November 12, 2004. Lim Yo-hwan and Hong Jin-ho faced each other in the semifinals of the Ever 2004 Ongamenet Star League. This month marks exactly 20 years.
Lim Yo-hwan mobilized workers to build a bunker in the opponent’s front yard and used bunkering, a tactic of putting pressure in the early stages, to get the necessary number of wins in a best-of-five match and reach the finals. Hong Jin-ho struggled to last 14 minutes of the first game even with the odds stacked against him, but gave up the second and third games in about 4 minutes. Bunkering three times in a row is commonly referred to today as ‘three-bunking’.
The narrative of rivalry between the two players, which had been building since the 2001 Coca-Cola Cup, was in vain. There was great controversy at the time. At the time, fans who wanted to see the two together criticized Lim Yo-hwan’s optimization strategy of quickly blocking the opponent, saying that he was too focused on winning and losing. On the other hand, there was an equal amount of rebuttal about what is wrong with being obsessed with winning in the professional world. What is clear is that it was difficult for the Zerg at the time to block the highly optimized Terran strategy (the initial worker bunkering was overcome after the Zerg also became highly optimized). The game that day posed a question to fans. What is a game? Will StarCraft ultimately be optimized to kill the opponent in the fastest time possible? What were the creative solutions that emerged from the competition between the two, and the aesthetics that resulted from this (this was the impression we got from the unique matches of Park Yong-wook, Kang Min, and Hong Jin-ho)? What was the sadness felt in the struggle and the artistry revealed in the combination of the two? Was it all an optical illusion?
Even after Samyeonbeong, the game continues to evolve. In the process of Zerg optimization, Terran moves towards refining the efficiency of the ‘One Barrack Double’ strategy instead of bunkering. The game went towards ultimate optimization. For example, the Zerg optimizes itself with a fast mutalisk strategy. The same goes for Protoss in terms of evolution. Eventually, the paradigm for all three races becomes fixed.
20 years have passed since the bunkering. Now the game is strictly based on a set path and formula. In the case of Kim Min-cheol, the current StarCraft powerhouse who recently won 3 consecutive individual league games, ‘Iron Wall’ Zerg has no flaws when it comes to optimization. That is the aesthetic of this era.
If they felt beauty in the originality of Park Yong-wook’s vicious Probe, Hong Jin-ho’s Storm Zerg, and Jo Jeong-hyeon’s Bamboo Terran, now those who watch the game feel beauty in the thoroughness that does not deviate from the winning formula. It is a different way of appreciating it than before.
Going back to the starting point, the turning point was the bunkering of the day. Even if it weren’t for bunkering, the era of optimization would have arrived. However, the bunkering that day remained as a scene that symbolically demonstrated the absolute nature of optimization, in which the timing of worker reconnaissance and the timing of troop mobilization were calculated in seconds. That is Samyeonbeong.
● But again, what is Samyeonbeong?
The whole world now feels what StarCraft viewers felt 20 years ago. It’s because of AI.
In a special lecture held at Seoul National University on the 1st of this month, Go player Lee Sedol said, “I don’t think there is a right answer in art.” They call themselves the last generation to learn that baduk is an art. AI Baduk, which only searches for moves with infinitely high odds of winning and does not doubt them, is not art.
He said that winning and losing are not everything in Baduk. he said “Even if victory or defeat is decided, it is not over at that moment.”
However, in StarCraft since Samyeonbeong, the view of games as art is classified as ‘amateurism’. Even if a game (or a match) is considered art, what value does it have regardless of whether it wins or loses? After Samyeonbeong, that question has never left my mind. I searched for the answer for a long time, but couldn’t find it. Lee Sedol repeats this in his head. There is no right answer in art. Then ask yourself again. Is life art or a game?
Foreshadowing the fate of the game, which would evolve toward optimization and become official, I watched that channel for a long time after the broadcast ended on November 12, 2004. Even when my father said, “Stop watching the game and go to sleep,” I watched the video for a long time and played the game again and again. Please get some sleep. It got to the point where my father was hitting me on the back and complaining.
It was the same then and it is the same now. Even though I know the full meaning, I still ask it to myself without confirming it. What is Samyeonbeong? While I’m asking that question, I’m still pondering and clinging to unnecessary things. As a human being with flaws, it is inevitable. That’s how it exists. Has it already been 20 years?
[소소칼럼]is a light text that talks about things happening around us or our little tastes. To ensure that simple and sweet feelings are not lost on us, reporters take turns writing about the little things that appeal to us.
Title: The Evolution of Strategy in StarCraft: A Dialogue with Esports Historian Dr. Yoon Sang-ho
Time.news Editor: Welcome, Dr. Yoon. It’s a pleasure to have you here today, especially as we commemorate the 20th anniversary of that landmark semifinal match between Lim Yo-hwan and Hong Jin-ho. Let’s dive right in. What was it about the “bunkering” strategy that made such an impact on the StarCraft community back in 2004?
Dr. Yoon Sang-ho: Thank you for having me! The “bunkering” strategy employed by Lim Yo-hwan was revolutionary. It showcased a method of rapid deployment that put immense pressure on the opponent. This tactic not only shaped the way players viewed early game strategies but also sparked a debate around optimization in competitive play. It was as if Lim had discovered a formula – a shortcut to victory – which turned traditional play on its head.
Time.news Editor: Absolutely! The backlash from fans highlighted a fascinating paradox: the balance between winning and the artistry of play. Do you think this emphasis on optimization has altered the aesthetics of StarCraft fundamentally?
Dr. Yoon Sang-ho: Without a doubt. What we see today is worlds apart from the beauty of those original, creative strategies. During Lim and Hong’s era, players like Park Yong-wook and Jo Jeong-hyeon emphasized unique styles — their gameplay was almost like a dance. Now, players have adopted these optimized strategies to such an extent that innovation sometimes takes a backseat to efficiency. The artistry has evolved yet remains tied to a different type of beauty grounded in calculated perfection.
Time.news Editor: That’s an interesting point. Speaking of evolution, what do you see as the trajectory of gameplay strategies since then? How has the introduction of AI changed the landscape?
Dr. Yoon Sang-ho: AI has indeed transformed gaming. Techniques like the ”One Barrack Double” and rapid mutation strategies for Zerg have become standardized, almost formulaic. As we witness today with players like Kim Min-cheol, the focus is on perfecting these established strategies. AI’s role parallels this, as it increasingly eliminates creative risk-taking in favor of superior, optimal strategies. It raises the question: is AI enhancing the game, or limiting the creative potential of human players?
Time.news Editor: It’s an exciting yet somewhat concerning transformation, isn’t it? Some might argue that the essence of the game is changing. Where do you think the community stands on this?
Dr. Yoon Sang-ho: The community is definitely divided. On one hand, there are purists who cherish the unpredictability and personal flair of classic gameplay. On the other hand, fans of the current meta appreciate the high-level optimization and the near-flawless execution of strategies. As we celebrate the 20th anniversary of Lim’s and Hong’s confrontation, discussions around what “Samyeonbeong” really means continue to be relevant. It symbolizes not only the evolution of strategy but also the broader philosophical questions about art and competition in gaming.
Time.news Editor: Fascinating. As we look forward, how can we strike a balance between optimization and creativity? Can we return to that sense of artistry seen two decades ago?
Dr. Yoon Sang-ho: That’s certainly a challenge. Game developers might play a role in encouraging diverse strategies to flourish by tweaking mechanics and incentivizing creativity. Plus, players must realize that there’s more to StarCraft than just winning. Like Lee Sedol mentioned in his recent lecture on Baduk, the journey, the experience, and the artistry matter just as much as victory. Perhaps by emphasizing this ethos in the community, we can foster a richer, more imaginative scene.
Time.news Editor: Wise words, Dr. Yoon. Before we wrap up, can you share a final thought on the legacy of Lim Yo-hwan and Hong Jin-ho’s rivalry for the future of esports?
Dr. Yoon Sang-ho: Their rivalry is emblematic of a broader narrative about competition and innovation in esports. It reminds us that while the landscape may shift, the core essence of what makes these games exhilarating—creativity, strategy, and sometimes unpredictability—should always be at the forefront. Their legacy serves as both inspiration and a cautionary tale: pushing for optimization should not come at the cost of artistic expression.
Time.news Editor: Thank you, Dr. Yoon, for your invaluable insights. Here’s to another 20 years of strategy, creativity, and the evolution of StarCraft!
Dr. Yoon Sang-ho: Thank you! It’s been a pleasure discussing this fascinating topic.