Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Sera Region' started by Lee, Jun 6, 2011.
Two games just as popular today as they were on release. This is some match up!
No contest here. Tetris is the most addicting and enjoyable puzzle game EVER. Starcraft never was my cup of tea. Tetris should win because it's the better game and has also had the larger impact on gaming. It will live on forever.
Two really difficult games to compare, because Tetris is one of the most iconic games of all time. Starcraft I would vote for over almost any game, but I don't think you can really argue against Tetris because it's so popular, so mainstream, and has been a mainstay.
Starcraft is a multi-million dollar industry and is the MAIN game in the development of e-sports around the world. Tetris is a game you play on your phone while waiting for the bus.
Why Starcraft is a better game than Tetris:
Starcraft is one of the deepest strategy games ever created. The game developed to such a standard that each second of the game is integral, each decision made by the player is crucial and remains a true measuring stick of just how good we can get at video games if we push ourselves to the limit. Replayability is huge with multiplayer, and the community is constantly alive, changing and reforming to reinvent the game.
Tetris is so popular because of it's lack of depth.While simple games are not bad by any stretch of the imagination, it loses out completely in this area. People like to cite Tetris' replayability as its strong suit. Tell me, how often do you just start up a game and then quit about 3 minutes later when you mess up or something better comes along? yes its addictive, but it's lack of depth pales in comparison to Starcraft.
Are there professional Tetris players?
Was there a Major League Gaming event last weekend that hosted players from US, Europe and South Korea that was attended by thousands of people for Tetris?
Are there fully sponsored leagues with hundreds of thousands of dollars of cash prizes and an entire gaming industry built upon Tetris?
E-Sports is synonymous with Starcraft, and it has done more for developing gaming as a serious industry and career than Tetris ever will. What does Tetris do? Get middle-aged housewives to buy a gameboy?
You say that Tetris is the most addictive puzzle game ever.
Tell me. How many puzzle games do you buy a year?
Exactly. None. Nada. Zip.
The only reason that Tetris gets so much acclaim is that people stopped playing puzzle games when they realised you could simulate killing people in games. I would say that there are many, many great puzzles games out there that can compete with Tetris that simply get overlooked because no one plays puzzle games. Games like Lumines and Super Puzzle Fighter are awesome, but are lost in the woodwork. If Lumines had come out in 1984, Tetris would be an afterthought.
Starcraft on the other hand, has outlasted every single other RTS from the era and continues to have a dominate scene 13 years after its release. And we aren't even counting Starcraft 2, which is going to be far, far bigger than its predecessor. There's a reason people aren't still playing Age of Empires or Rome: total War or Warcraft 2 or Supreme Commander or a million other strategy games. Because they can't possibly offer what Starcraft can.
You're mixing Starcraft and Starcraft II. Starcraft I never achieved the success here in the USA that Starcraft II is currently enjoying. In South Korea, Starcraft was a mini-phenomenon, but in North American and Europe it was little more than a cult-favorite.
You're quipping, what has Tetris ever done? Get middle-aged housewives to buy a gameboy? When in fact, that's actually a huge, huge boon in Tetris' favour. Tetris introduced video gaming to the mainstream - everyone knows what Tetris is because it's so easy, simple, and addictive that anyone can play it. This is an example of a more mainstream game vs an older game that paved the way for the newer one. I'm one of the biggest SC 1 and SC 2 fans this board has, and if we directly compare SC1 and Tetris, it's no contest. No story, bad graphics, no depth, no multiplayer - it's no contest, but contextually, I think Tetris is hard to top.
While I agree that Starcraft 2 is going to be massive in the United States, to say that Starcraft wasn't a big deal, even going as far to say that it was a "mini-phenomenon" in Korea is ridiculous. The reason Starcraft didn't have a big impact in the US during its life span (which is ongoing) was due to the fact that NO game industry in the US could survive in that climate.
The US has been relatively indifferent to professional gaming for a long time, and it is only recently that it is really starting to boom. There is also extraneous factors, like the spread of high speed internet becoming more widely available across the United States. Countries like Sweden and South Korea have had high speed broadband for years, and its no suprise that all the big teams and leagues are from these countries. You put this climate in with Starcraft, which many argue is a better game, and all of a sudden you have the exact same thing as whats happening today.
Now for your next statement: It was only a little bit successful in South Korea. Lets get this straight. Are there any Halo players sitting on 200K+ salaries right now? Not tournament winning, salaries. Thats the current state of Starcraft in South Korea right now. It is a national event there, and to say otherwise would be ignorant. There are major governing bodies for the regulation of a video game, and multiple leagues with hundreds of thousands of dollars. It wasn't a mini phenomenon. It is a full blown industry that had become a corner stone of their culture. It would be VERY hard to argue that Tetris has done that.
I disagree. When people talk about early video games, what immediately springs to mind? Pac Man. Donkey Kong. Space Invaders. These are the games that are in the public consciousness, and Tetris did not introduce gaming into main stream anywhere near as much as you're giving it credit for.
I don't understand why you're arguing this. Tetris is simple and easy, and although the blocks come faster and you make mistakes as time goes on, thats it. There is a clear lack of depth in the gameplay. And I fully realise that "oh this was before they had proper game consoles and technology", but realise, you had games like Super Mario Bros. and The Legend of Zelda out at the same time as this. Eventually, you have to get past the cool retro and nostalgia of it all and realise that it is one dimensional and loses its luster after a while.
No doubt. Tetris is a legit game, but Starcraft trumps it.
You didn't address why you say Starcraft was bigger than a mini-phenomenon. For a video game, it reached a lot of regular people in Korea, but it's not like it captivated a nation.
What does Starcraft salaries vs Halo salaries have to do with anything? Why does having two or three current players making over $200,000.00 qualify the game as being a cornerstone of their culture? Any foreigner I've ever seen talk about Korea from when they visited always say that if anything, some people say they have vaguely heard of Starcraft. Professional wrestlers make millions and I wouldn't even come close to saying that it's a cornerstone of American culture.
I would argue that Pac Man and Tetris would be the top answers if you asked an average person to name a video game. Tetris mobile versions have been downloaded over 100 million times since 2005.
Why bother having any old games in this tournament then? Games that have broken into the mainstream don't count for anything because it's a one dimensional game? Pac Man is one the most iconic video game characters ever, but there's no story, the graphics are terrible, and the gameplay is repetitive. The criteria we're judging both games on are different in my opinion, because obviously any older games are going to be one-dimensional or won't translate well to 2011.
There are televised events in South Korea. Video games being played professionally on television. I can't be the only one who finds that wild. How is an entire industry employing thousands of people just for ONE GAME not bigger than a mini-phenomenon? South Koreans are mental for Starcraft there, and it is taken extremely seriously.
For instance: One of the bonjwa's, sAviOr, among several others, were implicated in a match fixing scandal last year and indicted. They were banned from competitive Starcraft for life. It has been said that sAviOr once tried to play in an internet cafe, and he was threatened by staff and kicked out because he was seen as a cheater in a very serious event.
Here are some news articles reporting on the match fixing (from proper good newspapers too):
A South Korean Newspaper
Can you honestly tell me that this is still a "mini-phenomenon"?
Can you honestly say that any other game has had a larger impact on their culture?
I don't know what you classify "captivating a nation" as, but I would wager no other game has ever come close to having that impact outside of World of Warcraft. Certainly not Tetris.
Well thats completely subjective. I have a lot of Koreans students at my University, and they all play Starcraft or have friends who play it.
You must know, as a gamer yourself, that when people talk about South Korea, their prowess in RTS games is unmatched. This is something that they are famous for. I would argue that having the best competitive leagues in the world with all the best players creating an industry is almost certainly a cornerstone of their culture. Gaming is far more mainstream there than it is here, and I think we just can't grasp that fact yet, being maligned for so long.
This is off topic now, but: as for your professional wrestling comment, I would disagree. I think it is actually a great example of something that is so popular that it enters the 'pop culture' territory. Pro Wrestling is definitely something that is strongly tied in with American culture. Everyone knows Hulk Hogan and Stone Cold, whether you think it is silly or not. Wrestling is also televised, has a cult following and has an industry based around it. And yet, regardless of the prevalence of international wrestling companies, when anyone says "Pro Wrestling", its the WWF they think of, not lucha libre. This is true if you live in the UK or Australia or India or South Korea.
The factors that make Pro Wrestling a cultural cornerstone are every bit as prevalent for Starcraft in Korea.
To say that Starcraft is not or can not be considered a huge part of Korean culture is false.
I was waiting for the phone debate. Think about the platform we're talking about here. Do you honestly think that if you could get a very good port of Mario, Zelda or you know, Starcraft on a mobile phone, the download figures may be drastically different?
It is only because of the simplicity and low graphics requirements that Tetris can exist on mobile phones. If that is your requirement for the best game ever, then Pong should win this entire tournament.
Well thats just the whole thing with this tournament. Your argument is that Tetris is the greatest, most perfectly made game in the entire puzzle genre. Whats the point of having this tournament then? Because if it is the perfect game with 100 million downloads, then it should go on to win the entire tournament.
That should mean it beats Ocarina of Time and Golden Eye and FF7 by FAR. Tetris accomplishes its goals far more effectively than any of those games, and because it came out in 1986, we have to cut it some slack for being a bit simple.
Your argument to me, sounds like: "Yes the gameplay is reptitive, the graphics aren't that great and there's no story. But its old, so you can't compare"
If we give a free pass just like that, then this whole tournament becomes a farce.
This is because you have to have differentials in criteria, otherwise the whole concept of this tournament falls apart.
Tetris. More well known. Sells more. Everyone and their mother knows about it. It's simple and addictive. Literally. Any other game out there that actually does that? I'll take the really simple block stacking game over the sci-fi strategy one.
It has been out for twice as long as Starcraft has. It came out at a time when gaming was still very small and thus had a smaller market to enter with one main console.
What are you basing this off of? Did you recently just go and pick up Tetris deluxe on the Xbox360 did you? Just install it on your computer off Steam? This argument is based solely off Mobile Phone sales, which as I demonstrated earlier, cannot possibly be used to justify Tetris as a major seller.
If you could get more high quality games on everyones mobile phone, no one would play Tetris.
Subjective. My mother does not know what a Tetramino is.
So is Pong. So is Space Invaders. So is Connect-Four. If simple and addictive is all you need to vote a game over another, then crack cocaine should win this tournament by a landslide.
That is simple and addictive? I could name you about 100.
You are making the wrong choice.
Tetris and it's not even close.
I respect StarCraft for what it is. It's a great strategy game that has garnered a massive and dedicated following. Kudos to them.
However, Tetris is a phenomenon. It's one of the most played and well-known games of all time. Some of the biggest non-gamers are the best Tetris players. It dominated on the original Game Boy, becoming one of, if not the, biggest handheld game of all time. StarCraft is big among strategy fans. Tetris is one of the few games that unites gamers and non-gamers alike. There's a reason most gaming and computing devices come with Tetris built in.The game is absolutely timeless, something that can't be said for the aging StarCraft.
The game is brilliant for it's simplicity. It's easy enough that literally anyone can pick up and play, challenging enough to keep you engaged, and addictive enough to keep you coming back. It's a test of both observation, reflexes, your wits, and your ability to plan ahead. While it's a simple game of stacking blocks to create rows, there are many ways to go about it. Should stack from the sides and work my way to the middle? Maybe try to make rows every chance I get. Perhaps build up my blocks and then eliminate multiple rows at once with one well placed block. That's only a fraction of the strategy involved so to say that it lacks depth is absurd. In addition to it's many variants, it paved the way for similar puzzlers such as Super Puzzle Fighter and Lumines. It's probably the most my most purchased game ever and no matter how many GTA's, or Final Fantasy's, or Call of Duty's come out, it'll always be a favorite of mine.
StarCraft is a great strategy game. Tetris is arguably the greatest game ever made period. The winner here is obvious.
I respectfully disagree.
Just making sure that we're clear on the fact that its a great game with a massive following. Cool, same page there.
Just because it is more well known is irrelevant, seeing as it has been out for twice as long as Starcraft has into a far less diluted market. Tetris coming out in 1998 does not have nearly the same impact, I assure you.
It is played by many because of its simplicity and its ability to be ported to hand held consoles. Again, if Starcraft could be played on an early Nokia phone competitively, then Starcraft is massive as well.
How is this at all a mark in its favour? This just shows its status as a casual game that takes no prior skill or strategy. If my aunt can become a world class Tetris player, then the skill ceiling is so much lower than Starcraft that it is a farce.
I hate to be an elitist gamer ripping on casual gamers, but there is a certain point where we must differentiate between the two groups. To base a video game tournament over the opinions of casual gamers who have never played other video games would be obscene.
This could definitely be argued heavily. Pokemon Red and Blue as well as Super Mario Land were all superb games. The Legend of Zelda was also a lot of fun, and Pokemon Puzzle Challenge was a great puzzle game WITH a story.
The same could be said for Angry Birds or Cut the Rope or many other cheap games on mobile phone. Does this mean they are superior games? Absolutely not.
Because it's cheap to replicate and designed to distract you for a few hours rather than exist as a complete game with in-depth strategy?
Which is why people are still playing it at a professional level 13 years after its release, in an era where most games life spans are less than about 2 years.
The concept of Tetris may be timeless, but the original game itself? It's a black and white game with 3 soundtracks and repetitive game play.
Do you actually play Tetris to this degree? I highly doubt that 98% of the Tetris playing community does. I would wager most people play for 5 minutes and stop. Honestly, how often do you sit down to play Tetris and try to fully beat a high score? Not very often.
We all like to think of Tetris as fun, and we've all had great memories with it, but the truth is, it gets boring as hell after a while, especially if you've played it before. Then you turn it off and pick it up the next time you have time to kill for 10 minutes. To say you play it for hours at a time when you're not on a plane or something is a long stretch of the imagination. The supposed "replayability" of it comes only from the opening few minutes, and then the derivatives of it sets in.
Please tell me you are trolling right now. You can't honestly hope to win an argument where you say Tetris takes as much skill or reflexes as Starcraft.
That is oGsNaDa playing Starcraft. The amount of strategy, planning, observation and reflexes that go into playing a single game of Starcraft drwarf anything in Tetris.
Oh I know, there are some freakish videos of people clearing Tetris super fast on youtube. But you're facing a computer there. A set of what? 7 blocks that come down in a set area.
In Starcraft you're facing a human, moving super quick, on different maps using a hundred different units and thousands of strategies. The comparison isn't even close.
Starcraft skill dwarfs Tetris skill in almost every single way.
Oh. Oh god. THAT is the extent of strategy in Tetris? Should I save my line piece or not? I'm sorry, you are barking up the wrong fucking tree if you're looking to but Starcraft in the strategy department. You know...the real time strategy game that we're discussing.
There are podcasts and shows and analysts devoted solely to the strategy of Starcraft. There are books, there are build orders, there are coaches that offer their services solely for improvement in strategy in Starcraft. You are wrong sir, wrong.
Yes, it is Starcraft.
You're trying to compare these two games directly. "Tetris is simple, Starcraft isn't - therefore Starcraft wins. Tetris doesn't have progamers, Starcraft does - therefore Starcraft wins." I voted for Tetris because it's perhaps the best combination of simplicity, skill, and addictiveness to make everyone interested. The average non-gamer doesn't give a shit about a game like Starcraft, Halo, Oblivion or anything like that - they aren't gamers. Tetris is a game for everybody, gamers play/played it, non-gamers use it to kill some time, it's reached so many people.
"Tetris has a low skill ceiling, Starcraft has a high skill ceiling - Starcraft is better". These are all points that anyone would concede, you're debating something different entirely. If you want to directly compare the two games, I don't think anyone is going to say that it has as much depth, skill required, better graphics or anything like that - that's not the argument being made against Starcraft. I would never argue, "I would much rather sit down and play a few games of Tetris than I would Starcraft!" The argument is that Tetris is a near perfect combination of skill, addictiveness, and simplicity to make everyone interested, and it was one of the first games to do that, with another being a game like PacMan - it deserves credit for that.
To a degree within the certain context, yes. Tetris is different from the ones you listed because it was one of the very first games to bring gamers and non-gamers alike together, and because it has stood the test of time and still has gameplay that makes people want to play it.
I'm not judging Tetris vs Starcraft on how much each of them is played by their respective fanbases. Obviously some Starcraft progamers play for nine or ten hours a day, but that doesn't mean it should win the tournament versus Tetris. I don't think anyone would argue that people sit down for hours to play Tetris, it's a time-killer, but I don't see that being a knock against it. The argument I have used to defend Tetris is still as strong with or without conceding the above.
I've outlined why I don't think an argument like this is compelling. No one would argue that Tetris is a harder game to play than Starcraft, but that's not the argument being made for it.
Tremendous - Starcraft has people who love it a lot and make resources for the community. Has nothing to do with Tetris being one of the most perfect games created to ultimately become timeless, and unite gamers and non-gamers.
I'm a huge Starcraft fan, not of it's pro-scene, but of the actual game. I'm probably the best, or one of the best SC and SC II player on this forum. My point is that I know all the things you're arguing about, it's not a case of not understanding just how great Starcraft is, but I really think you're arguing a flawed case against Tetris.
I'm not going to respond directly quote in quote to your last post SalvisWin, but rather just try to sum up the main crux of your post and say what I believe makes Starcraft the better game.
You give up all the criteria that I have selected. You fully admit Starcraft is the deeper game, that it has a higher skill ceiling with a more prominent fan base and that the graphics are superior. (I understand graphics are moot when discussing cross-generation gaps, but you get the idea)
Your main argument, the one that is supposed to win the entire debate however, is that Tetris bring gamers and non-gamers together. If this is the criteria that you are basing a successful game on, then I think you have the wrong idea.
You clearly say that non-gamers do not give a shit about Halo or Starcraft or anything. But they play Tetris? Does this make it a better game at all? HELL NO. Gamers are the ones that video games should be marketed to. You want to know why? Because we care about story. We care about gameplay and we care about things like music, atmosphere, pacing. We are gamers, we aren't the idiot jocks that throws on guitar hero after a kegger and we arent bimbo's who purchase extra clothes for their Sims characters.
We are fans of video games, and as such we know what makes a good game. If you're basing this simply on a popularity contest, then sure, you could probably give the crown to Tetris. But we're looking for what makes a truly great game in this tournament. We are not looking for what a non-gamer is looking for. Because they don't know jack shit, and to have to pander to casual gamers in our very own tournament is plain offensive.
A truly great game isn't one that simply unites gamers and non-gamers by being so one dimensional that it works. A truly great game is one that is so goddamn good it pierces through the mainstream and maintains its depth and awesomeness regardless of the fact that it might be nerdy or difficult or uncool to play. That my friend, is a great game.
I concede all those criteria like you said, but I'm not advocating for Tetris based on it's popularity among the casuals. Case in point: if Cut the Rope, Angry Birds, or Farmville were in this tournament, I would not vote for any of those of Starcraft, yet all three of those games are extremely popular. I try to look at every game objectively by considering the context of when it was released. Tetris I look at differently than the three other casual games I listed above because it was one of the first games to appeal to a broad audience. The game wasn't developed or marketed to become one of the most purchased and downloaded games in history, it just happened to do so because it was a game that was so simple and addictive, yet required skill.
Would you vote the original Super Mario Bros. over Starcraft? If you just compare the games, Starcraft is deeper, requires a lot of skill, has a progaming scene (dwindling, but nonetheless) etc. I would look at Super Mario Bros. impact on gaming, how iconic the mascot of Mario has become, the style of gaming it helps pioneer. Tetris' impact on gaming, how recognizable the game has become, and how it contributed to bridging the gap of gamers and non-gamers are factors that in this case, I weigh more heavily than Starcraft's depth, skill-required, and fun factor.
Graet thread. Tetris wins it though.