Character Comparison - SC1 vs SC2

[DarthYam]

1.) Even on gamefaqs, where I've seen reviews attack the story gameplay and graphics are praised. You are trying to engage in a heads i win tails you loose argument where anyone who dares disagree must be fanboy or a shill.
2.) Graphically superior to the original starcraft. Gameplay is also superior to the original
3.) Not really. You basically just state "it sucks, and is technically inferior." To date you are pretty much the only one one the whole goddamned forum or battlenet that has tried to argue that point. So either everyone is a moron, or you might be full of dog crap.
4.) Oh please; I've elaborated on various elements about WOL and why I liked them, and why most of the accusations are unfair and ridiculous. I have elaborated in the past about how I feel each of the arcs in WOL was about Jim Raynor facing his inner demons and finally laying the past to rest, how the Dark Voice twist actually doesn't violate anything, how the reason brood war is slagged is because many of the same flaws that WOL is accused of having exist in Brood War. I can easily argue that Starcraft 2 has symbolism far more subtle than the original, or that the cutscene graphics are phenomenal, or the soundtrack good. I can easily link previous responses; I've done more than knock on brood war.

Your profile may say your 18, but mentally you are a toddler.

[Pr0nogo]

I'll respond to your post tomorrow, but until then, please edit it and actually quote what I'm saying instead of arbitrarily linking my comments to individual numbers. That makes it incredibly difficult to see what you're responding to. I don't even know how you managed to type a response (but it isn't coherent, so I suppose it's not a surprise).

[DarthYam]

1.) Even on gamefaqs, where I've seen reviews attack the story gameplay and graphics are praised. You are trying to engage in a heads i win tails you loose argument where anyone who dares disagree must be fanboy or a shill.
2.) Graphically superior to the original starcraft. Gameplay is also superior to the original starcraft. Graphically it's on par with Arkham Asylum cutscene wise , and compared to Dawn of war and other rts's it's the fricking mona lisa. It's not assassins creed, or prototype 2, levels of gorgeous. But it's hardly an eyesore. Compared to the 98 rendering it's a work of art.
3.) Not really. You basically just state "it sucks, and is technically inferior." To date you are pretty much one of the only one the whole goddamned forum or battlenet that has tried to argue that point. So either everyone is a moron, or you might be full of dog crap.
4.) Oh please; I've elaborated on various elements about WOL and why I liked them, and why most of the accusations are unfair and ridiculous. I have elaborated in the past about how I feel each of the arcs in WOL was about Jim Raynor facing his inner demons and finally laying the past to rest (and how the ending represents him finally free of his past), how the Dark Voice twist actually doesn't violate anything I can easily argue that Starcraft 2 has symbolism far more subtle than the original, or that the cutscene graphics are phenomenal, or the soundtrack good. I can easily link previous responses; I've done more than knock on brood war.

Your profile may say your 18, but mentally you are a toddler.

I rag on Pr0 because he acts as if anyone who likes WOL is a moron. Turlayon dislikes the game, but I have considerably more respect because he argues fairly and reasonably rather than sinking to insulting his opponent. Pr0 basically flings shit from a monkey cage and than accuses his opponent of doing it instead. Turalyon is fun to debate, and I can respect the guy even if I disagree. Pro is a giant toddler who throws shit and bawls like a baby when people dare argue against him

ps sorry double post

[topsecret221]

ps, you can delete messages.

[TcheQuevara]

I rag on Pr0 because he acts as if anyone who likes WOL is a moron.

Feel you Yam. I cringe with this atittude too. Liking WoL doesn't has anything to do with being a moron. In most cases, it's a coincidence.

But really guys, I agree that Pr0nogo is being unnecessarily aggressive as always, but you are discussing taste here. None of you are presenting objetive arguments. Detailed and good arguments, sure, but they're all subjective, every one of them. So you're not even talking the same language.

I mean, I'm liking the discussion, go on, just give up convincing each other. That's not going to happen.

[solidsamurai]

The only fanboy is you; the only people who think it's ugly are whiny little pissants like you; even Gradius acknowledges that from a gameplay and graphics perspective WOL is far superior.

Daw, how cute. :/

Huh. That's not what's happening at all. It's as if the tactical advantage of being able to ignore certain types of terrain is countered by other weaknesses. Imagine that.

Yes indeed. A game where every unit has hard counters. "Oh, look this guy is building reapers, I better counter with what counters reapers (ie. roaches). Oh shit, he killed my base too quickly. The end." And then there's maybe two other strategies that involve reapers, and that's it. Reapers are useless for every other scenario. And then there's the more 'versatile' unit like marines, which has a more expensive hard counter. Versatile really only means how expensive it is per hard counter unit to counter a whole bunch of that versatile unit.

The game is really cheesey. BW didn't just use hard counters - it had tricks. The ghost lock down + stim marines is a strategy that can be incorporated well enough to defeat most protoss or terran mecha. That's just of many that utilizes unit combos, and is less about cheese. A ball (or group or squad in the case of BW) of stimmed marines will do some damage, but they probably won't win the game, unless the enemy is a noob and avoided one of many essential things like expanding, getting a defense (they don't even need a ramp defense to counter stimmed marines, unless those marines have medics too), and building up a comparable army, or one that is more mixed than stimmed marines (ie. vultures can counter marines, as can stimbats, as can siege tanks, as can even goliaths with SCVs; already, that's 4 units - not exactly the one key fits the slot of a true 'hard counter' - with assistance, marines can defeat all of those units. Ie. Bunkers and marines defeat stimbats, ghost with lockdown and stim marines defeat siege tanks, focus-firing scvs and utilizing ramps can defeat goliaths. Vultures are trickier though, unless you can somehow hit the enemy before they get ion drive and run them into walls with stimmed marine blitzes. But already, that's pretty flexible for a strategy that centers around mostly creating one unit.). I only use terran in the example, since I prefer them online.

[Gradius]

If even an unreasonable zealot like Gradius likes the gameplay, then you know you're wrong.

Liking WoL doesn't has anything to do with being a moron. In most cases, it's a coincidence.

I do my best to keep that in mind. But as Tosh would say, "You testin' me brotha. Testin' me hard."

[solidsamurai]

Liking WoL doesn't has anything to do with being a moron. In most cases, it's a coincidence.

Yeah, I agree actually. It's a coincidence, rather than a desire. "I just so happened to enjoy this game", is like a 6/10; 7/10 for me.

[Pr0nogo]

I'm mostly confused as to why he's comparing StarCraft II to StarCraft: Brood War. I explicitly told him that I don't give a fuck about what he has to say with regards to Brood War. I'm asking him to defend the first game, and respond to counterarguments, and he does neither coherently.

I don't 'act like' or 'talk like' everyone who enjoys SCII is a moron, nor do I purport the idea that liking SCII makes you a moron. I have merely never found a person who enjoys SCII in all facets to some degree, and doesn't come across like a moron. Like others have said, it's likely coincidence. To that end, and because he has yet to directly respond to my post with quotes so I know exactly what he's talking about, I will not be responding with DarthYam's post. It's gotten to the point where the counterarguments to the supporters of Wings of Liberty are so blatantly obvious that they shouldn't even be allowed to propagate that mindset - it's been attacked so many times. I don't feel the need to seek peer assurance that my viewpoints are correct. This is something that we see inversed when it comes to the supporters of the game, likely because they've formed communities and rely on others' approval of the game to really like it. It's juvenile, and so is finding worth in the game at all - particularly when it's marketed to juveniles and casuals (who are generally two sides of the same coin).

[solidsamurai]

I don't 'act like' or 'talk like' everyone who enjoys SCII is a moron, nor do I purport the idea that liking SCII makes you a moron. I have merely never found a person who enjoys SCII in all facets to some degree, and doesn't come across like a moron. Like others have said, it's likely coincidence. To that end, and because he has yet to directly respond to my post with quotes so I know exactly what he's talking about, I will not be responding with DarthYam's post. It's gotten to the point where the counterarguments to the supporters of Wings of Liberty are so blatantly obvious that they shouldn't even be allowed to propagate that mindset - it's been attacked so many times. I don't feel the need to seek peer assurance that my viewpoints are correct. This is something that we see inversed when it comes to the supporters of the game, likely because they've formed communities and rely on others' approval of the game to really like it. It's juvenile, and so is finding worth in the game at all - particularly when it's marketed to juveniles and casuals (who are generally two sides of the same coin).

Ehhh... not good enuf pornogo. >