POST STUFF
|
 by Lipton, Level 54
Last updated at March 30, 2009, 12:25 am
|
|
djWheat runs a great podcast discussing eSports in general. In his 2nd episode he brings up the possibilities of a community segmentation within the Starcraft community with the release of StarCraft II. A similar split occurred between Counter-Strike 1.6 and Source.Check out the podcast I'm speaking about here
Will there be a split?
The surrounding events that led up to the Counter-Strike split were a far different animal than Blizzard releasing the sequel to the best RTS game ever made.What I'm talking about here is that at the time CS was still the premiere competitive game in N.America when CS Source came out. The crash and burn of the CPL also meant the death of the biggest event for Counter-Strike players. The mechanics changed so much between 1.6 and Source that 1.6 gamers swore by their game and stuck to it. That was the CS split...
djWheat could go into way more detail about the CS community than I could, so lets take a look now at the StarCraft community.
The biggest difference here is that SC gamers have been waiting for a sequel for over 10 years now-- a game that would surpass the original in both technical aspects and complexity as an eSport.CS gamers still do not have a true sequel to their game; 1.6 and Source were rather 2 different "expansion" / "version" upgrades. Not being a true sequel to original CS, Source I feel was just a pretty version of the game with major game play changes. This is what caused the split IMHO.
The StarCraft community on the other hand will be getting a true sequel a decade later. StarCraft II is a game with a plethora of complexity being built into it right now, and Blizzard has actually put together an in house eSports team which will help foster a great competitive transition from SC to SC2. Basically Blizz is taking an active approach to the success of SC2 as an eSport, while SC was an accident.
Will ProGamers and 'Elites' cause the split?
Many feel that StarCraft 2's success as an eSport will be determined by whether the Professional community accepts it, and what has been coming out from ProGamers and the non-professional 'Elites' is that the new game's mechanics dumb down gameplay.This is a debate I address in my 3 biggest Starcraft criticisms post, but to re-iterate, the pros will have no trouble trumping newbs all day long, even with auto-mine and MBS. That is almost a moot point to mention. However there is the complexity argument: will Starcraft II be as complex as it needs to be for an ultra-high skill level ceiling? I truly believe that it will.
SC2 has not only far more units than the original but also new gameplay mechanics that were unfathomable in the original. Starcraft has simplistic gameplay through which pros and elites over the years have discovered new strategies over and over again.
The sequel is just a richer game and even more potential for the competitive community to, for lack of a better word, exploit and create the StarCraft 2 versions of Muta stacking, Dragoon dancing, Manner Pylons, etc.
Now there were huge differences between CS 1.6 and Source, but fundamentally they were exactly the same game and nothing new except a graphics upgrade. This isn't the case with the StarCraft series.
The Split won't even have a chance
Unlike Counter-Strike, StarCraft has what one would consider a real Professional league. Not to slam on competitive CS, but Counter-Strike money is only made in the tournaments, not in salaries. Pro SC players benefit from tournament money as well as full-time jobs.The WCG will eventually completely move over to StarCraft II and the Pros can ***** all they want, but the audiences will be screaming for the sequel, the better graphics, and the integrated eSport spectator features.
N.America is ready for it's next eSport
Counter-Strike pwned StarCraft in timing to be an American eSport; Starcraft came out in '98 and was taken back to Korea during the Asian financial crisis as Korea had broadband at the time, Counter-strike came out when the US started un-failing in the broadband department. Thus CS became the next N.American eSport after Quake.
Timing is everything. Fans in America have been waiting for a new StarCraft game for 10 years; new gamers at the perfect SC competitive age are awaiting the next game to make their own name. Veterans like me will always talk about the purity that is the original StarCraft; however, I recognize that what N.America needs is a modern game to be its next eSport. That game is StarCraft 2, and I believe that the community is ready and willing to help SC pass the torch.
In the mean time, while we all wait for StarCraft 2, check out Tasteless's blog about the StarCraft competitive keyboard.
Related Links
djWheat - eSports podcasts3 biggest criticisms about StarCraft II
RSS & Social Links:
Starfeeder's RSS feed:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/starfeeder
Follow us on Twitter:
@Starfeeder
@CallMeTasteless <- Nick "Tasteless" Plott's his Starfeeder Blog
@SuperDanielMan <- Daniel "SuperDanielMan" Lee his Starfeeder Blog
Report Post
13 comments
hero.dE Mar 30, 2009 at 1:47 am
+2 votes
I pretty much agree with the idea that the only way a split will happen is if the Progamers (and Korea) turn their backs on Starcraft 2.
The foreign competitive Starcraft scene (referring to Europeans/Americans/etc.) will follow the Korean scene when it comes to what game they play. This is because playing in Korea is basically the equivalent of playing in the Majors for any sport. It is what every athlete (and likewise e-sports athlete) dreams of. There is no point in playing Starcraft 2 if the korean Progamers aren't playing it (and viceversa).
It's different for Counter-Strike because there is no country that clearly dominates all others with ease (though some will argue that Europe rapes America constantly [however it's nothing like the korean/foreigner split]).
The casual gamer (referring to the noncompetitive gamer) will play Starcraft2 regardless of what the competitive scene does. Updated graphics, new units, brand new game, etc. is much more important to them than having a competitive scene. They just want to enjoy the game.
Basically, I only invision the split happening if Korea rejects Starcraft 2. I don't have enough information, or knowledge, to judge whether or not this will happen; but I hope it doesn't. I'd much rather have a unified community than a split one.
Now about the split regarding Starcraft DoTA....
The foreign competitive Starcraft scene (referring to Europeans/Americans/etc.) will follow the Korean scene when it comes to what game they play. This is because playing in Korea is basically the equivalent of playing in the Majors for any sport. It is what every athlete (and likewise e-sports athlete) dreams of. There is no point in playing Starcraft 2 if the korean Progamers aren't playing it (and viceversa).
It's different for Counter-Strike because there is no country that clearly dominates all others with ease (though some will argue that Europe rapes America constantly [however it's nothing like the korean/foreigner split]).
The casual gamer (referring to the noncompetitive gamer) will play Starcraft2 regardless of what the competitive scene does. Updated graphics, new units, brand new game, etc. is much more important to them than having a competitive scene. They just want to enjoy the game.
Basically, I only invision the split happening if Korea rejects Starcraft 2. I don't have enough information, or knowledge, to judge whether or not this will happen; but I hope it doesn't. I'd much rather have a unified community than a split one.
Now about the split regarding Starcraft DoTA....
1 reply to hero.dE (hide)
1 reply to hero.dE (show)
Permalink
Post Reply
Reply to this comment
Ovie Mar 30, 2009 at 1:35 pm
+1 votes
I love DoTA but I hope it isn't successful in SCII and I hope IceFrog isn't the one to port it.
DoTA players will hopefully migrate to League of Legends instead.
DoTA players will hopefully migrate to League of Legends instead.
Nobahd Mar 30, 2009 at 4:35 am
+1 votes
I bet there will only be a small initial split, the Korean scene will embrace SC2. The major road block to me is the infrastructure being overhauled. I see a ton of money going into setting things up so they are on par with how we watch SC now. They have had ten years to streamline their whole system and now it must evolve around a much more modern game. I have no worries about actual game-play balance, it will be different and I'm sure, at least at first, Blizzard will be patching full time as the game goes through growing stages. Again, how the Koreans choose to deal with the new game as a business venture is my concern. If the switch gets taken care of quickly and without major hitches in hardware, software, networking or sponsor issues, SC2's competitive scene will flourish. N.America's competitive scene will never do well, the game is simply too difficult.
From the minute source came out, everyone knew 1.6 was better. From crummy hit-boxes to faulty skating animation and scoping, source was built around fancy ragdoll physics and better graphics, not authentic FPS competition. From watching SC2 matches, seeing people like Bisu and Savior play, I'm not gettting that same feeling that I got from the CS switch. As long as units like the mothership don't become god units, all will be well.
From the minute source came out, everyone knew 1.6 was better. From crummy hit-boxes to faulty skating animation and scoping, source was built around fancy ragdoll physics and better graphics, not authentic FPS competition. From watching SC2 matches, seeing people like Bisu and Savior play, I'm not gettting that same feeling that I got from the CS switch. As long as units like the mothership don't become god units, all will be well.
Ghork Mar 30, 2009 at 8:44 am
+0 votes
btw calling starcraft the best RTS ever made is a load of bullschläger.
Its by far a very good rts control vise, balance wise it is, and actually the reasons its a bad rts, limited group selecting, not many hot key options etc. is what makes it exelent for competetive play since the players need to make of for the games lack of controls and ai to overcome the odds thus requiring obsene amounts of apm, and thus in many regards the winner will be the one who can simply macro and micro best, not the one using best strategy. If however on an almost even playing field macro and micro wise, strategy and tactics start to come to play. This i actually find to be extremely bad game design, However its exelent for competetive gameplay and its easy to spectate which we all love.
Take another game from the same era, Total Annihilation that game is much better than starcraft. really not much to discuss there, however its not as good for turney play.
Its by far a very good rts control vise, balance wise it is, and actually the reasons its a bad rts, limited group selecting, not many hot key options etc. is what makes it exelent for competetive play since the players need to make of for the games lack of controls and ai to overcome the odds thus requiring obsene amounts of apm, and thus in many regards the winner will be the one who can simply macro and micro best, not the one using best strategy. If however on an almost even playing field macro and micro wise, strategy and tactics start to come to play. This i actually find to be extremely bad game design, However its exelent for competetive gameplay and its easy to spectate which we all love.
Take another game from the same era, Total Annihilation that game is much better than starcraft. really not much to discuss there, however its not as good for turney play.
Tajj Mar 30, 2009 at 4:40 pm
+0 votes
Go suck a dick, SC is the best RTS of all time... numbers prove it
Little stupid arguments over control group limitations are just for noobs, how about no one plays TA anymore cept for you are your sister
Little stupid arguments over control group limitations are just for noobs, how about no one plays TA anymore cept for you are your sister
Ghork Mar 31, 2009 at 7:15 am
+1 votes
lol. there's many issues pathing, control group limits, hot key limits, TA allows the player way more control over the game easily, or just reffer to Supreme commander for a modern day comparison.
I'm a Huge SC fan dont get me wrong, I follow all the SC leagues each week and I love it. However the Reason that SC is such a good competetive game is that players needs to do more stuff to make up for the game doing next to nothing. players have to do everything themselves, and its not cause TA's stuff is automated it isn't, there's just hot keys for simple stuff that make everything much easier, like the good old ctrl+z select all kinds of the units you have selected etc. etc.. the pathing, the 3d terrain instead of just 2 levels. SC even have problems with to many sprites in the game causing bugs, ever seen mass valks and you know that sometimes they can stop firing because of sprite limitations.
However as mentioned before, the fact that a player has to do everything themselves all the time, means that there'll be a larger different between different skill level players thus making it supreme for esports which i dont deny in any way. However the reasons for that is that the game is not as user friendly
I'm a Huge SC fan dont get me wrong, I follow all the SC leagues each week and I love it. However the Reason that SC is such a good competetive game is that players needs to do more stuff to make up for the game doing next to nothing. players have to do everything themselves, and its not cause TA's stuff is automated it isn't, there's just hot keys for simple stuff that make everything much easier, like the good old ctrl+z select all kinds of the units you have selected etc. etc.. the pathing, the 3d terrain instead of just 2 levels. SC even have problems with to many sprites in the game causing bugs, ever seen mass valks and you know that sometimes they can stop firing because of sprite limitations.
However as mentioned before, the fact that a player has to do everything themselves all the time, means that there'll be a larger different between different skill level players thus making it supreme for esports which i dont deny in any way. However the reasons for that is that the game is not as user friendly
akskdsl Apr 5, 2009 at 2:36 pm
+2 votes
define strategy for me please. Is it those random decisions you are making on the fly playing TA? Because we call those tactics, not strategy. A gameplan of sorts before the game starts would be more like strategy (i.e. buildorders)
Starcraft's strategic depth is far greater than you would think. Have you even tried looking into Starcraft before you even made that idiotic post of yours? If Starcraft was purely an APM fest, it would've died out a looong time ago.
Boxer, the most famous progamer, was known for his various strategic plays, amazing people even today. YellOw was known for his low-econ style strategy. Rainbow utilize as strategy that would mainly use guerilla tactics through the use of Reavers. Iloveoov came along and revolutionized the whole damn game by introducing a powerful new macro-based strategy. The progamer Bisu revolutionized the PvZ matchup by utilizing a new strategy that perfectly countered Savior's, the dominant player at the time, ZvP strategy. Then Jaedong came and came up with a new strategy that would counter Bisu's Sair/DT strategy. All of these are great examples of the constantly evolving game of Starcraft, with its ever-shifting meta-game and viable strategies
Also, if games were purely decided on strategy, that would be pretty damn boring imo. The micro and macro aspect throws in another element of skill that makes the game all more exciting. The game Starcraft is a perfect mix of strategy, mechanics, micro and macro, and it has proven it by lasting longer than any other game as an esport
Starcraft's strategic depth is far greater than you would think. Have you even tried looking into Starcraft before you even made that idiotic post of yours? If Starcraft was purely an APM fest, it would've died out a looong time ago.
Boxer, the most famous progamer, was known for his various strategic plays, amazing people even today. YellOw was known for his low-econ style strategy. Rainbow utilize as strategy that would mainly use guerilla tactics through the use of Reavers. Iloveoov came along and revolutionized the whole damn game by introducing a powerful new macro-based strategy. The progamer Bisu revolutionized the PvZ matchup by utilizing a new strategy that perfectly countered Savior's, the dominant player at the time, ZvP strategy. Then Jaedong came and came up with a new strategy that would counter Bisu's Sair/DT strategy. All of these are great examples of the constantly evolving game of Starcraft, with its ever-shifting meta-game and viable strategies
Also, if games were purely decided on strategy, that would be pretty damn boring imo. The micro and macro aspect throws in another element of skill that makes the game all more exciting. The game Starcraft is a perfect mix of strategy, mechanics, micro and macro, and it has proven it by lasting longer than any other game as an esport
Ghork Apr 5, 2009 at 2:47 pm
+1 votes
I apologize for doing writting strategy in a few places were i meant tactics. However that is still pretty irrelevant to the point i was trying to make
however you are misreading what i was writting.
Starcraft has AMAZING strategic and tactical depth. what i'm saying is take an insanely good tactical player with 100 apm, then a player with 350 apm and some studied builds will win.
Some players think great on the fly and do great decision making, yellow savior etc. then there are other players that are just fast. those aren't the number 1 players in korea, ofc not. But thats because once you have a lvl playing field apm wise, then players that can adapt their tactics to counter the opponent will clearly win.
And i 100% think that starcraft is a better for esports than TA, however that is because the game is extremely simple user interface wise, you are very limited in controls in many options thus you need to make up for it with high apm. thus making it an esport game. But having to overcome all those hurtles is not good game design.
Having to set each worker mining manually is not good game design instead of beeing able to rally it to working. Having to select each factory manually even if u wanna produce the same unit in 2 different factories is not good game design. Beeing limited to 12 units in a stack is not good game design, beeing limited in how to select units to dbl clicks + control and and shift modifiers along with dragging a square and single click is not good game design. The thing is you have to do everything yourself down to every level, that is not good design, but makes it good for esports.
Btw i'm a huge starcraft fan myself, but that is because the game is bad so that people have to overcome that thus creating a higher skillcap. But no the game is not the best rts thats an arrogant claim when the game controls are so basic.
however you are misreading what i was writting.
Starcraft has AMAZING strategic and tactical depth. what i'm saying is take an insanely good tactical player with 100 apm, then a player with 350 apm and some studied builds will win.
Some players think great on the fly and do great decision making, yellow savior etc. then there are other players that are just fast. those aren't the number 1 players in korea, ofc not. But thats because once you have a lvl playing field apm wise, then players that can adapt their tactics to counter the opponent will clearly win.
And i 100% think that starcraft is a better for esports than TA, however that is because the game is extremely simple user interface wise, you are very limited in controls in many options thus you need to make up for it with high apm. thus making it an esport game. But having to overcome all those hurtles is not good game design.
Having to set each worker mining manually is not good game design instead of beeing able to rally it to working. Having to select each factory manually even if u wanna produce the same unit in 2 different factories is not good game design. Beeing limited to 12 units in a stack is not good game design, beeing limited in how to select units to dbl clicks + control and and shift modifiers along with dragging a square and single click is not good game design. The thing is you have to do everything yourself down to every level, that is not good design, but makes it good for esports.
Btw i'm a huge starcraft fan myself, but that is because the game is bad so that people have to overcome that thus creating a higher skillcap. But no the game is not the best rts thats an arrogant claim when the game controls are so basic.
akskdsl Apr 5, 2009 at 3:20 pm
+1 votes
I do believe there was one game of Nal_rA playing around 100 apm and beating his opponent at proleague... :P haha
I see the argument why SC is better esports than game, and I'm inclined to agree somewhat. Starcraft's design can be hard for casuals, but its not THAT bad where it still doesn't attract new players. SC2 will be a better "game" but it will be a lot less intensive for esports.. and I'm afraid that it will lower the skill ceiling somewhat. I was hoping that Blizzard would give slight macro benefits for doing things SC style in SC2 (like each worker that was sent to mine manually would mine slightly faster, individually selected buildings would produce slightly faster), nothing incredibly game breaking, but noticable enough to do it like that..
I see the argument why SC is better esports than game, and I'm inclined to agree somewhat. Starcraft's design can be hard for casuals, but its not THAT bad where it still doesn't attract new players. SC2 will be a better "game" but it will be a lot less intensive for esports.. and I'm afraid that it will lower the skill ceiling somewhat. I was hoping that Blizzard would give slight macro benefits for doing things SC style in SC2 (like each worker that was sent to mine manually would mine slightly faster, individually selected buildings would produce slightly faster), nothing incredibly game breaking, but noticable enough to do it like that..
Ghork Apr 5, 2009 at 3:44 pm
+1 votes
Nal_rA is also a genius, but it seems you are getting the generel gist of what i'm saying.
It will be interesting how SC2 Adapts to esports, they've included a lot of things that will "lower apm requirment" but then they've also included a lot of forced micro to counter that.
Hopefully it will own.
Also very nice with all the resources that seem to go into making it better for spectating.
Anyways all i wanted with these replies is not just have everyone jump on a bandwagon SC is the best rts ever, yes it is but only in some aspects. Ignorant to just state otherwise.
It will be interesting how SC2 Adapts to esports, they've included a lot of things that will "lower apm requirment" but then they've also included a lot of forced micro to counter that.
Hopefully it will own.
Also very nice with all the resources that seem to go into making it better for spectating.
Anyways all i wanted with these replies is not just have everyone jump on a bandwagon SC is the best rts ever, yes it is but only in some aspects. Ignorant to just state otherwise.
Aleka Mar 31, 2009 at 1:24 am
+2 votes
New games will always do better, my bf is hoping for a CS2 as well as SC2 
Spike33 Apr 5, 2009 at 2:00 pm
+1 votes
SC was released a long time ago and the user interface sucked so it was all about speed and clickfest (actions per minute).
SC was one of the best RTS ever made for its time but advancements in user interfaces for RTS would remove some of the apm advantage. RTS are unwieldy for your average gamer, too much stuff to manage in too short a time for most people.
In the ideal world I'd love to see supreme commanders action que and patrol / pathing system in a game like starcraft 2, it would certainly put more pressure on reflex speed freaks, korean and non korean alike who get good by mastering the interface and having better motor skills then 90% of the gaming population.
SC was one of the best RTS ever made for its time but advancements in user interfaces for RTS would remove some of the apm advantage. RTS are unwieldy for your average gamer, too much stuff to manage in too short a time for most people.
In the ideal world I'd love to see supreme commanders action que and patrol / pathing system in a game like starcraft 2, it would certainly put more pressure on reflex speed freaks, korean and non korean alike who get good by mastering the interface and having better motor skills then 90% of the gaming population.
« Previous |
1 |
Next » |
The Starcraft 2 Gamer Community
Starcraft & Starcraft 2 news, rumors, articles, tournaments and eSports commentary.
25 Subscribers
1 Likes: 6 November 19, 2009, 9:18 pm4 Likes: 6 November 18, 2009, 2:26 pm9 Likes: 5 November 13, 2009, 6:18 pm6 Likes: 5 November 12, 2009, 6:59 pm8 Likes: 7 November 11, 2009, 4:26 pm6 Likes: 4 November 11, 2009, 9:58 am14 Likes: 7 November 8, 2009, 1:45 pm1 Likes: 3 November 8, 2009, 2:44 am3 Likes: 4 November 7, 2009, 2:02 am1 Likes: 4 November 6, 2009, 5:10 amStarted August 4, 2007
1334 Total Entries
1334 Total Entries
Your Comment is being posted. Please wait...