Seeking opinions: What type of gameplay WOULD make SC2 fun to watch.

[DemolitionSquid]

I'm gonna have to agree with Nicol that rarity is the most exciting thing to see. It doesn't matter if it comes from the difficulty of pulling it off, a deviation from the standard way to use a unit, or an abuse of a glitch. As long as its different, I find it the most interesting aspect of the game.

[Santrega]

Oh i should have mentioned that part. While I was learning to muta micro I was watching muta micro games. And knowing what it was like for me to do it made watching them do it so perfectly that much more exciting. Its hard to describe but it really was amazing. I knew what to look for and I could imagine where and just how fast they were clicking and how hard it was to get split second timing like they had. It added a whole new dimension.

However, in that case, I feel like you'd be better equipped after watching a game to learn how to do this same situation in sc2, if it were still available the same way. The reason is, you can watch what the player is doing at any point in time with the click and selection indicators thats in sc2.

It's not really a part of the gameplay, but it is valid in this discussion about actually watching the game. You should be able to learn from watching better people play, and thats severely limited in sc1, aside from BOs and what units are chosen in what situation. It's extremely difficult to learn the hows of a player doing something in sc1, you just know it gets done.

[ArcherofAiur]

However, in that case, I feel like you'd be better equipped after watching a game to learn how to do this same situation in sc2, if it were still available the same way. The reason is, you can watch what the player is doing at any point in time with the click and selection indicators thats in sc2.

It's not really a part of the gameplay, but it is valid in this discussion about actually watching the game. You should be able to learn from watching better people play, and thats severely limited in sc1, aside from BOs and what units are chosen in what situation. It's extremely difficult to learn the hows of a player doing something in sc1, you just know it gets done.

It wasnt just knowing where he was clicking. It was knowing how hard it was to click there. Thats what im trying to get across. It was the difficulty that made it incredible to watch.

[Nicol Bolas]

"OMG how was he able to make all those guys while still doing that drop!" "WOW he was able to destroy the probe scouting him while keeping his probe alive and making all those buildings" "Cool while he was defending that contain he also expanded. I could never do that!"

I've been playing SC (off and on) for a good 10 years now. And I've been watching SC for 2 years or so. And I have never once thought anything like that while watching any Pro games.

Being amazed by that is like being amazed that a programmer can intelligently discuss the C++ vs. Java issue, or that a marathon runner can run 20+ miles non-stop. They're supposed to be able to do that; it's their job.

Also, the initial 4 on 4 units, or 3 on 6 zergling micro can be rather exciting as well. This is nowhere near rare, but is highly mechanical. (Where the death of a single marine in early game could cause the entire crowd to gasp) This should probably conclude that at least 2 of the facets that make a game interesting are both rarity (or variance from standard play) and mechanical ability (a high show of skill). I wonder what other facets would fit into the mix.

The situation you describe comes from highly degenerate play. That is, play based on a particular metagame that requires all players involved to do X because not doing X will result in either their immediate loss or leave them too open to certain kinds of attacks.

For example, I found the standard PvT wall harass interesting a few times. Then it got dull. It's the same thing over and over. Zealot + Dragoon attacks wall. SCVs repair. Siege tank comes out. Dragoons get range. Siege tank gets Siege mode. Harass ends.

If one side fails completely (ie: the battle is not a draw) then it can elicit a gasp from the crowd, but that's only because somebody screwed the pooch and it suddenly means that they're in a problem spot. It isn't because the play itself was good or interesting; it's because one player is now screwed.

[ArcherofAiur]

I've been playing SC (off and on) for a good 10 years now. And I've been watching SC for 2 years or so. And I have never once thought anything like that while watching any Pro games.

Being amazed by that is like being amazed that a programmer can intelligently discuss the C++ vs. Java issue, or that a marathon runner can run 20+ miles non-stop. They're supposed to be able to do that; it's their job.



The situation you describe comes from highly degenerate play. That is, play based on a particular metagame that requires all players involved to do X because not doing X will result in either their immediate loss or leave them too open to certain kinds of attacks.

For example, I found the standard PvT wall harass interesting a few times. Then it got dull. It's the same thing over and over. Zealot + Dragoon attacks wall. SCVs repair. Siege tank comes out. Dragoons get range. Siege tank gets Siege mode. Harass ends.

If one side fails completely (ie: the battle is not a draw) then it can elicit a gasp from the crowd, but that's only because somebody screwed the pooch and it suddenly means that they're in a problem spot. It isn't because the play itself was good or interesting; it's because one player is now screwed.

Nicol we have already established that you and I get very different things out of playing starcraft. I suspect that if you went over to Teamliquid you would find allot more players who view the sport as I do.

[Santrega]

Nicol we have already established that you and I get very different things out of playing starcraft. I suspect that if you went over to Teamliquid you would find allot more players who view the sport as I do.

You keep confusing playing and watching... They really have no connection to each other at all.

[ArcherofAiur]

You keep confusing playing and watching... They really have no connection to each other at all.

I mean both. Playing and watching. The things I experience while playing impact what I experience while watching. Its not in a vacuume.

[Gifted]

I feel there is no reason they have to be mutually exclusive. I think that trying to judge the excitement of a game by individual parts will not garner as much as looking at the sum and identifying the parts that lead to that sum. For this reason, I believe that rarity and display of skill are not mutually exclusive at all and are typically intertwined.

Here are three examples of things that are displays of both in some form.. making them just as awesome to watch now as they were the first time.

Boxer's Immortal Marines
3 Marines, 1 Lurker (Having a hard time finding the original)
Tempest's Dragoon Micro

@Nicol, what type of examples would you enjoy seeing in SC2, include pro names doing them if it helps out.

@Archer Let's stay on subject and talk about what would be enjoyable to WATCH in SC2.

[ArcherofAiur]

@Archer Let's stay on subject and talk about what would be enjoyable to WATCH in SC2.

I am. But the thing is that what i find enjoyable to watch is influenced by playing the game. Its hard to explain why I enjoy watching muta micro without talking about what its like to muta micro. I could say oh cause they kill allot of units. And that would partially be true. But thats not the primary reason.

[Gifted]

I am. But the thing is that what i find enjoyable to watch is influenced by playing the game. Its hard to explain why I enjoy watching muta micro without talking about what its like to muta micro. I could say oh cause they kill allot of units. And that would partially be true. But thats not the primary reason.

Have you watched Muta Micro in SC2? Reread the Title of the thread. ^_^

EDIT: While I understand that you're trying to explain WHY you enjoy it, I think it's important that we don't digress on this subject too much, otherwise it's an exact duplicate of the other thread I linked.