|
On December 16 2011 09:36 Kahuna. wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 09:32 Talin wrote:
GOM's actions are based on GOM's interests, which are based on what the audience wants (or more accurately, their perception of what the audience wants).
Which brings me back to my initial point - the audience decides what's important for them. E-sports will still grow as long as there is an audience, so in that context it really doesn't matter if the overwhelming support swings one way or the other, as long as GOM acts accordingly. You're just rephrasing what I say. GOM's actions are based on GOM's interests... and GOM's interests lie in the growth of E-Sports because the growth of E-Sports lead to increase in viewership for GOM. No need to come up with many ways to say the same thing. The growth of E-Sports depends on the satisfaction of the audience that subscribes to E-Sports. If the MAJORITY (you fall in the minority) of audience is not satisfied, then E-Sports growth is stunted and potentially endangered. Thus, GOM decides to take the action that leads to the least dissatisfaction which is to punish Naniwa and not tolerate unacceptable behaviour. such as throwing away games.
That is true.
However I still have the right to try to make my minority become the majority by demonstrating how wrong, selfish, entitled and inconsiderate the majority is (in my opinion).
So that the next time something similar happens, GOM might look at the initial reactions of the audience and think to themselves "well, we screwed this up when we designed this tournament, let's protect this player's image because we need him".
Or even better, they would think "hey, let's make this tournament good for the players so that they're always motivated to play and can play in their top condition, because our audience will appreciate that the most".
|
i dont think this could possibly be considered harsh, if he deserves to be in code S hell get in code S this seasoncode s is ridic easy to get into now
if he cant get into code s then he didnt deserve to be in there and his game against NesTea is just proof hes not willing to put in the effort to be a true pro
|
On December 16 2011 09:40 Talin wrote:
That is true.
However I still have the right to try to make my minority become the majority by demonstrating how wrong, selfish, entitled and inconsiderate the majority is (in my opinion).
So that the next time something similar, GOM might look at the reactions of the audience and think to themselves "well, we screwed this up when we designed this tournament, let's protect this player's image because we need him".
You're right, but most viewers don't think from a players perspective because they're not PRO players. They just sit at home and play the game for enjoyment. You are among the few (I would say VERY few) who approach this situation from a PRO player's perspective despite not being a pro yourself.
GOM probably knows that most of their viewers don't care for the player's perspective because most viewers don't pay money for the direct 'good conditioning' of the players. Most pay to watch entertaining games so that they don't have to think of all the other problems in their lives (this is the same reason why most people watch other sports, or reality TV)... very few watch out of a genuine interest in the well-being of the athlete or in the lives of the people featured in the show. And if they feel like they weren't entertained, then they won't pay again. I wish you luck in trying to change that, but I don't believe you'd be able to since it would involve instilling in human kind an attitude of immense selflessness... and seeing as the player you're trying to support himself acted selfishly, your attempt to change the world - in this regard - is somewhat futile (and ironic since the event that sparked it is an act of selfishness by the person you are trying to support), but it is nevertheless respectable. Good luck. 
|
On December 16 2011 09:45 Forikorder wrote:
i dont think this could possibly be considered harsh, if he deserves to be in code S hell get in code S this seasoncode s is ridic easy to get into now
if he cant get into code s then he didnt deserve to be in there and his game against NesTea is just proof hes not willing to put in the effort to be a true pro
That would be fair enough if Code S didn't already become a semi-invitational tournament (or on it's way to becoming one). It seems like foreigners and foreign teams can just come and go and get invites as they please - depending on how much they weigh in gold viewers/fans.
I hated the fact Nani got a million Code A invites in a row for consecutive high finishes at MLG, and I disagree with the Code S invite as well. But then it shouldn't be handed out to anyone else either.
On December 16 2011 09:48 Kahuna. wrote:
Most pay to watch entertaining games so that they don't have to think of all the other problems in their lives (this is the same reason why most people watch other sports, or reality TV)... very few watch out of a genuine interest in the well-being of the athlete or in the lives of the people featured in the show. )
Considering that Starcraft 2 doesn't have such a huge casual audience (and by casual I mean non players and people completely detached from the players and the scene, possibly the game itself) and most people know the game and the players in-depth, I'm actually not sure that's so true yet. Most people who pay for tournaments are avid followers of the scene, they pay for more than "watching entertaining games". Casual audience probably sticks to the free content they get occasionally.
Most people who follow the scene understand the mentality of the players and should realize that a Naniwa-Nestea game had zero chance of being a good game. In fact, the game that ended up seeing is arguably the MOST unique and entertaining game that match could possibly produce. 
I'm not saying you should be concerned with the player's well-being as if he were your brother - you don't need to look at this from any angle other than a Starcraft fan angle to realize that the Protoss player's decision made perfect sense given the circumstances and that ANYTHING else would be basically faking it while still playing horribly.
I don't think there are many people that enjoy seeing fake, bad games. I certainly don't think they are the majority. So unless you're either sadistic or you hate Naniwa from a fan perspective (which is fine), your anger for what he did is completely irrational. It's pointless to be upset because of "lack of professionalism" - you're not his boss, you're not his sponsor, and he doesn't represent your business. Let his managers and sponsors be angry for that, it's their role. From a fan perspective, you have zero rational reason to be.
|
It's not a meaningless game when tons of paying fans wanted to see it. Do you think there would have been no backlash if GOM had decided to not air the game? It was supposed to be an epic grudgematch for honor. EGAlex's blog has it right, it is GOM's job to serve the viewers and the player's jobs to perform (especially when this is a special invite event where all the matches are somewhat "showmatches").
|
There is no justifying for Nani's actions,but tournaments really need to work on the subject of meaningless matches such as but not only the Group stages in IPL3 and the Blizzard cup.I mean this(Blizzard Cup) tournament was suposed to be the one to choose the best amidst the invitees,but it turned out to have a horrible format (BO1 Group stage) with room for "meaningless" matches for the players.
|
On December 16 2011 09:48 Talin wrote:
I don't think there are many people that enjoy seeing fake, bad games. I certainly don't think they are the majority. So unless you're either sadistic or you hate Naniwa from a fan perspective (which is fine), your anger for what he did is completely irrational. It's pointless to be upset because of "lack of professionalism" - you're not his boss, you're not his sponsor, and he doesn't represent you. Let his managers and sponsors be angry for that. From a fan perspective, you have zero rational reason to be.
On the contrary, Naniwa gets paid because I subscribe to the events that feature him. While watching the GSL and hearing Moletrap and Khaldor talk about how there is going to be a great grudge match between Naniwa and Nestea coming up (a match that I along with many other subscribers paid to see and looked forward to), I got excited. Moments later my excitement diminished because Naniwa, at the time, did not understand what professionalism and selflessness (the characteristic that you are so fond of preaching) were. Thus, I was rationally upset with the outcome of that match and Naniwa's actions because the return on my investment was not as high as it could've been, had Naniwa played the game out. So save your lectures on logic and rationality, because I am fairly confident I understand what it means to be rational. And you should share your views on selflessness with Naniwa; I wonder what he would think about it, seeing as he isn't perceived to be a very selfless SC2 player and in fact, admitted to not being one.
|
On December 16 2011 10:06 Kahuna. wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 09:48 Talin wrote:
I don't think there are many people that enjoy seeing fake, bad games. I certainly don't think they are the majority. So unless you're either sadistic or you hate Naniwa from a fan perspective (which is fine), your anger for what he did is completely irrational. It's pointless to be upset because of "lack of professionalism" - you're not his boss, you're not his sponsor, and he doesn't represent you. Let his managers and sponsors be angry for that. From a fan perspective, you have zero rational reason to be. On the contrary, Naniwa gets paid because I subscribe to the events that feature him. While watching the GSL and hearing Moletrap and Khaldor talk about how there is going to be a great grudge match between Naniwa and Nestea coming up (a match that I along with many other subscribers paid to see and looked forward to), I got excited. Moments later my excitement diminished because Naniwa, at the time, did not understand what professionalism and selflessness (the characteristic that you are so fond of preaching) were.
Even disregarding the fact that there was next to no chance that anyone would use their real strategies in a game like that, you would have to be aware of the fact that at the very least both players were physically and mentally exhausted and angry at their results in the tournament, and as long as you've ever played Starcraft, you KNOW that it's impossible to play when you're on that kind of a tilt even in competitive games, let alone games with zero competitive meaning. Just look at how Hero collapsed in the last 2 games the previous day, it was brutal.
Moletrap and Khaldor had to talk the way they talked because they too were being "professional" and did the acting and faking that Naniwa didn't. In no world, shape or form would that game at any point reach a level where it could be considered "epic". Expecting that is certainly not rational, and I honestly doubt there were many people that genuinely believed that it would.
Would you also be upset if Nani 6 Gated and rolled over and died with shit micro? Because if my criteria was that I wanted a quality game, I would. In fact, if a game has to be awful, it makes more sense to want it to be short as well.
On December 16 2011 10:06 Kahuna. wrote:
Thus, I was rationally upset with the outcome of that match and Naniwa's actions because the return on my investment was not as high as it could've been, had Naniwa played the game out. So save your lectures on logic and rationality, because I am fairly confident I understand what it means to be rational. And you should share your views on selflessness with Naniwa; I wonder what he would think about it, seeing as he isn't perceived to be a very selfless SC2 player and in fact, admitted to not being one.
Nani is a dick most of the time, I'm not arguing to support him and I've given him plenty of flak in the past, I'm arguing for a general principle and how players are (supposed to be) viewed and treated. At the end of the day, Starcraft is about watching players play, and everything else is of secondary importance. Moreover, while Nani might not be one, many other players are also long standing members of this community. There are many reasons why seeing them as a mix of clowns and modern-day gladiators is inappropriate in my eyes.
I feel a lot stronger on a personal level when people, for example, question why Tyler is still on a pro team and being flown to tournaments when he "isn't being professional with his training". It's really the same thing when you think of it.
|
On December 16 2011 10:28 Talin wrote:
Nani is a dick most of the time, I'm not arguing to support him and I've given him plenty of flak in the past, I'm arguing for a general principle and how players are (supposed to be) viewed and treated. At the end of the day, Starcraft is about watching players play, and everything else is of secondary importance. Moreover, while Nani might not be one, many other players are also long standing members of this community. There are many reasons why seeing them as a mix of clowns and modern-day gladiators is inappropriate in my eyes.
I feel a lot stronger on a personal level when people, for example, question why Tyler is still on a pro team and being flown to tournaments when he "isn't being professional with his training". It's really the same thing when you think of it.
What is irrational is your opinion that people see pros as clowns and gladiators... that hasn't been mentioned anywhere at all.
As for your comment regarding community involvement of players, there's two sides to every player... there's the 'community member' and then there is the 'player'. How you are judged as a player has nothing to do (or rather, should have nothing to do) with how you are judged as a member of the community. While you are playing you have to remember that you have two obligations to uphold as a player... you have the obligation to yourself to play well for the rewards that you seek and you also have the obligation to play well for the community/audience/viewers without whom you would not be a pro player (and instead just be a guy with a hobby). Your community involvement is not related to the two aforementioned obligations.
|
On December 16 2011 09:48 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 09:45 Forikorder wrote:
i dont think this could possibly be considered harsh, if he deserves to be in code S hell get in code S this seasoncode s is ridic easy to get into now
if he cant get into code s then he didnt deserve to be in there and his game against NesTea is just proof hes not willing to put in the effort to be a true pro That would be fair enough if Code S didn't already become a semi-invitational tournament (or on it's way to becoming one). It seems like foreigners and foreign teams can just come and go and get invites as they please - depending on how much they weigh in gold viewers/fans. I hated the fact Nani got a million Code A invites in a row for consecutive high finishes at MLG, and I disagree with the Code S invite as well. But then it shouldn't be handed out to anyone else either. Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 09:48 Kahuna. wrote:
Most pay to watch entertaining games so that they don't have to think of all the other problems in their lives (this is the same reason why most people watch other sports, or reality TV)... very few watch out of a genuine interest in the well-being of the athlete or in the lives of the people featured in the show. ) Considering that Starcraft 2 doesn't have such a huge casual audience (and by casual I mean non players and people completely detached from the players and the scene, possibly the game itself) and most people know the game and the players in-depth, I'm actually not sure that's so true yet. Most people who pay for tournaments are avid followers of the scene, they pay for more than "watching entertaining games". Casual audience probably sticks to the free content they get occasionally. Most people who follow the scene understand the mentality of the players and should realize that a Naniwa-Nestea game had zero chance of being a good game. In fact, the game that ended up seeing is arguably the MOST unique and entertaining game that match could possibly produce. I'm not saying you should be concerned with the player's well-being as if he were your brother - you don't need to look at this from any angle other than a Starcraft fan angle to realize that the Protoss player's decision made perfect sense given the circumstances and that ANYTHING else would be basically faking it while still playing horribly. I don't think there are many people that enjoy seeing fake, bad games. I certainly don't think they are the majority. So unless you're either sadistic or you hate Naniwa from a fan perspective (which is fine), your anger for what he did is completely irrational. It's pointless to be upset because of "lack of professionalism" - you're not his boss, you're not his sponsor, and he doesn't represent your business. Let his managers and sponsors be angry for that, it's their role. From a fan perspective, you have zero rational reason to be.
i think your wrong on both accounts
every tournament you hear tons of people say that they will or wont watch a tournament based on the level of players and alot of people said they wouldnt watch NASL due to lack of korean heavyweights (and koreans in general) so i think majority of the fanbase are solely interested in watching entertaining games
i dont get what your first point was directly aimed at you seem bitter that Naniwa was given a code s spot he didnt deserve yet say you understand he wasnt given a code s spot?
the new format works well imo instead of jsut looking at MLG wich wont be synched with Gom (might be possible to have 2 MLGs happen between one GSL season beggining and the next one) so jsut cherry picking from MLG wont work at all and this way players who cant attend MLGs as often have an equally fair chance
Nanis still in Code A and only has to win a few games to get in code s
and as for a rational reason to be angry, Naniwa VS NesTea was one of the most anticipated games of the night and im sure people tuned in to see them play as a nestea fan naniwa stole my chance to see this game which i was seriously looking forward to
|
On December 16 2011 10:37 Kahuna. wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 10:28 Talin wrote:On December 16 2011 10:06 Kahuna. wrote:On December 16 2011 09:48 Talin wrote:
I don't think there are many people that enjoy seeing fake, bad games. I certainly don't think they are the majority. So unless you're either sadistic or you hate Naniwa from a fan perspective (which is fine), your anger for what he did is completely irrational. It's pointless to be upset because of "lack of professionalism" - you're not his boss, you're not his sponsor, and he doesn't represent you. Let his managers and sponsors be angry for that. From a fan perspective, you have zero rational reason to be. On the contrary, Naniwa gets paid because I subscribe to the events that feature him. While watching the GSL and hearing Moletrap and Khaldor talk about how there is going to be a great grudge match between Naniwa and Nestea coming up (a match that I along with many other subscribers paid to see and looked forward to), I got excited. Moments later my excitement diminished because Naniwa, at the time, did not understand what professionalism and selflessness (the characteristic that you are so fond of preaching) were. Even disregarding the fact that there was next to no chance that anyone would use their real strategies in a game like that, you would have to be aware of the fact that at the very least both players were physically and mentally exhausted and angry at their results in the tournament, and as long as you've ever played Starcraft, you KNOW that it's impossible to play when you're on that kind of a tilt even in competitive games, let alone games with zero competitive meaning. Moletrap and Khaldor had to talk the way they talked because they too were being "professional" and did the acting and faking that Naniwa didn't. In no world, shape or form would that game at any point reach a level where it could be considered "epic". Expecting that is certainly not rational, and I honestly doubt there were many people that genuinely believed that it would. Would you also be upset if Nani 6 Gated and rolled over and died with shit micro? Because if my criteria was that I wanted a quality game, I would. In fact, if a game has to be awful, it makes more sense to want it to be short as well. On December 16 2011 10:06 Kahuna. wrote:
Thus, I was rationally upset with the outcome of that match and Naniwa's actions because the return on my investment was not as high as it could've been, had Naniwa played the game out. So save your lectures on logic and rationality, because I am fairly confident I understand what it means to be rational. And you should share your views on selflessness with Naniwa; I wonder what he would think about it, seeing as he isn't perceived to be a very selfless SC2 player and in fact, admitted to not being one. Nani is a dick most of the time, I'm not arguing to support him and I've given him plenty of flak in the past, I'm arguing for a general principle and how players are (supposed to be) viewed and treated. At the end of the day, Starcraft is about watching players play, and everything else is of secondary importance. Moreover, while Nani might not be one, many other players are also long standing members of this community. There are many reasons why seeing them as a mix of clowns and modern-day gladiators is inappropriate in my eyes. I feel a lot stronger on a personal level when people, for example, question why Tyler is still on a pro team and being flown to tournaments when he "isn't being professional with his training". It's really the same thing when you think of it. What is irrational is your opinion that people see pros as clowns and gladiators... that hasn't been mentioned anywhere at all. As for your comment regarding community involvement of players, there's two sides to every player... there's the 'community member' and then there is the 'player'. How you are judged as a player has nothing to do (or rather, should have nothing to do) with how you are judged as a member of the community. While you are playing you have to remember that you have two obligations to uphold as a player... you have the obligation to yourself to play well for the rewards that you seek and you and the obligation to play well for the community/audience/viewers without whom you would not be a pro player (and instead just be a guy with a hobby). Your community involvement is not related to the two aforemention obligations.
You want them to fake out games when they're in no condition to play, and make an appearance just for show and you want them to act as if they're only playing the game for the audience and how the audience perceives them to be the most important thing in the world for them. How is that unlike a mix of a clown and a gladiator, apart from the fact that gladiators were slaves (although even that analogy might be applicable in some form)?
In order for "esports" to be comparable to sports, players need to be paid for performance and their only job should be to play the game to the best of their ability under fair and reasonable conditions - it doesn't matter where the money comes from, a player shouldn't have to think about that side. This is what managers of all sorts are being paid for - to think about the things that players don't want to (and shouldn't need to) think or care about.
In an ideal "professional" world, Naniwa would have his manager at his side, and the manager would have informed GOM that Naniwa's job is to compete in tournaments, and that since he was out of the tournament, he is currently in no condition to play a high level game just for show before Nani even got near the booth.
If we have players get paid based on exposure, popularity, and how they are perceived by the audience, that is not a sport. It's a reality show.
|
On December 16 2011 10:49 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 10:37 Kahuna. wrote:On December 16 2011 10:28 Talin wrote:On December 16 2011 10:06 Kahuna. wrote:On December 16 2011 09:48 Talin wrote:
I don't think there are many people that enjoy seeing fake, bad games. I certainly don't think they are the majority. So unless you're either sadistic or you hate Naniwa from a fan perspective (which is fine), your anger for what he did is completely irrational. It's pointless to be upset because of "lack of professionalism" - you're not his boss, you're not his sponsor, and he doesn't represent you. Let his managers and sponsors be angry for that. From a fan perspective, you have zero rational reason to be. On the contrary, Naniwa gets paid because I subscribe to the events that feature him. While watching the GSL and hearing Moletrap and Khaldor talk about how there is going to be a great grudge match between Naniwa and Nestea coming up (a match that I along with many other subscribers paid to see and looked forward to), I got excited. Moments later my excitement diminished because Naniwa, at the time, did not understand what professionalism and selflessness (the characteristic that you are so fond of preaching) were. Even disregarding the fact that there was next to no chance that anyone would use their real strategies in a game like that, you would have to be aware of the fact that at the very least both players were physically and mentally exhausted and angry at their results in the tournament, and as long as you've ever played Starcraft, you KNOW that it's impossible to play when you're on that kind of a tilt even in competitive games, let alone games with zero competitive meaning. Moletrap and Khaldor had to talk the way they talked because they too were being "professional" and did the acting and faking that Naniwa didn't. In no world, shape or form would that game at any point reach a level where it could be considered "epic". Expecting that is certainly not rational, and I honestly doubt there were many people that genuinely believed that it would. Would you also be upset if Nani 6 Gated and rolled over and died with shit micro? Because if my criteria was that I wanted a quality game, I would. In fact, if a game has to be awful, it makes more sense to want it to be short as well. On December 16 2011 10:06 Kahuna. wrote:
Thus, I was rationally upset with the outcome of that match and Naniwa's actions because the return on my investment was not as high as it could've been, had Naniwa played the game out. So save your lectures on logic and rationality, because I am fairly confident I understand what it means to be rational. And you should share your views on selflessness with Naniwa; I wonder what he would think about it, seeing as he isn't perceived to be a very selfless SC2 player and in fact, admitted to not being one. Nani is a dick most of the time, I'm not arguing to support him and I've given him plenty of flak in the past, I'm arguing for a general principle and how players are (supposed to be) viewed and treated. At the end of the day, Starcraft is about watching players play, and everything else is of secondary importance. Moreover, while Nani might not be one, many other players are also long standing members of this community. There are many reasons why seeing them as a mix of clowns and modern-day gladiators is inappropriate in my eyes. I feel a lot stronger on a personal level when people, for example, question why Tyler is still on a pro team and being flown to tournaments when he "isn't being professional with his training". It's really the same thing when you think of it. What is irrational is your opinion that people see pros as clowns and gladiators... that hasn't been mentioned anywhere at all. As for your comment regarding community involvement of players, there's two sides to every player... there's the 'community member' and then there is the 'player'. How you are judged as a player has nothing to do (or rather, should have nothing to do) with how you are judged as a member of the community. While you are playing you have to remember that you have two obligations to uphold as a player... you have the obligation to yourself to play well for the rewards that you seek and you and the obligation to play well for the community/audience/viewers without whom you would not be a pro player (and instead just be a guy with a hobby). Your community involvement is not related to the two aforemention obligations. You want them to fake out games when they're in no condition to play, and make an appearance just for show and you want them to act as if they're only playing the game for the audience and how the audience perceives them to be the most important thing in the world for them. How is that unlike a mix of a clown and a gladiator, apart from the fact that gladiators were slaves (although even that analogy might be applicable in some form)? In order for "esports" to be comparable to sports, players need to be paid for performance and their only job should be to play the game to the best of their ability under fair and reasonable conditions - it doesn't matter where the money comes from, a player shouldn't have to think about that side. This is what managers of all sorts are being paid for - to think about the things that players don't want to (and shouldn't need to) think or care about. In an ideal "professional" world, Naniwa would have his manager at his side, and the manager would have informed GOM that Naniwa's job is to compete in tournaments, and that since he was out of the tournament, he is currently in no condition to play a high level game just for show before Nani even got near the booth. If we have players get paid based on exposure, popularity, and how they are perceived by the audience, that is not a sport. It's a reality show.
if Naniwa wasnt in the condition to paly he should have forfeited from the blizzard cup
by accepting his spot in the blizzard cup he agreed to play the torunament and then threw his game against NesTea im pretty sure any manager wouldnt ahve been able to do anything about the backlash his palyer got for forfeiting a game
|
On December 16 2011 10:49 Talin wrote:
You want them to fake out games when they're in no condition to play, and make an appearance just for show and you want them to act as if they're only playing the game for the audience and how the audience perceives them to be the most important thing in the world for them. How is that unlike a mix of a clown and a gladiator, apart from the fact that gladiators were slaves (although even that analogy might be applicable in some form)?
In order for "esports" to be comparable to sports, players need to be paid for performance and their only job should be to play the game to the best of their ability under fair and reasonable conditions - it doesn't matter where the money comes from, a player shouldn't have to think about that side. This is what managers of all sorts are being paid for - to think about the things that players don't want to (and shouldn't need to) think or care about.
In an ideal "professional" world, Naniwa would have his manager at his side, and the manager would have informed GOM that Naniwa's job is to compete in tournaments, and that since he was out of the tournament, he is currently in no condition to play a high level game just for show before Nani even got near the booth.
If we have players get paid based on exposure, popularity, and how they are perceived by the audience, that is not a sport. It's a reality show.
Naniwa and Naniwa's manager (in this case his team) have made it quite explicit that his behaviour was wrong... they have also confirmed that it will not happen again. If you fail to meet your obligation as a progamer to play well for yourself that doesn't release you from your obligation to perform well for your audience (without whom you're a nobody). Naniwa failed his former obligation by going 0-3 in his first three games. He is still required to play well in the last game to meet the latter obligation he has toward the audience that supports him and allows him to make a living through SC2. Even he has released a statement acknowledging that (whether he believes it or not is irrelevant, so long as he understands it and doesn't let it happen again).
And as I stated earlier, if a player is extremely unhappy with the tournament structure then he can do one of three things without coming off as an unprofessional douchebag:
(1) Not participate in the tournament and propose a change to its structure for next time; if GOM adopts such a change then Naniwa can choose to now compete in the tournament structure since itmeets his 'standards'
(2) He can choose to participate anyway, but in doing so he should understand that even though he disagrees with the structure he should not disrespect/dishonour the tournament if possible inconsequential games have to be played by him
(3) He can win all his games so that he never has to play an inconsequential game (this is an unreasonable request, but I included it in the list because I believe that it is just as unreasonable to blame GOM for its tournament structure... as I said in point (1)... if you don't like the structure, wait until it changes, if it ever does)
EDIT:
There's actually even a fourth option that would be reasonable and professional and this is the option that Naniwa should have exercised after going 0-3 at the tournament, seeing as the previous three options are so unlike him due to his personality and attitude:
(4) Prior to the match and before everything is ready for broadcast, kindly let the tournament organizers know that you are not mentally/physically fit to play for whatever reason (lack of emotional control, fatigue, injury, you will end up probe rushing if you do play, etc.)
|
This is one of the most thoughtful responses I have read. Unfortunately, it's too late to change anything 
|
On December 16 2011 11:15 ReketSomething wrote:This is one of the most thoughtful responses I have read. Unfortunately, it's too late to change anything
what are you talking about. The more people aware of this the better, it can only help the future
|
On December 16 2011 11:44 Divinek wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 11:15 ReketSomething wrote:This is one of the most thoughtful responses I have read. Unfortunately, it's too late to change anything what are you talking about. The more people aware of this the better, it can only help the future
Yeh, I'm pretty sure that this kind of debate will lead GOM to think about revising its structure of future tournaments. They're not going to completely ignore the opinions of the community.
|
Stop blaming Gom without thinking about their position.
There are literally no tournament formats that totally exclude useless games. Only Elimination style tournaments achieve this and then it has it's own weakness, where you don't see the breadth of match ups that GOM/Viewers want.
|
I still can't believe they scheduled that game. I was looking forward to it on some level due to the BM rivalry built up. But the moment these guys were both out of the running i stopped caring because the game's importance dropped from 9/10 to zero in my mind. I assumed they weren't going to play it. Both guys should have been eliminated at that point. But no, GOM, in their infinite wisdom decided to force the game to be played.
I've been paying for GSL non stop since season 2 but i didn't pay for this tournament. The format was a huge part of this, it just felt like unimportant show match rubbish. Games for the sake of games, and not for the sake of true ESPORTS competition. The NFL Pro Bowl isn't much better.
I just can't imagine what 'fan' would want to see this game played at that time. Naniwa did me a huge favour by agreeing with me. I can't wait to see them battle under true competitive circumstances and have it actually matter. That match will be HUGE. In PPV terms, MANY BUYS. Because at the end of the day i pay my money to see these players competing at the top of their game to become champion of earth. That is all i care about. Winners. Not losers. This was a battle of losers. No thanks, GOM.
|
8748 Posts
On December 16 2011 12:09 StUfF wrote:
Stop blaming Gom without thinking about their position.
There are literally no tournament formats that totally exclude useless games. Only Elimination style tournaments achieve this and then it has it's own weakness, where you don't see the breadth of match ups that GOM/Viewers want.
You don't mean to say "literally no tournament formats" when you follow it up like that. You know that there are popular tournament formats that don't have useless games but you think that they introduce even worse cons.
MLG's pool play, keeping in mind the extended series rule, is an example of a non-elimination format that makes every game count. Every placement in pool play is significant. And even when a pool play match won't effect a player's placement in the pool, there is a chance that those two players will meet in the championship bracket and play an extended series.
|
On December 16 2011 13:33 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2011 12:09 StUfF wrote:
Stop blaming Gom without thinking about their position.
There are literally no tournament formats that totally exclude useless games. Only Elimination style tournaments achieve this and then it has it's own weakness, where you don't see the breadth of match ups that GOM/Viewers want.
You don't mean to say "literally no tournament formats" when you follow it up like that. You know that there are popular tournament formats that don't have useless games but you think that they introduce even worse cons. MLG's pool play, keeping in mind the extended series rule, is an example of a non-elimination format that makes every game count. Every placement in pool play is significant. And even when a pool play match won't effect a player's placement in the pool, there is a chance that those two players will meet in the championship bracket and play an extended series.
OH SNAP! Liquid Tyler at it again.
I just wanted to quote Tyler :D
Though he brings up a very valid point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
