|
A shadow of depression is looming over Korea's uniquely prospering professional computer gaming league after a decade of non-stop growth.
Several professional gaming clubs are facing disbandment this year, while TV viewership ratings are stagnant on cable TV. No new games have appeared to succeed the role played by ``StarCraft,'' which alone has fed the so-called e-sports industry over the past 10 years.
Hanbit Soft, a major game publisher who owns one of 12 pro game clubs in South Korea, said last week that it wants to sell the Hanbit Stars team because of financial difficulties. The announcement shocked to the people in the gaming circle because of its contribution to the e-sports sector.
Hanbit is one of the founding members of the Korea e-Sports Association (KeSPA) and its chief executive Kim Young-man has served as the inaugural chairman of the organization since 2001 and 2006. Hanbit was also the local distributor of ``StarCraft'' in Korea and helped two TV broadcasters ― Ongamenet and MBC Games ― settle down as the only 24-hour TV channels in the world dedicated to computer and video games.
Hanbit said Kim will resign from the CEO's post as the firm is being acquired by T3 Entertainment, an online game developer. T3 said it is considering continuing the operation of the gaming club.
``We have not yet decided whether to continue the game club's operation,'' said a T3 spokeswoman.
Adding fuel to the fire on the crisis, the Air Force said last week it will stop recruiting gamers to its Ace gaming corps. The Ace has been the only place where young professional gamers can continue their career while completing the mandatory military service ― an inevitable choice for most players because their peak time as a gamer overlaps their military conscription age.
Computer games have long been a spectator sport in South Korea where there are two game-dedicated TV channels. There are 12 professional ``StarCraft'' clubs owned or sponsored by major companies and some 400 registered pro gamers. But the growth of the so-called e-sports business has slowed from last year in line with the waning popularity of ``StarCraft.''
In 2005, Ongamenet boasted a 3.1 percent viewership rating, ranking 9th among all cable channels. However this year, its ranking dropped to 16th place, and the viewership also fell to 1.9 percent, according to research firm Nielson.
Pundits expects the e-sports industry will go through a major shakeup when Blizzard, the game company that developed ``StarCraft,'' releases its sequel this year. The U.S. firm is allegedly preparing to sell the game in Korea via its own sales network, not through a local distributor such as Hanbit.
Many in the Korean e-sports field worry that Blizzard will demand license fees from the KeSPA and cable TV networks for use of its game in professional leagues, which will add more financial burdens on the league organizers, the clubs and the industry as a whole.
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/tech/2008/05/133_24407.html
---
The fate of e-sports rests on Blizzard's shoulders. Starcraft in Korea is by far the largest, most legitimate and most mainstream establishment of e-sports ever. If it was to collapse without a replacement, what hope is there for the future of e-sports? Starcraft II needs to become an e-sports success, or e-sports may suffer a fatal blow. Counterstrike and Halo just don't cut it for spectators.
|
"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
|
Awesome. We might see the death and rebirth of e-sports!!! or just the death...
|
Blizzard is either extremely smart (likely) or extremely lucky to be developing the successor right now. If the article is accurate there wouldn´t have been a better time for a sequel (economically speaking).
|
Note, I suspect part of the ratings drop is due to streaming online, if Nielson doesn't count that in Korea, like they don't count it in North America. Advertisers are still not yet willing to pay equal money for equal time on Internet streams, even if they can reach as many viewers as TV.
|
This doesn't come as a huge shock to me, I just want to know where "Blizzard, the game company that developed ``StarCraft,'' releases its sequel this year." Probably just some BS fact they came up with unless I missed something huge?
|
On May 21 2008 07:26 Unentschieden wrote: Blizzard is either extremely smart (likely) or extremely lucky to be developing the successor right now. If the article is accurate there wouldn´t have been a better time for a sequel (economically speaking).
Blizzard really is cutting it close. Releasing Starcraft 2 just as Starcraft is starting to decline, to gloriously succeed it and reinvigorate e-sports. Let's hope that they really were clever enough to have been planning this all along, because it would mean that they are seriously considering e-sports in their development. Starcraft 2 really needs to come out soon, because if Starcraft declines too far, it may be impossible to revive the e-sports scene.
|
I'll be sad if SC dies in South Korea...
|
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?
|
On May 21 2008 07:34 Tinithor wrote: I'll be sad if SC dies in South Korea... Too right. I was late to the sc bw scene and for me it just keeps getting better and better. It's very disappointing that such a perfect game seems to be over the hill after only ten years.
|
United Arab Emirates5090 Posts
|
On May 21 2008 07:50 pyrogenetix wrote: is this source legit?
ICCUP cited them, which is how I found them. It also sounds completely reasonable that Airforce Ace will get canned when Boxer leaves, considering that he is the main attraction and their team is always dead last.
|
This goes against everything else I have read regarding e-sports in Korea. I mean, OK maybe hanbit is thinking of pulling the plug, but that's because they fucking suck! Didn't the last OSL set a new record for viewership? Isn't the GOM TV tournament the largest tournament ever? Aren't there more new players entering than ever? Isn't the foreign community (even us foreigners that watch Korean starcraft) continuing to grow? Didn't they just hire a full time English commentator? Didn't they just launch a minor league? Isn't the Korean navy also thinking about starting a team?
All those things, to me, signal that e sports, particularly brood wars, is here to stay.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I agree with this article. Koreatimes is also a reputable source as far as I know.
|
On May 21 2008 07:55 Luddite wrote: This goes against everything else I have read regarding e-sports in Korea. I mean, OK maybe hanbit is thinking of pulling the plug, but that's because they fucking suck! Didn't the last OSL set a new record for viewership? Isn't the GOM TV tournament the largest tournament ever? Aren't there more new players entering than ever? Isn't the foreign community (even us foreigners that watch Korean starcraft) continuing to grow? Didn't they just hire a full time English commentator? Didn't they just launch a minor league? Isn't the Korean navy also thinking about starting a team?
All those things, to me, signal that e sports, particularly brood wars, is here to stay. QFT(and great inspirational writing)
|
Starcraft growth was obviously just a period of time Lets hope Starcraft 2 changes that
|
I was actually starting to think that "Starcraft" was going to break the paradigm that esports is more about game franchise sequels with new graphics.To be fair to Blizzard I think they will give us much more than this.
What this seems to show is that esports being technological in nature and having a younger audience is not immune to technological trends and generational fads. This in turn numbers the days on a particular games lifespan. Imagine Baseball,football.soccer etcetera developing this way. Korea was supposed to be the utopian model for how to make esports work and now we may see the utopia die. This truly brings into question the long term viability of esports or any esport based on a particular game.
|
Osaka26947 Posts
The article confirms what I have already heard about Air Force from Wax.
The lack of innovation from OGN and MBC is catching up with them. In addition, the lack of marketable personalities is also hurting the franchise in general.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On May 21 2008 07:55 Luddite wrote: This goes against everything else I have read regarding e-sports in Korea. I mean, OK maybe hanbit is thinking of pulling the plug, but that's because they fucking suck! Didn't the last OSL set a new record for viewership? Isn't the GOM TV tournament the largest tournament ever? Aren't there more new players entering than ever? Isn't the foreign community (even us foreigners that watch Korean starcraft) continuing to grow? Didn't they just hire a full time English commentator? Didn't they just launch a minor league? Isn't the Korean navy also thinking about starting a team?
All those things, to me, signal that e sports, particularly brood wars, is here to stay. Totally agreed here. Hanbit pulling out (while being a long time sponsor of the scene) is sad news, yes. But Pantech/P&C were in the same boat- and that didn't spell the end for the scene. ACE withdrawing recruitment basically coincides with boxers release. It's not that grim...
|
On May 21 2008 08:12 Manifesto7 wrote: The article confirms what I have already heard about Air Force from Wax.
The lack of innovation from OGN and MBC is catching up with them. In addition, the lack of marketable personalities is also hurting the franchise in general. Yeah I suppose that's true. They need Bisu to become the next bonjwa, or something. I think he has the perfect "superstar" persona, much more than Flash, Jaedong, or mind. Maybe Boxer's return...
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Well it IS getting a little stagnant, or so I feel. I dunno if grim is the right word
|
On May 21 2008 08:12 Manifesto7 wrote: The article confirms what I have already heard about Air Force from Wax.
The lack of innovation from OGN and MBC is catching up with them. In addition, the lack of marketable personalities is also hurting the franchise in general.
I think oversaturation is a huge problem as well. By having so many games played they have no significance. An OSL final isn't a very big event when there are three per year. And because there are so many games played, it's hard to give a sense of story to the sport because there are so many events to work through.
|
On May 21 2008 08:15 FrozenArbiter wrote: Oh it's far from grim, just getting a bit stagnant =]
I like your optimism, but it's unfounded here. It's not just a slowing of growth, it's the beginning of the pro-StarCraft ceasing to be the phenomenon it is now because of the bad business practices of OGN, MBC, and Kespa.
|
Marketing is definitely a big issue. It's hard to interest people who don't play Starcraft. That is why Starcraft 2 stands a chance at becoming a successor e-sport. When it sells insanely huge and is what everyone is playing, there will be more potential e-sports fans around. Starcraft viewers right now will most likely watch Starcraft 2 as well, and with the addition of new fans/viewers, there is the potential for growth.
That's assuming Starcraft 2 is easy enough on the eyes for long term spectating, and that it is a balanced game that's interesting to watch.
|
On May 21 2008 08:16 DTDominion wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 08:12 Manifesto7 wrote: The article confirms what I have already heard about Air Force from Wax.
The lack of innovation from OGN and MBC is catching up with them. In addition, the lack of marketable personalities is also hurting the franchise in general. I think oversaturation is a huge problem as well. By having so many games played they have no significance. An OSL final isn't a very big event when there are three per year. And because there are so many games played, it's hard to give a sense of story to the sport because there are so many events to work through.
I can relate to that. Keeping up with the sport by viewing games is almost impossible with the amount of games being played.
|
I trade sounding like a person with social poise and articulation for this: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO STARCRAFT
|
I agree that oversaturation is an issue, but that is a result of having two 24/7 channels dedicated to Starcraft. They have to create content to fill all that time, so they increase the number of Starleagues and special events and such. I'm not sure how they could solve that without diversifying their content more, but nothing else is as appropriate for spectating as Starcraft.
I think consolidation is needed to ensure Starcraft has a future. People shouldn't have to keep up with OSL and MSL going on at the same time, on different channels. GomTV's international stream is much appreciated, so perhaps there is still a place for them, or maybe they could partner with OGN to do the English international streams of OGN content. Consolidation would reduce confusion and make Professional Starcraft easier to follow.
|
*hopes for tiger terran to be next bonjwa*
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 21 2008 08:18 DTDominion wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 08:15 FrozenArbiter wrote: Oh it's far from grim, just getting a bit stagnant =] I like your optimism, but it's unfounded here. It's not just a slowing of growth, it's the beginning of the pro-StarCraft ceasing to be the phenomenon it is now because of the bad business practices of OGN, MBC, and Kespa. What I'm getting at is that grim makes it sound like SC is on its deathbed, which I really don't think it is. Just past its prime, perhaps
Like say there was no SC2 coming, I think SC could go on for many years still.
|
On May 21 2008 08:28 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 08:18 DTDominion wrote:On May 21 2008 08:15 FrozenArbiter wrote: Oh it's far from grim, just getting a bit stagnant =] I like your optimism, but it's unfounded here. It's not just a slowing of growth, it's the beginning of the pro-StarCraft ceasing to be the phenomenon it is now because of the bad business practices of OGN, MBC, and Kespa. What I'm getting at is that grim makes it sound like SC is on its deathbed, which I really don't think it is. Just past its prime, perhaps Like say there was no SC2 coming, I think SC could go on for many years still.
Perhaps, but it would be withering away into a pathetic existence. Starcraft in Korea right now gets very low ratings compared to hit American TV shows, and probably costs a lot more to keep going due to prize money and salaries for 400 professional players. There will come a point when viewership is just too low to justify the costs, and corporate backers will abandon ship. That is why Starcraft 2 is so important.
Even in the eSTRO coach's interview, he said that he is hoping that Starcraft 2 will breathe new life into e-sports. He wouldn't say that if he didn't suspect that Starcraft has peaked.
|
Pundits expects the e-sports industry will go through a major shakeup when Blizzard, the game company that developed ``StarCraft,'' releases its sequel this year. The U.S. firm is allegedly preparing to sell the game in Korea via its own sales network, not through a local distributor such as Hanbit. Many in the Korean e-sports field worry that Blizzard will demand license fees from the KeSPA and cable TV networks for use of its game in professional leagues, which will add more financial burdens on the league organizers, the clubs and the industry as a whole.
I wonder if Blizzard's merger with Activision has anything to do with this direction Blizzard is taking. It would be consistent with their direction with WOW. Activision/Blizzard seems to be looking for opportunities to maximize licencing and subscription profits like never before. Comments made by Activision's CEO led many to think that Blizzard could start charging fees for battlenet or related services. Seems that Blizzard may become a major force(besides developing games) to be reckoned with in the esports world.
|
Manefisto is correct, a key aspect is markettability. You need superstar personalities to lite fire to the Starcraft scene and attract/keep attention running...
Plus, Starcraft is practically 10 years old now..
|
Why don't they just pick any EA title in existance to replace Starcraft?
hehehehehehehe
|
|
On May 21 2008 08:51 yangstuh wrote: Manefisto is correct, a key aspect is markettability. You need superstar personalities to lite fire to the Starcraft scene and attract/keep attention running...
Plus, Starcraft is practically 10 years old now..
So do you think that Starcraft,and by extension esports are at their core about player personalities and new graphics? Than again fandom may define the sport in Korea.
10 years is long for an electronic game, but not for a conventional sport.
|
United States20661 Posts
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.
|
even if, IF! starcraft is dying, the sequel will just revive the scene and the esports community again. short term: maybe. long term: no
|
Sad news. =( I hope something (not just SC2) comes in to inject new life into the world of e-gaming...It would be a pity if it died before ever leaving S.Korea. =X
|
|
Korea needs international competition
|
I think its safe to assume everyone better start hearding in the SC2 Ark and set sail for Aiur. While you might be able to get SOME new interest in those outside Korea, inside Korea nothing new is going to change. Its like baseball and football in America, nothing is going to significantly increase or lower their ratings unless something crazy happened.
|
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 this is why GomTV tried to reach out to the international market..
|
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
|
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
|
Marketable personality? FBH needs to succeed horribly well XD
|
They should seriously restrict resources on the next season's maps, to encourage low econ micro-heavy games that are more entertaining to watch. I find Yellow in GomTV Intel-Classic is awesome to watch because he plays low econ and very micro heavy.
It's definitely fun for the fans to see a single unit rack up the kills, and narrowly evade death time and time again.
|
United States7166 Posts
FBH or Rock definitely need to start dominating the scene
|
It's the public's way of telling the SC pro's to switch to Sc2 once it gets out.
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
|
"when Blizzard, the game company that developed ``StarCraft,'' releases its sequel this year" hahaha naive
|
|
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~~
|
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.
|
On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote:Show nested quote +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. No. Just no. don't even try to compare sc to a shoooter.
|
On May 21 2008 10:41 Wizard wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote: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. 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.
|
On May 21 2008 10:41 Wizard wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote: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. 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.
|
On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Can you fill us in then? I hope you're just not talking about teamwork.
|
On May 21 2008 10:47 frankbg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 10:41 Wizard wrote:On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote: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. 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.
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).
|
On May 21 2008 10:47 frankbg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 10:41 Wizard wrote:On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote: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. 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. 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.
|
On May 21 2008 10:49 OakHill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote: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. 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)
|
Why do people insist on comparing disparate game genres in a futile attempt to prove which one is better than the other? Stay on topic.
|
On May 21 2008 10:55 Pellucidity wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 10:47 frankbg wrote:On May 21 2008 10:41 Wizard wrote:On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote: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. 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. 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).
You just proved your complete lack of understanding for counter-strike. It is a TEAM FPS, obviously people don't play 1v1. And the fact you say "people would just camp until one GG'd" is pretty sad (trying to stay polite here and not state what I really thought about that comment).
"5 strategies per map lal" Yeah, cause you would know that right? You just said you aren't good at cs (and the way you talk about the game, we can assume you're TERRIBLE at the game), so how the hell would you know how many strats there are? Just like SC, Counterstrike went through multiple "strategic revolutions" where certain teams or generation of players have changed the way certain aspects of the game are played. But then again you wouldn't know that because you're bashing something you know jack shit about.
You might want to go work for PCGamer, I'm sure Dan would enjoy working with a like-minded individual.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
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. It's 4 am here, I'll read the rest of your post tomorrow but unless you've played at a very high level in SC how can you possibly say this?
|
On May 21 2008 07:29 Zzoram wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 07:26 Unentschieden wrote: Blizzard is either extremely smart (likely) or extremely lucky to be developing the successor right now. If the article is accurate there wouldn´t have been a better time for a sequel (economically speaking). Blizzard really is cutting it close. Releasing Starcraft 2 just as Starcraft is starting to decline, to gloriously succeed it and reinvigorate e-sports. Let's hope that they really were clever enough to have been planning this all along, because it would mean that they are seriously considering e-sports in their development. Starcraft 2 really needs to come out soon, because if Starcraft declines too far, it may be impossible to revive the e-sports scene.
I disagree, I believe revealing SC2 decreased growth of Starcraft laying, but that's natural.
|
On May 21 2008 11:08 moebius_string wrote: Why do people insist on comparing disparate game genres in a futile attempt to say which one is better than the other?
I'm not saying any game is better. I'm saying CS is as competitive and requires as much skill/dedication/practice as Starcraft. I'm also trying to rectify the fallacies repeated by some users who obviously have way too little knowledge of CS and it's competitive scene.
Both games exploded at the same time and both pioneered esports in their respective genres. Oh and by the way. The CPL founded eSports with a shooter. KeSPA actually invited the CPL founder to talk about how they pretty much invented eSports.
|
On May 21 2008 11:10 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +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. It's 4 am here, I'll read the rest of your post tomorrow but unless you've played at a very high level in SC how can you possibly say this?
Because Starcraft skills transfer into visuals. Therefore anyone who knows he basics of the game (BOs, macro/micro, gamesense, map knowledge, etc) can understand what's going on and who dominates who. In CS, it is very hard for an outsider to tell these kind of things.
This indeed makes SC the better spectator eSports but in no way means that it requires the most skills and is the most competitive. (because then, why are there 3x more CS players than SC players and why is counterstrike THE esports worldwide while SC is only real big in korea?)
The reason why SC has such a "professional" scene is because Korea is very favorable to gaming while the west doesn't have the same view on video games. Say we turn things around and CS was a hit in korea and SC worldwide. Korea with its huge marketing potential (for esports tv channel and such) would boast a CS scene that is much more "pro" than SC, yet it would only be a hit in Korea.
|
Well even if SC declines in Korea... TSL is stepping in to fill the gaps world-wide, right? Right?? RIGHT?!? T_T
|
Yes CS has skill, but nobody cares because it's not fun to watch. They aren't fun to watch in overhead, 3rd person or 1st person. Starcraft is fun to watch because of how easy it is to see strategy and battles, so it's the best e-sport, since being a sport requires spectators.
Starcraft appears to be in decline, and Starcraft 2 needs to energize the fans and bring in new ones. Blizzard hopefully knows this and is working on the solution.
|
wtf? If sc is going down, please take down wc3, that game doesn't compare to sc and yet I don't see any article saying that wc3 is declining too.
|
On May 21 2008 11:24 Zzoram wrote: Yes CS has skill, but nobody cares because it's not fun to watch. They aren't fun to watch in overhead, 3rd person or 1st person. Starcraft is fun to watch because of how easy it is to see strategy and battles, so it's the best e-sport, since being a sport requires spectators.
Starcraft appears to be in decline, and Starcraft 2 needs to energize the fans and bring in new ones. Blizzard hopefully knows this and is working on the solution.
You're completely right, SC is a wayyyy better spectator esport than CS.
|
On May 21 2008 11:12 frankbg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 11:08 moebius_string wrote: Why do people insist on comparing disparate game genres in a futile attempt to say which one is better than the other? I'm not saying any game is better. I'm saying CS is as competitive and requires as much skill/dedication/practice as Starcraft. I'm also trying to rectify the fallacies repeated by some users who obviously have way too little knowledge of CS and it's competitive scene. Both games exploded at the same time and both pioneered esports in their respective genres. Oh and by the way. The CPL founded eSports with a shooter. KeSPA actually invited the CPL founder to talk about how they pretty much invented eSports.
I'm not saying that anything you say is wrong or blaming you for starting it. I happen to watch Counterstrike matches on WCG and like it( I just wish there was a way they could make it more readable for the uninitiated).
I'm just saying pitting one esport versus another is pointless since we are all on the same side. The mainstream is already closed minded as it is concerning esports.
|
On May 21 2008 09:23 KaRnaGe[cF] wrote: Korea needs international competition
I would agree with that. :D
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Uh what are we discussing here, competitiveness doesn't matter that much when it comes to popularity. Otherwise why would there be more DotA players than WC3 melee players (dunno if this is exactly true but we can just use WoW as an example if you want).
I'm not arguing the competitiveness of CS, but I don't really get what you are talking about, so I decided to read your post before sleeping!
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.
So this is clearly not strategical depth but skill depth that you are talking about for the most part. When he said don't compare a shooter to SC he obviously wasn't talking about the skill required to play (at least that's how I read it).
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). A lot of this I think is inherent to any competitive (edit: and deep) game (especially a game with imperfect information) played between humans. Psychology etc.
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) Ok, I still think it's impossible for you to say that high level CS takes more than high level SC without actually playing high level SC since you can't possibly know what goes into it.
Just because SC skill is more accessible to the viewer doesn't mean the crowd is going to see all that goes into an SC game while watching the screen.
|
I think part of the problem is that the "shelf-life" of a star is just so short in Korea. With the exception of Nada, no other top player has been able to maintain an era of dominance for more than a year. Fans like to stick with their favorites, so I guess it's kinda disappointing when they start getting destroyed left and right and stop making it into individual leagues.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Uh Boxer?
Not that I don't agree with you but when talking about longevity Boxer has to be mentioned (yes, nada too).
|
I agree, I think sc2 is coming out a little late. However, if they really do spend the time on it and use the information of starcraft's strengths and weakness from over the years, they have the potential to make it very successful. I'm not sure if it will be successful though (in replacing starcraft in korea).
|
On May 21 2008 11:34 FrozenArbiter wrote:Uh Boxer? Not that I don't agree with you but when talking about longevity Boxer has to be mentioned (yes, nada too ). Well Boxer was only at top of KesPa ranks for about a year I think... so he wasn't really dominant after that. He's still THE emperor though, so of course he remains popular for much longer.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Mm but he was right there at the top for a really long time. Like first starleague final he reached was in 2001, the last one.. 2005? Pretty long time to be right around the top.
Yes, yes, I know the last starleague he won was in 2002, damn you all But losing 2-3 to Oov, 2-3 to Garimto, 1-3 to reach and 2-3 to anytime is no shame!!
|
Not sure I understand the argument against counter-strike. I like watching it a lot, but its essentially like an american football game as far as how things progress. Its round(quarters) based, momentum has a huge influence as people can rally back and win, there are halves, and its a very easy to explain game. Two teams face off, Ts plant the bomb, CTs defend or defuse, maps have X number of routes, but really both are good games and can be fun to watch, and yeah dota..not sure how that ever became a big game.
|
Alot of you guys are saying that the new players lack charisma, and i can understand why you would say that if you started watching SC a long time ago and those were the guys who dominated the scene when you started,
But for me i DO like the new guys. They don't seem boring to me. I enjoy watching Flash and Jaedong and BeSt and all these guys play. I also like to see the lesser known players play to see what they got, and wonder if maybe one day they will be near the top of the scene. Thats fun for me.
Also on the subject of oversatturation, i dont really think thats an issue, people watch the games they want to watch, follow the teams and players they like, and so on just like normal sports in the US. Do you think anyone watches every baseball game that is played? No.
I dont think that losing ACE and Hanbit will be too big of a hit really. (Well atleast i hope not ><)
|
On May 21 2008 11:08 frankbg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 10:55 Pellucidity wrote:On May 21 2008 10:47 frankbg wrote:On May 21 2008 10:41 Wizard wrote:On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote: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. 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. 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). You just proved your complete lack of understanding for counter-strike. It is a TEAM FPS, obviously people don't play 1v1. And the fact you say "people would just camp until one GG'd" is pretty sad (trying to stay polite here and not state what I really thought about that comment). "5 strategies per map lal" Yeah, cause you would know that right? You just said you aren't good at cs (and the way you talk about the game, we can assume you're TERRIBLE at the game), so how the hell would you know how many strats there are? Just like SC, Counterstrike went through multiple "strategic revolutions" where certain teams or generation of players have changed the way certain aspects of the game are played. But then again you wouldn't know that because you're bashing something you know jack shit about. You might want to go work for PCGamer, I'm sure Dan would enjoy working with a like-minded individual.
- This pseudo-intellectual post was brought to you by frankbg. -
Lets see, I have the counterstrike case infront of me. It says first person shooter. Interesting. There also appear to be deathmatches... interesting. Just because it's only played in teams competitively doesn't mean it's a team FPS. As for the camping comment, how is it sad? is it not the truth? How would you 1v1 if you had to? "PROXY NADE AND FLANK PEWPEW".
I have a friend who plays CS competitively in one of the top three Dutch clans. I'm not saying he could take on any of the pro clans but he does compete in Lans and he told me they have a set number of strategies per map. Also, I'd like to see your name on lan/tournament sheets. See if you're actually half as pro as you are insinuating you are.
As for communication, "HE'S BEHIND THE TREE" hardly qualifies as anything. And claiming 75% of professional CS is communication and psychology/mind games is just outrageous, unless you're as simple minded as you look, in which case I suppose you're right.
I am indeed terrible at CS. This is because I played it twice and got bored. The CS learning curve is _ where as SC's is I and quite frankly, games like that don't interest me. Oh, and I'd rather not work for Dan Stapleface, I reckon you two would fit like a pair of shoes though. Both of you reckon you're top gosugamers and that the games you play are extremely difficult but I've never heard of either of you.
Now, back on topic then. I'm really hoping SC2 will be enough to get the eSports scene going again. It's a little too early to say how the game will turn out (I saw some progamers play, and to be perfectly honest the game looked slow and had completely lost it's element in my eyes) but the BETA isn't even out yet so it's really too soon to tell. I thought Gom TV was doing alright though? the star invitational videos all have like 30 000 views, and that's just the English streams. I think the Korean might have more, and they're giving all the new players intro videos to build a fanbase, although I'm not sure if it's working. All we can hope really is for SC2 to be released this year and be just as fun as the original which we've come to know and love, because aslong as we do I'm fairly sure the SC scene wont die.
P.s. It's 5 A.M. sorry if I'm not making any sense lol.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
The thing is that pretty much nobody can have the same kind of distinct styles that the players of yore had, the game has evolved too much and there are too many players. Oh well.
In addition, there are just so many more players to pay attention to, things just kinda get a little blurry imo.
EDIT: @Post above me who cares if the box says it's an FPS and talks about deathmatches if the game is only ever played competitively in team mode ?
|
Maybe with more differing kinds of maps we would be able to see which players are better at both high econ and low econ play.
|
On May 21 2008 11:59 FrozenArbiter wrote:The thing is that pretty much nobody can have the same kind of distinct styles that the players of yore had, the game has evolved too much and there are too many players. Oh well. In addition, there are just so many more players to pay attention to, things just kinda get a little blurry imo. EDIT: @Post above me who cares if the box says it's an FPS and talks about deathmatches if the game is only ever played competitively in team mode ?
That's not the point It's a FPS. not a TEAM FPS. That was the point Don't know if it's been said before but your name rocks by the way lol. *steals it*
|
Enough with the stupid CS arguements, it has nothing to do with this.
|
On May 21 2008 12:04 Tinithor wrote: Maybe with more differing kinds of maps we would be able to see which players are better at both high econ and low econ play. If they were to decrease the amount of minerals on a map, wouldn't it become slower and thus less fun for the main stream audience to watch? Sure some players will rush, but some will turtle in and just wait for an end game army before attacking. I'm not that experienced so I'm not sure this'll actually happen but it does seem logical to me.
|
Well i don't exactly know how low econ play used to work, but it seemed like people used to find it fun and interesting to watch so i merely suggested adding maps that favored that alongside maps that favored macro play.
|
On May 21 2008 11:57 Pellucidity wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 11:08 frankbg wrote:On May 21 2008 10:55 Pellucidity wrote:On May 21 2008 10:47 frankbg wrote:On May 21 2008 10:41 Wizard wrote:On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote: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. 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. 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). You just proved your complete lack of understanding for counter-strike. It is a TEAM FPS, obviously people don't play 1v1. And the fact you say "people would just camp until one GG'd" is pretty sad (trying to stay polite here and not state what I really thought about that comment). "5 strategies per map lal" Yeah, cause you would know that right? You just said you aren't good at cs (and the way you talk about the game, we can assume you're TERRIBLE at the game), so how the hell would you know how many strats there are? Just like SC, Counterstrike went through multiple "strategic revolutions" where certain teams or generation of players have changed the way certain aspects of the game are played. But then again you wouldn't know that because you're bashing something you know jack shit about. You might want to go work for PCGamer, I'm sure Dan would enjoy working with a like-minded individual. - This pseudo-intellectual post was brought to you by frankbg. - Lets see, I have the counterstrike case infront of me. It says first person shooter. Interesting. There also appear to be deathmatches... interesting. Just because it's only played in teams competitively doesn't mean it's a team FPS. As for the camping comment, how is it sad? is it not the truth? How would you 1v1 if you had to? "PROXY NADE AND FLANK PEWPEW". I have a friend who plays CS competitively in one of the top three Dutch clans. I'm not saying he could take on any of the pro clans but he does compete in Lans and he told me they have a set number of strategies per map. Also, I'd like to see your name on lan/tournament sheets. See if you're actually half as pro as you are insinuating you are. As for communication, "HE'S BEHIND THE TREE" hardly qualifies as anything. And claiming 75% of professional CS is communication and psychology/mind games is just outrageous, unless you're as simple minded as you look, in which case I suppose you're right. I am indeed terrible at CS. This is because I played it twice and got bored. The CS learning curve is _ where as SC's is I and quite frankly, games like that don't interest me. Oh, and I'd rather not work for Dan Stapleface, I reckon you two would fit like a pair of shoes though. Both of you reckon you're top gosugamers and that the games you play are extremely difficult but I've never heard of either of you. Now, back on topic then. I'm really hoping SC2 will be enough to get the eSports scene going again. It's a little too early to say how the game will turn out (I saw some progamers play, and to be perfectly honest the game looked slow and had completely lost it's element in my eyes) but the BETA isn't even out yet so it's really too soon to tell. I thought Gom TV was doing alright though? the star invitational videos all have like 30 000 views, and that's just the English streams. I think the Korean might have more, and they're giving all the new players intro videos to build a fanbase, although I'm not sure if it's working. All we can hope really is for SC2 to be released this year and be just as fun as the original which we've come to know and love, because aslong as we do I'm fairly sure the SC scene wont die. P.s. It's 5 A.M. sorry if I'm not making any sense lol.
Your post made no sense, and admitting your terrible at CS removes any credibility your post may have had.
Lrn2typ pl0x kthxbai.
|
On May 21 2008 12:28 FeArTeHsCoUrGe wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 11:57 Pellucidity wrote:On May 21 2008 11:08 frankbg wrote:On May 21 2008 10:55 Pellucidity wrote:On May 21 2008 10:47 frankbg wrote:On May 21 2008 10:41 Wizard wrote:On May 21 2008 10:36 frankbg wrote: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. 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. 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). You just proved your complete lack of understanding for counter-strike. It is a TEAM FPS, obviously people don't play 1v1. And the fact you say "people would just camp until one GG'd" is pretty sad (trying to stay polite here and not state what I really thought about that comment). "5 strategies per map lal" Yeah, cause you would know that right? You just said you aren't good at cs (and the way you talk about the game, we can assume you're TERRIBLE at the game), so how the hell would you know how many strats there are? Just like SC, Counterstrike went through multiple "strategic revolutions" where certain teams or generation of players have changed the way certain aspects of the game are played. But then again you wouldn't know that because you're bashing something you know jack shit about. You might want to go work for PCGamer, I'm sure Dan would enjoy working with a like-minded individual. - This pseudo-intellectual post was brought to you by frankbg. - Lets see, I have the counterstrike case infront of me. It says first person shooter. Interesting. There also appear to be deathmatches... interesting. Just because it's only played in teams competitively doesn't mean it's a team FPS. As for the camping comment, how is it sad? is it not the truth? How would you 1v1 if you had to? "PROXY NADE AND FLANK PEWPEW". I have a friend who plays CS competitively in one of the top three Dutch clans. I'm not saying he could take on any of the pro clans but he does compete in Lans and he told me they have a set number of strategies per map. Also, I'd like to see your name on lan/tournament sheets. See if you're actually half as pro as you are insinuating you are. As for communication, "HE'S BEHIND THE TREE" hardly qualifies as anything. And claiming 75% of professional CS is communication and psychology/mind games is just outrageous, unless you're as simple minded as you look, in which case I suppose you're right. I am indeed terrible at CS. This is because I played it twice and got bored. The CS learning curve is _ where as SC's is I and quite frankly, games like that don't interest me. Oh, and I'd rather not work for Dan Stapleface, I reckon you two would fit like a pair of shoes though. Both of you reckon you're top gosugamers and that the games you play are extremely difficult but I've never heard of either of you. Now, back on topic then. I'm really hoping SC2 will be enough to get the eSports scene going again. It's a little too early to say how the game will turn out (I saw some progamers play, and to be perfectly honest the game looked slow and had completely lost it's element in my eyes) but the BETA isn't even out yet so it's really too soon to tell. I thought Gom TV was doing alright though? the star invitational videos all have like 30 000 views, and that's just the English streams. I think the Korean might have more, and they're giving all the new players intro videos to build a fanbase, although I'm not sure if it's working. All we can hope really is for SC2 to be released this year and be just as fun as the original which we've come to know and love, because aslong as we do I'm fairly sure the SC scene wont die. P.s. It's 5 A.M. sorry if I'm not making any sense lol. Your post made no sense, and admitting your terrible at CS removes any credibility your post may have had. Lrn2typ pl0x kthxbai. oh the irony
|
My English is fine and my post makes perfect sense. Your post however is rather poorly put together, and since you're attempting to "bash" me, I can only assume you are a counterstrike player, in which case, touche.
P.S. Y-O-U-R = YOUR. Y-O-U-'-R-E = YOU ARE. I just saved you tons of money on tutoring.
|
On May 21 2008 12:04 Tinithor wrote: Maybe with more differing kinds of maps we would be able to see which players are better at both high econ and low econ play. There really isn't a good way to force "low econ" play, because high econ play > low econ play almost universally. Reducing the # of mineral patches would only cause saturation to occur earlier than normal, which even further promotes expanding. Increasing patches wouldn't change much either, as seen in maps like Baekmagogi.
|
Thanks for the news!
At least this news didn't come after Starcraft 2 or else we'll have those same apocolpse predicting idiots that will say "I told you so" because it's "too easy."
|
|
On May 21 2008 12:45 teamsolid wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 12:04 Tinithor wrote: Maybe with more differing kinds of maps we would be able to see which players are better at both high econ and low econ play. There really isn't a good way to force "low econ" play, because high econ play > low econ play almost universally. Reducing the # of mineral patches would only cause saturation to occur earlier than normal, which even further promotes expanding. Increasing patches wouldn't change much either, as seen in maps like Baekmagogi. Old maps like challenger and Bottleneck would do the trick maybe. They only have a few expansions, 2 easy ones on both maps I think. And either one or two expansions that wouldn't be very cost-efficient to get, thus forcing low economy games (lower than what we're used to nowadays anyways).
At Wizard - I was talking to Scourge. Should probably have quoted him but I'm getting the feeling people are getting sick of reading quotes that aren't on topic, sorry
|
|
The one thing I'll say about this whole "SC vs CS" thing is this: comparing Starcraft to Counterstrike is like comparing chess to checkers. Sure, there can be LOTS of depth in both games, but just like in a game of checkers, CS can only have so many different "moves" and then we've basically seen it all (at least to the un-pro audience). Shoot, dodge, kill vs rush/cheese/FE/omgzrecall/dtdrop/etc...
But back on topic, Savior definitely needs to get the hell out of his slump and give the Starcraft world more glitz and glam. Bisu was doing a good job at replacing Savior, until he fucked it all up. Rock's never gonna be able to rule the Kespa rankings, but he's a pretty entertaining personality.
|
I played CAL-M in 1.6... so that's probably like C+ ICCup at StarCraft (that's quite awhile ago).
IMO CS is a better spectator sport despite what some folks think, in fact I'd rather watch two pro CS teams than two SC pros any day of the week (however I'd rather play StarCraft).
Ability wise, StarCraft pros use more brain and muscle than any given entire CS team. I've never been mentally or physically exhausted after playing even a full day of CS matches. I could probably still run a marathon. I get on ICCup and play 10 SC games and I feel like I've been awake for 3 weeks. And if you try to say that I didn't play CS on a pro level and so I don't know what it would take physically or mentally, then you're kind of stupid because energy usage does not go up in that game depending on your level (strategy and aiming improves, and that's about it). Mind games come into play sometimes, but that's about equal for both games.
There's also a lot to say about being in a team vs being an individual... a lot of pro CS players in teams couldn't ever make it as individuals in the same position. Having 1/5th the pressure opposed to the whole of it is entirely different. When you go into a SC competition, you're alone. You might have someone else there that you know, but usually it's your competition. In CS you're with your buddies doing your thing, on your headsets planning strats and yelling at each other to get pumped up, and the pressure isn't even a consideration sometimes. Not to mention in SC you have the first 6 minutes of play to dwell on all the negative possibilities, while in CS it's all there happening right away, and you get many chances to fix mistakes made.
|
Losers: MSL & OSL
Winners: GOMTV
GomTV had the foresight to push for a potential bigger worldwide and growing audience. GomTV cared enough to hire an English caster and air it over the internet. MSL & OSL tried to get bigger by overwhelming viewers with Starcraft, lol. MSL & OSL didn't get a rat's ass about anyone outside Korea. With that much Starcraft being shown that would mean other shows fighting for that time slot may had been killed off.
When Starcraft 2 comes out, GOMTV will be so ahead of their competition for worldwide audience.
|
United States20661 Posts
Hong Jinho is the only consistently entertaining player left.
Oh, and arguably Lee Youngho Protoss Version
|
I think the games are getting less exciting to watch because there's so many of them, and moreover because they're all so macro oriented. So the low-econ maps seems like a great idea to change the game a little bit. Maybe with only 5 patches or so at the nat and 8 in the main to really discourage fast expo builds. And another big factor as someone said before is that none of the players stay at the top anymore; players dominate for short times and then fade as quickly so it's really hard to cheer for anyone.
|
On May 21 2008 11:04 frankbg wrote: 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.
What teams did you play for and tournaments you participated in? I follow the CS quite a bit.
|
In a perfect esport world games would not be replaced with sequels, but refined and patched to improve the level and pace of play like in conventional sports. Than again if Blizzard stays to the original design choices of the original with a few additions then Starcraft 2 won't really be that much of a departure from Starcraft, but an evolution.
|
I was never around in the "Golden Age," but I have to admit, it gets tiring following GSL, PL, MSL, OSL, and special events, not to mention TSL and other foreign events. There is definitely a lot of saturation. And if the individual leagues were less often, I guess people would have more opportunities to have a "hero" since they wouldn't be knocked down 4 months later.
But I don't really know the economics of it, just that it is stressful to live a life and also follow the pro-scene. However, I do the best I can, I still love it, and I hope and pray that the StarCraft II scene will be a continuation of what StarCraft was without being too different, but also revitalizing it for another 10 years.
|
Like i said, you dont need to follow every single game that happens if you dont have time to...
|
Interest for Starcraft may be reducing due to Starcraft 2 coming along, at the time SC2 ships it will boost e-sports in every country by atleast 100% Also i don't think Blizzard is going to require fees as they would want as much SC2 promotion as possible and obviosly channels and cable networks provide. Another thing is that if Blizzard require fees they would basicly require fee for every SC2 tournament thats going to be organized and thus automaticly pwning their SC2 sales as the interest for hosting sc2 tournaments for fees will be minimum if not nonexistant due to the still fresh and undeveloped e-sports!
|
What I think needs to happen is that there should be less individual leagues [maximum two] with longer seasons. I think a big problem is that the seasons are so short that winning an osl or an msl one year down the road is nothing because there's already been another one or two: overall, the prestige is quite low.
|
On May 21 2008 13:50 Wizard wrote: why did you even create this thread? I decided instead of being in the Star craft declining thread, it should have one of it's own, seeing how it was already 4 pages in length when i visited it. There was a drift into an argument in the declining SC thread Over Which is the better game, SC or Counter Strike.
Im not implying counterstrike was a horrific game; it's perfectly fine in it's own right, What i will not have is people asserting the fact that CS> SC.
5 Reasons SC> CS.
First of all, Of course the CS people will argue that CS> SC in popularity Wow, a game you have to pay for, (steam account) And actually has sponsoring? People can actually play all day and make money WHOAA. THAT MEANS YOU GUYS CAN ACTUALLY GET GOOD AT A GAME WHEREAS we actually play this game for fun. If you are going to argue that top tier players play the game for fun, you don't even know the half of playing CS competitively.
Starcraft isn't some glamor sport, despite the popularity in korea, It's graphics are pretty horrid in comparison to real day games whereas im pretty sure you first got into counter strike because everything was shiny and neat and set up cause you payed monthly for your steam account.
What game is BETTER starcraft or counterstrike?
Starcraft, by far. Counterstrike can only be coupled with pathetic society and capitalism
1. Starcraft has LAN latency , Chaos, iCCup , for middle tier even low skilled players have easy access to this.
1. CounterStrike On the other hand, has FPS GG Latency ping. People dont even LEAD or aim anymore, they just spray an ak at headshot level and hope . Please dont even try to argue that cause u know that's what you do vs laggers.
2.Starcraft is actually FAST , Apm please.
2. counterstrike ,"Oh look i can buy a gun and have everything set up with 5 buttons" Let's spam "a" and "d" and then throw a nade and crouch and jump what is that like 7 keys in a minute where starcraft can be 7 keys in a second?
3. Ok they both have mind games, Since i dont play at that tier of CS i wont go into that. (obviously SC>CS however )
4. Multitasking. If u cant do that in starcraft you lose so hard, so easily.
4. Woww i have a thing called radar it tells me where everything is , "getting shanked is considered noob" where as in SC a sneaky play like that, reflects the skill of the OTHER person cleverly timing his distractions and feints while dropping or harassing something important. What do u have in CS" Ohh I SEE YOU THAR HI. YOU SEE ME TOO LOL.
I could just go on and on, but NOT going to play a game that's as stupid as you look, (CS supporters) , I'm rather going to play 1;1 matches, unlike some people who decide that 1;1 is not a test of skill
Im pretty sure this goes against the "10 commandments" But no one puts down star craft below another game; especially one of 2nd class caliber such as CS
Please if im so wrong, retort me, give me your honest point, or do the committed counterstrike people have a trepidation of speaking out.
|
On May 21 2008 11:16 frankbg wrote: (because then, why are there 3x more CS players than SC players and why is counterstrike THE esports worldwide while SC is only real big in korea?)
maybe FPS is the easier game to play and pick up.
I mean its soooooooo easy to learn how to play an FPS, use the arrow keys and shoot. The learning curve of RTS games is so much higher, which already turns off alot of people and they dont even give the game a try.
|
I think it's because every player turtles and macros up these days and althrough fun to watch it gets pretty boring when there's only 6 matchups. Blizzard isn't doing starcraft any favors by keeping the race count at 3. Having more races creates more matchups and more strategies but they're taking the safer route
|
On May 21 2008 13:34 HeavOnEarth wrote: 5 Reasons SC> CS Pretty damn hard.
First of all, Of course the pathetic CS people will argue that CS> SC in popularity Wow, a game you have to pay for, (steam account) And actually has sponsoring? People can actually play all day and make money WHOAA. THAT MEANS YOU GUYS CAN ACTUALLY GET GOOD AT A GAME WHEREAS we actually play this game for fun. If you are going to argue that top tier players play the game for fun, you don't even know the half of playing CS competitively.
Starcraft isn't some glamor sport, despite the popularity in korea, It's graphics are pretty horrid in comparison to real day games whereas im pretty sure you first got into counter strike because everything was shiny and neat and set up cause you payed monthly for your steam account.
What game is BETTER starcraft or counterstrike?
Starcraft, by far. Counterstrike can only be coupled with pathetic society and capitalism
1. Starcraft has LAN latency , Chaos, iCCup , for middle tier even low skilled players have easy access to this.
1. CounterStrike On the other hand, has FPS GG Latency ping. People dont even LEAD or aim anymore, they just spray an ak at headshot level and hope . Please dont even try to argue that cause u know that's what you do vs laggers.
2.Starcraft is actually FAST , Apm please.
2. counterstrike ,"Oh look i can buy a gun and have everything set up with 5 buttons" Let's spam "a" and "d" and then throw a nade and crouch and jump what is that like 7 keys in a minute where starcraft can be 7 keys in a second?
3. Ok they both have mind games, Since i dont play at that tier of CS i wont go into that. (obviously SC>CS however )
4. Multitasking. If u cant do that in starcraft you lose so hard, so easily.
4. Woww i have a thing called radar it tells me where everything is , "getting shanked is considered noob" where as in SC it reflects the skill of the OTHER person cleverly timing his distractions and feints while dropping or harassing something important. What do u have in CS" Ohh I SEE YOU THAR HI. YOU SEE ME TOO LOL LETS SHOOT AND PARTY MKAY?"
I could just go on and on, but NOT going to play a game that's as stupid as you look, (CS supporters) , I'm rather going to play 1;1 matches, unlike some people who decide that they are too much of a wimp to even consider 1;1 matches
....wtf?
Wrong on every point, nice try.
Is this an attempt at sarcasm?
Those comments right there are equivalent to a noob's perception of Starcraft.
|
On May 21 2008 12:57 Skew wrote: I played CAL-M in 1.6... so that's probably like C+ ICCup at StarCraft (that's quite awhile ago).
IMO CS is a better spectator sport despite what some folks think, in fact I'd rather watch two pro CS teams than two SC pros any day of the week (however I'd rather play StarCraft).
Ability wise, StarCraft pros use more brain and muscle than any given entire CS team. I've never been mentally or physically exhausted after playing even a full day of CS matches. I could probably still run a marathon. I get on ICCup and play 10 SC games and I feel like I've been awake for 3 weeks. And if you try to say that I didn't play CS on a pro level and so I don't know what it would take physically or mentally, then you're kind of stupid because energy usage does not go up in that game depending on your level (strategy and aiming improves, and that's about it). Mind games come into play sometimes, but that's about equal for both games.
There's also a lot to say about being in a team vs being an individual... a lot of pro CS players in teams couldn't ever make it as individuals in the same position. Having 1/5th the pressure opposed to the whole of it is entirely different. When you go into a SC competition, you're alone. You might have someone else there that you know, but usually it's your competition. In CS you're with your buddies doing your thing, on your headsets planning strats and yelling at each other to get pumped up, and the pressure isn't even a consideration sometimes. Not to mention in SC you have the first 6 minutes of play to dwell on all the negative possibilities, while in CS it's all there happening right away, and you get many chances to fix mistakes made. Haha yeah, SC is waaay harder to get (individually) good at than CS, the learning curve is ridiculous. CS can be mentally draining/stressful, but never physically like SC. Competitive CS is great though.
CS is hard to cast since it's almost impossible to capture everything that goes on in a round. Lots of positioning goes on, then everything happens at once. It's like American football with horrible camerawork. With first person view you miss all the strategy/most of the tactics, and the top-view overlay is a joke. Occasionally third person view can show most of it, but I've never seen that happen on a stream.
HLTV's fun to watch though, just not nearly as accessible as a video stream.
|
On May 21 2008 11:16 frankbg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 11:10 FrozenArbiter wrote: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. It's 4 am here, I'll read the rest of your post tomorrow but unless you've played at a very high level in SC how can you possibly say this? Because Starcraft skills transfer into visuals. Therefore anyone who knows he basics of the game (BOs, macro/micro, gamesense, map knowledge, etc) can understand what's going on and who dominates who. In CS, it is very hard for an outsider to tell these kind of things. That's not a valid answer to FA's question. The fact that pro SC matches are more visually understandable than CS doesn't mean that there are nothing else behind. You're being one-sided here I think. Have you ever thought that what you could see from a Starcraft game was just the tip of the iceberg, and there were lots of things going on behind that your limited understanding didn't allow you to see, just like a normal player couldn't fully understand CS matches, too?
|
this is all nice, but the obvious answer is that in order for SC/SC2/e-sports to survive and even thrive...it has to be taken globally.
|
I have not been spectating this game as long as many here, but I think after 10 years it could be that the game has been honed to such a science by players, that players pick only the units to which strategies and tactics can be utilized to the utmost. Broodwar really needs new balance some patches and some unit changes or adjustments to break the current gameplay monotony. For example some units are never used. Certain matchups like Zerg vs Zerg and Terran vsTerran just seem broken. The last Hwasin vs Sea match and the subsequent game after made me not want to watch anymore games for two days-some adjustments to the game need to be made. Problem is maps can't fix it;only Blizzard can do it.
|
awh, such sad text :<
I'd really like to get someone who is in Korea and has a lot of knowledge about the inside things, someone like Rekrul or Tasteless to tell their opinion on this.
|
Oh btw, people say this about SC every single year, it's hard to take it seriously. Hanbit isn't making money because their team is boring and terrible. ACE is disbanding because Boxer is leaving, and ACE is terrible. Nielsen ratings are down because people watch on GOM/Daum.
|
On May 21 2008 14:25 SonuvBob wrote: Oh btw, people say this about SC every single year, it's hard to take it seriously. Hanbit isn't making money because their team is boring and terrible. ACE is disbanding because Boxer is leaving, and ACE is terrible. Nielsen ratings are down because people watch on GOM/Daum. I'm going to trust you because you're from Aiur, and if what you say is true, I am most displeased with this article.
|
On another level mauby Korea needs to change the organization a little sord of like in football.
There should be 1 major league say OSL and a second less prestigious league say MSL. Now these leagues will be played over longer period of time and they should be broadcasted from R32. Now the way players get in the leagues is by overall assesment, say CJ finishes 1st in the PRO league so they will have 2 players automaticly qualifuing for R32, while the rest all go through the full qualification rounds. This should be for the first 2 teams, while 3rd and 4th team should only get by 2 players automaticly qualifying but at R32 instead of R16. The actual players who get selected by teams to automaticly go to R16 and/or 32 should be based off their solo score!
Also whoever wins say major league OSL will also automaticly make it in the R16 next season, while if his team in the meantime finsihes say 2nd and get 2 players to automaticly qualify for R16 and the guy who won the OSL is highest ranking in the team, automaticly the 3rd highest ranking gets R16 auto qualifications, similar as how cup games work in football(soccer) now!
|
On May 21 2008 14:28 Ancestral wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 14:25 SonuvBob wrote: Oh btw, people say this about SC every single year, it's hard to take it seriously. Hanbit isn't making money because their team is boring and terrible. ACE is disbanding because Boxer is leaving, and ACE is terrible. Nielsen ratings are down because people watch on GOM/Daum. I'm going to trust you because you're from Aiur, and if what you say is true, I am most displeased with this article.
I wouldn't be surprised if it is wrong. Why would GomTV start a new league and run GSI if the situation is grim? It makes no sense.
|
I dont think starcraft its declining.... a drop in Korean TV? Maybe. But year after year more people get interested in starcraft and korean e-sports around the world, maybe its time that korean government invest in tourism and korean TV start to export their culture, starcarft included. The games (phylosophical, cultural, and technically spoking), are rising around the world... i think that with the internet, the newest technologies and korean e-sport, will spread around the world and will take more strong than ever in their history. They needs open their markets, dont close it to korean geographic boundaries...
|
Why would GomTV start a new league and run GSI if the situation is grim? It makes no sense. Because the GSI made a leap into tapping a market hundreds of times larger than the current saturated one in korea.
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
why are people still bashing each other about CS vs SC? let's just settle it at that both games are damn hard to play in different ways and not kill each other over it -_-;
what needs to be addressed is whether sc is in decline or not!
|
On May 21 2008 07:28 SpiritAshura wrote: This doesn't come as a huge shock to me, I just want to know where "Blizzard, the game company that developed ``StarCraft,'' releases its sequel this year." Probably just some BS fact they came up with unless I missed something huge? Actually they have said that for roughly 3 months now, its just that people like you think that its BS eventhough it is confirmed by Blizzard that they are aiming for a 2008 release.
http://www.gamereplays.org/starcraft2/portals.php?game=33&show=page&name=gamereplays_visits_blizzard&st=2
Read the last line there, and I have never seen Blizzard say anything different and this statement here even confirms it even more. Also if we look at history WC3 beta started 4 months before its release, and WC3 was far from finished in its beta they even added a new unit in it and reworked a lot of fundamentals in it, so seeing a sc2 beta at the end of the summer is not that unlikely from what we have seen of the game so far.
|
After tonight's proleague matches i must say that, I STILL LOVE STARCRAFT!!!!!
|
surprising that it's lasted this long really i think starcraft has been in decline in the west since WC3 came out personally , alot less new players now it's mostly the real die hards nowdays
|
On May 21 2008 11:57 Pellucidity wrote: - This pseudo-intellectual post was brought to you by frankbg. -
Lets see, I have the counterstrike case infront of me. It says first person shooter. Interesting. There also appear to be deathmatches... interesting. Just because it's only played in teams competitively doesn't mean it's a team FPS. As for the camping comment, how is it sad? is it not the truth? How would you 1v1 if you had to? "PROXY NADE AND FLANK PEWPEW".
You do actually have 1v1, within a 5v5 setup. If 4 of each team's players die, you do have to 1v1. Go and watch a pro game see if people camp. Now saying there are deathmatches is like me judging SC from BGH and fastest on bnet, once again, you don't know enough to debate this topic. Since you took the liberty of insulting me in your opening to the post, I'll return the favor: You're fucking retarded and don't know what you're talking about.
I have a friend who plays CS competitively in one of the top three Dutch clans. I'm not saying he could take on any of the pro clans but he does compete in Lans and he told me they have a set number of strategies per map. Also, I'd like to see your name on lan/tournament sheets. See if you're actually half as pro as you are insinuating you are.
Each time might have a set number of strats, because no one can learn 100 strats x 10 maps and execute them perfectly (since you need all 5 players to work the strat perfectly). That does not mean theres 5/6 possible strats. Once again, flawed logic based on your lack of knowledge about the game. My personnal CS experience will be listed at the end of the post.
As for communication, "HE'S BEHIND THE TREE" hardly qualifies as anything. And claiming 75% of professional CS is communication and psychology/mind games is just outrageous, unless you're as simple minded as you look, in which case I suppose you're right.
If your friend denies that high level CS is 75% mindgame, he is lying to you about his status. Also, if you think "HES BEHIND THE TREE" is the kind of call people make, then I shouldn't even reply to this post because what you need is to hop on the short yellow bus, your sped friends are waiting for you to go to school.
I am indeed terrible at CS. This is because I played it twice and got bored. The CS learning curve is _ where as SC's is I and quite frankly, games like that don't interest me. Oh, and I'd rather not work for Dan Stapleface, I reckon you two would fit like a pair of shoes though. Both of you reckon you're top gosugamers and that the games you play are extremely difficult but I've never heard of either of you.
So you played it twice but you can assess the learning curve properly? Yeah, cause that makes sense.... I don't reckon I'm top gosugamer. I said I played high level Counter-Strike, that doesn't mean I am "pro" as pro means someone who is paid to play (go pick up a dictionary). Once again my exp will be at the bottom of the page.
My CS background:
Online Pre-1.6 XD's / Xtreme Dreamers (Dreamcite LAN center sponsored team) / CAL-Main [e--] / Team Eminence / CAL-Invite iwa. / Issues with authority / CAL-Main [fe]- / Flawless Execution / CAL-Main and UGS-Main Champions cBs/Excel / Cheap Banana Slide, name changed to Excel / CAL-Intermediate Finals (loss to JMC)
Online Post 1.6 warped / Team Warped / CAL-Main kinship / Kinship / CAL-Premier [4R] / 4thReich / CEVO-A (4th Seed of playoffs, moved up to IM) aoL / another online Legend / CAL-Main [fe]- / Flawless Execution (remake) / CAL-Intermediate
LAN Experience WCG Canadian Finals 2006 / Quarterfinalist ESWC Canadian Qualifier 2006 / Round of 8 WCG Canadian Finals 2005 / (forgot result, we had a PUG going and didn't place too good) DreamLAN 1 / PUG team, Round of 16 DreamLAN 2 / 2nd Place, Team [tup] Lan-4-Ever TR / 4th, Team daL PureLAN 8 / 7th, 5wW (friendly PUG)
Also attended many other smaller lans where I forgot our placement, including all of PureLANs, ETS Lans, Basefrag Lans as player, staff and match caster.
So yeah, I think I know wtf I am talking about when it comes to CS.
|
And whats your SC background?
|
On May 21 2008 12:57 soudo wrote: The one thing I'll say about this whole "SC vs CS" thing is this: comparing Starcraft to Counterstrike is like comparing chess to checkers. Sure, there can be LOTS of depth in both games, but just like in a game of checkers, CS can only have so many different "moves" and then we've basically seen it all (at least to the un-pro audience). Shoot, dodge, kill vs rush/cheese/FE/omgzrecall/dtdrop/etc...
Lol. Definatly not biaised.....
So what's your history with CS. I mean, you must be pretty good to make such assessments, no?
Saying the moves in CS are limited to "Shoot, dodge, kill" is like me saying the moves in SC are limited to "attack move, move, gather".
Once again, clearly no understanding of the game you are judging on.
Haven't you guys learned anything from the PCG article? You can't really have a decent opinion of whats involved in a game without actually playing it at a good enough level.
On the other hand, I thought Skew's reply was quite accurate. SC is alot more exhausting than CS and the pressure is indeed shared between 5 players. But the fact that you have to act as a team compensates for less mouse movements, it adds a entirely new aspect that you don't find in SC, outside of 2v2s but they are nothing like the coordination and communication you need with CS. Also in CS it's more about accuracy of your mouse movement and anticipation rather than fast click and high apm. You don't need to look at two things and switching between these 2 every .05 seconds (bad players do that where they'll position in a bad place and have to watch 2 spots).
|
This is reminding of the PC Gamer article on Starcraft...
Can we please stop the BW vs CS debate? Both takes a lot skill, end discussion.
Starcraft Declining in Korea. DISCUSS.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On May 21 2008 18:09 frankbg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 12:57 soudo wrote: The one thing I'll say about this whole "SC vs CS" thing is this: comparing Starcraft to Counterstrike is like comparing chess to checkers. Sure, there can be LOTS of depth in both games, but just like in a game of checkers, CS can only have so many different "moves" and then we've basically seen it all (at least to the un-pro audience). Shoot, dodge, kill vs rush/cheese/FE/omgzrecall/dtdrop/etc...
Lol. Definatly not biaised..... So what's your history with CS. I mean, you must be pretty good to make such assessments, no? Saying the moves in CS are limited to "Shoot, dodge, kill" is like me saying the moves in SC are limited to "attack move, move, gather". Once again, clearly no understanding of the game you are judging on. Haven't you guys learned anything from the PCG article? You can't really have a decent opinion of whats involved in a game without actually playing it at a good enough level. On the other hand, I thought Skew's reply was quite accurate. SC is alot more exhausting than CS and the pressure is indeed shared between 5 players. But the fact that you have to act as a team compensates for less mouse movements, it adds a entirely new aspect that you don't find in SC, outside of 2v2s but they are nothing like the coordination and communication you need with CS. Also in CS it's more about accuracy of your mouse movement and anticipation rather than fast click and high apm. You don't need to look at two things and switching between these 2 every .05 seconds (bad players do that where they'll position in a bad place and have to watch 2 spots). Oh SC is not only attack move gather only but also build 10 plus buildings control about hundred units simultenously and also you need to scout patrol use ur skill and spells correctly and precise. also pro gamer of sc need accurate and also fast mouse movements to control all of the units and groups. Sc 2v2 needs coordination between the allies so that they can take out both of their enemy, the are multitasking because they can see what their allies is seeing in the screen so they need more movement and coordination. its like playing 1v1 and doubling it. So starcraft moves are not very limited.This is my only opinion about your post!
On the other hand I am not believing that SC is declining but i it also its WOW flavor because maybe of lack of colorful micro or strategy or even strong charismatic players. I also think that they should lessen their competitions for only annually and make it more longer so that fans can cheer for fav player for a long time. OGN and MSL also need to care about foreign fans of SC so that they can have higher turnouts. SC2 needs to be a good game for the SC leagacy to last longer. I certainly believe Blizzard is doing its best to make SC2 a worhty successor of SC1 ^^
|
On May 21 2008 13:34 HeavOnEarth wrote: Im not implying counterstrike was a horrific game; it's perfectly fine in it's own right, What i will not have is people asserting the fact that CS> SC.
5 Reasons SC> CS.
First of all, Of course the CS people will argue that CS> SC in popularity Wow, a game you have to pay for, (steam account) And actually has sponsoring? People can actually play all day and make money WHOAA. THAT MEANS YOU GUYS CAN ACTUALLY GET GOOD AT A GAME WHEREAS we actually play this game for fun. If you are going to argue that top tier players play the game for fun, you don't even know the half of playing CS competitively.
Starcraft isn't some glamor sport, despite the popularity in korea, It's graphics are pretty horrid in comparison to real day games whereas im pretty sure you first got into counter strike because everything was shiny and neat and set up cause you payed monthly for your steam account.
What are you smoking? Why are you even talking? You clearly never even have been on steam and probably never played CS. Payed monthly for your steam account? Seriously? Damn I have been missing 5 years of payments then! Seriously though, don't even touch the subject if you're gonna start off by saying Steam is pay-to-play (when it's not).
What game is BETTER starcraft or counterstrike?
Starcraft, by far. Counterstrike can only be coupled with pathetic society and capitalism
Huh, seriously, I think you need to stop smoking dope bro. Btw, I think Marx is calling for you, better go back to the Soviet block. Pathetic society and capitalism? LOL. I would call you a retard but I'll refrain, since anyone reading this will already conclude you are.
1. Starcraft has LAN latency , Chaos, iCCup , for middle tier even low skilled players have easy access to this.
You can create a LAN server through hamachi for CS aswell, I'm surprised someone with your intelligence didn't figure that one out before posting and looking like a complete tool. Also, unlike other systems (I think bnet does that, not 100% sure), Steam does not host the games for you, therefore it does not dictate your latency. There are no latency issues whatsoever with CS, as long as you play with people on your (relative) timezone. East people play East/Cent, West people play West/Cent (using North America as exemple).
1. CounterStrike On the other hand, has FPS GG Latency ping. People dont even LEAD or aim anymore, they just spray an ak at headshot level and hope . Please dont even try to argue that cause u know that's what you do vs laggers.
Rofl. Ya ok noob. Stop playing on servers all the way across the world or get off your 56k, whatever you're doing, you're clearly wrong. If all you see is spray and pray, you're either so bad you cant tell when people recoil control or you just play with baddies like you.
2.Starcraft is actually FAST , Apm please.
2. counterstrike ,"Oh look i can buy a gun and have everything set up with 5 buttons" Let's spam "a" and "d" and then throw a nade and crouch and jump what is that like 7 keys in a minute where starcraft can be 7 keys in a second?
Once again, complete Ignorance. I buy my weapons within 2-3 seconds max. Obviously, just like if you played a random noob mod in SC, if you play on a public CS server, you'll have time to do so, just like you would have time to build 85 cannons in SC vs the computer or on a UMS. Also, if you click to buy your guns, you're REALLY bad (I doubt you actually ever played CS since you stated it's monthly pay to play). I'm sure you run into walls and spaz out whenever you run into some action anyways so be happy theres "5 buttons" (theres actually a lot more. lol) cause anymore would probably blow your tiny brains out.
3. Ok they both have mind games, Since i dont play at that tier of CS i wont go into that. (obviously SC>CS however )
So you're saying you have no clue, yet you make a judgement anyways. Oh well, just like the rest of your trash post.
4. Multitasking. If u cant do that in starcraft you lose so hard, so easily.
4. Woww i have a thing called radar it tells me where everything is , "getting shanked is considered noob" where as in SC a sneaky play like that, reflects the skill of the OTHER person cleverly timing his distractions and feints while dropping or harassing something important. What do u have in CS" Ohh I SEE YOU THAR HI. YOU SEE ME TOO LOL.
Huh, I think you haven't been playing CS, but CSS. In CS you don't see enemies on your radar (ever.), only your teammates. Also, I'm pretty sure you can't use the radar without taking a pause from the play anyways. Good players keep track of about a half dozen things in the UI just like you would keep track of minerals and minimap in SC. Your argument is like saying: "LOL THERES A MINIMAP IN SC, LOL I SEE YOU THAR HI" and ignoring fog of war. Again, ignorance is the key word here.
I could just go on and on, but NOT going to play a game that's as stupid as you look, (CS supporters) , I'm rather going to play 1;1 matches, unlike some people who decide that 1;1 is not a test of skill
Who said 1:1 isn't a test of skill? It's the standard competitive mode for SC, just like 5v5 is the standard for CS. By the way, you could always 1v1 in CS, it's just considered irrelevent because it only tests your aiming and twitch reaction when the actual game (5v5) requires a LOT more. Often good aimers can't teamwork and players with less aim will be chosen over them on a team.
Im pretty sure this goes against the "10 commandments" But no one puts down star craft below another game; especially one of 2nd class caliber such as CS
Please if im so wrong, retort me, give me your honest point, or do the committed counterstrike people have a trepidation of speaking out.
I'm not putting SC below another game, I'm saying they are two different things that both require a lot of skills and in my opinion CS is equal, possibly more skill requiring, because of the multitude of things you have to understand (and that come with experience, since they don't translate visually to spectators) before you can even be anywhere close to decent. It's obvious you don't understand those skills and don't even know of their existence. But then again, from the way you see things, I don't expect anything intelligent from you anymore.
Also, I wonder why 3x as many people play the "2nd class caliber" game versus SC which according to you is the all-supreme game of all times.
Final word: SC is a much better spectator sport than CS, but they both require an incredible amount of skills, more than any other games in their genre and quite possibly more than any other games period (lets ignore Q3 and 1v1 DM games for arguments sake). These 2 games are the boat on which eSports has been sailing for the past 10 years.
|
On May 21 2008 18:34 dat[fury] wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On May 21 2008 18:09 frankbg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 12:57 soudo wrote: The one thing I'll say about this whole "SC vs CS" thing is this: comparing Starcraft to Counterstrike is like comparing chess to checkers. Sure, there can be LOTS of depth in both games, but just like in a game of checkers, CS can only have so many different "moves" and then we've basically seen it all (at least to the un-pro audience). Shoot, dodge, kill vs rush/cheese/FE/omgzrecall/dtdrop/etc...
Lol. Definatly not biaised..... So what's your history with CS. I mean, you must be pretty good to make such assessments, no? Saying the moves in CS are limited to "Shoot, dodge, kill" is like me saying the moves in SC are limited to "attack move, move, gather". Once again, clearly no understanding of the game you are judging on. Haven't you guys learned anything from the PCG article? You can't really have a decent opinion of whats involved in a game without actually playing it at a good enough level. On the other hand, I thought Skew's reply was quite accurate. SC is alot more exhausting than CS and the pressure is indeed shared between 5 players. But the fact that you have to act as a team compensates for less mouse movements, it adds a entirely new aspect that you don't find in SC, outside of 2v2s but they are nothing like the coordination and communication you need with CS. Also in CS it's more about accuracy of your mouse movement and anticipation rather than fast click and high apm. You don't need to look at two things and switching between these 2 every .05 seconds (bad players do that where they'll position in a bad place and have to watch 2 spots). Oh SC is not only attack move gather only but also build 10 plus buildings control about hundred units simultenously and also you need to scout patrol use ur skill and spells correctly and precise. also pro gamer of sc need accurate and also fast mouse movements to control all of the units and groups. Sc 2v2 needs coordination between the allies so that they can take out both of their enemy, the are multitasking because they can see what their allies is seeing in the screen so they need more movement and coordination. its like playing 1v1 and doubling it. So starcraft moves are not very limited.This is my only opinion about your post!
You didn't understand my post. What I said is if You say that CS is just "shoot, dodge, kill", it's like if I would (wrongly) assume that BW was 3 moves (attack, move, gather). I know obviously that it is much more than that. But I was showing how oversimplified your assumption was. CS is much more than "shoot, dodge, kill". If you think elsewise, you've simply never played CS outside of casually in a public servers (which equals playing fastest 3v3 on bnet with complete nubs).
|
Your argument why CS is requires more skill and is more competitive compared to SC isn't even an argument, but pure BS. Popularity among players doesn't have a direct connection to skill(and it's more of a reverse dependancy, because harder games are played by fewer people, an obvious fact), or you want to tell me the Sims requires the most skills of all games, because it is the most popular?
The Sims > CS! I learned a new thing today!
|
This is just like the 2003-2004 debate where everyone thought that esport SC in korea was going downhill...
Just because a sponsor who have sponsored korean eSports in 7-8 years with a team and OSL's don't want to do it anymore does not mean that korean esport will die >.<
|
Stop the CS vs Bw bs please. It is off topic.
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
GUYS BOTH CS AND SC REQUIRE TONS OF FUCKIN SKILL AND ALSO THE TOPIC OF WHICH ONE IS HARDER / SKILLFUL is totally off topic godamnit.
|
On May 21 2008 18:59 lololol wrote: Your argument why CS is requires more skill and is more competitive compared to SC isn't even an argument, but pure BS. Popularity among players doesn't have a direct connection to skill(and it's more of a reverse dependancy, because harder games are played by fewer people, an obvious fact), or you want to tell me the Sims requires the most skills of all games, because it is the most popular?
The Sims > CS! I learned a new thing today!
Can you not read? Have you not read ANYTHING else but that argument or are you so blinded by your pre-conceived notions that you can't debate any other argument? You basically prove my whole point that you guys don't know enough about CS to judge it.
The whole popularity issue wasn't even something I brought up, I was merely replying to something someone else brought up. I never said that this was the reason it required more skills. Don't put words in my mouth. Also, where do you hold stats that show more people play the Sims than CS. Also do you compare the time spent? People playing the Sims once a month aren't really gamers in my book. Seriously, stop making arguments out of your asshole.
This is getting really irritating. I would quit the debating because it's offtopic but some of you guys just won't drop it. If you're gonna try to counter-argument, at least don't act like a bigoted retard.
|
Spenguin
Australia3316 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
Well duh! For the Romanians I hope.
I guess it had to come to an end sooner or later but I believe we'll have 2-4 years of Starcraft left after SC2 comes out.
<3 Hanbit
|
On May 21 2008 19:10 frankbg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 18:59 lololol wrote: Your argument why CS is requires more skill and is more competitive compared to SC isn't even an argument, but pure BS. Popularity among players doesn't have a direct connection to skill(and it's more of a reverse dependancy, because harder games are played by fewer people, an obvious fact), or you want to tell me the Sims requires the most skills of all games, because it is the most popular?
The Sims > CS! I learned a new thing today! Can you not read? Have you not read ANYTHING else but that argument or are you so blinded by your pre-conceived notions that you can't debate any other argument? You basically prove my whole point that you guys don't know enough about CS to judge it. The whole popularity issue wasn't even something I brought up, I was merely replying to something someone else brought up. I never said that this was the reason it required more skills. Don't put words in my mouth. Also, where do you hold stats that show more people play the Sims than CS. Also do you compare the time spent? People playing the Sims once a month aren't really gamers in my book. Seriously, stop making arguments out of your asshole. This is getting really irritating. I would quit the debating because it's offtopic but some of you guys just won't drop it. If you're gonna try to counter-argument, at least don't act like a bigoted retard.
What is your SC background to prove you know enough about SC to judge it? Yes, you should quit, because the only bigoted retard here is you. You don't even know what an argument is, and personal attacks are definitely not, they just show you're an idiot.
|
This argument isn't being seen by either side very clearly I don't think.
SC at high levels is not as hard as a lot have it made out to be. It's taken foreigners so long to get where they are because #1 there's no motivation, #2 there were very few places to train hardcore (quality a problem too) and #3 no one lives near another competitor to be able to learn off of each other, which speeds the process up exponentially.
CS is an entirely different fucked up world of PC gaming stress. First you have to spend years on it like on SC to get good, then AFTER you're aim, technique and understanding is top notch you have to find a team where personalities, skills and motivations match well. Then you have to train extremely hard until 5 people can work together as 1. Saying that kind of work is not as much work as a SC player goes through is nonsense. There's assloads of mental work that goes into CS, but no more than SC, and they both take absolute top ability to select an area of 5 pixels at any given time.
CS's 'twitching' and working with others to become a perfect unit is something SC doesn't take. SC's doing 1000 things at once while strategizing is something CS doesn't take. Both games take huge amounts of effort and time to be top at, and both games exist in scenes that are immensely different from one another.
Now, lets all stop talking about this and go make a WoW player feel like an asshat.
|
On May 21 2008 19:45 lololol wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 19:10 frankbg wrote:On May 21 2008 18:59 lololol wrote: Your argument why CS is requires more skill and is more competitive compared to SC isn't even an argument, but pure BS. Popularity among players doesn't have a direct connection to skill(and it's more of a reverse dependancy, because harder games are played by fewer people, an obvious fact), or you want to tell me the Sims requires the most skills of all games, because it is the most popular?
The Sims > CS! I learned a new thing today! Can you not read? Have you not read ANYTHING else but that argument or are you so blinded by your pre-conceived notions that you can't debate any other argument? You basically prove my whole point that you guys don't know enough about CS to judge it. The whole popularity issue wasn't even something I brought up, I was merely replying to something someone else brought up. I never said that this was the reason it required more skills. Don't put words in my mouth. Also, where do you hold stats that show more people play the Sims than CS. Also do you compare the time spent? People playing the Sims once a month aren't really gamers in my book. Seriously, stop making arguments out of your asshole. This is getting really irritating. I would quit the debating because it's offtopic but some of you guys just won't drop it. If you're gonna try to counter-argument, at least don't act like a bigoted retard. What is your SC background to prove you know enough about SC to judge it? Yes, you should quit, because the only bigoted retard here is you. You don't even know what an argument is, and personal attacks are definitely not, they just show you're an idiot.
You stated that my argument was Bullshit. You didn't read my other posts/arguments and targeted a single point I made about popularity, twisted it in a way that wasn't intended to try and make it look ridiculous (Sims vs CS argument, cmon, you're being a huge flamebait there). And the fact that my initial polite arguments have been replied to with insulting stuff. I didn't start the personnal attacks, the blind fanboys did.
Edit: By the way, I never tried to belittle the skill required in SC but merely tried to correct the shit ton of fallacies that were being spread about CS. You guys are the ones who are trying to belittle a very good game, a game that pioneered esports as much as SC did (probably more, considering CS is worldwide and SC is restricted to a single country).
Oh and Skew's last post pretty much /thread.
|
Yes it is BS, it's not even an argument. I read all the posts in the thread and most of it was replied to by other posters. I haven't twisted anything, it's written pretty clear, you're just making things up again. I didn't try to make it look ridiculous, it IS ridiculous, seriously go read it! You didn't reply about popularity, you mentioned it yourself when you quoted a question about your SC background to steer away from the question itself, which you still haven't answered, because you have none and basically shot yourself in the foot by complaining that others don't know much about CS, but you say things like "I have played at some of the highest levels in Counter-Strike and I will state that it requires more than SC". "It doesn't have to apply to me" isn't much of an argument and yes, your arguments and statement are pure BS. I don't care what others replied to you and I'm not the one responsible for that, so you have no point again.
|
Osaka26947 Posts
The next person to make a post about SC vs CS will be banned. It is not the topic of this thread and only leads to flaming. If you have any lingering arguments, read Skew's post 5 times.
|
On May 21 2008 19:47 Skew wrote: Now, lets all stop talking about this and go make a WoW player feel like an asshat. I lol'd
|
i agree with everything skerp said. a cal m player a few post back. peace
|
Let's go back to the maintopic here shall we?
First things first. Several gaming clubs? ACE was a shure thing, that should not come to any suprise for anyone here. The whole thing stands and falls with boxer. Then we have hanbit who won't get to distribute starcraft 2 and T3 Entertainment, an online game developer. Imagine EA had a battlefield2 progaming team and it's successor battlefield3 get's distributed by Activision. That's like a kick in the face.
But even if we take those two, a proteam leaving is not in any way a sign of colapse of the whole fucking industry.
Now the whole viewership ratings. It looks like it does not take the streaming services into consideration. I would want to know exactly how many people are watching starcraft over streaming and what shows/events are leading.
Next is the Starcraft 2 "Problem". People know that it's coming and this may be good news (depence on if it can replace starcraft) for the gaming aspect but it shure as heck does no good for the competition right now. Beacause it slightly takes away the glory of the up and coming finals and viewers are quick to leave the scene and conserve their memorys of the "glory days". I think blizzard did a great job with starcraft, but they need to be carefull how they inject it to the industry and don't just slam it on the table, demand license fees and get the biggest piece of the pie from an industry that may have a blizzard game as a basis, but it shure as heck build the major part with it's own hands.
10 years might seem long to some of us, but for a "competition & entertainment" programm it's not that long. 400 progamers, 12 teams, 3 leagues plus various events and tournaments. All that needs to be organised and presented in a proper way. What the industry tough does not realise is that in every competition be it soccer or f1, etc, the entertainment that it generates is way more important. That's why the masses watch world championships, wait for a car to crash in the most crazy way or wait for the knock-out in boxing. Now back in the "glory days" players themself provided entertainment by their play alone. But sooner or later, as perverse as it may sound, the players need to go out and merchandise themself as a person.
They can't sit in their houses all day and act like they're part of an olympic team. The whole reason why boxer has such a celebrity value is because he actively took part in the whole growing process of the industry and didn't just sit there expecting it to be a never ending dream. The whole reason why reach and yellow are still progamers is because they have build up a celebrity value. I think new players do a great job by playing the game, but that ship has sailed, that just consumes money nothing else.
Why do you think the most beloved and cheered athletes are allways the ones who did more than just play the game for themself? Think about the one sumo fighter (forgot his name) who slaps his head and screams all the time even tough it has nothing to do with the sport (who just happens to be extremly conservative). People love him like crazy. The fact that he's not top notch of the competition is secondary for entertainment.
|
(1.) What is your SC background to prove you know enough about SC to judge it? (2.) Yes, you should quit, because the only bigoted retard here is you. (3.) You don't even know what an argument is, and personal attacks are definitely not, they just show you're an idiot.
1 and 2 are made incredibly Ironic by 3.
|
the most disheartening news here is about the ACE team being disbanded. Not that I thought it could keep going forever, but that having created it would have been added to Lim Yo Hwan's legacy as a progamer. Now it just seems like they did him a favor.
|
The pro-gaming scene lacks drama at the moment because it lacks a bonjwa. Ever since the fall of Savior there's been no story to dress up the game. Players just drift around. When Savior reigned, the game was drenched in anticipation, because an entire generation of Terran players (Hwasin, Iris, to some extent FBH) were training like crazy to bring him down and bring the bonjwa crown back under a Terran head, and Savior knew it, and was fighting like crazy to delay his fall. Savior/Iris on Arkanoid basically summed up the state of the game; both sides being visibly pushed to the edge of their abilities; a relentless Terran assault pitted against Savior's nearly inhuman endurance; the palpable sense that something greater than just two players, or even two races, was being played out before your eyes. After dispatching the former bonjwa Nada in the following week to take his first OSL title, all Savior had to do was crush some no-name MBC Protoss and his domination would be absolute.
|
On May 21 2008 19:57 frankbg wrote: Edit: By the way, I never tried to belittle the skill required in SC but merely tried to correct the shit ton of fallacies that were being spread about CS.
Oh really? What about this statement here?
On May 21 2008 11:04 frankbg wrote: 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). It would've been valid only if you had said "I have played BOTH games at a high level". You shouldn't have even posted if you weren't going to follow the topic anyways. Thanks for derailing an important thread in an SC forum into a discussion about CS. Anyways, back on topic now.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 21 2008 13:34 HeavOnEarth wrote:I decided instead of being in the Star craft declining thread, it should have one of it's own, seeing how it was already 4 pages in length when i visited it. There was a drift into an argument in the declining SC thread Over Which is the better game, SC or Counter Strike. Im not implying counterstrike was a horrific game; it's perfectly fine in it's own right, What i will not have is people asserting the fact that CS> SC.5 Reasons SC> CS. First of all, Of course the CS people will argue that CS> SC in popularity Wow, a game you have to pay for, (steam account) And actually has sponsoring? People can actually play all day and make money WHOAA. THAT MEANS YOU GUYS CAN ACTUALLY GET GOOD AT A GAME WHEREAS we actually play this game for fun. If you are going to argue that top tier players play the game for fun, you don't even know the half of playing CS competitively. Starcraft isn't some glamor sport, despite the popularity in korea, It's graphics are pretty horrid in comparison to real day games whereas im pretty sure you first got into counter strike because everything was shiny and neat and set up cause you payed monthly for your steam account. What game is BETTER starcraft or counterstrike?Starcraft, by far. Counterstrike can only be coupled with pathetic society and capitalism 1. Starcraft has LAN latency , Chaos, iCCup , for middle tier even low skilled players have easy access to this. 1. CounterStrike On the other hand, has FPS GG Latency ping. People dont even LEAD or aim anymore, they just spray an ak at headshot level and hope . Please dont even try to argue that cause u know that's what you do vs laggers. 2.Starcraft is actually FAST , Apm please. 2. counterstrike ,"Oh look i can buy a gun and have everything set up with 5 buttons" Let's spam "a" and "d" and then throw a nade and crouch and jump what is that like 7 keys in a minute where starcraft can be 7 keys in a second? 3. Ok they both have mind games, Since i dont play at that tier of CS i wont go into that. (obviously SC>CS however ) 4. Multitasking. If u cant do that in starcraft you lose so hard, so easily. 4. Woww i have a thing called radar it tells me where everything is , "getting shanked is considered noob" where as in SC a sneaky play like that, reflects the skill of the OTHER person cleverly timing his distractions and feints while dropping or harassing something important. What do u have in CS" Ohh I SEE YOU THAR HI. YOU SEE ME TOO LOL. I could just go on and on, but NOT going to play a game that's as stupid as you look, (CS supporters) , I'm rather going to play 1;1 matches, unlike some people who decide that 1;1 is not a test of skill Im pretty sure this goes against the "10 commandments" But no one puts down star craft below another game; especially one of 2nd class caliber such as CS Please if im so wrong, retort me, give me your honest point, or do the committed counterstrike people have a trepidation of speaking out. Dude, don't.
This will only start a flamewar because you are dissing CS pretty hard -_-
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 21 2008 20:11 Manifesto7 wrote: The next person to make a post about SC vs CS will be banned. It is not the topic of this thread and only leads to flaming. If you have any lingering arguments, read Skew's post 5 times. Was just about to make this post -_- Damn things blew up while I was sleeping.
|
|
I really hope that SC2 is the start of a new era in South korea.
|
On May 21 2008 19:04 JoxxOr wrote: This is just like the 2003-2004 debate where everyone thought that esport SC in korea was going downhill...
Just because a sponsor who have sponsored korean eSports in 7-8 years with a team and OSL's don't want to do it anymore does not mean that korean esport will die >.<
i agree. what if e-sports loses some if its followers? they'll have 70% of people in korea instead of 75%??
but the part about blizzard needing to do a damn good job on sc2 is absolutely true.
|
On May 21 2008 19:57 frankbg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 19:45 lololol wrote:On May 21 2008 19:10 frankbg wrote:On May 21 2008 18:59 lololol wrote: Your argument why CS is requires more skill and is more competitive compared to SC isn't even an argument, but pure BS. Popularity among players doesn't have a direct connection to skill(and it's more of a reverse dependancy, because harder games are played by fewer people, an obvious fact), or you want to tell me the Sims requires the most skills of all games, because it is the most popular?
The Sims > CS! I learned a new thing today! Can you not read? Have you not read ANYTHING else but that argument or are you so blinded by your pre-conceived notions that you can't debate any other argument? You basically prove my whole point that you guys don't know enough about CS to judge it. The whole popularity issue wasn't even something I brought up, I was merely replying to something someone else brought up. I never said that this was the reason it required more skills. Don't put words in my mouth. Also, where do you hold stats that show more people play the Sims than CS. Also do you compare the time spent? People playing the Sims once a month aren't really gamers in my book. Seriously, stop making arguments out of your asshole. This is getting really irritating. I would quit the debating because it's offtopic but some of you guys just won't drop it. If you're gonna try to counter-argument, at least don't act like a bigoted retard. What is your SC background to prove you know enough about SC to judge it? Yes, you should quit, because the only bigoted retard here is you. You don't even know what an argument is, and personal attacks are definitely not, they just show you're an idiot. You stated that my argument was Bullshit. You didn't read my other posts/arguments and targeted a single point I made about popularity, twisted it in a way that wasn't intended to try and make it look ridiculous (Sims vs CS argument, cmon, you're being a huge flamebait there). And the fact that my initial polite arguments have been replied to with insulting stuff. I didn't start the personnal attacks, the blind fanboys did. Edit: By the way, I never tried to belittle the skill required in SC but merely tried to correct the shit ton of fallacies that were being spread about CS. You guys are the ones who are trying to belittle a very good game, a game that pioneered esports as much as SC did (probably more, considering CS is worldwide and SC is restricted to a single country). Oh and Skew's last post pretty much /thread.
I have played both RTS and FPS at the highest level so i know what takes more skill!
I used to play Starcraft 10 hours a day for many years and i got the chance to be apart of the first ever WCG. Before i left i played some Q3 for fun like 1 hour a day maybe. I had no one to practice with so i only played some random 1on1 games. When i got to korea i played Q3 with the people competing in the Q3 competition. This was when Q3 was really big and the CPL focused only on Q3. Let's just say i beat quake legend dOOMER and python who i belive later finished 3rd place in the tournament. I had to devote my entire life to be at the highest level in starcraft and with Q3 all it took was some fun 1on1 games now and then. I have played CS to and it's easier then Q3 but with more teamplay. No way in HELL CS takes more skill then starcraft.
|
On May 21 2008 20:11 Manifesto7 wrote: The next person to make a post about SC vs CS will be banned. It is not the topic of this thread and only leads to flaming. If you have any lingering arguments, read Skew's post 5 times.
Thanks, it sucks to see a good discussion thread get hijacked and ruined.
Edit* It looks like people are still at it even after your warning
|
Here's an idea about how to reinvigorate professional starcraft:
add a new format of gaming. Like, make SCV Football a sport. UMS's, Team Melee, 3v3s, 4v4s, 1v3s, things like that. Also add small stakes betting to the mix and you'd probably see some more interest. Just keep the mafia out.
|
Are you serious? DotA is ruining WC3. ;;
|
On May 22 2008 02:00 maybenexttime wrote: Are you serious? DotA is ruining WC3. ;;
i meant as stupid little stunts not like actual sports T_T to ya know have more of a comedy thing into it.
Better Yet, make episodes like Real Life Progamer or some sort of a progaming movie, like Remember the Lecaf or Boxer I/II/III/IV/V/VI, etc.
that would give mbc/ogn more time to put those kinds of things on
|
maybe now that there are so many games and so many teams, people choose favorite teams and just watch those, so the number of viewers is spread out more? What I would like to see are the stats on viewership for the finals of OSL/MSL/PL over the years, and see if that has been increasing or not.
|
Well, the future of eSport rest alone in the shoulders of TeamLiquid.net
Maybe GG.net will come win to make a slightly less prestigious league, the GG*SL, equivalent somewhat to the MSL. WGTCL being broadcast as ProLeague = GG
|
Of note is that Daum had an assload of people viewing the stream just for the OSL matches earlier. Twin match go?
|
I do not believe in StarCraft 2, I think Blizzard will totaly fuck it up. -_-
But this is very silly how dumb game creators are, starcraft is the best rts EVER but ffs, everyone else has had 10 YEARS to do a better game (yes, you can make a better game) or atleast a game that would work as a global e-sport. But more or less every game has been a fail, I think SC2 will join up with them.
|
On May 22 2008 02:52 Leath wrote:Well, the future of eSport rest alone in the shoulders of TeamLiquid.netMaybe GG.net will come win to make a slightly less prestigious league, the GG*SL, equivalent somewhat to the MSL. WGTCL being broadcast as ProLeague = GG
Don't make me go emo :-(
|
On May 22 2008 02:57 NotSupporting wrote: I do not believe in StarCraft 2, I think Blizzard will totaly fuck it up. -_-
But this is very silly how dumb game creators are, starcraft is the best rts EVER but ffs, everyone else has had 10 YEARS to do a better game (yes, you can make a better game) or atleast a game that would work as a global e-sport. But more or less every game has been a fail, I think SC2 will join up with them. Only Blizzard have created succesfull esport RTS games ever in history(2 of them), so if we have anything to bet on its them. SC2 will be huge, thats a given, the only question is if it will beat starcraft in greatness or not.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 22 2008 02:02 Caller wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2008 02:00 maybenexttime wrote: Are you serious? DotA is ruining WC3. ;; i meant as stupid little stunts not like actual sports T_T to ya know have more of a comedy thing into it. Better Yet, make episodes like Real Life Progamer or some sort of a progaming movie, like Remember the Lecaf or Boxer I/II/III/IV/V/VI, etc. that would give mbc/ogn more time to put those kinds of things on Having to resort to gimmicks (kind of like the ceremonies ; [) isn't a good sign.
|
i play fps all my life. and none of them is as hard as starcraft. to me fps is natural. its not stressing etc. u just jump in. starcraft is a unique beast. it is the most unforgiving, challenging game there is. by your post i can tell you are very bias. just because u became high level at CS. u want to make believe (by being delusional to yourself, and the world) that it requires as much skill or even more skill than SC. because you want to make yourself feel more special and superior and that you became so high with a game that is "just as hard as SC if not more" in your eyes. you are on an ego trip and as i can see from ur post, you are very defensive about it because u think it ties in with how l33t u are in CS and how ur CS skills is just as "special" or even more "special" than those SC skills. your very immature. now how dare u come here on this SC forum and try prove how special u r cuz u got in high lvl CS and how its more demanding when it is clearly not. im sorry last romantic but i just had to post this.
|
On May 21 2008 07:55 Luddite wrote: This goes against everything else I have read regarding e-sports in Korea. I mean, OK maybe hanbit is thinking of pulling the plug, but that's because they fucking suck! Didn't the last OSL set a new record for viewership? Isn't the GOM TV tournament the largest tournament ever? Aren't there more new players entering than ever? Isn't the foreign community (even us foreigners that watch Korean starcraft) continuing to grow? Didn't they just hire a full time English commentator? Didn't they just launch a minor league? Isn't the Korean navy also thinking about starting a team?
All those things, to me, signal that e sports, particularly brood wars, is here to stay.
I wish you were here so I could give you a hug.
|
But in the end, everything comes down to the viewers. SC2 can be very funny to play, but if it gets boring to watch then it will totaly fail as an e-sport.
|
i´m wondering "how long" it might take for SC2 to actually "become" a decent esport.
was SC immediately awesome, or did it take 1-3 years before people began to realise how awesome it was and began to enjoy spectating and competing in it?
1-3 years is a shit-long time
i suppose SC was unique in that there wasn´t much before it. with SC2 we´ll know what to look for and will more quickly know how good it really is
|
On May 22 2008 01:46 Caller wrote: Here's an idea about how to reinvigorate professional starcraft:
add a new format of gaming. Like, make [b]SCV Football[b] a sport. UMS's, Team Melee, 3v3s, 4v4s, 1v3s, things like that. Also add small stakes betting to the mix and you'd probably see some more interest. Just keep the mafia out.
Zergling Soccer gogogo!
Zealot Kendo!!!
Ultralisk Judo!!!
Medic stripping!! o,oV
|
On May 22 2008 06:40 EtherealDeath wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2008 01:46 Caller wrote: Here's an idea about how to reinvigorate professional starcraft:
add a new format of gaming. Like, make [b]SCV Football[b] a sport. UMS's, Team Melee, 3v3s, 4v4s, 1v3s, things like that. Also add small stakes betting to the mix and you'd probably see some more interest. Just keep the mafia out. Zergling Soccer gogogo! Zealot Kendo!!! Ultralisk Judo!!! Medic stripping!! o,oV also Defense Of The Aliens
|
SC2 will be a successful esport no doubt, however will it compare to Korean Starcraft esports? Thats a different story.
I will say this, Starcraft 2 will be a more successful esport than WC3 because of a lot of reasons -cooler, more manlier setting (gritty sci-fi) compared to the more cartoony fantasy warcraft world. -faster action -more units -more death -no creeping, means more confrontation between the players -etc.
|
On May 22 2008 02:52 Leath wrote:Well, the future of eSport rest alone in the shoulders of TeamLiquid.netMaybe GG.net will come win to make a slightly less prestigious league, the GG*SL, equivalent somewhat to the MSL. WGTCL being broadcast as ProLeague = GG
SC not e-sports, e-sports will be fine with or without TL.
And my other point is I don't really care about Korea in terms of SC2, my hope is that its a worldwide success, I could give a damn about one little country when there's the potential for so many more to be involved.
|
i think sc2 will re-boost starcraft in korea (o'rly?). but it doesn't really seem to be declining imo
|
On May 22 2008 07:04 Aerox wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2008 06:40 EtherealDeath wrote:On May 22 2008 01:46 Caller wrote: Here's an idea about how to reinvigorate professional starcraft:
add a new format of gaming. Like, make [b]SCV Football[b] a sport. UMS's, Team Melee, 3v3s, 4v4s, 1v3s, things like that. Also add small stakes betting to the mix and you'd probably see some more interest. Just keep the mafia out. Zergling Soccer gogogo! Zealot Kendo!!! Ultralisk Judo!!! Medic stripping!! o,oV also Defense Of The Aliens
I think you might be onto something with this..
|
Yeah, I agree that although StarCraft has lost some of its novelty with people who are familiar with it.In my personal experience, StarCraft continues to captivate new gamer's attentions and if people are only introduced to StarCraft in any way as a game that is not "cheesy", I really think that it will have a change to continue to grow or at least provide a good platform for SCII to take off. I also hope that e-sports and SCII in particular will be able to be played at a level of professionalism and organization like chess.
|
Just wait til SC2 comes out. That will definately be a huge blow to korean esport. As far as BW is concerned for that matter. But then , most of us will prolly be too busy playing the game to really care.
We ll have to wait for the first Korean SC2 tournaments and events to give esport a new breath imo.
On a positive note. It will be very entertaining, exciting and fun to see the birth of a new pro scene as SC2 players master new tricks, strategies and blow our minds away with whole new pimpest plays that even your wildest dreams cannot conceive just yet.
|
On May 21 2008 20:11 Manifesto7 wrote: The next person to make a post about SC vs CS will be banned. It is not the topic of this thread and only leads to flaming. If you have any lingering arguments, read Skew's post 5 times. SC is CS backwards!
|
On May 21 2008 07:55 Luddite wrote: This goes against everything else I have read regarding e-sports in Korea. I mean, OK maybe hanbit is thinking of pulling the plug, but that's because they fucking suck! Didn't the last OSL set a new record for viewership? Isn't the GOM TV tournament the largest tournament ever? Aren't there more new players entering than ever? Isn't the foreign community (even us foreigners that watch Korean starcraft) continuing to grow? Didn't they just hire a full time English commentator? Didn't they just launch a minor league? Isn't the Korean navy also thinking about starting a team?
All those things, to me, signal that e sports, particularly brood wars, is here to stay. and what about the GSL League? that hasn't even hit season one, shouldn't this be expanding even more so now?
|
With the release of StarCraft II, I think things will only get better. I think (just a hunch) that organisations such as the CGS, and other e-sport organisations will pick StarCraft2 up.
|
Someone mentioned this earlier.
If Starcraft is declining, its due to the lack of appealing stars who dominate for extended periods of time.
There is a reason people still cling onto an old Boxer, a very poorly performing Savior, a struggling Nada, and a declining Bisu, forgotten Reach's and Ra's, and other old classics whose names were established during the infancy stage of proleague. People have favorites. People want stars to idolize, stars who have proven their skill consistently while appealing to the masses.
Yet in Starcraft, the average peak of a pro Gamer is not even a year - maybe one or two seasons. Compare this to any physical sport, say American Basketball. Fans of Kobe have watched him develop for years, identify with him better because of it, and can root for him in all his games past and to come for years.
In Starcraft, its always risky to do such. When one sees a player dominate, intuition from watching physical sport players tells us that they should at least remain strong for years to come. So far, Nada is the only one satisfying this criteria. All one has to do is look at Savior to see that such is not truly the case for Starcraft.
Starcraft is highly dynamic. Reigns of dominance are too short; players come and go so fast, and so many games are played, that its hard to continue to watch the eSport without losing interest faster than one would lose interest in a physical sport. Who are the top players now? Jaedong? He didn't even qualify for the OSL. Stork? He's finally on the decline having choked in so many important matches. Flash? Yes he is strong now, yet Starcraft's history is absolute, and fans will once again fear deprived of the need for a star when Flash inevitably falls like the greats before him.
At the rate Starcraft is going, all the old, personable pros will die, and we will be left with nothing more than a generation of Minds, MenSols, and Luxury's ; players with skill, but no lasting attribute which makes them immortal.
Notice the above problem is only truly apparent in the very competitive Korean pro scene. Mondragon has been a top international competitor for quite a while. Even Warcraft III pros such as Grubby, ToD, and Sky have had fairly long, extensive reigns when compared to Starcraft. Its always hard to believe in a sport when all your favorites slump after two seasons and NEVER made a comeback. Yet, that is what Starcraft is becoming.
|
On May 22 2008 15:58 FeArTeHsCoUrGe wrote: Someone mentioned this earlier.
If Starcraft is declining, its due to the lack of appealing stars who dominate for extended periods of time.
There is a reason people still cling onto an old Boxer, a very poorly performing Savior, a struggling Nada, and a declining Bisu, forgotten Reach's and Ra's, and other old classics whose names were established during the infancy stage of proleague. People have favorites. People want stars to idolize, stars who have proven their skill consistently while appealing to the masses.
Yet in Starcraft, the average peak of a pro Gamer is not even a year - maybe one or two seasons. Compare this to any physical sport, say American Basketball. Fans of Kobe have watched him develop for years, identify with him better because of it, and can root for him in all his games past and to come for years.
In Starcraft, its always risky to do such. When one sees a player dominate, intuition from watching physical sport players tells us that they should at least remain strong for years to come. So far, Nada is the only one satisfying this criteria. All one has to do is look at Savior to see that such is not truly the case for Starcraft.
Starcraft is highly dynamic. Reigns of dominance are too short; players come and go so fast, and so many games are played, that its hard to continue to watch the eSport without losing interest faster than one would lose interest in a physical sport. Who are the top players now? Jaedong? He didn't even qualify for the OSL. Stork? He's finally on the decline having choked in so many important matches. Flash? Yes he is strong now, yet Starcraft's history is absolute, and fans will once again fear deprived of the need for a star when Flash inevitably falls like the greats before him.
At the rate Starcraft is going, all the old, personable pros will die, and we will be left with nothing more than a generation of Minds, MenSols, and Luxury's ; players with skill, but no lasting attribute which makes them immortal.
Notice the above problem is only truly apparent in the very competitive Korean pro scene. Mondragon has been a top international competitor for quite a while. Even Warcraft III pros such as Grubby, ToD, and Sky have had fairly long, extensive reigns when compared to Starcraft. Its always hard to believe in a sport when all your favorites slump after two seasons and NEVER made a comeback. Yet, that is what Starcraft is becoming. WHAT THE FUCK. do you even know what makes starcraft a successful e-sport? i will make you a list: 1) competitive sport - no one likes a player taking place for all the other progamers 2) fans for specific player - wcg documentary of 2005 go watch it and learn. havent you heard of clubs of fans supporting a specific player 3) boxer - boxer didnt win always but was and is the superstar of starcraft even when having a hard time 4) unique way of win - a progamer wins by its own merits. no luck based referees. no stupid luck based rules like poker. etc. i could really go on here with reasons that make e-sports as big as it is. what i am trying to say is that you are just so damn wrong. what do you think progaming is anyways. a place where people gather to see. one fucking and only player dominating others. is that really what you think it is. for gods sake you make me register to answer your idea. geez..
and to the creator of this bad title topic.
i will smile at your title and your idea for this topic. everyday that passes and e-sports is still on tv.
every day e-sports continues to bring tournaments. excellent moments are lived and experience. etc etc. every damn 1 one more day e-sports continues to show osl msl and whatnot tastelessandgsi. every damn day.
i will smile at your "e-sports is dying omfgz lolz!!oneoneon"
every damn day it continues to give us their fans such joy and excitement GO OSL GO MSL GO GOMTV
oh by the way i forgot.. have you ever heard LIVE FOR THE SWARM in zerg? the zerg scourge maybe dont say it but damn it means it. starcraft is full of this kind of things. and thats nice.
|
On May 22 2008 15:58 FeArTeHsCoUrGe wrote:Show nested quote +Starcraft is highly dynamic. Reigns of dominance are too short; players come and go so fast, and so many games are played, that its hard to continue to watch the eSport without losing interest faster than one would lose interest in a physical sport. The amount of games played may be causing burnout and a sort of artificial plateau that players reach must faster than if they played less games and had time to reinvent their game. Show nested quote + Notice the above problem is only truly apparent in the very competitive Korean pro scene. Mondragon has been a top international competitor for quite a while. Even Warcraft III pros such as Grubby, ToD, and Sky have had fairly long, extensive reigns when compared to Starcraft. Could be unlike western players, these guys have an abundance of time to study the game to an almost mathematical level I suppose and play the game in a way that is efficient for gaining wins, but is tedious as hell to watch and play against. Show nested quote + Starcraft, its always risky to do such. When one sees a player dominate, intuition from watching physical sport players tells us that they should at least remain strong for years to come. So far, Nada is the only one satisfying this criteria. All one has to do is look at Savior to see that such is not truly the case for Starcraft. Using a keyboard and a mouse is 2 dimensional when dealing with conventional sports which use the entire body. Perhaps this allows more players to make up for skill with dexterity and rote memorization;thus leading to less players being able to stay the king of the hill for any period of time. Computer interfaces are still quite crude and by extension game interfaces. I think we have a long way to go before interfaces become an extension of the human body,but your point is well taken. Very well thought out post that summed up many observations made here.
|
yeah, this thread kind of died as soon as the OP decided to put it in the SC2 forum
|
Certain posts on this forum need more active moderation.
|
|
Bring back Proleague winner stays on like MSL Teamleague. All kills were fantastic yo
|
On May 22 2008 17:00 e-sportspower wrote: WHAT THE FUCK. do you even know what makes starcraft a successful e-sport? i will make you a list: 1) competitive sport - no one likes a player taking place for all the other progamers 2) fans for specific player - wcg documentary of 2005 go watch it and learn. havent you heard of clubs of fans supporting a specific player 3) boxer - boxer didnt win always but was and is the superstar of starcraft even when having a hard time 4) unique way of win - a progamer wins by its own merits. no luck based referees. no stupid luck based rules like poker. etc. i could really go on here with reasons that make e-sports as big as it is. what i am trying to say is that you are just so damn wrong. what do you think progaming is anyways. a place where people gather to see. one fucking and only player dominating others. is that really what you think it is. for gods sake you make me register to answer your idea. geez..
and to the creator of this bad title topic.
i will smile at your title and your idea for this topic. everyday that passes and e-sports is still on tv.
every day e-sports continues to bring tournaments. excellent moments are lived and experience. etc etc. every damn 1 one more day e-sports continues to show osl msl and whatnot tastelessandgsi. every damn day.
i will smile at your "e-sports is dying omfgz lolz!!oneoneon"
every damn day it continues to give us their fans such joy and excitement GO OSL GO MSL GO GOMTV
oh by the way i forgot.. have you ever heard LIVE FOR THE SWARM in zerg? the zerg scourge maybe dont say it but damn it means it. starcraft is full of this kind of things. and thats nice.
From reading FeArTeHsCoUrGe's post, I'm kind of sure he knows what makes Starcraft a popular eSport. Same with the OP. The OP did not say eSport is dying. He is reporting that it declining in Korea or rather stagnant. FeArTeHsCoUrGe's post makes an excellent comparison with sports. No need to sound condescending when you fail to address any of his thoughts while going on a tangent.
I worry about the future of eSports. Truly, I do. It's troubling when some of its fan can't read.
|
The failure of Hanbit has nothing to do with the popularity of E-sports related to Starcraft in Korea. Hanbit failed with their other highly invested projects bringing titles such as Hell gates in London which has poor popularity in the Korean market. Hence their failure to finance their Starcraft team has nothing to do with a supposedly 'declining' interest in the game. The title is quite misleading.
|
On May 22 2008 17:00 e-sportspower wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2008 15:58 FeArTeHsCoUrGe wrote: Someone mentioned this earlier.
If Starcraft is declining, its due to the lack of appealing stars who dominate for extended periods of time.
There is a reason people still cling onto an old Boxer, a very poorly performing Savior, a struggling Nada, and a declining Bisu, forgotten Reach's and Ra's, and other old classics whose names were established during the infancy stage of proleague. People have favorites. People want stars to idolize, stars who have proven their skill consistently while appealing to the masses.
Yet in Starcraft, the average peak of a pro Gamer is not even a year - maybe one or two seasons. Compare this to any physical sport, say American Basketball. Fans of Kobe have watched him develop for years, identify with him better because of it, and can root for him in all his games past and to come for years.
In Starcraft, its always risky to do such. When one sees a player dominate, intuition from watching physical sport players tells us that they should at least remain strong for years to come. So far, Nada is the only one satisfying this criteria. All one has to do is look at Savior to see that such is not truly the case for Starcraft.
Starcraft is highly dynamic. Reigns of dominance are too short; players come and go so fast, and so many games are played, that its hard to continue to watch the eSport without losing interest faster than one would lose interest in a physical sport. Who are the top players now? Jaedong? He didn't even qualify for the OSL. Stork? He's finally on the decline having choked in so many important matches. Flash? Yes he is strong now, yet Starcraft's history is absolute, and fans will once again fear deprived of the need for a star when Flash inevitably falls like the greats before him.
At the rate Starcraft is going, all the old, personable pros will die, and we will be left with nothing more than a generation of Minds, MenSols, and Luxury's ; players with skill, but no lasting attribute which makes them immortal.
Notice the above problem is only truly apparent in the very competitive Korean pro scene. Mondragon has been a top international competitor for quite a while. Even Warcraft III pros such as Grubby, ToD, and Sky have had fairly long, extensive reigns when compared to Starcraft. Its always hard to believe in a sport when all your favorites slump after two seasons and NEVER made a comeback. Yet, that is what Starcraft is becoming. WHAT THE FUCK. do you even know what makes starcraft a successful e-sport? i will make you a list: 1) competitive sport - no one likes a player taking place for all the other progamers 2) fans for specific player - wcg documentary of 2005 go watch it and learn. havent you heard of clubs of fans supporting a specific player 3) boxer - boxer didnt win always but was and is the superstar of starcraft even when having a hard time 4) unique way of win - a progamer wins by its own merits. no luck based referees. no stupid luck based rules like poker. etc. i could really go on here with reasons that make e-sports as big as it is. what i am trying to say is that you are just so damn wrong. what do you think progaming is anyways. a place where people gather to see. one fucking and only player dominating others. is that really what you think it is. for gods sake you make me register to answer your idea. geez.. and to the creator of this bad title topic. i will smile at your title and your idea for this topic. everyday that passes and e-sports is still on tv. every day e-sports continues to bring tournaments. excellent moments are lived and experience. etc etc. every damn 1 one more day e-sports continues to show osl msl and whatnot tastelessandgsi. every damn day. i will smile at your "e-sports is dying omfgz lolz!!oneoneon" every damn day it continues to give us their fans such joy and excitement GO OSL GO MSL GO GOMTV oh by the way i forgot.. have you ever heard LIVE FOR THE SWARM in zerg? the zerg scourge maybe dont say it but damn it means it. starcraft is full of this kind of things. and thats nice.
Carlo?
|
On May 22 2008 17:00 e-sportspower wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2008 15:58 FeArTeHsCoUrGe wrote: Someone mentioned this earlier.
If Starcraft is declining, its due to the lack of appealing stars who dominate for extended periods of time.
There is a reason people still cling onto an old Boxer, a very poorly performing Savior, a struggling Nada, and a declining Bisu, forgotten Reach's and Ra's, and other old classics whose names were established during the infancy stage of proleague. People have favorites. People want stars to idolize, stars who have proven their skill consistently while appealing to the masses.
Yet in Starcraft, the average peak of a pro Gamer is not even a year - maybe one or two seasons. Compare this to any physical sport, say American Basketball. Fans of Kobe have watched him develop for years, identify with him better because of it, and can root for him in all his games past and to come for years.
In Starcraft, its always risky to do such. When one sees a player dominate, intuition from watching physical sport players tells us that they should at least remain strong for years to come. So far, Nada is the only one satisfying this criteria. All one has to do is look at Savior to see that such is not truly the case for Starcraft.
Starcraft is highly dynamic. Reigns of dominance are too short; players come and go so fast, and so many games are played, that its hard to continue to watch the eSport without losing interest faster than one would lose interest in a physical sport. Who are the top players now? Jaedong? He didn't even qualify for the OSL. Stork? He's finally on the decline having choked in so many important matches. Flash? Yes he is strong now, yet Starcraft's history is absolute, and fans will once again fear deprived of the need for a star when Flash inevitably falls like the greats before him.
At the rate Starcraft is going, all the old, personable pros will die, and we will be left with nothing more than a generation of Minds, MenSols, and Luxury's ; players with skill, but no lasting attribute which makes them immortal.
Notice the above problem is only truly apparent in the very competitive Korean pro scene. Mondragon has been a top international competitor for quite a while. Even Warcraft III pros such as Grubby, ToD, and Sky have had fairly long, extensive reigns when compared to Starcraft. Its always hard to believe in a sport when all your favorites slump after two seasons and NEVER made a comeback. Yet, that is what Starcraft is becoming. WHAT THE FUCK. do you even know what makes starcraft a successful e-sport? i will make you a list: 1) competitive sport - no one likes a player taking place for all the other progamers 2) fans for specific player - wcg documentary of 2005 go watch it and learn. havent you heard of clubs of fans supporting a specific player 3) boxer - boxer didnt win always but was and is the superstar of starcraft even when having a hard time 4) unique way of win - a progamer wins by its own merits. no luck based referees. no stupid luck based rules like poker. etc. i could really go on here with reasons that make e-sports as big as it is. what i am trying to say is that you are just so damn wrong. what do you think progaming is anyways. a place where people gather to see. one fucking and only player dominating others. is that really what you think it is. for gods sake you make me register to answer your idea. geez.. and to the creator of this bad title topic. i will smile at your title and your idea for this topic. everyday that passes and e-sports is still on tv. every day e-sports continues to bring tournaments. excellent moments are lived and experience. etc etc. every damn 1 one more day e-sports continues to show osl msl and whatnot tastelessandgsi. every damn day. i will smile at your "e-sports is dying omfgz lolz!!oneoneon" every damn day it continues to give us their fans such joy and excitement GO OSL GO MSL GO GOMTV oh by the way i forgot.. have you ever heard LIVE FOR THE SWARM in zerg? the zerg scourge maybe dont say it but damn it means it. starcraft is full of this kind of things. and thats nice.
In the last second before I submitted my post, I changed the sentence in my first paragraph from
"If Starcraft is declining (which I highly doubt),"
by removing the bold part for sake of argument and clarity, whether or not I agree Starcraft is in the decline or not.
However, your illiterate post just boggles my mind.
On May 22 2008 17:00 e-sportspower wrote: 2) fans for specific player - wcg documentary of 2005 go watch it and learn. havent you heard of clubs of fans supporting a specific player 3) boxer - boxer didnt win always but was and is the superstar of starcraft even when having a hard time
This is what my entire post was about. I mentioned how these aspects are huge parts of Starcraft, and how if Starcraft is declining, its because these aspects are slowly dying away or becoming less appealing. I have no idea why you would list such points, leading me to conclude you didn't even read my post, however right or wrong it may be. Idiot.
I would continue to shut you down, but then I saw this:
On May 22 2008 17:00 e-sportspower wrote: oh by the way i forgot.. have you ever heard LIVE FOR THE SWARM in zerg? the zerg scourge maybe dont say it but damn it means it. starcraft is full of this kind of things. and thats nice.
And then there is the fact that you created an account just to respond to a simple opinion and shut down the OP. Go away troll.
|
I will like to mention that I am 100% rooting for GomTV. Even if Starcraft is slightly declining in Korea, the international appeal has never been stronger (as evident by our very own TSL league).
And I'm sure we all await to see how Starcraft II will affect the proscene in Korea. I have no doubt it will blossom everywhere else.
|
thedeadhaji
39472 Posts
On May 22 2008 22:11 EvoChamber wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2008 17:00 e-sportspower wrote:On May 22 2008 15:58 FeArTeHsCoUrGe wrote: Someone mentioned this earlier.
If Starcraft is declining, its due to the lack of appealing stars who dominate for extended periods of time.
There is a reason people still cling onto an old Boxer, a very poorly performing Savior, a struggling Nada, and a declining Bisu, forgotten Reach's and Ra's, and other old classics whose names were established during the infancy stage of proleague. People have favorites. People want stars to idolize, stars who have proven their skill consistently while appealing to the masses.
Yet in Starcraft, the average peak of a pro Gamer is not even a year - maybe one or two seasons. Compare this to any physical sport, say American Basketball. Fans of Kobe have watched him develop for years, identify with him better because of it, and can root for him in all his games past and to come for years.
In Starcraft, its always risky to do such. When one sees a player dominate, intuition from watching physical sport players tells us that they should at least remain strong for years to come. So far, Nada is the only one satisfying this criteria. All one has to do is look at Savior to see that such is not truly the case for Starcraft.
Starcraft is highly dynamic. Reigns of dominance are too short; players come and go so fast, and so many games are played, that its hard to continue to watch the eSport without losing interest faster than one would lose interest in a physical sport. Who are the top players now? Jaedong? He didn't even qualify for the OSL. Stork? He's finally on the decline having choked in so many important matches. Flash? Yes he is strong now, yet Starcraft's history is absolute, and fans will once again fear deprived of the need for a star when Flash inevitably falls like the greats before him.
At the rate Starcraft is going, all the old, personable pros will die, and we will be left with nothing more than a generation of Minds, MenSols, and Luxury's ; players with skill, but no lasting attribute which makes them immortal.
Notice the above problem is only truly apparent in the very competitive Korean pro scene. Mondragon has been a top international competitor for quite a while. Even Warcraft III pros such as Grubby, ToD, and Sky have had fairly long, extensive reigns when compared to Starcraft. Its always hard to believe in a sport when all your favorites slump after two seasons and NEVER made a comeback. Yet, that is what Starcraft is becoming. WHAT THE FUCK. do you even know what makes starcraft a successful e-sport? i will make you a list: 1) competitive sport - no one likes a player taking place for all the other progamers 2) fans for specific player - wcg documentary of 2005 go watch it and learn. havent you heard of clubs of fans supporting a specific player 3) boxer - boxer didnt win always but was and is the superstar of starcraft even when having a hard time 4) unique way of win - a progamer wins by its own merits. no luck based referees. no stupid luck based rules like poker. etc. i could really go on here with reasons that make e-sports as big as it is. what i am trying to say is that you are just so damn wrong. what do you think progaming is anyways. a place where people gather to see. one fucking and only player dominating others. is that really what you think it is. for gods sake you make me register to answer your idea. geez.. and to the creator of this bad title topic. i will smile at your title and your idea for this topic. everyday that passes and e-sports is still on tv. every day e-sports continues to bring tournaments. excellent moments are lived and experience. etc etc. every damn 1 one more day e-sports continues to show osl msl and whatnot tastelessandgsi. every damn day. i will smile at your "e-sports is dying omfgz lolz!!oneoneon" every damn day it continues to give us their fans such joy and excitement GO OSL GO MSL GO GOMTV oh by the way i forgot.. have you ever heard LIVE FOR THE SWARM in zerg? the zerg scourge maybe dont say it but damn it means it. starcraft is full of this kind of things. and thats nice. Carlo?
I lol'ed, that's for sure.
|
Do the mods have the power to move threads to another topic? It'd be great if the CS posts could just be moved to their own threads. I mean, I wanted to read about the OP, but it's kinda disheartening with all the off topic stuff
|
Hmm, I wonder what is beating Starcraft in ratings.
I don't think all of it is the fault of the progamers. Something that hasn't been mentioned is the personality of the crowd/fans. I've heard that the fans always hide their faces because they don't want to be seen ditching school, or similar reasons to that. That's understandable, but even so, I think that by doing that, it gives off an impression that being a fan is not something to be proud of, perhaps even something that is looked down upon? I know they go through alot of work making the cheerfuls and posters and preparing gifts and stuff, but the whole "word of mouth" thing is pretty powerful. If it's not something you can freely talk to people about, that limits the amount of popularity it can get.
I kind of assumed some things there, so please correct me if any of it is wrong.
|
Every year they say StarCraft is going to die soon, and every year it keeps living.
Necessity is the mother of invention. I believe that whatever obstacle StarCraft may face there will be someone to help overcome it. StarCraft will never die. StarCraft is the Chess of the information technology age. The perfect, inarguably irreplaceable original and favourite in the hearts of all those who played it competitively. I can see StarCraft never dying in my lifetime.
StarCraft 2 will be a fun game, but it won't destroy SC 1. SC 1 and SC 2 are like oranges and apples. 3D games will always be different, even in RTS, than the 2D classics. I mean, just look at SC2 and tell me you could choose one over the other? It'd come down to personal taste, not superiority. Another way to think of it, is ask yourself if the old side scrolling classics on SNES are any less fun than the FPS games on modern consoles? They aren't. They're just new and different.
|
the macro play argument is weak IMO
thats been the game for years now, IMO there are way too many games. With the amount of players playing its also difficult for people to stay on top for a long time, I mean you could get bounced from a league and then be stuck in the challenge league and such for a year. Players are all just insanely good with early game builds now that its difficult to go away from the norm unless its all in cheese. With the way mutas can be controlled now, 1 base play is suicide vs zerg ( I mean its been tough to do for years, but it could be done if they didnt expand, but now with mutas your shit can get raped HARD) The maps are kind of eh sometimes too, and it seems that in a lot of mirror MU's its a coin flip because the players are so good 1 small mistake and you basically cannot come back.
edit:
btw if people are losing interest in korea thats sort of a shock to me.
|
My humble opinion is....
Starcraft will grow after the retire of ACE.
Why? Because if Boxer lives the army, ACE will no longer exists. BUT THE EMPEROR WILL BE BACK!!!!!! He will just rejoin SKT and there your have the recepie to an awesome new starcraft chapter.
|
On May 23 2008 06:42 oSS-Zarathustra wrote: My humble opinion is....
Starcraft will grow after the retire of ACE.
Why? Because if Boxer lives the army, ACE will no longer exists. BUT THE EMPEROR WILL BE BACK!!!!!! He will just rejoin SKT and there your have the recepie to an awesome new starcraft chapter. What I'm thinking is ... the U.S. doesn't need all these soldiers. Will just lend some to S. Korea so they don't need this conscription service anymore! I mean come on, it's not very good for eSports, and eSports are more entertaining to the general masses than mandatory military conscription.
Just an idea, and also one of the best ones ever. Call your senator!
|
On May 22 2008 07:08 yangstuh wrote: SC2 will be a successful esport no doubt, however will it compare to Korean Starcraft esports? Thats a different story.
I will say this, Starcraft 2 will be a more successful esport than WC3 because of a lot of reasons -cooler, more manlier setting (gritty sci-fi) compared to the more cartoony fantasy warcraft world. -faster action -more units -more death -no creeping, means more confrontation between the players -etc.
-Newer
+ Show Spoiler + WHAT THE FUCK. do you even know what makes starcraft a successful e-sport? i will make you a list: 1) competitive sport - no one likes a player taking place for all the other progamers 2) fans for specific player - wcg documentary of 2005 go watch it and learn. havent you heard of clubs of fans supporting a specific player 3) boxer - boxer didnt win always but was and is the superstar of starcraft even when having a hard time 4) unique way of win - a progamer wins by its own merits. no luck based referees. no stupid luck based rules like poker. etc. i could really go on here with reasons that make e-sports as big as it is. what i am trying to say is that you are just so damn wrong. what do you think progaming is anyways. a place where people gather to see. one fucking and only player dominating others. is that really what you think it is. for gods sake you make me register to answer your idea. geez..
and to the creator of this bad title topic.
i will smile at your title and your idea for this topic. everyday that passes and e-sports is still on tv.
every day e-sports continues to bring tournaments. excellent moments are lived and experience. etc etc. every damn 1 one more day e-sports continues to show osl msl and whatnot tastelessandgsi. every damn day.
i will smile at your "e-sports is dying omfgz lolz!!oneoneon"
every damn day it continues to give us their fans such joy and excitement GO OSL GO MSL GO GOMTV
oh by the way i forgot.. have you ever heard LIVE FOR THE SWARM in zerg? the zerg scourge maybe dont say it but damn it means it. starcraft is full of this kind of things. and thats nice.
You must be unfamiliar with Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods. In sports people love when their is a player who is the absolute best. It gives them someone to embrace or root against and that's why they loved Slayers_Boxer. He would be a nobody if he didn't win anything and it would be silly to think otherwise.
|
Valhalla18444 Posts
This article is sensationalist bullshit. Teams have tanked before, and progaming didn't implode
|
send free to lecaf and it wont matter if hanbit self implodes
|
They need to loosen up the rules, allow chatting again, and everything that used to make starcraft fun.
|
seems like e-sports in Korea has just gone downhill eversince Boxer had to join the army.
|
I know this was probably already mentioned before. Its been 10 years, thats pretty good. Nothing lives forever. Besides we got sc2 coming up soon and you know they are gonna pick that shit up on the networks.
|
Do you know football, tennis, basket ball, car racing etc.... ?
Haven't they been played for decades ? Do the spectators increased each year ? Obviously starcraft wasn't going to grow forever. Maybe its just mature now. Due to the fact that computer games evolve, SC and his 640x480 resolution will die one day, being played by a handful of 70 year old fanatics.
However, SC2 will probably kill SC a lot sonner.
|
Yeah, I'm really looking forward to Tennis II.
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
On May 23 2008 06:02 PsycHOTemplar wrote: Every year they say StarCraft is going to die soon, and every year it keeps living.
Necessity is the mother of invention. I believe that whatever obstacle StarCraft may face there will be someone to help overcome it. StarCraft will never die. StarCraft is the Chess of the information technology age. The perfect, inarguably irreplaceable original and favourite in the hearts of all those who played it competitively. I can see StarCraft never dying in my lifetime.
StarCraft 2 will be a fun game, but it won't destroy SC 1. SC 1 and SC 2 are like oranges and apples. 3D games will always be different, even in RTS, than the 2D classics. I mean, just look at SC2 and tell me you could choose one over the other? It'd come down to personal taste, not superiority. Another way to think of it, is ask yourself if the old side scrolling classics on SNES are any less fun than the FPS games on modern consoles? They aren't. They're just new and different.
- nice post, we share the same hopes - still even though a game may survive, its popularity can decline and its participation in the world of professional e-sports can disappear - that Korean news article is depressing : ( the decrease in tv viewership is probably the worse sign for Korean SC e-sports
- anyway, It could be worse..
|
On May 23 2008 11:33 EvoChamber wrote: Yeah, I'm really looking forward to Tennis II.
I'm not. MRS (Multiple Racket Selection) is going to kill the macro that most pros who used one racket have mastered.
|
I've got to think that decrease in TV viewership is due to the fact that you can watch on GOMTV or Daum or even on youtube with such ease.
I've been watching VODs and following the korean pro scene since cola cola league. Back then, I had to pay a korean friend to pay his relative living in korea to purchase an account for ongamenet via a cellphone so that I could watch VODs that buffered every 3 seconds, but I'd still sit there and watch frame by frame.
Personally I disagree with many of the arguments that people are laying out. Too many games? Perhaps. But I still watch pretty much every single new vod that gets posted on jon's youtube page. Sure as hell beats waiting a whole friggin week for 4 games where perhaps 1 or 2 may be decent.
No personality? I couldn't give a rat's ass if some progamer does some retarded dance or ceremony after a match. All I care about are GG's. Watching Flash come back against TheRock and Yellow recently was just as entertaining for me as any of boxer's old matches. OK, it might not have the wow factor or the "newness" of boxer pulling some crazy new moves, but there really hasn't been anything that revolutionary since I'd say about '04. You can only invent something once, and just because the game has matured doesn't reduce the entertainment value for me.
And what is this bullshit about progamer looks. OK, I'm sure it has a huge effect on the screaming korean teenie girls out there. But as a true fan of the sport, I could care less about the looks of a gamer. And to the guy saying nada is handsome? WTF? If you can look past the glitzy new hairdo, he is fairly ugly. I get excited when watching a vod with flash, mind, or sea. Sure all three of them are kinda ugly, but I'd much rather watch them play than Chrh, Reach or Yellow. Those guys are pretty good looking I'd say, and I respect BW history and their contributions to the game in earlier days, but their games right now are no where near as entertaining as top level players.
While it may be true that some fans may care more about personality, looks, etc., I'm more a fan of the game itself, and the level of play right now is higher than it has ever been. That is why my level of interest is still as strong as ever.
|
Yeah, I'm really looking forward to Tennis II Yeah, I like squash too.
|
None of the really good players out there are down right ugly. They may not be models or anything but who really cares...
|
On May 23 2008 16:34 Tinithor wrote: None of the really good players out there are down right ugly. They may not be models or anything but who really cares...
The fangirls. Who make up a considerable amount of the fanbase in Korea.
|
On May 22 2008 00:26 MultiMarine wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2008 19:57 frankbg wrote:On May 21 2008 19:45 lololol wrote:On May 21 2008 19:10 frankbg wrote:On May 21 2008 18:59 lololol wrote: Your argument why CS is requires more skill and is more competitive compared to SC isn't even an argument, but pure BS. Popularity among players doesn't have a direct connection to skill(and it's more of a reverse dependancy, because harder games are played by fewer people, an obvious fact), or you want to tell me the Sims requires the most skills of all games, because it is the most popular?
The Sims > CS! I learned a new thing today! Can you not read? Have you not read ANYTHING else but that argument or are you so blinded by your pre-conceived notions that you can't debate any other argument? You basically prove my whole point that you guys don't know enough about CS to judge it. The whole popularity issue wasn't even something I brought up, I was merely replying to something someone else brought up. I never said that this was the reason it required more skills. Don't put words in my mouth. Also, where do you hold stats that show more people play the Sims than CS. Also do you compare the time spent? People playing the Sims once a month aren't really gamers in my book. Seriously, stop making arguments out of your asshole. This is getting really irritating. I would quit the debating because it's offtopic but some of you guys just won't drop it. If you're gonna try to counter-argument, at least don't act like a bigoted retard. What is your SC background to prove you know enough about SC to judge it? Yes, you should quit, because the only bigoted retard here is you. You don't even know what an argument is, and personal attacks are definitely not, they just show you're an idiot. You stated that my argument was Bullshit. You didn't read my other posts/arguments and targeted a single point I made about popularity, twisted it in a way that wasn't intended to try and make it look ridiculous (Sims vs CS argument, cmon, you're being a huge flamebait there). And the fact that my initial polite arguments have been replied to with insulting stuff. I didn't start the personnal attacks, the blind fanboys did. Edit: By the way, I never tried to belittle the skill required in SC but merely tried to correct the shit ton of fallacies that were being spread about CS. You guys are the ones who are trying to belittle a very good game, a game that pioneered esports as much as SC did (probably more, considering CS is worldwide and SC is restricted to a single country). Oh and Skew's last post pretty much /thread. I have played both RTS and FPS at the highest level so i know what takes more skill! I used to play Starcraft 10 hours a day for many years and i got the chance to be apart of the first ever WCG. Before i left i played some Q3 for fun like 1 hour a day maybe. I had no one to practice with so i only played some random 1on1 games. When i got to korea i played Q3 with the people competing in the Q3 competition. This was when Q3 was really big and the CPL focused only on Q3. Let's just say i beat quake legend dOOMER and python who i belive later finished 3rd place in the tournament. I had to devote my entire life to be at the highest level in starcraft and with Q3 all it took was some fun 1on1 games now and then. I have played CS to and it's easier then Q3 but with more teamplay. No way in HELL CS takes more skill then starcraft.
Yeah this debate is over but you're full of sh** and you don't know what you're talking about. You never showed up to any CPL and are the biggest nonamer I've met, beating someone named "doomer" online means jack. Could've been me. And to say CS is easier than Q3..... lol. Yeah wtv. I'm done with this but please don't lie to try and make a point, it's dishonest and retarded. And I thought the mods said to drop it, can you not read? You'd expect a super gosu gamer to atleast be able to read a 3 sentence post that says to STOP IT.
|
On May 22 2008 04:45 zimz wrote: i play fps all my life. and none of them is as hard as starcraft. to me fps is natural. its not stressing etc. u just jump in. starcraft is a unique beast. it is the most unforgiving, challenging game there is. by your post i can tell you are very bias. just because u became high level at CS. u want to make believe (by being delusional to yourself, and the world) that it requires as much skill or even more skill than SC. because you want to make yourself feel more special and superior and that you became so high with a game that is "just as hard as SC if not more" in your eyes. you are on an ego trip and as i can see from ur post, you are very defensive about it because u think it ties in with how l33t u are in CS and how ur CS skills is just as "special" or even more "special" than those SC skills. your very immature. now how dare u come here on this SC forum and try prove how special u r cuz u got in high lvl CS and how its more demanding when it is clearly not. im sorry last romantic but i just had to post this.
mods? everybody is adding insults to this closed debate, it's kinda gay that I can't answer and prove these braindead idiots wrong. so either nuke em or ban em or let me knock their arguments and bring some facts in.
edit: alternatively, could we get a thread on this particular subject? I suppose the fanboys will go nuts and start talking shit and turning it into a flame war but then again it'll just show who the mature, level-headed people with facts are.
|
=( What a buncha failures.
I agree with tenbagger. VOD access is so much easier than before that I miss so much more live now. Especially with the awkward times.
|
I wonder what will actually happen to the leagues when SC2 comes out. Will the SC1 leagues fold (unlikely?) and there will be only SC2 leagues, or SC2 will be threated a bit like WC3 (different game with own leagues). I think we will have both SC1 and SC2 leagues for some time - it will depend if SC2 will turn out a game that fits for TV (and if it will fit for the players too, that's the most important thing!).
You must be unfamiliar with Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods. In sports people love when their is a player who is the absolute best. It gives them someone to embrace or root against and that's why they loved Slayers_Boxer. He would be a nobody if he didn't win anything and it would be silly to think otherwise.
For me it's like the worst scenario for any sport. The same person winning all the time. Id rather see dramatic games between players of similar skill (with battles between players of different styles being the best). Do you remember the Ilooveoov vs Boxer finals? Would it be fun, if we knew that Boxer would win for sure? I mean this is an upset when Boxer loses to some unknown zerg (or Mondragon loses to Dreiven), but at least the game is not predictable and not boring. If the same person is always winning, watching the game is pointless, as you know the result. Not to mention that everyone plays the same now, ok I know that there is not much place for style, but seriously, these new progamers are a bunch of noones for me - I dont see anything ballsy, or stylish in most of their games, they just play like robots.
I think cycling was ruined by that guy who used to win every race. Here in Poland strongmen championships are quite popular (I dont like them) - and there is one guy (Pudzianowski) who wins them EVERY time. It's quite boring for me, I watched it like two or three times and always wondered who will be 2nd or 3rd, because there was no competition for the first spot.
I work at a company that is endorsed by Tiger Woods, which made me hate him lol
|
On May 23 2008 15:57 L wrote: Yeah, I like squash too. Well, thought it does feel that we are in Rugby ver. 45.3b
And there are still bugs unfixed...
|
On May 23 2008 15:57 L wrote: Yeah, I like squash too.
I play tennis and a little bit of squash. Their only similarity is a racquet & a ball. The racquets are very different. The balls are different. The arena is significantly different. The mechanics on everything is different. The rules aren't even the same. It's more like Starcraft to Supreme Commander where the only similarity is that they're both RTS.
In the eStro coach interview, he said SC2 will replace SC1 and that it wouldn't make sense to have both. I believe SC2 will replace SC1. It will only depend on when after SC2's launch. We have to ask, if the pros are so good then they will adjust to NEW STRATEGIES. Those they don't then that speaks volume how much more mechanics they are than strategy.
|
wait sooo im confuzed and didnt feel like reading everything :D is there gonna be a tournament for SC2 in korea? or are they just gonna stick to SC1?
|
On May 25 2008 05:40 [X]Ken_D wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2008 15:57 L wrote:Yeah, I'm really looking forward to Tennis II Yeah, I like squash too. I play tennis and a little bit of squash. Their only simliarity is a racquet & a ball. The racquets are very different. The balls are different. The arena is significantly different. The mechanics on everything is different. The rules aren't even the same. It's more like Starcraft to Supreme Commander where the only similarity is that they're both RTS. In the eStro coach interview, he said SC2 will replace SC1 and that it wouldn't make sense to have both. I believe SC2 will replace SC1. It will only depend on when after SC2's launch. We have to ask, if the pros are so good then they will adjust to NEW STRATEGIES. Those they don't then that speaks volume how much more mechanics they are than strategy.
Hm as I heard it the coach said SC" will replace bw IF and only if it is good for competition. Personally I believe it will replace it anyway though, and if it isn't as competitive both bw and sc2 will soon be dead.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
No it's not about that at all. Obviously there will be SC2 tournaments in Korea.
It's about a slight decline in viewership numbers for SC and Hanbit considering dropping their progaming team, as well as Ace disbanding (HUGE COINCIDENCE: BoxeR just about to finish his military service, can't possible have anything to do with that!).
Validity of this is under contention so read the thread if you want to learn more about it, but no, nothing about SC2 tournaments.
|
: (, everything dies eventually ;;
|
I play tennis and a little bit of squash. Their only simliarity is a racquet & a ball. The racquets are very different. The balls are different. The arena is significantly different. The mechanics on everything is different. The rules aren't even the same. It's more like Starcraft to Supreme Commander where the only similarity is that they're both RTS. They both use a raquet and a ball, so he UI and units are similar. Different maps and different mechanics separate them, but they're both very related, especially when comparing them to other sports/games.
Use badminton if you're really butthurt over semantics.
|
SC is healthy. Whatever. It's old and healthy.
|
The real issue at hand is that its not an isolated case. Its not a decision of hmm should we play this new game or stick with the current. Fact is the rest of the world will play sc2 en masse; however, the Korea companies are branching outward and if they wanna keep in line with that goal, they're going to have to switch as well. If they wanna keep things the way they are in Korea though, they have to change nothing.
|
On May 25 2008 07:10 L wrote:Show nested quote +I play tennis and a little bit of squash. Their only simliarity is a racquet & a ball. The racquets are very different. The balls are different. The arena is significantly different. The mechanics on everything is different. The rules aren't even the same. It's more like Starcraft to Supreme Commander where the only similarity is that they're both RTS. They both use a raquet and a ball, so he UI and units are similar. Different maps and different mechanics separate them, but they're both very related, especially when comparing them to other sports/games. Use badminton if you're really butthurt over semantics.
You are wrong. Starcraft 2 carries over a lot of things that is 90-100% exactly like how it is from Starcraft 1. I also play badminton and I can tell you that a person playing badminton cannot jump into squash. Nor can a squash player jump into tennis. It's a lot more than a racquet & ball. The comparison that is made is from Starcraft 1 to Starcraft 2 which would be like Tennis to Tennis 2, not Tennis to squash. Don't feel "butthurt" being wrong.
I don't want to go too off topic on this thread which has went off many times already so I'll end the comparision here.
|
I think the current starcraft league models in Korea is crap. Starcraft at its core is a 1v1 game. it does not make sense to have two league that runs 24/7
what they should've done is follow the tennis model. grand slams / masters and host across the world.
|
|
|
|