They are after me. It is me, and thousands of others like me, that the leagues need to reach out to to grow their sport. I could be their surplus. I am your paradigm for the random guy that won't play an RTS himself but will gladly watch a good game. This is why I am important and my perspective matters.
So here it is: between StarCraft and Warcraft 3 the older game is the far superior spectator sport.
"My girlfriend has never played games at all and she loves watching SC."
I have completed the Warcraft 3 single player campaign but I still don't really dig WC3 when I watch it. Seriously, when I play the game in single player for a week, I expect to understand the basics of what is going on in a match. I am not a complete retard, but in WC3 I don't.On the other hand, I have never really played SC but I enjoy watching it greatly. My girlfriend has never played games at all and she loves watching SC. Not WC3. Why would that be?
The best things about SC are the game's pace, how dozens of units can perish within seconds, the quick turns of action, its intensity and non stop war going on. You can argue that WC3 is not as fast and exciting. You can say that the match develops at a much slower pace. But that's not even important.
"WC3's two bunches of colourful units running in circles around the bush in the middle of the map."
Before your eyes get bloodshot, I will say that I do know there is a lot to Warcraft 3. You do not have to tell me that. I am aware of the mind game and the wealth of skill you need to master it. I know there are so many little things that players use to corner their opponent into an unfavourable position. But how much of it actually translates into a visual cue that is understandable not just for those that know the game really well?Let me tell you how an outsider sees Warcraft 3. It's two bunches of colourful units running in circles around the bush in the middle of the map for no apparent reason. Seriously, that's what it is.
By contrast, nothing gets more transparent than StarCraft. You have a clear front line, or a couple, and units just keep pouring into it (you can have two avalanches of units smashing into each other for four friggin' minutes, now how cool is that?). When more units die on one side of the front than on the other, the line moves and you can easily tell who is winning.
"A game needs to be transparent and easy to enjoy."
It may sound stupid to some, but how is a Quake or Counter-Strike player, let alone a non-gamer, supposed to enjoy a game where they cannot see who is winning? In Warcraft 3, they have a skirmish and run away. Then they run away again. And then you find out the guy that ran away is actually winning the game!?In order for a game to grow as a spectator sport, it needs to be able to attract more than just its own players. It needs to be transparent and easy to enjoy. And it needs to entice with infinite depth beneath the surface level.
In Warcraft 3 there is so much more to enjoy than meets the eye. Sadly, there is so little that does meet the eye.
When you like fantasy you like to watch wc3
When you like science fiction you like to watch sc
sure is sc faster!!
is a warrior with larg sworts faster then a space ship?
i dont think so
the key word is (Real)
OMG Orcs are real!?
I love watching warcraft 3 games, just because of the action and micro.
Luck plays a big role in wc3 as well, thats why 1 little thing can make someone lose.
And thats really interesting to watch :P. But of course its obvious that night elves will win everyone no matter what :D
SC has and always will be a better game for WC3. If only companies would realize that.
You see two guys beating the crap out of each other in the streets. One is running away, the other starts to eat sweets. (creeping :E) Now who is your CLEAR winner?
Lame :(
Oh wait... this is SK, it actually is.
Seriously though, congratulations on getting a girlfriend!
Just jokes man. On point, War 3 is definitely not spectator friendly. You have to keep it simple for the average Joe and when there's tens of items that can sway a game and a plethora of spells it gets confusing, even for the War 3 player.
As you said, tournament organisers are after you, none gamers that like to watch the game, but the fact is that game developpers aren't after watchers, they are rather interested by watchers that may become gamers, watchers dont spend money only purchasers do. So in order to have a watcher buy the game, they just make the game so that it meets his needs. Blizzard having both SC and WC, it is just a simple market segmentation.
WoW is the prefect example of a game that meets the needs of many people, which made it the most popular game ever, being quite easy to understand (battles i mean) but failed yet to be a spectator game.
All Warcraft 3 players who are at the top of their game should agree, unless they are in denial.
If Starcraft still had the sponsorship that Warcraft 3 had, I'm pretty sure Warcraft 3 would have a lot less of it's players wanting to compete in its events.
I do agree that Starcraft is more spectator friendly since its more basic, and really fast, always bringing action packed games.
"A more skilled" game is discutable, ofcourse the speed required to play the game at high level is much higher than in Warcraft, but Warcraft is much more axed on Strategies and timings which are much more important than in Starcraft.
Ofcourse at highest level things might be harder in Starcraft as it's literally recognized as a sport with high salaries given to the bestest players in Korea, the interest for the game causes a lot more people to take it really seriously practicing tons for TV games etc.
While in Warcraft we have a few tournaments where you must qualify to take part in, and a lot of invitational ones these days, the players are sponsored by teams that are very often not even based in same country as them. There is no coaches, every player is his own coach and practices in his own way.
And Starcraft does have a lot of sponsorship actually, way more than Warcraft, but the thing is that is only happening in Korea.
So I ask you, guys, are the knowledge you have to get in order to enjoy a good warcraft game and the games themselves really worth less than a good starcraft game?
An extreme example of the same thing is WoW Arena - completely unwatchable for someone that does not know the game very well. But is watching WoW or WC3 fun for those that know them? Hell yes it is. I never claimed otherwise!
BUT i enjoy a lot more playing warcraft than sc bw
On the other hand, considering the "technical" view aspect, colors / pixels etc , war3 replays are soooo much better for my poor eyes :))
This is one reason i'd kinda like to see WoW do well in arenas, because there is never this need to produce a new version to make money. Blizzard make their money (in bucketloads) by charging people every month. The game stays, to all intents and purposes, the same so that there is at least some equilibrium but the cash counters are still happy. Everybody wins!
Carmac, you are sort of right about your opinion having a larger pull then the general fans. However you are ignorant of the fact that the fans $ has more pull then an article or interview you may write will have. Strictly because, your articles are geared towards us (e-sports enthusiasts; involved or just spectating ) The tournament organizers do indeed rely on us as writers, however not very much. Sure you can publicize an event or tournament well, but do we care? Not really, most web sites I have signed up to in e-sports have had surveys (what games I play, etc etc, one point never left out is "do you wish to receive our newsletter?")
No, I am not saying that just because there are newsletters that your job or mine is anyhow less important or effective, but I would like to point out to you that organizations have far better tools to reach out to the far ends of the public and gather an audience. Some organizations wish to exercise such tools, others do not.
You could argue that our jobs as writers make our opinions vastly more important then others, I mean look at the CGS. They had to literally pay spectators to sit in the stands for the Televised events. But if someone like us had written an article on it and pumped it up a little bit, the audience may have actually been genuine.
This argument can go on for eternity. However I will end it with this, people will do whatever they feel like. We can only plant tiny seeds in their subconscious with our own words. What set person wishes to do with the seeds is up to them. But by no means should you feel your opinion is worth more then anyone else, regardless of the fact that you may have more impact with your words most of the time then others do.
He meant as non native players, not as writers. You could argue that gives 'us' more power, but each scene generally has its own writers and source of staff.
eSport games ranked after how easy they are to understand:
1. DoA (or other fighting games)
2. FIFA (or other sports games)
3. Racing games
4. 1on1 shooters (like quake)
5. Team shooters (here it starts to get complicated as it is hard to keep the overview)
6. RTS games
@ Carmac: "In order for a game to grow as a spectator sport, it needs to be able to attract more than just its own players."