Forum Overview :: Gamerasutra
 
No, fast min-max by Senor Barborito 02/25/2003, 7:22am PST
Fussbett wrote:

Senor Barborito wrote:

Here's the problem with the Korean gameplayers on Blizzard.Net - they were first to champion the reduction of Blizzard's simplistic rock/paper/scissors game mechanics down to mindless algorithm execution. Rote algorithm execution is NOT strategy - chess is strategy. The point at which a game loses any intellectual appeal from explorations of positional combinations and devolves into unabashed clicking of buttons in a certain predetermined sequence as quickly as possible is the point at which the game has ceased to be fun in an objective and inarguable sense.

The point you miss is that when both sides are churning out units as quickly as the game will possibly allow, they are evenly matched and thus a higher level game unfolds (and I suspect, shockingly close to a tactics-based game we all crave). They actually do play the game beyond unit production, but unfortunately most of us get crushed by the sheer unit production early on.


Any game played at a high enough level is going to be boring to a patzer, which is what these whining douchebags are. Boo hoo! He beat me by hitting the ball to a place I can't reach over and over again. How is that fun? Maybe if you could figure out how to return a fucking serve the game wouldn't appear to be so "broken". Hitting the ball hard isn't the point of tennis, it's the point at which tennis begins. If you're playing someone who can hit hard then being able to hit hard is the entry fee you have to muster before the actual game, the deep game, the interesting high-level game even starts. In an RTS, clicking fast and knowing what beats what is the exact same thing.


I played tennis and chess each several times a week for years. Tennis is a mental game about position and outwitting your opponent - recombination creates a functionally infinite number of tennis moves much as chess does. There is a game played at a high level because of these infinite possibilities. In Warcraft 3 or Starcraft any player with the right build order and unit production order who can click faster than you will beat you every last goddamn time no matter what you do, end of story.

Pete Sampras doesn't have to use any tennis techniques AT ALL because you can't return his serve.

Koreans don't need to flank you because you didn't live past their opening rush.


Jesus, who complains about clicking in a computer game for godsake? Do you complain about button pushing in Virtual Fighter? Aw, he just pushed the buttons faster than me. Yeah, well sort of, I guess. Awww, he knows the combos, he knocked me down and took the football, he memorized the dictionary, he studied openings, he bet more than I could afford, he practiced, he worked, he won.

Let me let all you rts-dilettante, Korean-hating motherfuckers in on a little secret: you weren't out-clicked, you were out-played. You don't have to like it, but please shut up about it.

/mc


There comes a point in the game where it literally comes down to who can push the unit production buttons faster because absolutely every 'good' player uses the same build order, the same units, and the same strategy (RUSH). At this point the game is reduced to an exercise in who can click faster and this is exactly what happened to Starcraft.

Here's where I'm totally lost. Can someone link to some Korean movies that showcase this insane clicking ability? This assertion that building more units is a result of fast clicking is lost on me. Last time I played Starcraft I remember build queues and waiting for things to be built. I never remembered once thinking "if only I could increase my index finger speed..."

In any case, if everyone is using the same build order, the same units and they arrive at the same time, doesn't that turn the resulting battle into something akin to Myth? A purist tactical game where resource management is irrelevant?


Unfortunately no, because the game inevitably devolves into 'RUSH THE CENTER AND PUSH HIM BACK INTO HIS BASE'

Tug of war. All the development that went into Starcraft, all the millions of hours that have been spent playing it have reduced it down to a game of fucking Tug of war. Tell me you don't see something wrong with this.

There's nothing extra-special about Korean fingers or manual dexterity - it's just that at least as far as I and many other people could tell the powergaming madhouse click-frenzy rushes centered around min-max that reduced the game to tug of war came out of that community. It was frustrating as fuck to encounter because you'd try doing something original time after time only to be overwhelmed in a frenzy of non-stop clicking. The 100% efficient build order + the one or two best units that could be obtained quickly just over and over at you like a million fucking bugs in Starship Troopers.

To me RTS games are invalid unless there is an actual balance between rush-tactics and turtle tactics and Starcraft was when I really sat up and noticed 'Holy shit everything I liked about this genre is dead.'

--SB
PREVIOUS NEXT REPLY QUOTE
 
Why I hate RTS and how to make the greatest one EVAR by Tom-Foolery Constructor 02/21/2003, 2:29pm PST NEW
    Re: Why I hate RTS and how to make the greatest one EVAR by FABIO 02/21/2003, 7:23pm PST NEW
        What's wrong with rock/paper/scissors? by FoK 02/23/2003, 9:37pm PST NEW
            Re: What's wrong with rock/paper/scissors? by FABIO 02/23/2003, 11:01pm PST NEW
                Re: What's wrong with rock/paper/scissors? by fok 02/23/2003, 11:11pm PST NEW
            Did you even read the initial post? by Senor Barborito 02/23/2003, 11:10pm PST NEW
                Yeah... by fok 02/24/2003, 12:57am PST NEW
                you just rebuted yourself by FABIO 02/24/2003, 10:04am PST NEW
                    I think it was pretty obvious what I was saying, dumbass by Senor Barborito 02/24/2003, 10:17am PST NEW
                        Willful Misunderstanding by Mr. Palomar 02/24/2003, 12:39pm PST NEW
                        Re: I think it was pretty obvious what I was saying, dumbass by FABIO 02/24/2003, 2:24pm PST NEW
                            Re: I think it was pretty obvious what I was saying, dumbass by FABIO 02/24/2003, 2:26pm PST NEW
                                I did answer you, dumbass. Christ you're thick. by Senor Barborito 02/24/2003, 11:38pm PST NEW
                                    Re: I did answer you, dumbass. Christ you're thick. by FABIO 02/25/2003, 10:56am PST NEW
                                        Re: I did answer you, dumbass. Christ you're thick. by Senor Barborito 02/25/2003, 7:16pm PST NEW
                                            Fixed quotes. And hopefully clarified for the final time here. by Senor Barborito 02/25/2003, 7:24pm PST NEW
                                            JU-LIE! JU-LIE! JU-LIE! -nt- by Bill Dungsroman 02/26/2003, 5:21pm PST NEW
                                                Re: JU-LIE! JU-LIE! JU-LIE! -nt- by FABIO 02/26/2003, 9:24pm PST NEW
                        Re: I think it was pretty obvious what I was saying, dumbass by Ice Cream Jonsey 02/24/2003, 3:25pm PST NEW
                            RE: I think it was pretty obvious what I was saying, dumbass by Alternate789 02/24/2003, 4:16pm PST NEW
                            Re: I think it was pretty obvious what I was saying, dumbass by curst 02/24/2003, 11:16pm PST NEW
                Re: Did you even read the initial post? by Monty Cantsin 02/25/2003, 1:40am PST NEW
                    That was easily the stupidest thing you have ever written by Senor Barborito 02/25/2003, 2:16am PST NEW
                        Re: That was easily the stupidest thing you have ever written by Zseni 02/25/2003, 2:35am PST NEW
                        Koreans: fast index fingers? by Fussbett 02/25/2003, 4:17am PST NEW
                            No, fast min-max by Senor Barborito 02/25/2003, 7:22am PST NEW
                                Re: No, fast min-max by ValiumAddict 02/25/2003, 3:39pm PST NEW
                                Re: No, fast min-max by TehFieryBalrog 07/05/2007, 9:36pm PDT NEW
                        Re: That was easily the stupidest thing you have ever written by Monty Cantsin 02/25/2003, 4:44pm PST NEW
                    Re: Did you even read the initial post? by Zseni 02/25/2003, 2:26am PST NEW
                        Re: Did you even read the initial post? by Monty Cantsin 02/25/2003, 4:20pm PST NEW
                            Re: Did you even read the initial post? by Zseni 02/25/2003, 5:28pm PST NEW
                                Queneau plays Black and White by Mr. Palomar 02/25/2003, 5:59pm PST NEW
                                Re: Did you even read the initial post? by Monty Cantsin 02/25/2003, 7:35pm PST NEW
                                Re: Did you even read the initial post? by TehFieryBalrog 07/05/2007, 9:40pm PDT NEW
                                    If you're going to respond to 2003 you could get the title right. NT by Soul Calibur 07/05/2007, 9:42pm PDT NEW
                    Re: Did you even read the initial post? by Ray, of Light 02/25/2003, 3:39am PST NEW
                        I used to win money playing Quake regularly by Senor Barborito 02/25/2003, 7:41am PST NEW
                            "See, I'm really good a video games!" by Irritating kid 02/25/2003, 9:20am PST NEW
                                Re: "See, I'm really good a video games!" by FABIO 02/25/2003, 11:55am PST NEW
                                    Hey, that's my line. by Fussbett 02/25/2003, 4:06pm PST NEW
                                        Video Games, Chess, and Laziness. by mrs. johnson 02/25/2003, 4:40pm PST NEW
                                            Yes, exactly. by Senor Barborito 02/25/2003, 7:29pm PST NEW
                                                Re: Yes, exactly. by mark 02/25/2003, 8:36pm PST NEW
                                                    This argument is pretty much over by now, right? by Bodybag 02/25/2003, 9:08pm PST NEW
                                                    There isn't one strategy for chess that will always win NT by Senor Barborito 02/25/2003, 11:49pm PST NEW
                                        that's guy's a fucking crackpot by FABIO 02/25/2003, 6:35pm PST NEW
                                            I don't know about suspense games, but much of his strategy talk is dead on-nt- by mark 02/25/2003, 6:51pm PST NEW
                                            it's all DePalma's fault by jeep 02/25/2003, 7:45pm PST NEW
                                                Re: it's all DePalma's fault by FABIO 02/25/2003, 10:44pm PST NEW
                                    Re: "See, I'm really good a video games!" by TehFieryBalrog 07/05/2007, 9:43pm PDT NEW
                                        This guy is new and already knows SB was crazy and Zseni is bad at everything by Flavilio 07/06/2007, 12:10am PDT NEW
                                            Battlenet screenname is Balrog200 or soapie on USEast, channel scu NT by TehFieryBalrog 07/07/2007, 12:32am PDT NEW
                                                alternatively aim screenname is balrog36 NT by TehFieryBalrog 07/07/2007, 12:47am PDT NEW
                                                    ^^^ This guy loves balrogs. NT by Any and all balrogs. 07/07/2007, 2:57am PDT NEW
                        Re: Did you even read the initial post? by Monty Cantsin 02/25/2003, 5:03pm PST NEW
                            You CAN turtle in RA2+YR by Bodybag 02/25/2003, 6:57pm PST NEW
                                Re: You CAN turtle in RA2+YR by jeep 02/25/2003, 7:51pm PST NEW
                                    Re: You CAN turtle in RA2+YR by Bodybag 02/25/2003, 8:17pm PST NEW
                            Re: Did you even read the initial post? by Ray, of Light 02/25/2003, 8:00pm PST NEW
                        StarScripts are tomorrow's Blueprints by Fussbett 10/30/2006, 11:30pm PST NEW
 
powered by pointy