead only one place, refrain from the whole "you're an idiot" routine if you want to argue.
|
On February 28 2009 06:57 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2009 06:20 inReacH wrote:On February 28 2009 04:57 Hawk wrote:On February 26 2009 16:27 inReacH wrote:On February 26 2009 16:18 IdrA wrote:
no its not that theyre sandy vaginas
anyone who thinks theyre too far behind cuz of 3 months of beta testing is fucking retarded, and fucking retarded people dont tend to be very valuable for anything. Dude.. no.. You say that because you know and have many examples of that kind of thing being overcome all around you all the time. You don't have to be so critical to people for misjudging something that is so obvious to you. Have you ever heard people talking about missing the boat on poker and that's why they aren't interested? Well it's the same thing, yes it could be overcome but it's a certain degree harder and everyone's threshold is somewhere. I agree with you that it's dumb to think that way but that doesn't make them retarded or reduce the validity of their potential competitive goals. Yes, because no one is getting into poker anymore because it's so difficult and there's not different limits and skill levels that separate players. How the hell do you manage to be wrong about everything that you post on this website?? God.. of course people still get into poker but what I mentioned does happen in poker, people are more hesitant because of how developed the game has become and how much more difficult it is online than it used to be. All I said was this kind of thinking will have an effect, not that it would mean no new players would be entering the competitive scene. Why are you taking one mild and obvious thing that I said and implying that I'm making this huge, broad ridiculous statement? The poker example is not bad I don't think, although there's a key difference here: Poker was MORE profitable in the past (or perhaps I should say, it was easier to make a good bit of money, the absolute top money might have been less) where as for SC (and SC2) the opposite is probably gonna hold true.. The more the scene develops, the better for anyone looking to play competitively.. Making money in Poker in 2001 as compared to now: Easier Making money in SC in 2001 as compared to now: Harder. I belong in the camp that thinks as many of the top SC and WC3 players should be given keys, I don't think the deterrent would be that big - you wouldn't even have to come out and say anything about it, just do it. Show nested quote +On February 28 2009 06:52 Hawk wrote:On February 28 2009 06:20 inReacH wrote:On February 28 2009 04:57 Hawk wrote:On February 26 2009 16:27 inReacH wrote:On February 26 2009 16:18 IdrA wrote:
no its not that theyre sandy vaginas
anyone who thinks theyre too far behind cuz of 3 months of beta testing is fucking retarded, and fucking retarded people dont tend to be very valuable for anything. Dude.. no.. You say that because you know and have many examples of that kind of thing being overcome all around you all the time. You don't have to be so critical to people for misjudging something that is so obvious to you. Have you ever heard people talking about missing the boat on poker and that's why they aren't interested? Well it's the same thing, yes it could be overcome but it's a certain degree harder and everyone's threshold is somewhere. I agree with you that it's dumb to think that way but that doesn't make them retarded or reduce the validity of their potential competitive goals. Yes, because no one is getting into poker anymore because it's so difficult and there's not different limits and skill levels that separate players. How the hell do you manage to be wrong about everything that you post on this website?? God.. of course people still get into poker but what I mentioned does happen in poker, people are more hesitant because of how developed the game has become and how much more difficult it is online than it used to be. All I said was this kind of thinking will have an effect, not that it would mean no new players would be entering the competitive scene. Why are you taking one mild and obvious thing that I said and implying that I'm making this huge, broad ridiculous statement? Because it's wrong? Because you're an idiot? Because the concept that you're pushing from the start is stupid as shit? -_- Sigh. This can lead only one place, refrain from the whole "you're an idiot" routine if you want to argue.
Like I said in a previous post, I may be overestimating how large an impact it could have..
I guess I just don't feel it's that necessary to have that aspect of the game pushed so hard before release especially when it may have several negative implications.
SC2 has a long future in front of it and I just want the community to be as big as possible. The things that have happened with BW in the last 10 years are really exciting and I'm looking forward to the compounding effect SC2 is going to bring.
Btw FA, really nice to talk to you lol <3
|
how did þoker come into this>?
|
"Still, none of them except the press and progamers did not get any special treatment."
"Nothing off about it. They got access to alpha (and more of it). No reason to believe that it will be any different in beta. "
Where have I ever said Blizzard policies regarding progamers will change in beta?!
All I said was that they did not really get any special treatment. They were among a pretty large group of people which had an "unlimited" access to alpha: progamers, commentators (and some people otherwise associated with esports in Korea), press, some/many fansite staff members, people at DreamHack and even probably those ESL events...
All I'm saying is that progamers weren't actually singled out if you take into account that plenty of other people were treated the same way - not that they won't get into beta...
I was also worried that you might've been one of those people who believe Blizzard had hired progamers to test the game from the early stages, based on their badly worded statements (Pillars and David Kim are hardly progamers in the moder meaning of the word). But apparently it's not the case, so whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
