EPTA Different Perspective on The NaNiwa Controversy - Page 6
| Blogs > EGalex |
|
Kazeyonoma
United States2912 Posts
| ||
|
MisterKatosS
France352 Posts
I was really starting to be considering to make the same post despite all my years of lurking lazyness I 've had on this forum :D ... Bref ! Naniwa is paid for entertainment. (I even would have used the same sport image ! with tennis though) | ||
|
Brett
Australia3821 Posts
But I understand why he did and hold GOM responsible for making them play the match, for the terrible format and for what I regard as a completely disingenuous response to the situation. Their handling of it smacks of the retrospective application of some hitherto undefined code of conduct, some creative rule 'application' and a disproportionate penalty. I think, as you rightly concede here, conduct that effectively amounts to throwing of matches occurs in many sports the world over, and is accepted because of the ridiculous facade put on by the teams/players involved. Typically it occurs during leagues that are structured and ongoing, with some form of yearly reset. People are duped into accepting that conduct as part of the system on the basis of thinly veiled arguments that what they did 'could have worked' or 'they tried a new strategy' or 'they had to test their roster ahead of the finals'. Well, I'm one of the people who doesn't buy that. I believe that their actions effectively undermined the true competitive spirit generally required and displayed in that particular sport. Regardless I'm not offended by it, because I can see the reasons why they do it. I'm not offended by Nani's actions either.... For the same reason. This incident was not such a situation. It was a group stage of an elimination tournament for single players. It is not an anual event to which both players will always be invited. Both players were eliminated. Neither had any chance of progressing. However, in this situation, unlike previous examples of Code S/A group play, and ALL best of X competitions, these two were forced to play a dead rubber. It is here the similarity to sports starts.... What I do not understand is why people wish so readily to have this completely fake, low standard 5-15 minute game played out. We'd all know it was bullshit. Everyone would be jumping to make excuses for the low calibre of gameplay... Nani just spared us all the crap. And GOM could have spared EVERYONE the crap, by not playing the match... Just like they don't play a match between people who are 0-2 in the group stages of GSL... Just like they dont force the playing of the last 3 matches when Nestea 4-0's Inca in the Code S final. And in those circumstances, I cannot understand how GOM reacted as they did. I am so disappointed with it that I will not be purchasing any of their products in the coming year, as voting with my dollars is about the only real way I have to protest against their response. | ||
|
Chappo
Australia6 Posts
You compare Naniwa's game to modern professional sports games where the average game goes for approx 1 hour minimum with a bit of padding etc. The average starcraft game may be around 10-15min in comparison. To compare these two scenarios in terms of customer satisfaction is inaccurate imo. If it was a best of 5 or 7 between Naniwa and Nestea and obviously threw every match then it would be completely different. Short version: 10-15 minute game cannot be compared to 1-2 hour game. | ||
|
sl0v
Norway51 Posts
| ||
|
Krogan
Sweden375 Posts
For me as a fellow swede raised in a culture that teaches us to never ever lie I see what Naniwa did as little different to Jinro swearing or Thorzain being chill and not showing much emotion, these guys are not playing a game with you, they are not putting up any fronts its just how they are, no fluff as you Americans like to say (yeah what Nani did is actually no fluff where as a 4gate would have been fluff.). I don't mean to sound pro swedish or anti American or whatever but this post from alex very clearly shows that mental difference between how we think and most of the world. Honesty for us is not something that is based on how much money is involved. Naniwa was just being honest and that is what other countries will just have to learn to deal with. For me personally what Nestea did at the blizzcon finals was MUCH MUCH worse then what Naniwa did and neither do I have any interest of watching players that pretend to care about a game, that is just insulting to my intellect. Next season of GSL will be the first time I do not buy a ticket as I choose to vote with my wallet as I quite simply feel unwelcome now, swedes are going to be honest as its hardwired into our very core, learn to deal with it. | ||
|
Subversive
Australia2229 Posts
| ||
|
kazansky
Germany931 Posts
| ||
|
JPP
Finland104 Posts
Of course, GOM has the rights to not invite a player like that to a tournament, but actually penalizing an athlete for something that is against the rules is wrong (which of course didn't happen here). | ||
|
Full.tilt
United Kingdom1709 Posts
Everything else is fluff, people can attempt to convince and sway people to agree with their opinions on the matter with endless blogs, posts and polls and that's fine, but it has no real effect on the actual situation. The world keeps turning and Naniwa will continue to compete in SC2. The most important people in this situation - gomtv, the tournament decision makers have acted out of hand and outside their own rules. They have no competition in South Korea so they can do what they want I guess but they are the only people I truly lose respect for. Maybe we need pro gamer licenses, or some other pledge that professionals agree to before they start competing in tournaments. Attempt to compete to win all matches in a tournament you enter would be a fair start. | ||
|
Subversive
Australia2229 Posts
On December 15 2011 20:43 Krogan wrote: I don't mean to sound pro swedish or anti American or whatever but this post from alex very clearly shows that mental difference between how we think and most of the world. Honesty for us is not something that is based on how much money is involved. Naniwa was just being honest and that is what other countries will just have to learn to deal with. For me personally what Nestea did at the blizzcon finals was MUCH MUCH worse then what Naniwa did and neither do I have any interest of watching players that pretend to care about a game, that is just insulting to my intellect. Next season of GSL will be the first time I do not buy a ticket as I choose to vote with my wallet as I quite simply feel unwelcome now, swedes are going to be honest as its hardwired into our very core, learn to deal with it. Why should anyone have to adapt to this supposedly intrinsic, death before lies attitude, that you allege all Swedes possess? He's in Korea, in a Korean tournament. When in Rome dude... | ||
|
Timerly
Germany511 Posts
Additionally, I would also point out the fact that, as illustrated above, every major professional sports league utilizes a format in which there are meaningless games. By your logic, All-Star games shouldn't even exist. The difference is that every major professional sports league has a much better rule set than GOM, better precedence to be cited for single decisions and most importanly a 99% chance that games are actually NOT meaningless. Be it B-players playing for an A-spot, international standings used for seeding, different monetary rewards (placement / wins) or some other thing. In this instance Nani had close to no motivation to play a good game except his duty to perform for his fans as well as the businesses involved. There is no A-team spot to play for as he's already among the top of the foreigner scene, there was no monetary reward, there was no standing implication. There have to be incentives and they have to be made clear to the player by teams, leagues and preferrably some form of association. Professionals often times (and the best ones at that) focus on exactly one thing: winning. Nani was not willing to put effort into this game because his mentality is one of playing 100% to win tournaments, nothing else matters to him. That in itself is admirable because it makes him practice like few do. Yes, he should be aware of his duties outside of this but I argue that these duties have to be made clear to him by somebody else if there is a chance he won't realize it himself. That way he can focus on his game but one could avoid this kind of situation entirely. This could have been done with better rules, coaching him on the issue or any other way but I do not agree that players are solely responsible here. There are reasons why teams have coaches and management and this is one of them. Again, look at major sports. There are many examples where exactly these guys take care of that. The whole All Star match point I won't even argue about because show matches and matches in a competition are not even remotely related. The term "ecosystem" is a buzzword as of late for those of us on the business side of the industry, because we all recognize the fact that in order for eSports to keep growing and find stability, the industry needs to become more self-sustaining, and less reliant on outside income, like corporate sponsorships. Here let me just ask: why? How is PPV access a better model than advertising and sponsorship revenue? E-sports as a growing market will happen a lot faster if people get free access to it. The whole internet revolves around free, ad financed things growing, from Google to League of Legends. Freemium or not, getting everything you want without paying actual money (obviously you pay in different terms like time etc.) means people pick it up a lot more quickly. I can't even show my friends a set of GSL VoDs without paying GOM for it, how am I going to get them into it with a broadcast schedule that makes it close to impossible to follow it live for many parts of the world? You may not like to rely on sponsors but again there's a reason why this happens in major sports. Obviously, that doesn't change your point in Naniwa hurting business, be it GOM subscribers not getting their money's worth or sponsors instead, it's really more of an issue of splitting the damage between leagues and teams instead of just letting the leagues take the hits for player actions, making them a lot less lenient. Obviously, this way teams have an easier time but again my question is, is that actually a good thing? What I'd like to do in this blog is plead my case for why NaNi's actions were completely unacceptable, not only to the 30-35% of the community blaming GOM for the incident, but also to the other 60-65% of the community who agree that NaNi's actions were unacceptable, but for reasons different from mine. I do not believe that these 30-35% actually blame GOM for it happening. Obviously it's Naniwa's own decision and he is at fault but it just means that these 30-35% understand the problematic situation of GOM having this format. I also strongly believe that much of the anti-GOM outrage and Naniwa-justification is based on GOM's reaction, much less on the actual incident. While some people are upset because of the format, I argue that the majority is just extremely pissed about the form of punishment and its justification provided (although it may be correct to punshim him, the case they make is pretty circumstancial). I just have to say that multiple parties are at fault and this post may not be intended as such but its clear focus on Naniwa makes it hard to perceive as a singled out issue. Many of the environmental factors you quote there just blow this just as much out of proportion as you already anticipated yourself. I really appreciate people from the industry stepping up and sharing their thoughts, it's just hard for me to agree with too much of it, not only because of differing opinions but also because of the way you presented it. Obviously, this is the internet and this kind of thing will happen but please consider the next time to actually focus more clearly on what you want to express and its implications. | ||
|
thejadegecko
United States8 Posts
| ||
|
ottersareneat
United States55 Posts
On December 15 2011 20:24 kmpow wrote: Dear Alex (1)You are the money handler of EG, how could you think that your opinion on the matter is relevant for public display? The opinion expressed here is concerned with money and good relation with those holding money, in this case GomTV and their sponsors. You want puppets, I, as a fan, want games that matters with emotions attached. Not an awkward fight between the players with nothing to gain, the tournament is the defining factor of motivation. First, thanks for your reply. I'm not sure what you mean by "money handler" here, but in case there is an actual confusion or misinformation regarding what exactly I do for EG, I'm definitely much more than an accountant  . Regarding why my opinion is relevant, I feel that I understand the economics and business side of the eSports industry as well as anyone around; given that EG is generally viewed as a successful business (even by those who don't like us very much), I feel that I have some reputability on the subject.(3)A wall of text from the CEO of the buyout team might not be the best idea how to spend the hours you are paid, since the bias of money is showing. Your opinion on business practice should probably be more interesting and commenting on GomTV's actions if one of your players would receive similar treatment and feel a lot more relevant. What exactly do you mean by "the bias of money"? Are you criticizing me for approaching the situation from the perspective of someone who would like to see the eSports industry be sustainable, and employing logical business sense? The number on this site says otherwise in quite clear numbers, a vast majority has expressed an understanding for Naniwa's actions. See http://www.teamliquid.net/poll/index.php Even though there is room for interpretation, your interpretation is in the category the superlative form of lying. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damned_lies,_and_statistics I think you may be misreading the results of the poll. As of now, the results are: A) Disappointing, but no big deal: 40% B) Completely unacceptable: 24% C) Understandable: 24% D) Completely justified: 12% My interpretation of this information is that A) equates to mild disapproval, B) equates to strong disapproval, C) equates to mild approval, and D) equates to strong approval. According to the numbers above, this would place public opinion at 64/36 in disapproval, which is only one percentage point away from my proposed figures (when I began writing my blog, the numbers added up to exactly 65/35). The grudge-match argument. As a continuation on my previous paragraph, the real disappointment is how the absolutely most interesting game, from a Western perspective, became a game with NOTHING at stake. It is GomTV's responsibility to actually give our players something worth fighting for. This is why the match was a joke from the beginning and this is in extension why the majority of TL users feel no offense of the outcome (See poll link above). The game was NOT a show match, it was an unnecessary game, a sham. The grudge-match argument is a selling point which lost its value before the game was played. Well, once again, as I mentioned above, I think you're misreading the results of that poll. They show the opposite conclusion of what you're claiming. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by grudge-match argument, but I'm assuming that you're claiming that my logic involves some kind of textbook logical fallacy. The point that the system only works when all parties (teams, players, tournaments, and fans) do their part is entirely accurate. I would be happy to elaborate on why this is, and how the different pieces work together, if you like. | ||
|
Pondo
Australia283 Posts
 | ||
|
Yaki
France4234 Posts
| ||
|
iCemiLo
Singapore94 Posts
 great write-up. | ||
|
Subversive
Australia2229 Posts
I think you may be misreading the results of the poll. As of now, the results are: A) Disappointing, but no big deal: 40% B) Completely unacceptable: 24% C) Understandable: 24% D) Completely justified: 12% My interpretation of this information is that A) equates to mild disapproval, B) equates to strong disapproval, C) equates to mild approval, and D) equates to strong approval. According to the numbers above, this would place public opinion at 64/36 in disapproval, which is only one percentage point away from my proposed figures (when I began writing my blog, the numbers added up to exactly 65/35). That's my rough understanding as well. It's tricky though, because whilst I felt it was poor what Naniwa did, there's such a large difference between option A and B in tone. I think a lot of people hesitate to call it completely unacceptable even if they didn't like it and therefore select A. On the other hand, I think some people voting A are saying that not seeing the game was disappointing but they didn't mind too much. Overall though, most people who didn't think he should be punished or that there wasn't anything wrong with it probably voted C or D, so therefore I think it's reasonable to extract mild censure from option A. | ||
|
tar
Germany991 Posts
On December 15 2011 19:45 tar wrote: Thank you for this quite enlightening post from the perspective of a team owner. I too was - on from the beginning - of the opinion that Naniwa deserved to be punished (just disagreeing with the particular punishment GOM went for). Regarding the need to play meaningless games in a tournament situation, however, I have to disagree: The comparision with professional -offline- sports is too general. You need to further differentiate between League and Tournament systems. In the case of a league system matches and broadcasting time are planned beforehand (i.e. before knowing if a specific game will be meaningless at the end of a season). In those cases all games will be played no matter if they are important or not. On the other hand, with a tournament system at hand, meaningless games are hardly ever played out. Usually (think olympics or soccer world cups) there will only be a petite finale besides the overall finale. The reasoning behind that is that without at least 3rd place left to fight for and after an exhausting tournament, there wouldn t be interesting games, simply because u cannot force a competition without something to compete for - even in professional sports. So I think we shouldn't ask too much of a pro gamer (esp considering their average age), at the very least not ask more of them then we would of professional offline athletes. Which then brings me to one final point I really, really want to bring forward especially after this statement: Entertaining fans and viewers sure is very important in sports, yet I think there are limits to what you can tolerate if you want to further professionalism in that sport - all the more if the sport at hand is a young one struggling for acceptance: When Idra played Mana in the IPL he called the game a "fucking joke" but more importantly Mana a " fucking idiot" Up to today I cannot believe that this did not have a larger impact on the scene. Why wasn't Idra tapped on the shoulder for that one? Why wasn't there a public apology? This is not meant to be some kind of idra-bashing but rather an expression of my utter bafflement how this could be acceptable on a pro level. Entertaining the fans (i am thinking the bad boy factor here) at all costs is not professional but a mere reduction of professionalsim to the extend it creates revenue. That is acceptable (and only logical) if we see sc2 as mere entertainment programme like for example Big Brother. If one wants to speak of eSports though, professionalsim requires more than that. Dear EGalex, I'd really appreciate your opinion on the level of professionalism that sc2 in general but more specifically EG as a business is striving for considering my above statement ( esp the part below ur quote). In short: Do you see sc2 as a sport or an mere entertainment programme? | ||
|
Ninjahoe
Sweden148 Posts
However, if the team you support have NO CHANCE at all in winning their final game of MLB (unless their opponants are equally unmotivated, wich would only generate a really poor match), will you go watch it? Would you really want to see a game, where you know that your team won't stand a chance, because their competitive morale is so low from the past seasons poor results? I know I wouldn't, and that's why I don't feel betrayed or upset about what NaNi did. | ||
| ||
