|
EDIT/UPDATE: I still stand by everything I said below, but given some of the discussion (especially Chill's and HonestTea's points) I want to make the following things clear:
- I am not addressing not the legal issues here. As I understand it, and I believe the laws are fairly clear, Blizzard has clear legal rights to demand whatever they want of leagues and organizations using, and especially making a profit from, their games. I am not advocating a boycott or anything silly like that just because I don't like something they're perfectly entitled to do.
- I am not defending KeSPA as such, or any of their various decisions. In that I defend KeSPA I do so only given KeSPA's current state as the only existing governing body of a well-established esports league which specifically uses or may use Blizzard's games.
- My main concern here is that Blizzard is handling the current conflict, between their legal rights and the precedents they allowed to be established over the last ten to twelve years, poorly. My concern is actually inspired much more by battle.net 2.0 issues than by any negotiations Blizzard may be participating in in Korea, but the entire pattern I see from Blizzard gives me cause for concern. Again, not that they're doing anything illegal or legally questionable, but their perceived attitude I find concerning.
---
So let's see. We have the only established e-sports scene in the world, which made Starcraft the best-selling RTS ever, and the company that made the game is doing an end-around the people who made the success, in order to try to get the money.
So here's Blizzard's stated cause-of-problem with KeSPA: "In 2007, we were shocked and disappointed to learn that KeSPA had illegally sold the broadcasting rights for Starcraft tournaments without our consent. With this clear violation of our intellectual property rights, we were forced to become more actively involved in the situation and make our voice be heard. Even so, we began talks with KeSPA in good faith so we could find a way to protect our intellectual property rights as well as help e-Sports to grow further," (from here).
All well and good; KeSPA really doesn't have the rights to sell Starcraft to anyone. On the other hand you could argue that they were merely selling the rights to participate in the leagues they oversee (an argument you could make from the history that Boonbag outlines). That would be a much less clear situation. Still, Blizzard wanting a piece of the pie is completely justified: they did make the game, ran it through 16 patches (the last patch update was less than two years ago - for a 10-year old game!), and have generally deserved strong support from their community.
The problem is Blizzard doesn't just want a part of the pie, they want it all - when they've done virtually nothing to support the professional aspect of the game.
Admittedly we only have KeSPA's word on this, but allegedly Blizzard wants:
"...not the right as a copyright but unreasonable demands as following.
1. Set the contract term for using its games to 1 year
2. Prior approvals about all league operations such as contracting sponsorship, marketing materials, broadcasting plan
3. License fee for running of league and all license fee of sponsorship inducement
4. Ownership of all broadcasted programs, program videos
5. Right to audit KeSPA" (from here).
In other words, Blizzard wants full control of any league run in Korea (and presumably elsewhere). Look at the list: short contracts, approval of all materials, advertising, and sponsors, ownership of all broadcasts - basically the only reasonable requirements (assuming KeSPA is telling the truth) are 3, the license agreement, and 5, the audit request.
This is all in line with what they've said before:
"What kind of business model and future do you have envisioned for Battle.net?
Paul Sams: Battle.net will be a hub for all of Blizzard's game, and help develop the community and e-sports. The specifics of our business and service model can change from game to game, and region to region.
Our basic policy is to make the games on a global basis, but thoroughly localize the services," (emphasis mine, from here).
Blizzard wants not only ownership (IP rights) but control. If there are local leagues, they want to run them.
And now we have an agreement with GOMtv. GOM basically only got through the third season of their tournament because of Blizzard support, and folded it in after that. While GOM's got much bigger companies backing it, there's little doubt in my mind that Blizzard has the clout and money to make all their requirements stick with GOM (which on relative terms is a shoestring operation in esports), and thus that this new agreement is the "total control" agreement KeSPA refused.
"Through this partnership, Gom-TV will now have exclusive rights to broadcasting e-Sports matches and tournaments that involves games such as upcoming Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty, Brood War, Warcraft 3, WoW and other expansion packs that will go along with these games...
Gom-TV will host Starcraft II: Wings of Liberty tournament after it's official release on July 27th, as well as a Ladder Tournament that will be held by both Gom-TV and Blizzard Entertainment.
Also, Gom-TV will host Global Starcraft II league, Starcraft II World Championship, as well as Clan Battles and Streak (?) Battles in the future," (from here).
That all suggests to me that, not only is GOM now subject to all the exclusive and control conditions Blizzard wanted to impose on KeSPA, Blizzard is also putting pressure on GOM to make sure that Starcraft II will be the only main-line esport being played in Korea right after release. If Blizzard has to approve GOM leagues, and other leagues have to license through GOM... do you see where I'm going with this? It's almost like Blizzard is attempting specifically to kill SC:BW in order to ensure SC2's success... reasonable from a marketing standpoint, I guess, but awful PR.
Of course it has been pointed out that CJ Media owns parts (at least) of both GOM and OGN, so it's entirely possible that (under Korean government pressure if nothing else) deals will go through fairly easily, and MBC will be included to avoid appearances of "favoritism" or whatever. This is a best-case scenario though, and will probably result in OGN and MBC continuing to mainly broadcast SC, while GOM does SC2, WoW, etc. This would be great for the fans, I guess, but sort of unstable (especially if Blizz is still insisting on one-year contracts). But even though I consider that not unlikely, I'm sure it's not what Blizzard is thinking - I think they just haven't accounted for the kind of government and society Korea has.
For a company whose success was built on community, Blizzard seems to be going out of their way to disrupt that. Look at the list of battle.net 2.0 problems: no LAN, no chat channels, no multiple IDs (good/bad depending on your PoV I guess), problems with replays (although w/rewind included I guess some of that's understandable), etc. Fortunately Blizzard hasn't said anything yet about all the tournaments that instantly happened when beta was released, but I'm starting to get worried about possible stuff like:
- SC:BW getting a patch to port onto b.net 2.0
- Blizzard shutting down iCCup (like this but for real)
- TL having to pay exorbitant fees if we want to run TSL SC2.
I'm not saying KeSPA were heroes here anything, but I am saying I don't like the direction Blizzard seems to be taking and I do not trust Blizzard right now.
 
|
BTW as serious as this is to all be taken I cannot help but want to view this more as Misadventures, instead of Adventures in Korea. Just putting that out there 
|
United States1719 Posts
read it all, agree with everything, and you sound actually knowledgeable in this regard
|
completely agreed. i dont want to see sc clones the way they cloned counterstrike, but i think it'll be inevitable at this rate. blizzard might win with the rest of the world, but korea wont be giving in this easily.
|
What will happen to all the existing progamers after this season..... They pretty much shit on the existing Brood War community.
e-Sports was founded based on the love and passion for the games and now Blizzard is trying to destroy it. It's going to be a bumpy ride.
|
whatever they do they better not port broodwar to bnet 2.0..or its off to boring garena for me for sc 
|
Even if blizzard wins the rest of the world, it won't mean shit.
Korean players play in an better environment then any of us could dream of and there for they are ten times better then any non-Korean players.
|
|
|
I agree. Blizzard is trying to bite off more than they can chew. They're basically trying to forcibly take over, control and wage war against every single thing that made their games popular.
They want a monopoly on everything related to their games.
Of course blizzard deserves some compensation for their games, and a piece of the pie, but they cannot simply have it all.
They have some lucid and twisted image of E-Sports and what it is. They see E-Sports only as another thing to milk money from. They should get a reasonable % of the income from such events and also their logo should appear on booths etc, but they are being totally unreasonable in wanting absolute and total control as soon as possible.
In the recent TL subs about the betting scandal the Korean companies all have a clear view of what E-Sports are:
A marketing tool to get their name out there, to the customers. The companies that sponsor the OSL and MSL league probably lose money for the sake of exposure instead of making it.
Blizzard nowadays is not above sacrificing fun, the spirit of tournaments, freedom and other things that moulded their image for decades just for the sake of money.
|
Good post, I have always wanted to say that what Blizzard has done right in past, made it successful, now they are doing everything against their old successes. Everything now is driven by greed. Ever after the success of WOW, they saw the potential of milking more money out of their future franchise games.
|
"SC:BW getting a patch to port onto b.net 2.0"
Who cares? We just dont update the game, like we did after buggy as hell 1.16.0 version.
"Blizzard shutting down iCCup (like this but for real)"
Blizz has nothing to do with iCCup, its a legal server, and even if its not, they can do nothing with a russian server.
"TL having to pay exorbitant fees if we want to run TSL SC2."
Yeah, and ppl who cheer for Blizzard now will cry back good old days
|
Calgary25969 Posts
On May 27 2010 23:14 Sashimi wrote:
Good post, I have always wanted to say that what Blizzard has done right in past, made it successful, now they are doing everything against their old successes. Everything now is driven by greed. Ever after the success of WOW, they saw the potential of milking more money out of their future franchise games.
How is regaining control of your titles greed?
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
My hope is entirely in that second option. I couldn't care less about competitive Sc2 right now, but I understand that it deserves a place to be nurtured and experimented with. Having that place be GOM Tv is not a terrible idea.
But it does feel like Blizzard doesn't care about the esports scene that Korea has built around their game, and it does feel like Blizzard is willing to kill BW for the sake of Sc2, which would be a terrible, terrible trade-off.
Blizzard should not be in the business of running esports, if they want royalties, that's fine, but control is not their right, and it's necessary that they be prevented from gaining it.
|
On May 28 2010 00:09 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2010 23:14 Sashimi wrote:
Good post, I have always wanted to say that what Blizzard has done right in past, made it successful, now they are doing everything against their old successes. Everything now is driven by greed. Ever after the success of WOW, they saw the potential of milking more money out of their future franchise games. How is regaining control of your titles greed?
KESPA isn't selling Starcraft.
|
Blizzard should just stick to game design.
They seem too busy with money, deals and facebook implementation to produce a good game lol.
Back to basics please.
|
Calgary25969 Posts
On May 28 2010 00:14 Severedevil wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 00:09 Chill wrote:On May 27 2010 23:14 Sashimi wrote:
Good post, I have always wanted to say that what Blizzard has done right in past, made it successful, now they are doing everything against their old successes. Everything now is driven by greed. Ever after the success of WOW, they saw the potential of milking more money out of their future franchise games. How is regaining control of your titles greed? KESPA isn't selling Starcraft.
Ok. What's that got to do with regaining control?
|
On May 28 2010 00:17 Boblion wrote:
Blizzard should just stick to game design.
They seem too busy with money, deals and facebook implementation to produce a good game lol.
Back to basics please.
I can't blame them for wanting more money for what thay are putting out. It is in fact, their games that are so popular - so why shouldn't they be allowed to cash in on them?
At the core they are fighting piracy, because a lot of what KeSPA and iCCup does is steal what Blizzard made and give it to the community for free. That is great, and I am glad that Blizzard has been very permissive of it for the time being, but if there is money being made off that product, and that money is not going into their bank account then I think they have a right to intervene.
Alas though I think I agree with you when you say that for one, Blizzard should not try to take action in areas where no one is making money, but see a money making opportunity. Secondly, all the people outside of Blizzard who created e-sports to what it is today should not be bothered with what it may owe to Blizzard, despite it being their game.
Blizzard never sponsored any StarLeagues or players, or did much to nurse the professional scene. Players and organizations outside of the company build it from the ground up and therefore, even though Blizzard has right to their game, there should not interfere or try to bank on this side of e-Sports.
I don't know if this is exactly the case, but it does seem like it from the OP. Blizzard is going to have to decide whether to make a very friendly fan based game that is community friendly, or whether to make a bigger profit.
I really don't see a way to accomplish both ends of that statement.
And I think the right choice is just to let those profits go - which I am positive, sounds crazy to every single business person working at Blizzard.
|
On May 28 2010 00:09 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2010 23:14 Sashimi wrote:
Good post, I have always wanted to say that what Blizzard has done right in past, made it successful, now they are doing everything against their old successes. Everything now is driven by greed. Ever after the success of WOW, they saw the potential of milking more money out of their future franchise games. How is regaining control of your titles greed?
imo blizzard should make the game> sell the game and then stay the fuck out of what anyone does with it! I'm sure you can think of extreme examples where this isn't true but seriously, Kespa built e-sports. Blizzard just made a game imo they have no right to claim "a piece of the pie" from something they are already benefitting greatly from.
|
Calgary25969 Posts
On May 28 2010 00:40 nttea wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 00:09 Chill wrote:On May 27 2010 23:14 Sashimi wrote:
Good post, I have always wanted to say that what Blizzard has done right in past, made it successful, now they are doing everything against their old successes. Everything now is driven by greed. Ever after the success of WOW, they saw the potential of milking more money out of their future franchise games. How is regaining control of your titles greed? imo blizzard should make the game> sell the game and then stay the fuck out of what anyone does with it!
And I and Blizzard disagree. It's not greed to protect what is yours.
|
I'm honestly not really upset with Blizzard wanting some money: they made the game, it's their right to get paid for it. But demanding royalties is one thing, and I'm all for KeSPA (or whoever) paying up. Demanding control of something they didn't create (the esports scene) even if they did provide the game is what's gotten me upset. I honestly wouldn't mind if it were just SC2 they wanted control of: making something and specifically marketing it as a potential esport, and controlling that market (since you provide it) is one thing, and completely reasonable. (My complaints about their approach to the community still stand, but become personal rather than principled. But if they can make money without the community base they've always claimed to work for, more power to them.)
What I dislike is the "retro-active" part, the bid to take over stuff they had little to do with (beyond making the game in the first place). It's as if the guys who made the original Frisbee not only came out with a new-and-improved disk specifically designed for ultimate frisbee, and arranged that all leagues using it be licensed by them, but also started demanding that any league that ever used a frisbee and gave cash prizes (= making money or gambling, by most laws) start paying royalties beyond the cost of the frisbee, and submit application and league organization forms before you're allowed to play.
Before the Korean professional leagues, esports basically didn't exist. And Blizzard may have provided the game (and yes, a computer game takes way more work to make than a frisbee), but they didn't do anything to set up the league structure. Like I said, if Blizzard was just saying, "Hey guys, we've been nice so far, but please pay up on the royalties," I'd be find with it, and really not happy with KeSPA (or whoever) if they didn't. In fact, KeSPA should probably make an offer to start paying a reasonable royalty, on their own initiative, to save some face in this argument. But Blizzard is going way beyond that with what they're asking, and while that's fine for SC2 (a new game, specifically designed for esport play), trying to retro-actively take control of all SC esports like this just bugs me.
|
On May 28 2010 00:49 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 00:40 nttea wrote:On May 28 2010 00:09 Chill wrote:On May 27 2010 23:14 Sashimi wrote:
Good post, I have always wanted to say that what Blizzard has done right in past, made it successful, now they are doing everything against their old successes. Everything now is driven by greed. Ever after the success of WOW, they saw the potential of milking more money out of their future franchise games. How is regaining control of your titles greed? imo blizzard should make the game> sell the game and then stay the fuck out of what anyone does with it! And I and Blizzard disagree. It's not greed to protect what is yours.
Agreed. it's clearly a case that in Korea, Intellectual Property right laws aren't either enforced enough or through international jurisdiction, it's hard for Blizzard to fight this case as of until now.
If this was in America, KeSPA would of been forced to sign under Blizzard's terms already or cease operations... It's amazing that they've gotten this far without compensating Blizzard for their IP rights.
The main thing is, regardless how much you the consumer assume Blizzard is doing this out of greed, it isn't. They never fought about this issue until KeSPA started using licensing agreements over a game that they didn't technically own. KeSPA can argue all they wish about the passive marketing they've done for SC over the years but it's not the case of "We made you famous now we can do whatever we want", it's just Blizzard is releasing the sequel of this game and realized they want their compensation for developing this epic sequel. The average joe who plays sc2 will not care what makes or breaks in korea.
|
kespa will have to pay 2 fees
one for running bw leagues
one to not run sc2 leagues
|
I've done some research on the licensing laws for Blizzard's other games, War3 and WoW. I'll say this much; the licensing fee isn't that big of a sum of money. I'm not sure what Blizzard is trying to ask out of GomTV or KeSPA but I'm sure it was considered reasonable under the circumstances. Regardless of all the other logistical issues, clearly GomTV saw this as a opportunity and will be making a strong investment in it.
|
On May 28 2010 00:09 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 27 2010 23:14 Sashimi wrote:
Good post, I have always wanted to say that what Blizzard has done right in past, made it successful, now they are doing everything against their old successes. Everything now is driven by greed. Ever after the success of WOW, they saw the potential of milking more money out of their future franchise games. How is regaining control of your titles greed?
Chill, can you define what you mean by "control of your titles"? As I said repeatedly, I am all in favor of KeSPA paying up when it comes to royalties (possibly even to the extent of back-payments for the last 12 years). However, while I'm not an IP lawyer, I don't see how Blizzard can reasonably ask for actual control of something that they didn't create, which in this case would be the esports scene in Korea - certainly not to the degree that (at least KeSPA alleges) they are apparently trying to get.
I understand that the originally-from-Blizzard-but-not-really-from-Blizzard complication of the growth of Korean esports causes a difficult situation, but I don't think Blizzard making a power-grab for control of the SC:BW scene is the right option here. (They want to run SC2 themselves, fine; new game.) It may be legally within their rights (although again not being a lawyer I can't say that for sure), but it doesn't quite seem right for them to be making demands beyond licensing fees and/or royalties.
|
Calgary25969 Posts
On May 28 2010 01:15 Musoeun wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 00:09 Chill wrote:On May 27 2010 23:14 Sashimi wrote:
Good post, I have always wanted to say that what Blizzard has done right in past, made it successful, now they are doing everything against their old successes. Everything now is driven by greed. Ever after the success of WOW, they saw the potential of milking more money out of their future franchise games. How is regaining control of your titles greed? Chill, can you define what you mean by "control of your titles"? As I said repeatedly, I am all in favor of KeSPA paying up when it comes to royalties (possibly even to the extent of back-payments for the last 12 years). However, while I'm not an IP lawyer, I don't see how Blizzard can reasonably ask for actual control of something that they didn't create, which in this case would be the esports scene in Korea - certainly not to the degree that (at least KeSPA alleges) they are apparently trying to get. I understand that the originally-from-Blizzard-but-not-really-from-Blizzard complication of the growth of Korean esports causes a difficult situation, but I don't think Blizzard making a power-grab for control of the SC:BW scene is the right option here. (They want to run SC2 themselves, fine; new game.) It may be legally within their rights (although again not being a lawyer I can't say that for sure), but it doesn't quite seem right for them to be making demands beyond licensing fees and/or royalties.
An analogy:
i. A startup artist creates a full-length animation for profit.
ii. A porno magazine creates a business by buying copies of the animation and then manipulating still shots from this animation. They pay only the cost of buying the animation. This is the first instance of this happening.
iii. The startup says stop doing that.
My argument: Yes, they should be able to control their property.
Your argument: No, they can get money for it but they can't control an industry they didn't make.
I'm not a lawyer so I don't know how shit works or even if that's a valid analogy, but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it.
|
5003 Posts
but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it.
And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule.
|
Calgary25969 Posts
On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote:Show nested quote + but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule.
Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand.
|
It seems perfectly fine that Blizzard sets the terms for how their game is being used by other companies. They created the game, the art, the sounds, the music. Kespa has been exploiting Starcraft 1 for years to make money. Intuitively it seems like Blizzard has missed out on some revenues that they were entitled to, if only just for playing the Starcraft music on TV. Legally it may not be that simple. But I think the fact that an agreement was reached between GOM and Blizzard indicate that there is some legal leverage. Otherwise GOM would be stupid to make a deal for something worthless.
Esports will live on even without OGN, MBC Game and Kespa if there is demand for it.
|
5003 Posts
On May 28 2010 01:43 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote: but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule. Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand.
I see that logic, but I think the biggest difference is that people don't like the restrictions that may come with it. The reason why proleagues developed was because of the lack of restrictions, and people are afraid that this will happen at this point.
I also believe that logic is too suffocating. I'm not too sure if you're willing to let me stretch your logic, but there's often many cases your creation being branded like that (see: ideas). it's like saying "If you read this book, you can only interpret it this way, the authorial intent" rather than allowing people to derive their own meanings from it because of control. But that's how books, doctrines, ideas, and I believe, Starcraft as a game, can grow. There is a lot of benefits that we have been reaping from Blizzard not being able to control Starcraft for so long and that's why I believe sticking to that rock solid logic may not be the best plan of action if we're looking forward to e-Sports improving. That's probably why there's a lot of disagreement with what you're saying right now -- you're looking at what you believe to be fundamental, and a lot of other people (including me) are looking at the benefits that can come from it.
|
On May 28 2010 01:53 Milkis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 01:43 Chill wrote:On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote: but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule. Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand. I see that logic, but I think the biggest difference is that people don't like the restrictions that may come with it. The reason why proleagues developed was because of the lack of restrictions, and people are afraid that this will happen at this point. I also believe that logic is too suffocating. I'm not too sure if you're willing to let me stretch your logic, but there's often many cases your creation being branded like that (see: ideas). it's like saying "If you read this book, you can only interpret it this way, the authorial intent" rather than allowing people to derive their own meanings from it because of control. But that's how books, doctrines, ideas, and I believe, Starcraft as a game, can grow. There is a lot of benefits that we have been reaping from Blizzard not being able to control Starcraft for so long and that's why I believe sticking to that rock solid logic may not be the best plan of action if we're looking forward to e-Sports improving. That's probably why there's a lot of disagreement with what you're saying right now -- you're looking at what you believe to be fundamental, and a lot of other people (including me) are looking at the benefits that can come from it.
Ya it's not like Kespa doesn't create the same "stifling" situations?
Does nobody remember the Kespa rejection of Item-Mania as a team sponsor?
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=76380
|
On May 28 2010 01:53 Milkis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 01:43 Chill wrote:On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote: but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule. Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand. I see that logic, but I think the biggest difference is that people don't like the restrictions that may come with it. The reason why proleagues developed was because of the lack of restrictions, and people are afraid that this will happen at this point. I also believe that logic is too suffocating. I'm not too sure if you're willing to let me stretch your logic, but there's often many cases your creation being branded like that (see: ideas). it's like saying "If you read this book, you can only interpret it this way, the authorial intent" rather than allowing people to derive their own meanings from it because of control. But that's how books, doctrines, ideas, and I believe, Starcraft as a game, can grow. There is a lot of benefits that we have been reaping from Blizzard not being able to control Starcraft for so long and that's why I believe sticking to that rock solid logic may not be the best plan of action if we're looking forward to e-Sports improving. That's probably why there's a lot of disagreement with what you're saying right now -- you're looking at what you believe to be fundamental, and a lot of other people (including me) are looking at the benefits that can come from it.
I definitely agree with this, although I can also see where Chill is coming from. I believe it's Blizzard's right to have complete control over what people do with their game, especially if people are making money from it. But Blizzard having complete control over their game doesn't mean that Blizzard know what's best for their game. They might not pick the best rules for tournaments, they might not run tournaments smoothly, they might not know what's best for the players etc.. I wouldn't argue that Kespa, MBC or OGN are the best thing for Starcraft, but I see benefits in having the game broadcast and played without such harsh restrictions.
|
On May 28 2010 01:43 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote: but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule. Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand.
I'm sure that Diablo and WoW nerds running/raiding 24/24 7/7 and spending money to get their l33t gear are a way better connotation indeed
That "moral" argument is ridiculous. Blizzard doesn't care about slaves or people nerding.
|
5003 Posts
On May 28 2010 01:57 GogoKodo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 01:53 Milkis wrote:On May 28 2010 01:43 Chill wrote:On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote: but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule. Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand. I see that logic, but I think the biggest difference is that people don't like the restrictions that may come with it. The reason why proleagues developed was because of the lack of restrictions, and people are afraid that this will happen at this point. I also believe that logic is too suffocating. I'm not too sure if you're willing to let me stretch your logic, but there's often many cases your creation being branded like that (see: ideas). it's like saying "If you read this book, you can only interpret it this way, the authorial intent" rather than allowing people to derive their own meanings from it because of control. But that's how books, doctrines, ideas, and I believe, Starcraft as a game, can grow. There is a lot of benefits that we have been reaping from Blizzard not being able to control Starcraft for so long and that's why I believe sticking to that rock solid logic may not be the best plan of action if we're looking forward to e-Sports improving. That's probably why there's a lot of disagreement with what you're saying right now -- you're looking at what you believe to be fundamental, and a lot of other people (including me) are looking at the benefits that can come from it. Ya it's not like Kespa doesn't create the same "stifling" situations? Does nobody remember the Kespa rejection of Item-Mania as a team sponsor? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=76380
Obviously, KeSPA can be considered another bottleneck that contributes to such a situation. I don't think I implied otherwise.
|
Calgary25969 Posts
On May 28 2010 01:53 Milkis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 01:43 Chill wrote:On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote: but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule. Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand. I see that logic, but I think the biggest difference is that people don't like the restrictions that may come with it. The reason why proleagues developed was because of the lack of restrictions, and people are afraid that this will happen at this point. I also believe that logic is too suffocating. I'm not too sure if you're willing to let me stretch your logic, but there's often many cases your creation being branded like that (see: ideas). it's like saying "If you read this book, you can only interpret it this way, the authorial intent" rather than allowing people to derive their own meanings from it because of control. But that's how books, doctrines, ideas, and I believe, Starcraft as a game, can grow. There is a lot of benefits that we have been reaping from Blizzard not being able to control Starcraft for so long and that's why I believe sticking to that rock solid logic may not be the best plan of action if we're looking forward to e-Sports improving. That's probably why there's a lot of disagreement with what you're saying right now -- you're looking at what you believe to be fundamental, and a lot of other people (including me) are looking at the benefits that can come from it.
That's fair, I'm looking at it like it's not Blizzard and Starcraft. I feel a lot of people start at "This will change things for the worse" and then work backwards to justify it. I think it's perfectly just and I'm just along for the ride to see how it changes things.
|
Calgary25969 Posts
On May 28 2010 02:01 Boblion wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 01:43 Chill wrote:On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote: but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule. Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand. I'm sure that Diablo and WoW nerds running/raiding 24/24 7/7 and spending money to get their l33t gear are a way better connotation indeed That "moral" argument is ridiculous. Blizzard doesn't care about slaves or people nerding.
What moral argument? You put words in my mouth and then chastised me for them. Don't call me a racist!
|
On May 28 2010 02:01 Milkis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 01:57 GogoKodo wrote:On May 28 2010 01:53 Milkis wrote:On May 28 2010 01:43 Chill wrote:On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote: but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule. Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand. I see that logic, but I think the biggest difference is that people don't like the restrictions that may come with it. The reason why proleagues developed was because of the lack of restrictions, and people are afraid that this will happen at this point. I also believe that logic is too suffocating. I'm not too sure if you're willing to let me stretch your logic, but there's often many cases your creation being branded like that (see: ideas). it's like saying "If you read this book, you can only interpret it this way, the authorial intent" rather than allowing people to derive their own meanings from it because of control. But that's how books, doctrines, ideas, and I believe, Starcraft as a game, can grow. There is a lot of benefits that we have been reaping from Blizzard not being able to control Starcraft for so long and that's why I believe sticking to that rock solid logic may not be the best plan of action if we're looking forward to e-Sports improving. That's probably why there's a lot of disagreement with what you're saying right now -- you're looking at what you believe to be fundamental, and a lot of other people (including me) are looking at the benefits that can come from it. Ya it's not like Kespa doesn't create the same "stifling" situations? Does nobody remember the Kespa rejection of Item-Mania as a team sponsor? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=76380 Obviously, KeSPA can be considered another bottleneck that contributes to such a situation. I don't think I implied otherwise.
I think you definitely implied otherwise, talking about how proleagues are built upon some great freedom and that now that Blizzard is in control (rather than Kespa) it's creating a different situation that will kill the leagues.
If that wasn't your intention then I'm sorry.
|
5003 Posts
On May 28 2010 02:03 GogoKodo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 02:01 Milkis wrote:On May 28 2010 01:57 GogoKodo wrote:On May 28 2010 01:53 Milkis wrote:On May 28 2010 01:43 Chill wrote:On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote: but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule. Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand. I see that logic, but I think the biggest difference is that people don't like the restrictions that may come with it. The reason why proleagues developed was because of the lack of restrictions, and people are afraid that this will happen at this point. I also believe that logic is too suffocating. I'm not too sure if you're willing to let me stretch your logic, but there's often many cases your creation being branded like that (see: ideas). it's like saying "If you read this book, you can only interpret it this way, the authorial intent" rather than allowing people to derive their own meanings from it because of control. But that's how books, doctrines, ideas, and I believe, Starcraft as a game, can grow. There is a lot of benefits that we have been reaping from Blizzard not being able to control Starcraft for so long and that's why I believe sticking to that rock solid logic may not be the best plan of action if we're looking forward to e-Sports improving. That's probably why there's a lot of disagreement with what you're saying right now -- you're looking at what you believe to be fundamental, and a lot of other people (including me) are looking at the benefits that can come from it. Ya it's not like Kespa doesn't create the same "stifling" situations? Does nobody remember the Kespa rejection of Item-Mania as a team sponsor? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=76380 Obviously, KeSPA can be considered another bottleneck that contributes to such a situation. I don't think I implied otherwise. I think you definitely implied otherwise, talking about how proleagues are built upon some great freedom and that now that Blizzard is in control (rather than Kespa) it's creating a different situation that will kill the leagues. If that wasn't your intention then I'm sorry.
Proleagues were built upon Blizzard not being able to control the game to fit their needs. It is, built on some Freedom. However, this does not mean KeSPA isn't also stifling the situation at hand.
There's two layers -- Blizzard is the first, KeSPA is built on Blizzard ceding control, and then there's E-Sports based on it. I'm looking at the Blizzard -> E-Sports connection rather than KeSPA -> E-Sports connection.
I'm completely and utterly paranoid of Blizzard being in control. If they have sent positive and good signals about where they want to take E-Sports, I wouldn't mind. My issue is that the only signals Blizzard has given about E-Sports is Battle.net 2.0 and the rights that they demanded from KeSPA, which I believe is extremely and utterly suffocating.
If Blizzard actually looked like they were trying to build E-Sports, the direction that it was going (which obviously includes improvement of player conditions, and yes, it has been improving), then I don't think anyone would be supporting KeSPA right now. Based on what I have seen from Blizzard, I don't think we can expect them to be able to do better than what we have now.
|
On May 28 2010 01:28 Chill wrote:
I'm not a lawyer so I don't know how shit works or even if that's a valid analogy, but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it.
See, this is where stuff starts to break down. Generally speaking I agree with you: but here we've got the situation:
Blizzard approves of SC as an esport, we know this.
If Blizzard just wanted to be paid, there wouldn't be any argument (I hope) about who was right.
But from my perspective, what Blizzard is saying is, "No you can't do that because we want to now," even though the idea (esports leagues) they want to control isn't actually their idea. It's not exactly KeSPA's idea either of course, but KeSPA is the closest thing to a reputable esports organization there is. Blizzard is saying, "Yo, you guys can't do this any more unless you do it our way."
I guess they may be within their rights, but it's stupid. Blizzard should have been saying, "Hey, pay up. BTW, we'd like to partner with you, how do you keep this stuff running?" but instead they were making demands when they don't actually have any experience running esports leagues. Looks like Blizzard's gotten what they wanted finally by talking to GOM, but I'm just not a fan of the attitude Blizzard's taken throughout. They may be legally right, but they're not right.
Edit: Or even better, Blizzard should have settled with forcing royalties out of KeSPA, and set themselves up somewhere else. Yes, nowhere else really has the player base to draw from, but a league based, in, say, Brussels would have avoided the KeSPA issue until Blizzard had the reputation and experience-clout to challenge in Korea. I know KeSPA's hardly a model organization overall, but so far it's the best there is.
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On May 28 2010 02:02 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 01:53 Milkis wrote:On May 28 2010 01:43 Chill wrote:On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote: but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule. Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand. I see that logic, but I think the biggest difference is that people don't like the restrictions that may come with it. The reason why proleagues developed was because of the lack of restrictions, and people are afraid that this will happen at this point. I also believe that logic is too suffocating. I'm not too sure if you're willing to let me stretch your logic, but there's often many cases your creation being branded like that (see: ideas). it's like saying "If you read this book, you can only interpret it this way, the authorial intent" rather than allowing people to derive their own meanings from it because of control. But that's how books, doctrines, ideas, and I believe, Starcraft as a game, can grow. There is a lot of benefits that we have been reaping from Blizzard not being able to control Starcraft for so long and that's why I believe sticking to that rock solid logic may not be the best plan of action if we're looking forward to e-Sports improving. That's probably why there's a lot of disagreement with what you're saying right now -- you're looking at what you believe to be fundamental, and a lot of other people (including me) are looking at the benefits that can come from it. That's fair, I'm looking at it like it's not Blizzard and Starcraft. I feel a lot of people start at "This will change things for the worse" and then work backwards to justify it. I think it's perfectly just and I'm just along for the ride to see how it changes things.
Exactly. If there's no change in the situation until August, then this'll be a huge loss. Hopefully this move forces a deal that will keep Blizzard in the money and out of esports, which is easily the best-case scenario right now.
But as a fan of esports, Chill, I can't see how you're content to just watch this happen and not feel strongly one way or another.
***
I've been struggling to come up with an appropriate analogy. I don't think the artist analogy works because what's being shown on Korean TV is so far from the original intent Blizzard had with the game, and the game has been changed so dramatically than what Blizzard ever foresaw. Not to mention the maps are a separate content. It's almost as if Blizzard provided the tools with which this final product has been made.
I feel like a more apt comparison is a game like Ultimate Frisbee, which cut out the "frisbee" part of it's name to avoid copyright issues with Wham-o. And then there's games like pool, which aren't run by the companies that make the pool tables. Poker isn't controlled by the card makers.
I don't think any existing analogy works well though, which means that BW is somewhat uncharted territory. If there was a way to bring this to court without grievously injuring BW, then that might be the most interesting tack.
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
What has Kespa ever done to make you put faith in its ability to run things?
Start the leagues? No - OGN started that.
Broadcast the leagues? No - the OGN/MBCgame started that.
Get the original sponsorships? No - teams and players did it on their own.
Extinguish the match fixing scandal? No - was the cops that did this.
Kespa gets zero credit from me. In every step of the way Kespa has come in a step after things have been already established. The one positive element that comes from Kespa is the creation of ACE. Other than that, all they've done is create an environment where players are slaves and "free agency" is not free.
On the other hand, Blizzard created Starcraft. SC is their intellectual property. Blizzard is the rightful owner of how SC is used or represented. This is indisputable.
EVERY single one of Blizzard's demands are a) within its rights and b) reasonable.
1. Set the contract term for using its games to 1 year
- The idea is to re-negotiate new terms every year. Blizzard is not saying "After a year, no more esports!" What they are saying is "after each year we will establish a new esports agreement with the party of our choosing." It is not different from the CBAs that major sports leagues all over the world use.
2. Prior approvals about all league operations such as contracting sponsorship, marketing materials, broadcasting plan
- This is entirely reasonable. SC is a brand associated with Blizzard - especially with SC2 coming out. Blizzard has the right to claim that their brand is used in the way they wish. For example, the YOU ARE THE GOLF KING MSL. Blizzard is going to let the SC brand be associated with another game company? No sir.
Furthermore, Blizzard as the owner of SC has the right to negotiate its own sponsorships. If Blizz wants to enter a sponsorship deal with JP Morgan Chase, but one of its starleagues is being sponsored by Shinhan Bank, then we have a problem.
3. License fee for running of league and all license fee of sponsorship inducement
- Considering that without Blizz' implicit approval none of the leagues are possible to exist, this is fair. Like it or not, there is money to be made through esports. Blizz has a rightful claim to a piece of the pie.
4. Ownership of all broadcasted programs, program videos
- This is the hardest to stomach, but hey, EULA. Though I do believe that Blizzard will probably be willing to share these rights with any of its broadcast partners.
5. Right to audit KeSPA.
- Oh god someone please audit that incompetent organization.
|
Calgary25969 Posts
On May 28 2010 02:24 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 02:02 Chill wrote:On May 28 2010 01:53 Milkis wrote:On May 28 2010 01:43 Chill wrote:On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote: but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule. Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand. I see that logic, but I think the biggest difference is that people don't like the restrictions that may come with it. The reason why proleagues developed was because of the lack of restrictions, and people are afraid that this will happen at this point. I also believe that logic is too suffocating. I'm not too sure if you're willing to let me stretch your logic, but there's often many cases your creation being branded like that (see: ideas). it's like saying "If you read this book, you can only interpret it this way, the authorial intent" rather than allowing people to derive their own meanings from it because of control. But that's how books, doctrines, ideas, and I believe, Starcraft as a game, can grow. There is a lot of benefits that we have been reaping from Blizzard not being able to control Starcraft for so long and that's why I believe sticking to that rock solid logic may not be the best plan of action if we're looking forward to e-Sports improving. That's probably why there's a lot of disagreement with what you're saying right now -- you're looking at what you believe to be fundamental, and a lot of other people (including me) are looking at the benefits that can come from it. That's fair, I'm looking at it like it's not Blizzard and Starcraft. I feel a lot of people start at "This will change things for the worse" and then work backwards to justify it. I think it's perfectly just and I'm just along for the ride to see how it changes things. Exactly. If there's no change in the situation until August, then this'll be a huge loss. Hopefully this move forces a deal that will keep Blizzard in the money and out of esports, which is easily the best-case scenario right now. But as a fan of esports, Chill, I can't see how you're content to just watch this happen and not feel strongly one way or another.
I feel a huge flaw of the gaming community is pessimism and resistance to change. See: any patch ever in any game. So as a result I guess this forces me to take the opposite position. I don't think things will improve but I'm still optimistic and willing to give it a chance. I think another big part of it is that I'm a fan of the game first and of progaming second.
|
5003 Posts
What has Kespa ever done to make you put faith in its ability to run things?
Start the leagues? No - OGN started that.
Broadcast the leagues? No - the OGN/MBCgame started that.
Get the original sponsorships? No - teams and players did it on their own.
Extinguish the match fixing scandal? No - was the cops that did this.
KeSPA is simply the governing body that attempts to put structure into this. It's made up of the people who is sponsoring the teams and broadcasting the teams.
Basically, the businesses that started eSports joined/started KeSPA. Fun.
The conditions are ridiculous because it's pretty much saying "We don't care about your little council, we, Blizzard, is the one who makes the decisions"
1. Set the contract term for using its games to 1 year
- The idea is to re-negotiate new terms every year. Blizzard is not saying "After a year, no more esports!" What they are saying is "after each year we will establish a new esports agreement with the party of our choosing." It is not different from the CBAs that major sports leagues all over the world use.
No one likes uncertainty in businesses. If there is uncertainty about getting the contract again after one year, then why would you invest in such an infrastructure? If Blizzard owned the Arenas, and many of the sunk costs involved, I wouldn't have a problem. But they don't.
2. Prior approvals about all league operations such as contracting sponsorship, marketing materials, broadcasting plan
- This is entirely reasonable. SC is a brand associated with Blizzard - especially with SC2 coming out. Blizzard has the right to claim that their brand is used in the way they wish. For example, the YOU ARE THE GOLF KING MSL. Blizzard is going to let the SC brand be associated with another game company? No sir.
I don't think this is a big deal, but the potential that "Oh SC2 isn't doing so well, let's get SC fans over to SC2", then they can just end it in a snap. I don't think anything, other than the fans should decide something like this, not Blizzard's whim (which there seems to be a lot of those nowadays)
3. License fee for running of league and all license fee of sponsorship inducement
- Considering that without Blizz' implicit approval none of the leagues are possible to exist, this is fair. Like it or not, there is money to be made through esports. Blizz has a rightful claim to a piece of the pie.
Taxation is bad. Especially if the taxed money does not go back into the infrastructure.
Secondly, Taxation on corporations who already don't make money from eSports? Oh boy.
4. Ownership of all broadcasted programs, program videos
- This is the hardest to stomach, but hey, EULA. Though I do believe that Blizzard will probably be willing to share these rights with any of its broadcast partners.
I believe this was pretty much one of the biggest fighting points. No businesses would want this.
5. Right to audit KeSPA.
- Oh god someone please audit that incompetent organization.
lol? someone sounds angry
The point is that if KeSPA agrees to this, KeSPA is one worthless organization. It's like working for Blizzard (making all the good decisions, bringing it up to Blizzard), without getting any support from them.
|
It's not that I trust KeSPA to run things, it's that I'm trusting Blizzard to run things less and less, and GOM organization never struck me as all that great either.
It's not that I trust KeSPA to run things, but they're the closest thing to representing Korean esports that there is right now, no matter how they got there.
"Sure, whatever KeSPA, keep doing your thing," isn't a great option.
"KeSPA, we demand you meet all these requirements to keep doing your thing," isn't a great option either, imo.
In the abstract, of course Blizzard has the rights to demand that certain conditions be met, but in this case we've got precedent - 10 years or so - of Blizzard acknowledge that leagues independent of the game developer is cool. We've known all along that OGN/MBC/KeSPA/possibly the teams should probably be paying royalties, but Blizzard never pushed the point - and now they're demanding basically total control and supervision of any leagues using their games. It's not that Blizzard is legally in the wrong to do this, but the huge break with precedent doesn't feel right, either.
[That said, if this all succeeds and we get the same quality of play and broadcasts, and KeSPA actually breaks, I may turn out to be a fan in retrospect. I'm more complaining about Blizzard than trying to justify KeSPA here.]
|
On May 28 2010 02:02 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 02:01 Boblion wrote:On May 28 2010 01:43 Chill wrote:On May 28 2010 01:38 Milkis wrote: but it seems to me if someone is profiting from something you created, not only do they owe you money, but you need to be in agreement with them doing it. And what is your rationale behind that? You seem to make no exceptions to this rule, so I'm wondering how you back up the rationale and what you believe to be the purpose of that rule. Because what they're doing may not agree with how you brand your creation. You should be in control of what you created. Maybe Blizzard doesn't want Starcraft to be Korea-dominated and have the connotation of slaves training for 16 hours a day? I don't know what they want, I just know it's logical that they protect their brand. I'm sure that Diablo and WoW nerds running/raiding 24/24 7/7 and spending money to get their l33t gear are a way better connotation indeed That "moral" argument is ridiculous. Blizzard doesn't care about slaves or people nerding. What moral argument? You put words in my mouth and then chastised me for them. Don't call me a racist!
I only have a few corporate law classes under my belt so take this for what it's worth. I believe the issue most people have with Blizzard's man-handling is not whether they have the right to control their product. That is obviously a given. The issue players have is on ethical grounds.
The guy saying that blizzard is all greed is just trying to say that they have a larger interest in profit than they do in customer satisfaction. Which is undeniable as of 01/16/2007. 07/09/2008 was the last nail in the coffin.
Whether they do a good job with esports or whatever remains to be seen. I think it's a bit early to judge their efforts. My opinion is that it's interesting to look at the Blizzard of early 2000 with the blizzard now. I no longer see any efforts to make a really solid game to please the community. I see a carbon copy of SC1 in 3d with shitty non-gameplay features and a company who isn't even worried about their game succeeding but on how they can milk the "esport" of it before it even releases. This is as ass backwards as it gets. I have a feeling I won't be the only one laughing if SC2 does not turn out to be Blizzard's shining star.
Rant
+ Show Spoiler +
I'll just say that WC3 really innovated on WC2 and pre-existing RTS games and that SC2 is a safe play with no innovation which is clearly designed to milk money.
The Blizzard we grew up with and loved is gone. Make room for the corporate behemoth next to all great names of shitty fucking companies: Activision, EA, Sony. I'm not going to predict doom and gloom, but with the little innovation coming from SC2, WoW and what we know so far of D3 (D2 in 3d with only 5 classes.... 5 classes), I will not be surprised to see Blizzard lose a significant portion of their "fanbase". Who knows? their next MMO might be baller and D3 might rock.
Not holding my breath.
|
I should also say, just so we're clear: I think esports is too big at this point for any stupid decisions to kill off. I don't think Blizzard or KeSPA or any amount of retarded decisions will manage to end the scene, because there's a huge fanbase, for SC especially. So I'm complaining, but I'm not panicking and I am assuming it will all work out eventually anyway. Like Kim Carrier said, what's it going to be like looking back on 100 years of esports instead of just ten?
|
This is really interesting from a legal perspective, with IP and all that, plus the international laws. There's probably parallels (at least on the US side of things) with all the major pro sport leagues, their contracts with the media and all that stuff.
Obviously, the legal ruling will have a major impact for those of you who like to watch the pros. However, all this talk about greed and ethics... I don't get it. That shit has absolutely nothing to do with Blizzards moves and demands being legal or not, but it has been brought up in about 95% of the posts in these threads like it is some how relevant.
Chill, as much as he is clearly a fan of esports, is just about the only one approaching this rationally
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On May 28 2010 02:43 Musoeun wrote:
It's not that I trust KeSPA to run things, it's that I'm trusting Blizzard to run things less and less, and GOM organization never struck me as all that great either.
It's not that I trust KeSPA to run things, but they're the closest thing to representing Korean esports that there is right now, no matter how they got there.
"Sure, whatever KeSPA, keep doing your thing," isn't a great option.
"KeSPA, we demand you meet all these requirements to keep doing your thing," isn't a great option either, imo.
In the abstract, of course Blizzard has the rights to demand that certain conditions be met, but in this case we've got precedent - 10 years or so - of Blizzard acknowledge that leagues independent of the game developer is cool. We've known all along that OGN/MBC/KeSPA/possibly the teams should probably be paying royalties, but Blizzard never pushed the point - and now they're demanding basically total control and supervision of any leagues using their games. It's not that Blizzard is legally in the wrong to do this, but the huge break with precedent doesn't feel right, either.
[That said, if this all succeeds and we get the same quality of play and broadcasts, and KeSPA actually breaks, I may turn out to be a fan in retrospect. I'm more complaining about Blizzard than trying to justify KeSPA here.]
I feel like we both agree about the legal issues here, but it's just a matter of who we believe is "right."
My point of view is that Kespa is a notoriously unreliable organization that doesn't do anything that Blizzard (or anyone else for that matter) couldn't do much better. I'd gladly take away the keys to esports from Kespa at the first opportunity.
Yes, I do believe that Blizzard would do a better job running things. I think their influence would improve many aspects of esports. Their standards and demands would be good for the scene (for example, they are quite aware of player conditions and from what I hear none too happy with them)
My worry, as is yours, is putting all that control to one entity - particularly an entity that has such an obvious commerical interest. But then I realize, Kespa already is that one entity with all the control. It's not like Kespa as currently constructed has any checks and balances that stop it from running a one-man show. Kespa ALREADY runs a one-man show, and a very, very poor one at that. A list of all the mistakes and errors that Kespa has done would be too long for this post.
In short, Yes, I do believe Blizzard would do a better job, and that its demands would be reasonable. I believe this because of what I have seen of Kespa from its birth to now, all through the lifespan of professional starcraft.
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On May 28 2010 02:54 Hawk wrote:
This is really interesting from a legal perspective, with IP and all that, plus the international laws. There's probably parallels (at least on the US side of things) with all the major pro sport leagues, their contracts with the media and all that stuff.
Obviously, the legal ruling will have a major impact for those of you who like to watch the pros. However, all this talk about greed and ethics... I don't get it. That shit has absolutely nothing to do with Blizzards moves and demands being legal or not, but it has been brought up in about 95% of the posts in these threads like it is some how relevant.
Chill, as much as he is clearly a fan of esports, is just about the only one approaching this rationally
Us rational ones are quiet on this issue - in terms of a legal point of view, it's so black and white that there's nothing to say.
|
5003 Posts
Us rational ones are quiet on this issue - in terms of a legal point of view, it's so black and white that there's nothing to say.
Of course in a legal point of view it's black and white. I don't think anyone talked about it in a legal perspective. It's more about what you posted before -- "Do you trust Blizzard more than KeSPA". Hanging over legalism and calling it "correct" is completely and utterly moot in this argument ,no matter how "rational" you claim to be.
|
On May 28 2010 00:55 Musoeun wrote:
What I dislike is the "retro-active" part, the bid to take over stuff they had little to do with (beyond making the game in the first place). It's as if the guys who made the original Frisbee not only came out with a new-and-improved disk specifically designed for ultimate frisbee, and arranged that all leagues using it be licensed by them, but also started demanding that any league that ever used a frisbee and gave cash prizes (= making money or gambling, by most laws) start paying royalties beyond the cost of the frisbee, and submit application and league organization forms before you're allowed to play.
Before the Korean professional leagues, esports basically didn't exist. And Blizzard may have provided the game (and yes, a computer game takes way more work to make than a frisbee), but they didn't do anything to set up the league structure. Like I said, if Blizzard was just saying, "Hey guys, we've been nice so far, but please pay up on the royalties," I'd be find with it, and really not happy with KeSPA (or whoever) if they didn't. In fact, KeSPA should probably make an offer to start paying a reasonable royalty, on their own initiative, to save some face in this argument. But Blizzard is going way beyond that with what they're asking, and while that's fine for SC2 (a new game, specifically designed for esport play), trying to retro-actively take control of all SC esports like this just bugs me.
My sentiments exactly.
Plus this:
"What kind of business model and future do you have envisioned for Battle.net?
Paul Sams: Battle.net will be a hub for all of Blizzard's game, and help develop the community and e-sports. The specifics of our business and service model can change from game to game, and region to region.
And the fact that Battle.net 1.0 has been a terrible place to find games of even halfway reasonable quality (everybody who's any good at Starcraft fled East for ICCUP a long, long time ago) for a decade, and the state of Battle.net 2.0 convinces me that they are going to fuck it up horribly.
|
Calgary25969 Posts
Why do people assume Blizzard can do no right?
They created the best RTS of all time.
They created the best MMORPG of all time.
They run a massive yearly convention.
If anyone can do it, Blizzard can. You can magnify their results and focus on the things that could be made better, but on a whole they are clearly massively in the black (in terms of design and execution, not dollars).
Also, you know before the Korean professional leagues, KeSPA didn't exist either, right?
|
On May 27 2010 22:44 Musoeun wrote:Fortunately Blizzard hasn't said anything yet about all the tournaments that instantly happened when beta was released, but I'm starting to get worried about possible stuff like: - SC:BW getting a patch to port onto b.net 2.0 - Blizzard shutting down iCCup ( like this but for real) - TL having to pay exorbitant fees if we want to run TSL SC2. I think you have a good argument, minus that statement. I doubt Blizzard will make TL pay a fee to start a high profile tournament like TSL, which attracts more attention to SC2. Plus TSL does not represent competition to Blizzard's "Proleague". Even if it is a small fee, it would not make sense.
|
I edited the following into the OP, and I'm posting it here as well:
I still stand by everything I said below, but given some of the discussion (especially Chill's and HonestTea's points) I want to make the following things clear:
- I am not addressing not the legal issues here. As I understand it, and I believe the laws are fairly clear, Blizzard has clear legal rights to demand whatever they want of leagues and organizations using, and especially making a profit from, their games. I am not advocating a boycott or anything silly like that just because I don't like something they're perfectly entitled to do.
- I am not defending KeSPA as such, or any of their various decisions. In that I defend KeSPA I do so only given KeSPA's current state as the only existing governing body of a well-established esports league which specifically uses or may use Blizzard's games.
- My main concern here is that Blizzard is handling the current conflict, between their legal rights and the precedents they allowed to be established over the last ten to twelve years, poorly. My concern is actually inspired much more by battle.net 2.0 issues than by any negotiations Blizzard may be participating in in Korea, but the entire pattern I see from Blizzard gives me cause for concern. Again, not that they're doing anything illegal or legally questionable, but their perceived attitude I find concerning.
|
Blizzard retaining that much control over SC is simply a terrible thing for eSports. It's really as basic as that. You might want to believe that this is 'in their rights' and that they're the victims here, but in reality you're not talking about strictly US laws which have a precedent set (Valve and CS). Because the issue is not black and white, and also because legality should always be discussed regarding it's supporting logic (not just the fact that this or that law exists and makes things 'right' ), you guys are being completely ridiculous when you just give blanket statements of 'Blizzard right, KeSPA wrong'.
When companies like Blizzard refuse to cater to their market, you know you have a problem. Blizzard knows a metric fuckton of people will buy SC2 no matter what, and thus they can make design decisions based on anti-piracy and anti-KeSPA concerns only. In a reasonable world, Blizzard would realize they need to include features like LAN support to satisfy the demand coming from nearly everyone who is following SC2 (as well as promote it's future playability as an eSport). However, they can weigh the options and easily decide that fucking us over is much preferred to having an eSports scene surrounding SC2 pop up in, say, China. You know, somewhere they fear that the draconian US copyright laws won't be in effect to force everyone to pay them even more money than they're already making off their products.
It should be plain to see that the restrictions placed on anything regarding SC2 that is 'beyond the game' (lol) are completely hazardous to the game's future playability. Custom content is limited to the point of being crippling, as posters like IskatuMesk have pointed out. Region-based play splits the community and badly hurts growth - what kind of community would TL be if we didn't play on iccup with people from around the world? Lack of LAN support makes any 'offline' events a shell of what they once were (this alone is disastrous for eSports). And now we have Blizzard wanting to shove their list of demands in anyone's face who dares try to make their game better than it started out. This is amazing hubris - to believe they're actually going to continue to succeed with this kind of philosophy. This is Blizzard in the post-WoW gaming world.
In the end though, what Blizzard is doing in Korea is a slap in the face to everyone involved. Not only is it complete and utter arrogance, it's also about the most dick way you could find to repay the people who have given you an unimaginable amount of free advertising and publicity over the years.
Hell, these are the people who made Starcraft into the only real eSport anywhere in the world. Yes, they made it that way - not Blizzard. They hacked the limited map editor and made maps that were actually balanced for high level play. They were able to obtain huge sponsors both for the leagues and for actual teams. They've gotten to the point where they can hold the Finals of a league in a fucking airplane hangar because they had the sponsorship of the largest airline in Korea. They've fought the exact kind of stereotypes about gaming that we have to face in the rest of the world - there was even a mention of this in the latest After Talk. And you know what? They've made huge strides. They have two TV stations who devote the majority of their airtime to SC, while we're happy in the US if fucking Halo gets a 30 minute spotlight on ESPN. What right does Blizzard have to come back - after largely leaving the game to die - and claim control? The eSport of SC is most certainly not 'owned' by Blizzard.
I can't help but feel you guys are way too caught up in your 'fuck KeSPA' game to realize that this kind of thing is absolutely terrible for eSports. It's not KeSPA getting fucked over, it's all the old gamers who have worked incredibly hard to make eSports in Korea what is is - the guys who are either still playing (like Boxer) or who have moved on to commentary/coaching. All the organizers who have been mostly behind the scenes for the past 10 years. Hell, all fans of eSports as well. They thought the match-fixing scandal was damaging to the infrastructure, but now Blizzard wants them to throw it all away and start anew. Blizzard is saying to each and every one of them: 'We don't give a shit about what you've done for the game, or eSports, or anything'.
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On May 28 2010 04:05 Musoeun wrote:
I edited the following into the OP, and I'm posting it here as well:
I still stand by everything I said below, but given some of the discussion (especially Chill's and HonestTea's points) I want to make the following things clear:
- I am not addressing not the legal issues here. As I understand it, and I believe the laws are fairly clear, Blizzard has clear legal rights to demand whatever they want of leagues and organizations using, and especially making a profit from, their games. I am not advocating a boycott or anything silly like that just because I don't like something they're perfectly entitled to do.
- I am not defending KeSPA as such, or any of their various decisions. In that I defend KeSPA I do so only given KeSPA's current state as the only existing governing body of a well-established esports league which specifically uses or may use Blizzard's games.
- My main concern here is that Blizzard is handling the current conflict, between their legal rights and the precedents they allowed to be established over the last ten to twelve years, poorly. My concern is actually inspired much more by battle.net 2.0 issues than by any negotiations Blizzard may be participating in in Korea, but the entire pattern I see from Blizzard gives me cause for concern. Again, not that they're doing anything illegal or legally questionable, but their perceived attitude I find concerning.
This is all fair, and again, we probably agree with most points, but if your concerns are based on what you percieve is Blizz's attitude, well, that's a matter of perception. Obviously I see the same things you do but my perception is that whole thing is a good thing.
|
What's been pissing me off about this whole thing are all the misconceptions people have . They don't know what Blizzard will do. It cannot be assumed worse than what KEspa would do (which is pretty horrifically bad).
Do you guys REALLY want a magnified version of the BW pro-gaming scene for SC2? Really? Its a small, pretty stale niche in a marketing scheme. People are worried that this might destroy E-sports in Korea, and that's just silly. I highly doubt that all other organizations will refuse to profit from an easily profitable situation (just with a bit of compliance with Blizzard). Assuming that E-sports dies in Korea, what do you think all the players will do? they won't just sit there and not make money from the new E-sport goldmine.
Even if E-sports somehow dies in Korea, I really don't care that much. Yes it would be unfortunate but the scene will be SO much bigger then Korea.
It isn't like before when Korea has the only real professional scene in bw.
|
Blizzard has every right to a "monopoly" over their own products that they made. What's more, Blizzard has employed a genius system to bypass most any international law or politicking. With BNet 2.0, Blizzard can stop any illegally broadcasted tournament dead in its tracks by banning the accounts playing or simply disconnecting their game. Whether you like Blizzard's approach to diplomacy in Korea or not, they already have physical control over SC2 and at this point are simply giving organizations like kespa a last chance before they hover their hand over the big red button. It might seem like a dirty move, but you have to remember that blizzard works hard on these games over many many years and they have to defend not only their rights as a company, but the rights of the many artists and programmers that they employ.
|
Also isn't what sparked the actual aggression by Blizzard KEspa selling non existent broadcasting rights to IEG?
|
Blizzard is not stupid enough to demand insane amounts of money.
It's in THEIR best interest to make everyone earn good money making tournaments. Ideal case scenario for Blizzard: everyone making tournaments and giving a percentage to Blizzard. Basic logic tells them that if they push too hard, they will suffocate the whole market and THEY will be the ones losing the most.
All they need to do is find the golden-middle percentage they'll take, and everything will be ok.
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On May 28 2010 04:15 QibingZero wrote:
Blizzard retaining that much control over SC is simply a terrible thing for eSports. It's really as basic as that. You might want to believe that this is 'in their rights' and that they're the victims here, but in reality you're not talking about strictly US laws which have a precedent set (Valve and CS). Because the issue is not black and white, and also because legality should always be discussed regarding it's supporting logic (not just the fact that this or that law exists and makes things 'right' ), you guys are being completely ridiculous when you just give blanket statements of 'Blizzard right, KeSPA wrong'.
When companies like Blizzard refuse to cater to their market, you know you have a problem. Blizzard knows a metric fuckton of people will buy SC2 no matter what, and thus they can make design decisions based on anti-piracy and anti-KeSPA concerns only. In a reasonable world, Blizzard would realize they need to include features like LAN support to satisfy the demand coming from nearly everyone who is following SC2 (as well as promote it's future playability as an eSport). However, they can weigh the options and easily decide that fucking us over is much preferred to having an eSports scene surrounding SC2 pop up in, say, China. You know, somewhere they fear that the draconian US copyright laws won't be in effect to force everyone to pay them even more money than they're already making off their products.
It should be plain to see that the restrictions placed on anything regarding SC2 that is 'beyond the game' (lol) are completely hazardous to the game's future playability. Custom content is limited to the point of being crippling, as posters like IskatuMesk have pointed out. Region-based play splits the community and badly hurts growth - what kind of community would TL be if we didn't play on iccup with people from around the world? Lack of LAN support makes any 'offline' events a shell of what they once were (this alone is disastrous for eSports). And now we have Blizzard wanting to shove their list of demands in anyone's face who dares try to make their game better than it started out. This is amazing hubris - to believe they're actually going to continue to succeed with this kind of philosophy. This is Blizzard in the post-WoW gaming world.
In the end though, what Blizzard is doing in Korea is a slap in the face to everyone involved. Not only is it complete and utter arrogance, it's also about the most dick way you could find to repay the people who have given you an unimaginable amount of free advertising and publicity over the years.
Hell, these are the people who made Starcraft into the only real eSport anywhere in the world. Yes, they made it that way - not Blizzard. They hacked the limited map editor and made maps that were actually balanced for high level play. They were able to obtain huge sponsors both for the leagues and for actual teams. They've gotten to the point where they can hold the Finals of a league in a fucking airplane hangar because they had the sponsorship of the largest airline in Korea. They've fought the exact kind of stereotypes about gaming that we have to face in the rest of the world - there was even a mention of this in the latest After Talk. And you know what? They've made huge strides. They have two TV stations who devote the majority of their airtime to SC, while we're happy in the US if fucking Halo gets a 30 minute spotlight on ESPN. What right does Blizzard have to come back - after largely leaving the game to die - and claim control? The eSport of SC is most certainly not 'owned' by Blizzard.
I can't help but feel you guys are way too caught up in your 'fuck KeSPA' game to realize that this kind of thing is absolutely terrible for eSports. It's not KeSPA getting fucked over, it's all the old gamers who have worked incredibly hard to make eSports in Korea what is is - the guys who are either still playing (like Boxer) or who have moved on to commentary/coaching. All the organizers who have been mostly behind the scenes for the past 10 years. Hell, all fans of eSports as well. They thought the match-fixing scandal was damaging to the infrastructure, but now Blizzard wants them to throw it all away and start anew. Blizzard is saying to each and every one of them: 'We don't give a shit about what you've done for the game, or eSports, or anything'.
KESPA does NOT equal the old gamers, does not equal the organizers, does not equal fans.
Kespa is Kespa.
|
On May 28 2010 05:21 HonestTea wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 04:15 QibingZero wrote:
Blizzard retaining that much control over SC is simply a terrible thing for eSports. It's really as basic as that. You might want to believe that this is 'in their rights' and that they're the victims here, but in reality you're not talking about strictly US laws which have a precedent set (Valve and CS). Because the issue is not black and white, and also because legality should always be discussed regarding it's supporting logic (not just the fact that this or that law exists and makes things 'right' ), you guys are being completely ridiculous when you just give blanket statements of 'Blizzard right, KeSPA wrong'.
When companies like Blizzard refuse to cater to their market, you know you have a problem. Blizzard knows a metric fuckton of people will buy SC2 no matter what, and thus they can make design decisions based on anti-piracy and anti-KeSPA concerns only. In a reasonable world, Blizzard would realize they need to include features like LAN support to satisfy the demand coming from nearly everyone who is following SC2 (as well as promote it's future playability as an eSport). However, they can weigh the options and easily decide that fucking us over is much preferred to having an eSports scene surrounding SC2 pop up in, say, China. You know, somewhere they fear that the draconian US copyright laws won't be in effect to force everyone to pay them even more money than they're already making off their products.
It should be plain to see that the restrictions placed on anything regarding SC2 that is 'beyond the game' (lol) are completely hazardous to the game's future playability. Custom content is limited to the point of being crippling, as posters like IskatuMesk have pointed out. Region-based play splits the community and badly hurts growth - what kind of community would TL be if we didn't play on iccup with people from around the world? Lack of LAN support makes any 'offline' events a shell of what they once were (this alone is disastrous for eSports). And now we have Blizzard wanting to shove their list of demands in anyone's face who dares try to make their game better than it started out. This is amazing hubris - to believe they're actually going to continue to succeed with this kind of philosophy. This is Blizzard in the post-WoW gaming world.
In the end though, what Blizzard is doing in Korea is a slap in the face to everyone involved. Not only is it complete and utter arrogance, it's also about the most dick way you could find to repay the people who have given you an unimaginable amount of free advertising and publicity over the years.
Hell, these are the people who made Starcraft into the only real eSport anywhere in the world. Yes, they made it that way - not Blizzard. They hacked the limited map editor and made maps that were actually balanced for high level play. They were able to obtain huge sponsors both for the leagues and for actual teams. They've gotten to the point where they can hold the Finals of a league in a fucking airplane hangar because they had the sponsorship of the largest airline in Korea. They've fought the exact kind of stereotypes about gaming that we have to face in the rest of the world - there was even a mention of this in the latest After Talk. And you know what? They've made huge strides. They have two TV stations who devote the majority of their airtime to SC, while we're happy in the US if fucking Halo gets a 30 minute spotlight on ESPN. What right does Blizzard have to come back - after largely leaving the game to die - and claim control? The eSport of SC is most certainly not 'owned' by Blizzard.
I can't help but feel you guys are way too caught up in your 'fuck KeSPA' game to realize that this kind of thing is absolutely terrible for eSports. It's not KeSPA getting fucked over, it's all the old gamers who have worked incredibly hard to make eSports in Korea what is is - the guys who are either still playing (like Boxer) or who have moved on to commentary/coaching. All the organizers who have been mostly behind the scenes for the past 10 years. Hell, all fans of eSports as well. They thought the match-fixing scandal was damaging to the infrastructure, but now Blizzard wants them to throw it all away and start anew. Blizzard is saying to each and every one of them: 'We don't give a shit about what you've done for the game, or eSports, or anything'. KESPA does NOT equal the old gamers, does not equal the organizers, does not equal fans. Kespa is Kespa.
That's all you can say to my post? Even when I made it abundantly clear:
It's not KeSPA getting fucked over, it's all the old gamers who have worked incredibly hard to make eSports in Korea what is is - the guys who are either still playing (like Boxer) or who have moved on to commentary/coaching. All the organizers who have been mostly behind the scenes for the past 10 years. Hell, all fans of eSports as well.
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On May 28 2010 05:41 QibingZero wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 05:21 HonestTea wrote:On May 28 2010 04:15 QibingZero wrote:
Blizzard retaining that much control over SC is simply a terrible thing for eSports. It's really as basic as that. You might want to believe that this is 'in their rights' and that they're the victims here, but in reality you're not talking about strictly US laws which have a precedent set (Valve and CS). Because the issue is not black and white, and also because legality should always be discussed regarding it's supporting logic (not just the fact that this or that law exists and makes things 'right' ), you guys are being completely ridiculous when you just give blanket statements of 'Blizzard right, KeSPA wrong'.
When companies like Blizzard refuse to cater to their market, you know you have a problem. Blizzard knows a metric fuckton of people will buy SC2 no matter what, and thus they can make design decisions based on anti-piracy and anti-KeSPA concerns only. In a reasonable world, Blizzard would realize they need to include features like LAN support to satisfy the demand coming from nearly everyone who is following SC2 (as well as promote it's future playability as an eSport). However, they can weigh the options and easily decide that fucking us over is much preferred to having an eSports scene surrounding SC2 pop up in, say, China. You know, somewhere they fear that the draconian US copyright laws won't be in effect to force everyone to pay them even more money than they're already making off their products.
It should be plain to see that the restrictions placed on anything regarding SC2 that is 'beyond the game' (lol) are completely hazardous to the game's future playability. Custom content is limited to the point of being crippling, as posters like IskatuMesk have pointed out. Region-based play splits the community and badly hurts growth - what kind of community would TL be if we didn't play on iccup with people from around the world? Lack of LAN support makes any 'offline' events a shell of what they once were (this alone is disastrous for eSports). And now we have Blizzard wanting to shove their list of demands in anyone's face who dares try to make their game better than it started out. This is amazing hubris - to believe they're actually going to continue to succeed with this kind of philosophy. This is Blizzard in the post-WoW gaming world.
In the end though, what Blizzard is doing in Korea is a slap in the face to everyone involved. Not only is it complete and utter arrogance, it's also about the most dick way you could find to repay the people who have given you an unimaginable amount of free advertising and publicity over the years.
Hell, these are the people who made Starcraft into the only real eSport anywhere in the world. Yes, they made it that way - not Blizzard. They hacked the limited map editor and made maps that were actually balanced for high level play. They were able to obtain huge sponsors both for the leagues and for actual teams. They've gotten to the point where they can hold the Finals of a league in a fucking airplane hangar because they had the sponsorship of the largest airline in Korea. They've fought the exact kind of stereotypes about gaming that we have to face in the rest of the world - there was even a mention of this in the latest After Talk. And you know what? They've made huge strides. They have two TV stations who devote the majority of their airtime to SC, while we're happy in the US if fucking Halo gets a 30 minute spotlight on ESPN. What right does Blizzard have to come back - after largely leaving the game to die - and claim control? The eSport of SC is most certainly not 'owned' by Blizzard.
I can't help but feel you guys are way too caught up in your 'fuck KeSPA' game to realize that this kind of thing is absolutely terrible for eSports. It's not KeSPA getting fucked over, it's all the old gamers who have worked incredibly hard to make eSports in Korea what is is - the guys who are either still playing (like Boxer) or who have moved on to commentary/coaching. All the organizers who have been mostly behind the scenes for the past 10 years. Hell, all fans of eSports as well. They thought the match-fixing scandal was damaging to the infrastructure, but now Blizzard wants them to throw it all away and start anew. Blizzard is saying to each and every one of them: 'We don't give a shit about what you've done for the game, or eSports, or anything'. KESPA does NOT equal the old gamers, does not equal the organizers, does not equal fans. Kespa is Kespa. That's all you can say to my post? Even when I made it abundantly clear: Show nested quote +It's not KeSPA getting fucked over, it's all the old gamers who have worked incredibly hard to make eSports in Korea what is is - the guys who are either still playing (like Boxer) or who have moved on to commentary/coaching. All the organizers who have been mostly behind the scenes for the past 10 years. Hell, all fans of eSports as well.
Sorry, I should have clarified,
I believe that KESPA is fucking over the old gamers, the organizers, and the fans.
Will Blizzard also fuck them? Who knows. But change is promising.
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
I just wanted to point out that Blizzard is not aiming to fuck the players and the organizers and the fans, Blizzard just wants to fuck Kespa.
|
On May 28 2010 05:50 HonestTea wrote:
I just wanted to point out that Blizzard is not aiming to fuck the players and the organizers and the fans, Blizzard just wants to fuck Kespa.
But in doing so they're being completely callous toward everyone else. If they're not considering the players, organizers, and fans in their decision (other than to profit from them), it's just the same.
I think they'd prefer KeSPA fucking them over anyway - at least they pay the bills.
|
On May 28 2010 05:50 HonestTea wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 05:41 QibingZero wrote:On May 28 2010 05:21 HonestTea wrote:On May 28 2010 04:15 QibingZero wrote:
Blizzard retaining that much control over SC is simply a terrible thing for eSports. It's really as basic as that. You might want to believe that this is 'in their rights' and that they're the victims here, but in reality you're not talking about strictly US laws which have a precedent set (Valve and CS). Because the issue is not black and white, and also because legality should always be discussed regarding it's supporting logic (not just the fact that this or that law exists and makes things 'right' ), you guys are being completely ridiculous when you just give blanket statements of 'Blizzard right, KeSPA wrong'.
When companies like Blizzard refuse to cater to their market, you know you have a problem. Blizzard knows a metric fuckton of people will buy SC2 no matter what, and thus they can make design decisions based on anti-piracy and anti-KeSPA concerns only. In a reasonable world, Blizzard would realize they need to include features like LAN support to satisfy the demand coming from nearly everyone who is following SC2 (as well as promote it's future playability as an eSport). However, they can weigh the options and easily decide that fucking us over is much preferred to having an eSports scene surrounding SC2 pop up in, say, China. You know, somewhere they fear that the draconian US copyright laws won't be in effect to force everyone to pay them even more money than they're already making off their products.
It should be plain to see that the restrictions placed on anything regarding SC2 that is 'beyond the game' (lol) are completely hazardous to the game's future playability. Custom content is limited to the point of being crippling, as posters like IskatuMesk have pointed out. Region-based play splits the community and badly hurts growth - what kind of community would TL be if we didn't play on iccup with people from around the world? Lack of LAN support makes any 'offline' events a shell of what they once were (this alone is disastrous for eSports). And now we have Blizzard wanting to shove their list of demands in anyone's face who dares try to make their game better than it started out. This is amazing hubris - to believe they're actually going to continue to succeed with this kind of philosophy. This is Blizzard in the post-WoW gaming world.
In the end though, what Blizzard is doing in Korea is a slap in the face to everyone involved. Not only is it complete and utter arrogance, it's also about the most dick way you could find to repay the people who have given you an unimaginable amount of free advertising and publicity over the years.
Hell, these are the people who made Starcraft into the only real eSport anywhere in the world. Yes, they made it that way - not Blizzard. They hacked the limited map editor and made maps that were actually balanced for high level play. They were able to obtain huge sponsors both for the leagues and for actual teams. They've gotten to the point where they can hold the Finals of a league in a fucking airplane hangar because they had the sponsorship of the largest airline in Korea. They've fought the exact kind of stereotypes about gaming that we have to face in the rest of the world - there was even a mention of this in the latest After Talk. And you know what? They've made huge strides. They have two TV stations who devote the majority of their airtime to SC, while we're happy in the US if fucking Halo gets a 30 minute spotlight on ESPN. What right does Blizzard have to come back - after largely leaving the game to die - and claim control? The eSport of SC is most certainly not 'owned' by Blizzard.
I can't help but feel you guys are way too caught up in your 'fuck KeSPA' game to realize that this kind of thing is absolutely terrible for eSports. It's not KeSPA getting fucked over, it's all the old gamers who have worked incredibly hard to make eSports in Korea what is is - the guys who are either still playing (like Boxer) or who have moved on to commentary/coaching. All the organizers who have been mostly behind the scenes for the past 10 years. Hell, all fans of eSports as well. They thought the match-fixing scandal was damaging to the infrastructure, but now Blizzard wants them to throw it all away and start anew. Blizzard is saying to each and every one of them: 'We don't give a shit about what you've done for the game, or eSports, or anything'. KESPA does NOT equal the old gamers, does not equal the organizers, does not equal fans. Kespa is Kespa. That's all you can say to my post? Even when I made it abundantly clear: It's not KeSPA getting fucked over, it's all the old gamers who have worked incredibly hard to make eSports in Korea what is is - the guys who are either still playing (like Boxer) or who have moved on to commentary/coaching. All the organizers who have been mostly behind the scenes for the past 10 years. Hell, all fans of eSports as well. Sorry, I should have clarified, I believe that KESPA is fucking over the old gamers, the organizers, and the fans. Will Blizzard also fuck them? Who knows. But change is promising.
No, it's really not.
To thread OP: great post.
|
Like a lot of people, I was hoping Blizzard would work with countries outside of Korea to help establish professional leagues. I don't hate either company, so I'd be happier to see them working with separate areas rather than strangling each other =/
|
On May 28 2010 08:53 Mortality wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2010 05:50 HonestTea wrote:
Sorry, I should have clarified,
I believe that KESPA is fucking over the old gamers, the organizers, and the fans.
Will Blizzard also fuck them? Who knows. But change is promising. No, it's really not. To thread OP: great post.
I really wish people would stop essentially saying 'NO U', 'NO U' back and forth at each other.
It seems that everyone has already decided ahead of time that Blizzard is evil or that Kespa is evil, and goes from there.
I don't think gut feelings and emotional responses are worth anything here; no one knows how this is really going to turn out. Signing your name on a pseudo-petition without any actual evidence will not make Mike Morhaime or whoever leads Kespa wake up one night in a cold sweat screaming "I GET IT NOW! IT'S ABOUT THE GAMERS!'
|
|
|
5003 Posts
It's okay, as long as KeSPA is on the other end, I can see some of these users still choosing Blizzard
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
