|
On December 16 2011 05:50 Truthful wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 05:34 mvhtnb wrote:
The first thing that strikes me (thats an underlined me). Is that as a swede I do not think of the sports industry (not just E-sports) as an industry, nor as a way for the organizers, sponsors, tournament hosts or sports teams to make money.
As a swede, sports, gaming, competing and the like is for pure enjoyment, for the fun, for the competition itself and for the individuals interested in the individual stages of the whole scene (team organizers, organizers in general, coaches etc etc) and this does not include anyone who's interest in the scene is the money. Profit has nothing to do with the scene (this is ofc not totally true, but the general idea and guidelines in these sorts of problems is not as much sided towards the "industry" as it is towards the ones interested.
The most notable difference and the most influential reason for this different cultural base is possibly the way sports leagues are managed in the states. For those not common with this; the leagues, baseball for example, is really a corporate business, and the right to "have" a team in the league is gained by buying "stocks" in the business. Then this showbiz gets cash and distributes it among the "owners" in different ways.
In Sweden, this is as far away from the way it is organized as one can get, and also, I assume, for many Swedes (myself included) disgusting. I mean, I get sick in the stomach, for realz. To treat the sportsmen, the ones who really make up this, whos passion, skill, engagement, training, ..lifes. As a way to profit. It is so ... well... american, I guess.
Here the leagues are free for anyone as long as they can compete, league spots are solely gained based on performance and relegation is mainly only possible due to cheating or by crime.
Tournaments, competitions and the like, go by the same idea, the sportsmen are the ones in focus, the money-mongers is an ugly side effect.
I do not intend to really make up a new system for the tournament organization, I am mainly theorizing over why Naniwa did what he did.
I for one. Do not think he meant for anyone to get hurt (financially hurt in this case).
I only think he was a sportsman.
Where "some" wanted him to be a showpiece.
(Also, some would argue, the tournament should get punished by a lower viewer rate if their tournament has a problematic format for the players to do their best, not punish the players for not following the puppeteers strings to their liking.) Hey, first off, i want to say good job on not showing bias in every single sentence of your post. it must've been hard. second, that's exactly what he's being called out for. not being a "sportsman". its a matter of responsibility as a progamer. but not all responsibility is quantified and labeled under the category of that dirty disgusting (and American right?) financial incentive.
Wow you really got mad  He is just trying to put out a possible explanation to naniwas obvious lack of knowledge of how esports is nothing more than a business and industry to some ppl.
|
I'm impressed by how deep someone can go into this issue. Alex, This was insightful, and well spoken. Cheers to you!
|
On December 16 2011 06:09 Fjodorov wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 05:50 Truthful wrote:On December 16 2011 05:34 mvhtnb wrote:
The first thing that strikes me (thats an underlined me). Is that as a swede I do not think of the sports industry (not just E-sports) as an industry, nor as a way for the organizers, sponsors, tournament hosts or sports teams to make money.
As a swede, sports, gaming, competing and the like is for pure enjoyment, for the fun, for the competition itself and for the individuals interested in the individual stages of the whole scene (team organizers, organizers in general, coaches etc etc) and this does not include anyone who's interest in the scene is the money. Profit has nothing to do with the scene (this is ofc not totally true, but the general idea and guidelines in these sorts of problems is not as much sided towards the "industry" as it is towards the ones interested.
The most notable difference and the most influential reason for this different cultural base is possibly the way sports leagues are managed in the states. For those not common with this; the leagues, baseball for example, is really a corporate business, and the right to "have" a team in the league is gained by buying "stocks" in the business. Then this showbiz gets cash and distributes it among the "owners" in different ways.
In Sweden, this is as far away from the way it is organized as one can get, and also, I assume, for many Swedes (myself included) disgusting. I mean, I get sick in the stomach, for realz. To treat the sportsmen, the ones who really make up this, whos passion, skill, engagement, training, ..lifes. As a way to profit. It is so ... well... american, I guess.
Here the leagues are free for anyone as long as they can compete, league spots are solely gained based on performance and relegation is mainly only possible due to cheating or by crime.
Tournaments, competitions and the like, go by the same idea, the sportsmen are the ones in focus, the money-mongers is an ugly side effect.
I do not intend to really make up a new system for the tournament organization, I am mainly theorizing over why Naniwa did what he did.
I for one. Do not think he meant for anyone to get hurt (financially hurt in this case).
I only think he was a sportsman.
Where "some" wanted him to be a showpiece.
(Also, some would argue, the tournament should get punished by a lower viewer rate if their tournament has a problematic format for the players to do their best, not punish the players for not following the puppeteers strings to their liking.) Hey, first off, i want to say good job on not showing bias in every single sentence of your post. it must've been hard. second, that's exactly what he's being called out for. not being a "sportsman". its a matter of responsibility as a progamer. but not all responsibility is quantified and labeled under the category of that dirty disgusting (and American right?) financial incentive. Wow you really got mad He is just trying to put out a possible explanation to naniwas obvious lack of knowledge of how esports is nothing more than a business and industry to some ppl.
Thank you! 
Also, good way of putting it.
|
On December 16 2011 05:34 mvhtnb wrote:
The first thing that strikes me (thats an underlined me). Is that as a swede I do not think of the sports industry (not just E-sports) as an industry, nor as a way for the organizers, sponsors, tournament hosts or sports teams to make money.
As a swede, sports, gaming, competing and the like is for pure enjoyment, for the fun, for the competition itself and for the individuals interested in the individual stages of the whole scene (team organizers, organizers in general, coaches etc etc) and this does not include anyone who's interest in the scene is the money. Profit has nothing to do with the scene (this is ofc not totally true, but the general idea and guidelines in these sorts of problems is not as much sided towards the "industry" as it is towards the ones interested.
The most notable difference and the most influential reason for this different cultural base is possibly the way sports leagues are managed in the states. For those not common with this; the leagues, baseball for example, is really a corporate business, and the right to "have" a team in the league is gained by buying "stocks" in the business. Then this showbiz gets cash and distributes it among the "owners" in different ways.
In Sweden, this is as far away from the way it is organized as one can get, and also, I assume, for many Swedes (myself included) disgusting. I mean, I get sick in the stomach, for realz. To treat the sportsmen, the ones who really make up this, whos passion, skill, engagement, training, ..lifes. As a way to profit. It is so ... well... american, I guess.
Here the leagues are free for anyone as long as they can compete, league spots are solely gained based on performance and relegation is mainly only possible due to cheating or by crime.
Tournaments, competitions and the like, go by the same idea, the sportsmen are the ones in focus, the money-mongers is an ugly side effect.
I do not intend to really make up a new system for the tournament organization, I am mainly theorizing over why Naniwa did what he did.
I for one. Do not think he meant for anyone to get hurt (financially hurt in this case).
I only think he was a sportsman.
Where "some" wanted him to be a showpiece.
(Also, some would argue, the tournament should get punished by a lower viewer rate if their tournament has a problematic format for the players to do their best, not punish the players for not following the puppeteers strings to their liking.)
If the focus is on the games, and the sports, and competition then Naniwa should have had no problems simply playing the game even though there was no money or prestige incentive to do so. There was a competition between him and Nestea. If that was all that mattered, then he would have played the game to the best of his ability. He chose not to.
I feel that overall this stance is very idealistic. If pure sportsmanship was sustainable from an industry sense, then that would be wonderful. I think it is much more likely that there would simply be no industry, which means no televised games, no leagues and no tournaments; or at least not ones where people could play for a living or have easy access to viewing. It is impossible to avoid the business aspects of sports when discussing them in the capacity of being professionals.
|
This is essentially a rehash of all the intelligent posts on this subject from yesterday, hardly a revelation.
|
On December 16 2011 06:18 Delwack wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 05:34 mvhtnb wrote:
The first thing that strikes me (thats an underlined me). Is that as a swede I do not think of the sports industry (not just E-sports) as an industry, nor as a way for the organizers, sponsors, tournament hosts or sports teams to make money.
As a swede, sports, gaming, competing and the like is for pure enjoyment, for the fun, for the competition itself and for the individuals interested in the individual stages of the whole scene (team organizers, organizers in general, coaches etc etc) and this does not include anyone who's interest in the scene is the money. Profit has nothing to do with the scene (this is ofc not totally true, but the general idea and guidelines in these sorts of problems is not as much sided towards the "industry" as it is towards the ones interested.
The most notable difference and the most influential reason for this different cultural base is possibly the way sports leagues are managed in the states. For those not common with this; the leagues, baseball for example, is really a corporate business, and the right to "have" a team in the league is gained by buying "stocks" in the business. Then this showbiz gets cash and distributes it among the "owners" in different ways.
In Sweden, this is as far away from the way it is organized as one can get, and also, I assume, for many Swedes (myself included) disgusting. I mean, I get sick in the stomach, for realz. To treat the sportsmen, the ones who really make up this, whos passion, skill, engagement, training, ..lifes. As a way to profit. It is so ... well... american, I guess.
Here the leagues are free for anyone as long as they can compete, league spots are solely gained based on performance and relegation is mainly only possible due to cheating or by crime.
Tournaments, competitions and the like, go by the same idea, the sportsmen are the ones in focus, the money-mongers is an ugly side effect.
I do not intend to really make up a new system for the tournament organization, I am mainly theorizing over why Naniwa did what he did.
I for one. Do not think he meant for anyone to get hurt (financially hurt in this case).
I only think he was a sportsman.
Where "some" wanted him to be a showpiece.
(Also, some would argue, the tournament should get punished by a lower viewer rate if their tournament has a problematic format for the players to do their best, not punish the players for not following the puppeteers strings to their liking.) If the focus is on the games, and the sports, and competition then Naniwa should have had no problems simply playing the game even though there was no money or prestige incentive to do so. There was a competition between him and Nestea. If that was all that mattered, then he would have played the game to the best of his ability. He chose not to. I feel that overall this stance is very idealistic. If pure sportsmanship was sustainable from an industry sense, then that would be wonderful. I think it is much more likely that there would simply be no industry, which means no televised games, no leagues and no tournaments; or at least not ones where people could play for a living or have easy access to viewing.
Full agreement. On all points.
I dont understand why he didnt just play the game.
Im just theorizing over why he did not expect the relegation (I think, had he known, he would have played it).
|
This post made me, as a paying customer and huge fan, happy. To see that the reasoning of one of the persons inside the industry was reasoning the same way as I did is reassuring.
Just this post from a man "inside" rekindles my trust in this wave of esports that now floods the world.
Thank you!
|
On December 16 2011 06:00 GuvenorBrown wrote:
I completly support Naniwas decision not to play out the game against Nestea. No matter the sports I always think its extremly painfull to watch teams play out games that doesent matter,.and im supprised that tournaments dont have the option to forfeit meaningless games beforehand. Its just anoying to see a half assed 4gate in a game u know the players dont realy care about. And i dont think u can do the comparisson with a none e-sports team playing out a meaningless match. in teamsport they usualy use the match to give unexperienced player the chance to play in front of a crowd while letting the best players sitt on the bench to not risk injury. And for Naniwa not doing his part for the tournament and esport, this insident probobly gave more publicity to gom Naniwa and his team then any "real" game would have.
First off I question whether you actually support E-Sports, because if you did, you would understand that great games are always appreciated, and that a match against two high level players like that, a grudge match as well, would have been incredibly fun to watch.
Second, you debunk your own argument in your writing. You say "it's just annoying to see a half assed 4 gate in a game you know the players don't really care about." The definition of what NaNi did was half assed. It was rude, unentertaining, and probably lost Nani a lot of Fans.
Finally, This incident garnered a huge amount of negative press for E-Sports, and GOM. Whether it gains publicity or not, looking bad is never good. Things like this are never forgotten, and instead of being the player that defeated the(at the time) best zerg in the world, winning the MLG invitational, and coming second to the new best zerg in the world, he'll be remembered as the guy that does probe rushes.
EDIT: An example of the dissapointment (from Nestea's perspective): Xerxes' entering athens after the battle of Thermopylae
|
On December 16 2011 05:13 m0ck wrote:
Really, it comes down to one single rule:
Avoid matches in which one or both players have no meaningful incentive to win.
If Naniwa considers having money on the line the only meaningful incentive to win that says a whole lot about his (abysmal) values.
|
Very articulate blog, enjoyed it.
Don't entirely agree with you though. I agree Naniwa shouldn't have just probe rushed and done some quick cheesy build so this whole explosion didn't happen. But the problem here isn't that he "threw the game", it's that he didn't give fans an illusion of a game. Personally I don't see the difference of throwing the game with a probe rush or a poor 2 base timing push - sure in the latter cause I got to watch a game, but it's not the game I want to see. I want to see the game where both players are playing their absolute hardest because there's tournament life on the line. If you don't want players to throw useless games - do your best not to have useless games. I feel like people are complaining because Naniwa didn't trick them into thinking he played his best. Also, you used sports analogies which were apt to a degree (I feel the fact sports event are generally single game events as opposed to sets of matches kind of weakens your point though) but no one really cares about games where both teams are out of the playoffs, viewership falls off because teams play with less intensity and they aren't showing their best games. In the sports world they have to play these matches out, but what's the point in Starcraft?
That being said, I don't blame GOM for being angry (though the Code S revoke was quite harsh in my opinion, especially given there was no specific rule disallowing this) and I think Nani could've handled the situation much better (4gate and then complain to GOM about the format, or something of the like). I just think this is silly because even if Naniwa had played out a weak strategy it wouldn't be the epic game everyone wanted anyway.
|
This was a fantastic post and I have to agree with it 100%. It summarizes all that I've been thinking of, except one thing...
Where was NesTea in this entire post? The guy deserves a personal apology too. He probably was on tilt 0-3 down too, but everyone just whines that Naniwa was probably feeling bad. What about NesTea, who is supposed to be the world's best Zerg, but just got demolished in 3 straight games? He was game, and probably really wanted a win to end the day for both himself and his fans, and I bet he walked out feeling shamed and wronged.
Let's not forget that there are always 2 players who show up to a game to play. Not just one.
|
Sweden5462 Posts
The write-up was a little long but I agree.
Yes circumstances could be better (as in better format etc) but that's for the future. Right then someone is hyped to see a game between Nani and Nestea and get's nothing and I agree that it's not acceptable to throw it.
However I strongly feel that we can draw other conclusions as well. For one, formats that produce those scenarios needs to be improved.
Off the top of my head I can think of a shitload of ways on how to make that one game count and I don't understand why it was not taken care off.
For example have a challenge tournament were the winner of nestea and nani get's in. In fact, as a hardcore fan I hate games like that I don't expect players to spoil good builds for nothing etc and I don't really pay attention to games like that so I expect tournaments to have better formats.
BUT we all have to try our best here leagues will not be perfect and neither will players or viewers... We all need to do our best to work for the big picture!
|
Really nice piece.
It would be interesting to see how much of the audience could actually tell the difference between a game that was played for huge stakes in which both players were going all out to win and a game where the players were not really motivated.
You'd need a ton of money for motivation and you'd need to release the games with the names of the players disguised and you'd need to then release the VoDs in random order ^^
|
well written, thank you very much for some professional insight.
On December 16 2011 06:43 TheButtonmen wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 05:13 m0ck wrote:
Really, it comes down to one single rule:
Avoid matches in which one or both players have no meaningful incentive to win. If Naniwa considers having money on the line the only meaningful incentive to win that says a whole lot about his (abysmal) values.
if winning was all that mattered, then 99% of starcraft players should just quit playing.
|
Great Writeup !  I completely agree maybe if the butthurt fanboys take their time and read ths they change their opinion on the whole matter.
|
EDIT
On December 15 2011 06:33 GOMTV wrote:
NaNiWa has been considered as one of the players to receive a Code S seed for the 2012 GSL Season 1 as a part of the this new seeding system due to his recent impressive results. Other players under consideration were IdrA (MLG Orlando 4th, IEM Guangzhou) and Sen (Blizzcon Battle.net Invitational 3rd) among others. During this phase of consideration aforementioned incident happened, which led us to the decision to remove NaNiWa from the top of the list of considered players. This is not to be seen as a direct punishment resulting from the incident, the incident did however understandably have an influence on NaNiWa's position on the list of candidates.
From Evil Geniuses Website ( http://myeg.net/team/prepare-yourselves-idra-is-back-in-code-s/): Now EG is excited to announce that IdrA will in fact be entering directly into Code S. Though we don’t yet have details on who or why, the GSL has informed us that a current Code S player has dropped out of the league, and IdrA has been invited to fill that space.
On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote:
2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa. Something doesn't fit here. Was IdrA guaranteed a spot or was he "under consideration"?
Hypothetically, if IdrA or Sen received NaNiwa's spot, there isn't any issue. It'd be nice to have a clear understanding of events.
|
On December 16 2011 07:42 domane wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 06:33 GOMTV wrote:
NaNiWa has been considered as one of the players to receive a Code S seed for the 2012 GSL Season 1 as a part of the this new seeding system due to his recent impressive results. Other players under consideration were IdrA (MLG Orlando 4th, IEM Guangzhou) and Sen (Blizzcon Battle.net Invitational 3rd) among others. During this phase of consideration aforementioned incident happened, which led us to the decision to remove NaNiWa from the top of the list of considered players. This is not to be seen as a direct punishment resulting from the incident, the incident did however understandably have an influence on NaNiWa's position on the list of candidates. Show nested quote +On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote:
2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa. Something doesn't fit here. Was IdrA guaranteed a spot or was he "under consideration"? Hypothetically, if IdrA or Sen received NaNiwa's spot, there isn't any issue. It'd be nice to have a clear understanding of events.
I believe idra would have received his Code S spot regardless, but that Sen was the one who was "under consideration".
|
On December 16 2011 07:50 Keone wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 07:42 domane wrote:On December 15 2011 06:33 GOMTV wrote:
NaNiWa has been considered as one of the players to receive a Code S seed for the 2012 GSL Season 1 as a part of the this new seeding system due to his recent impressive results. Other players under consideration were IdrA (MLG Orlando 4th, IEM Guangzhou) and Sen (Blizzcon Battle.net Invitational 3rd) among others. During this phase of consideration aforementioned incident happened, which led us to the decision to remove NaNiWa from the top of the list of considered players. This is not to be seen as a direct punishment resulting from the incident, the incident did however understandably have an influence on NaNiWa's position on the list of candidates. On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote:
2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa. Something doesn't fit here. Was IdrA guaranteed a spot or was he "under consideration"? Hypothetically, if IdrA or Sen received NaNiwa's spot, there isn't any issue. It'd be nice to have a clear understanding of events. I believe idra would have received his Code S spot regardless, but that Sen was the one who was "under consideration".
Sen was in because of his 3rd place at Blizzcon
|
On December 16 2011 07:53 aviator116 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 07:50 Keone wrote:On December 16 2011 07:42 domane wrote:On December 15 2011 06:33 GOMTV wrote:
NaNiWa has been considered as one of the players to receive a Code S seed for the 2012 GSL Season 1 as a part of the this new seeding system due to his recent impressive results. Other players under consideration were IdrA (MLG Orlando 4th, IEM Guangzhou) and Sen (Blizzcon Battle.net Invitational 3rd) among others. During this phase of consideration aforementioned incident happened, which led us to the decision to remove NaNiWa from the top of the list of considered players. This is not to be seen as a direct punishment resulting from the incident, the incident did however understandably have an influence on NaNiWa's position on the list of candidates. On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote:
2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa. Something doesn't fit here. Was IdrA guaranteed a spot or was he "under consideration"? Hypothetically, if IdrA or Sen received NaNiwa's spot, there isn't any issue. It'd be nice to have a clear understanding of events. I believe idra would have received his Code S spot regardless, but that Sen was the one who was "under consideration". Sen was in because of his 3rd place at Blizzcon
No he wasn't.
Sen got the spot that they took from Naniwa, it seems even he was told that his spot materialized (in the past few days, as he's been told) right when Naniwa's was taken.
|
On December 16 2011 07:56 FairForever wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 07:53 aviator116 wrote:On December 16 2011 07:50 Keone wrote:On December 16 2011 07:42 domane wrote:On December 15 2011 06:33 GOMTV wrote:
NaNiWa has been considered as one of the players to receive a Code S seed for the 2012 GSL Season 1 as a part of the this new seeding system due to his recent impressive results. Other players under consideration were IdrA (MLG Orlando 4th, IEM Guangzhou) and Sen (Blizzcon Battle.net Invitational 3rd) among others. During this phase of consideration aforementioned incident happened, which led us to the decision to remove NaNiWa from the top of the list of considered players. This is not to be seen as a direct punishment resulting from the incident, the incident did however understandably have an influence on NaNiWa's position on the list of candidates. On December 15 2011 17:51 EGalex wrote:
2) IdrA did not receive NaNiwa's Code S spot. IdrA was offered his Code S spot weeks ago, in a decision that was completely unrelated to NaNiwa. Something doesn't fit here. Was IdrA guaranteed a spot or was he "under consideration"? Hypothetically, if IdrA or Sen received NaNiwa's spot, there isn't any issue. It'd be nice to have a clear understanding of events. I believe idra would have received his Code S spot regardless, but that Sen was the one who was "under consideration". Sen was in because of his 3rd place at Blizzcon No he wasn't. Sen got the spot that they took from Naniwa, it seems even he was told that his spot materialized (in the past few days, as he's been told) right when Naniwa's was taken.
you misunderstood me. i meant that Sen was the next highest ranked foreigner in GSL points in large part because of his Blizzcon showing, so he was given the green light when the Naniwa incident occurred.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
