Advertisement
 

Membership

 

Advertisement

 

Search

 
Forums \ StarCraft II Forum \ why the new interface will help the game
 1, 2, 3, 4 

3 months ago
#21

ETBrooD

   2
2008-08-21 17:13:00, XyreX wrote:
2008-08-21 15:36:08, Zoler wrote:
Starcraft has only been popular in 8-10 years as a sport. Give it as much time as football and chess and it will surely be much more popular, no doubt.


lol? it´s not like the number of sc players are raising nowaday, give starcraft a 100 year and it will almost for sure be dead.
btw chess is not really a that big "sport" its mostly played for fun.


Maybe in your town it isn't big. Here in europe chess is so big you can find it almost everywhere, you go around a few corners and it's there. You go to a cafe and it's there. You go to a restaurant and you see a whole club blitzing or you don't see them because they're in a hidden room playing league matches or debating and analyzing games.

SC is absolutely nothing compared to that, that's where I agree to you. But it's very likely that IF SC2 proves itself to be highly competitive it will grow as much as chess did. It could've happened to SC as well if adults weren't so ignorant about video games in the past.
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#22

phoniexrisen

   1
as long as macro plays in the mid level an even more important factor than micro then it will never overtake chess. The idea that chess is played for fun is dead wrong there have been thousands if not hundred thousand books wrote on the subject , thousands of documentarys and has pretty much the respect of the world as the ultimate test of strategic thinking.

The only way to answer the question of the true nature of gosu for the pros being smarts instead of keyboard and mouse ablity is if the game went turn based and that will never happen. I just dont belive that some of the smartest people on the planet are under twenty korean boys , they just happen to live in a country that decided to make e sports their identity and have the serousness and pay structure for someone to even want to reach a high level of play. I do belive that the eight hour mandatory practice sessions their teams require does have a lot to do with it . Take nascar racing there a lot of poeple who can intellectually tell you how to win a race but only a handful who have the reflexes and driving skill to be the top handful of drivers in the world.

All im saying is if speed becomes less a part of the game and people have to think more to win I dont think we would see the same ppl at the top.
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#23

ETBrooD

   2
Boxer, July, Savior, Flash, Bisu, Stork all heavily focus on strategy and they are/were all top gamers. I highly doubt that we would see a much different ranking than the current one if SC was not about hand skills anymore. Maybe some gamers ranked lower than #30 would have a tough time but the best of the best would stay.

There are extremely hand skill based gamers like Sea who's not a champion even though his stats are amazing. On the other hand there is July who is specialized in extremely tactical fights, his hand skills are probably lower than Sea's but he's grabbed a few titles and he keeps doing so.
When watching them play I'm more impressed by Sea, especially his unit control is just awesome, but July's strategies seem to fully cover all of his weaknesses so he can achieve what Sea can't.

Flash beat Stork with brilliant strategy, he outplayed him a week before the match even began just with words - "I will counter your carrier strategy!" he said and Stork responded "I have a build prepared for you".
What did Flash do? He didn't even let Stork get into dangerous territory, he just used his mind and owned him without having to show his amazing multitasking.

You might become a progamer with godlike control but you'll never get on top with that. Watch Tester play, he's the perfect macro protoss but he can't go much further than that. He just isn't brilliant enough.

What do these examples tell us? Well I'd just say strategic minds are usually superior to keyboard&mouse artists.
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#24

phoniexrisen

   1
come on theres only so much you can do .....if your protoss you got reaver drops so what ? If you really get down to it games like total war are true strategy indicators because economy is taken out of things. If you dont think a player with meduim level macro can beat a player with better micro you are sadly mistaken this game leans more towards macro than it does towards micro in its current form . And as far as tatical minds go if these guys were the greatest strategists in the world one do you think they would just be playing starcraft and two they would have no problems achieving the same level of greatness at chess as say starcraft > think about it all strategy games are based on previous ones before ....chess influenced starcraft after all . Im just saying for pure strategy from what I have seen from top pro matches these guys would not accomplish it if they did have slow fingers and I doubt they would achieve the same level of success in strategy games that arent computer oriented.

Im not attacking the game im just saying anaylze the game and you will see broodwar has always been to economy dependent. The changes will only get more people playing and shift things more to tatical batttleground. Real armies are given a budget by their respective goverments they have to choose how to spend that money but the general is not required to go load up the bags of cash in his jeep or go buy the stuff himself , he is paid to fight a war and win not print money or collect it himself.


Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#25

zKod

   1
Lol... You say that Total War is true strategy because the economy has been taken out? Obviously you have no idea what the game is about, and obviously just tried to use some random game name to look smart. OR you used cheats to get all buildings+gold for units production.

First of all, in Total War you need to choose what path of building process you want for each province. You need to dedicate some provinces/castles to teching to cavalry or archers or infantry. If you think it's not macro based, then it's because when *you* play the game, you end up with 100k gold by late game period because you forget to spend them on buildings and conquest.

And so basicly you want a game where the macro is low right? Why are you even here? You should be playing World of Conflict, if you have a problem with macro. I'm sure you could go pro in that and earn alot of money and fame.

I agree the game is economy-based, but saying there's limited micro is just ignorant. Else you don't know what you're talking about.
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#26

phoniexrisen

   1
First off you obviously have never played multiplayer total war or even knew there was such a thing . You battle one army against another period ,you pick your units based upon historical factions and then just like real historical battles took place you rely upon real world miltary strategy .

Random game name .....Ive been playing total war since the very first one thank you ....shogun total war and am looking forward to empires total war and to be honest if total war had the same pro scene that starcraft had I would probably be playing that more . I know how to play both games just glad blizzard is updating what should have been updated ages ago .

does world of conflict even have money tournaments ?

I knew enventually we would get to the tired old fanboy phrase of if you dont like it then go play something else. I for one love starcraft and love they have gotten rid of a stupid feature that should have never been there in the past when it comes to gathering minerals . Its not who mines the best its about who fights the best. Maybe you sir should go play a accounting game since macro is such a beloved thing for you .
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#27

zKod

   1
Yeah, i've played the multiplayer part, and it was boring as hell. I hate games where you can do nothing other than have prefixed units. And yeah, i've also played it since Shogun.

If you love Starcraft so much, then why would you play Total War more if it had a proscene? You pretty much made your own arguments useless because nobody will bother listening to someone who tries to make Starcraft 2 become like other games.

World of Conflict used to have money tournaments, but not so much anymore. My point was, you should play that game instead, since you find it better. If you are trying to convince me that you're only playing Starcraft because of it's competetive scene, then thanks for the laugh and you go right ahead with that, because that'll get you SO far.

And yeah, I play an accounting game... it's called Starcraft.

EDIT: To be honest, i'm not saying that the game would be bad if it had more micro. But to dismiss macro is just ignorant, because then the game will be looked less competetively on. If you ever watch replays, even now a days the "somewhat" professionals still have bad macro late-game.
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#28

phoniexrisen

   1
I never said i played world of conflict . Never said I had motivations to want ot see starcraft as say a particular other game , this you came up with your very own assuming which you know how that old saying goes.

A person cant play two rts games competively ? All strategy games are pretty much base on one older game just flashed up with pretty graphics and animations and that is

CHESS ! THINK ABOUT IT

The oldest strategy game in the world except maybe human survival which we almost lost when homo sapien got down to about a thousand or so people at one time .

whithout Chess you would have never had starcraft to begin with .

Just before you say it cause I know you want to , I dont play chess much it bores me too much like total war does you .
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#29

hiflier

   1
if person could play 2 rts competetively it would be stupid as hell. imagine a person who play wc3 and sc and can win a tournaments in both. and it would mean that these games are the same.

starcraft and starcraft 2 will never be as chess and will never base only on strategic mind. it is just because it's called rts which means that you'll be required to have fast fingers. (and to get them and to came up with tactic you'll have to spend a lot of time) i dont think blizzard will create game where apm 50 will serve for person who came up with new tactic and just because of this fact he can win. in this situation the next person can copy this tactic... and thats all.

in this way blizzard will kill themselves. they have to give a user and imagination that time and effort counts in this game and not only intelligence. and it should be like this.


mostly strategic mind is used in chess because time does not play that huge role in it. and even if you're a chess master does not mean that you'd be a great general in real war cause the war are different.


economy plays huge role in every war. and as you are a mind of zerg or a general of protoss you should care about it.

so macro(economy) + micro(giving orders) = war

i think that in this point i agree with kakashi who sad that blizzard should create a game where micro and macro counts as hell.

lot of micro + lot of macro + different strategies should be sc2.

that would be a game which we want.



if it's only a micro based game and if it is what you want then the game for you is wc3. (which i dont like but i have to say that im impressed by moon and it requires a tactic mind)

but in any case for me

wc3<sc

in other case i wouldn't be playing this game for 2 years


ps. about chess which in the end effect in starcraft. if there would not be chess there would be something else.

so thinking about what would be if... is pointless.

but i finally slowly get your point
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#30

szedrus

   1
Such a misfortune it is to see another thread about automining and mbs only with a different name this time. There will always be people because of whom the competitive level of any type of thing will drop.

These are the guys who are floating in the middle. They do not claim that automining/mbs is good or bad. Their strategy is to post threads in which they approach the subject from very distorted angles rather than trying to focus on the simplicity of the problem. The name of this thread is a great example of this strategy : "why the new interface will help the game".
No trace of the problem within the title, but after reading the first 2 paragraphs one immediately realizes that it is the same old story only in a sugar-coated version. The reasons are self-explenetary and are already explained above.

I don't feel like discussing the damages done to SC2 because of mainstream gamers and the figure of the lead producer anymore /The lead producer has worked on game so far which do not have macro in the way wer know it, and the casual gamers, the consumers of todays game industry do not need to be introduced/.

It is just painful to see that more and more people tend to favor this kind of approach. If competition dies, Sc will follow. Multiplayer is the only thing that can keep a software alive after ten years and the fact that todays top gamers usually claim that they did not even finish single-player missions stongly supports this.

Finally, you can apprach this subject from any angle you please, but this kind of more micro will make up for less micro is just a forgery and we all know it.

I would love to hear a reply from the thread's owner. Thank you!
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#31

zKod

   1
#30 +1
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#32

phoniexrisen

   1
I was referring to useless human skills , skills that shouldnt have been necessary in the first place.Having to stop and put each worker on a mineral instead of them going right to it is silly you could become skilled at this but the way your talking is same way ppl talked when any sport evovled like the coaches in football who were against cleats , yes this made football easier according to your logic but did it make the game worse? players now run faster and the game is more exciting . sounds to me my friend its not that I fear competition , because the high skill level is what attracted me in the first place, it sounds more like you fear or cannot embrace innovation. So dont buy your sons cleats or helmets for that matter if they ever play football cause its cheapning the game and bringing down the skill curve . I think ya been playing starcraft too long and forgot theres a real world out here that advances every day in huge technological leaps and bounds.Stop fearing the future if the truly skilled are really skilled getting rid of a redudant backwards part of the game that no other rts game felt inclined to adopt , not even wc 3 because says only useful to have five workers on a mine wont make a diffrence if theyre indeed such strategic giants like you belive nonthing will change .

I belive the true cream is about to rise to the top.
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#33

szedrus

   1
"useless human skills", "getting rid of a redudant backwards part of the game"

These two statements clearly clarify that there are still people out there living in a dream world. You talk about advancements and the future. You should take a look at what future has brought us concerning the gaming scene. Today there are no more in-depth rpgs, no more delicate RTSes. Today everything is about making it easier for the masses. This is the reason why today games are like songs. All about business for the consumers. Is it so hard to see ?

Starcraft 2 was expected to be different. It was expected to raise the standards one step higher. Not much thinking is necessary to realize that this standard is nowhere if automatization is allowed to take place.

Of course the example you have drawn between football and Sc is a faulty one. Macro management and the control of workers take up at least 25-30 percent of the attention of a player, whereas cleats are a different kettle of fish, as a football player you do not even bother with them during the game. I really do not want to get personal here, but if you cannot see the difference between a slight detail and something which forms the essential part of the gameplay, it will only tell volumes of how flawed and limited your knowledge is on Starcraft.
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#34

phoniexrisen

   1
TO hiflier you said for a person to be super skilled at two rts game is stupid as he as you put it and that means both games are similiar .

Well most rts games have more similarties than diffrences and all are pretty much based on the same strategic concepts. Ill make an example and tell me if im wrong .


probe = pawn
zealot = pawn or knight

dark templar =bishop
reaver =rook
high templar =queen

this is not completely transferrable but i think you can kinds of see what im getting at .

IF person excells at two diffrent rts games it just means they are highly intilligent and skilled strategically in their thinking within the parameters of the game environment.
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#35

szedrus

   1
Relating starcraft to chess as an argument will only make this dispute harder for you. They have nothing in common.

In chess you see the whole game area <<<< >>>> Starcraft is about intelligent exploring

In chess you rely only on your mind <<<< >>>> Starcraft also requires speed

In chess you have only one "map" <<<< >>>> map knowledge plays an important role in SC

In chess you have the same units <<<< >>>> Starcraft features different races and even in mirror matchups you are not likely to have the same units as you opponent.

These are just a few examples, but are good to shed light on yet another faulty example.....
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#36

phoniexrisen

   1
Your saying players running faster did not affect the sport of football , next thing youl say it that what you call a slight detail say shoulder pads didnt change the game either. Why do you guys defend something that blizzard put in because no one had thought of anything else , obviously they felt it was flawed or they would have included in in wc 3 as well instead 5 worker max effeciency. Maybe its just possible what you call skill is more the fact the game has been out for close to ten years now and anyone who has been doing something for ten years I would expect them to be a little good at it .

Obviously on the chess analogy its just way too over your head. I was comparing how one unit is a counter unit to each other , and isnt chess on a master level about the same things as sc , try not to lose pieces and box your opponent in a corner where he cant get out strategically ? You just dont get it do you ? ALL strategy games are based on Chess , IN ancient times chess was played by kings and generals to sharpen the miltary mind . Look at real world miltary tatics there are similarties to chess strategies abudant.

saying it is not similiar for your reasons would be like me saying there the same because you genereally are sitting down when playing both.

It amazes me how hardcore rts think theyre so smart but yet dont even seem to have a firm grasp of history or miltary history for that matter , every technique of supreme strategic genuis you have seen the pros play in a game do you think it was totally orginal , most of the time if you look these strategies are thousands of years old and have been studied by strategists since the beginning of mankind picking up a rock and throwing it at his neighbor.

I challenge you give me a starcraft strat and i will show you its real world equivalent and one that is basically borrowed from miltary history. Maybe you'll then begin to see that when it comes to rts games most of what ppl consider a pro doing as genius has just been borrowed from the minds of Napoleon , Alexander or Hannibal .
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#37

hiflier

   1
"IF person excells at two diffrent rts games it just means they are highly intilligent and skilled strategically in their thinking within the parameters of the game environment."

if it is as you have written then it means that there shouldn't be 2 games but only 1.

its like being very good at soccer and football at the same time.

i just can't require from sc to be a chess.

i cant require from sc to be as wc3.

cause there is no need to be like this.

you're right with your comparings. but if you want to play game where mind caunts the most play chess.

if you want to play game where micro + mind play a role then wc3 is created for you.

and if you want to play a game where you have micro + macro + mind play sc. that's my point. and there is no need to add more.


szedrus has written what i'm afraid of with sc2.

"Today everything is about making it easier for the masses."

cash succes.

so discuss i've said what i wanted. have a nice conversation.
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#38

Ki_Do

   1
laughin out loud
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#39

zKod

   1
Just nevermind his argument about playing 2 RTS's competetively, because obviously he's on another level of enlightenment and has met Jesus/Buddha. So he's apparently the only one who's able to play 2 games competetively.

You make a fine idol... I'll go play Quake and Counter-Strike: Source both competetively, because their FPS's, so they must be the same.

Don't even bother saying this is possible, because if you do, then you've just dug your hole even deeper.
Top of the page   Quote  

3 months ago
#40

Vaphell

   3
CS and Quake are very different because first one is about team play and you won't get anywhere playing alone, the latter is about owning solo. But all RTSes are pretty much the same - you have some resource income, you build structures that let you produce army, you take that army and try to hurt the opponent. What's different are the little numbers - costs, dmg/hp etc. Every single RTS has the concept of cannon fodder, meatshield, ranged units, casters/support units.

I have no doubt that some brilliant guy would be able to play competetively 2 different RTS games. I'd suspect Boxer could be an example. Maybe he would not be the best existing player in both games but that's not the point. He is of the rare kind of people who just feel the game mechanics.

I knew 1 such guy personally (at the warsaw tech university):
- he always was the best in our little circle of SC players (i managed to beat him maybe 5 times total), before SC he owned in WC2,
- he can play chess without looking the board, he owned the local champion at his first tournament in his city,
- he is very good at bridge
- he owned everyone in quake 1 - once he went to some big quake event and ppl there were amazed how he can play with his ridiculuously high sensitivity (~30), when he came back he was on the whole new level of play and there was noone who could get more than 1:5 frag ratio with him, not to mention that he was already unbeatable playing on his P100 with NO SOUND CARD, using only 1/4 of the screen (box in center) when he bought new PC - oh maaan :/
- he is/was badass at Magic: the Gathering, was in ranked in top 5(?) in Poland and he only played tournaments from time to time, even 2 years after last tournament he received invitations to some european level events. He specialized in drafts (you get random cards and build deck) as he was playing occasionally and he didn't have the latest cookie cutter deck.
- he was one of the 5 best players in Archmage/Reincarnation, almost always in top ten, few seasons #1 (http://www.the-reincarnation.com/) - cool online turn based game with big similarities to MtG (black, blue, red, white, green colors, etc)
- he is/was the best tank in his WoW guild, there were those primary tanks - guys with all the best gear - but he knew exactly what to do and what buffs to get (consumables, etc) before doing an instance
- give him any RPG manual, he will sit with it for 2 hrs reading and he will come up with some imba character

He is the most intelligent person i have ever known, i don't hesitate to call him gaming genius. If he lived in Korea he would be material for godly player. unfortunately in the rest of the world you have to work so you can't improve gaming skills.


Btw, wasn't there a guy who played some older RTS and went to the C&C3 tournament almost without training and owned everyone?
Top of the page   Quote  

 1, 2, 3, 4 

Forum post
  • Do to others what you would have them do to you.
  • Do not judge so that you will not be judged.
    » Read posting rules in detail

    Reminder: IP-addresses for each comment is saved. Offensive posts will be censored. Repeated offense will result in a warning and/or a temporal lockdown of the account.
    • why the new interface will help the game \ Reply
    To submit a post, you have to be a registred member. Register an account below the title 'Membership' in the left menu.

    » Top of the page