Blogs Gaming 15 - The StarCraft 2 Argument

http://www.bit-tech.net/blog/podcasts/2010/08/06/gaming-15-the-starcraft-2-argument/

 

you missed a bleep!!!

 

I blame Tim Burton.

Spoiler

Fixing it now. Sigh.

 

Fixed. It's a clumsy edit, but it'll do.

 

Nice, I got the unedited mix ^_^

 

Boooo, would have loved to join in on the Tim Burton bashing, crappy week for a holiday.

Looking forward to listening to it.

 

haha, i was playing Angry Bird on my iphone while listening to this podcast. was getting really frustrated at level 3-5 of Angry when Harry mentioned those games don't tell you how to progress.

 

I don't like tim burton either. Only good thing he's done is Batman

 

where is the link to the youtube video of the guy with the assault rifle xbox controller.

 

Another video link i can't find is the vvvvvvv video

 

Quite entertaining, no way I could talk absolute bollocks for over an hour and make it sound interesting. I agree with Harry in that the story line is pretty good. Hey, it's a space opera, whadduya expect, and polished! Never seen an interface quite so sexy and interactive. However, the actual game itself, the all-essential gameplay, gets a huge, big, gaping, "meh". Sure, some of the single player campaign levels are well thought out, but technically, it's exactly the same game as '98. It's looks OK, the graphics aren't even that great, but the gameplay sucks hard. It's clearly been designed for the huge online multiplayer community of ready-made consumers, but for the experienced RTS fan there's nothing new or exciting going on here.

 

Not embedded because it's EXTREMELY NSFW audio

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDO5N9XQJm4

 

Is this the controller he referenced?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywQ7GIBGPEM

I know it may be a little idiotic, but it is modded and that's what this site promotes. I'll get off my soapbox if it's the wrong video.

 

edit......CardJoe beat me in video finding........dang

 

Tim Burton is horrible, I agree with this.

And I like World War 2 games.

 

I did not expect to laugh as much as I did.

 

Oh, what silliness.

This obsession about APM is inaccurate. SC2 was criticized by the pro's for having a low APM requirement, the average effective APM for a diamond player is below 100. If the staff had taken any time to watch professional analysis, they would see that micro does not in fact win games.

And again, this odd mentality with being "good" is again childish. The fernando torres analogy is solid, i dont understand why its not logically applied. Im going to use myself as an example:

Ive player approximately 90 games of SC2 in 1v1 since launch, i did NOT play beta, i was never any good at SC1. By this logic, i should be horrific at this game. I am in the top .5% in the world according to league rankings.

I watched Day9, i worked out build orders, i studied pro replays. I didn't do anything having to do with APM. This obsession with APM determining skill is inaccurate and unfounded.

Furthermore, your definition of success, or being "good," is downright naive. I dont consider myself exceptional, but i do have a solid grasp of the game. Whats more, i have fun playing it, with my 50% win rate. Im not the best, but im confident in my play and can accept losses. Who are you to say what "good" is? Both subjectively and empirically, i am "good," yet that has nothing to do with my enjoyment of the game.

I think this crusade against SC2 is the perfect example of the reverse fanboy on Joe's part, as he has consistently and without substance bashed the game, from the "First Impressions" article till now. It is obvious that he has not taken any serious time to research the claims he has made or peruse the wealth of strategic theory and analysis that would cast the game in a different light.

I understand it's fun to hate whatever is popular, but joe has been hating it before it even came out, without any well thought out reasoning.

 

Starcraft has three things that make it better than most other RTS games.

1. Its blanced and always will be.
2. Its map creator was both very good and very easy to use (i could make it do interesting things with no skill at all).
3. The story made sences and there was even able to push some mild drama into the mix the whole leveing behind of ******** (no spoilers) we can say the new one does dial back the sence of loss a bit its still ok the trade off with the better graphics make it ok.

OMG Joe starcraft (even the first one has a cover system) the trees lower the chance to be hit and high ground gives an advantage of its not reviled if the openent doenst have a unit on the same or higher level (flighers and sencors can make short work of this advantage).

multi player brakes into 3 tiers home maps (casual/fun anything goes fighting off zombi hords being a single marine agains the swarm races with vultures). General play against people of the same level hard. The super hard ladder competion play (imossible for most).

You play Counter Strike vs a good team you might get a kill but you will get many many deaths.
You play Guildwars vs a top guild even if your team all have head sets and have complemetry builds you will losse and losse baddly most likly without a kill.

You know why this isnt a problem you dont play them there is a match maker for a reason you will probably never play a top korian but you will play lots of other causal SC2 players you just havent played enough games for you rating to flaten out I bet you werent even playing a good player I aced someone in under 15mins and I doubt I can clam 1 to 2 actions a second.

Its like in real life when you go to a tornament and theres some guy in your weight class who can do that revers spinning kick and actual keep is leg strait and the balance shifitng all the way through the spin you know when he steps up its not going to end well. But you find your level as with anything.

 

fail.