|
This blog will be relatively short, it's basically just going to point out what I consider to be the biggest flaw in eSports today. The blog will also demonstrate the importance of what kespa brings to the table for eSports.
The problem is quite simply, not enough focus... Have you ever walked into a theater expecting to watch an epic movie, but there are about five main plots going on at the same time and there seems to be no logical flow to any of it. Even if there were, you wouldn't be able to keep up with all 5 of them at once, nor would you want to.
Every other sport out there has one major league and that's pretty much it... These are not hounded for having insufficient content, nor do you have a bunch of people running around trying to get pros for new leagues. It's a simple matter of, people are content with the existing organization, it's well done and easy to follow. If eSports could mount each of it's games behind one organization similarly to what Kespa was to Starcraft: Brood War, everything flows better. It's just right, so to say. What happens in this case is there are a few leagues to watch with a very narrow player focus. What this gives you is more attachment to individual players and, when you get attachment to players, they will bring the viewer ship.
I feel like Valve is going in the right general direction with this in terms of the international being one big tournament rather than many small ones, however, it's not a won battle. They do need something like that, but it has to span most of the year and claim players. Once players are claimed by the organization to only play in events which they are permitted to by organization, then you reach the perfect monopoly for any sport.
I'm expecting people to claim that this would not be in the player's best interest, but anything that gives a solid, uncomplicated foundation to the game will bring in viewers which in the end directly helps the players. It doesn't help the players to have people distracted by the quantity and complexity of the whole thing. Players need to be hyped up by an organization and kept at the top by said organization for as long as humanly possible because that's what brings viewer ships, ties to players or in other words "fan boys".
So please, go back to the drawing boards at your respective organizations, master a good product and claim a monopoly, it's better for everyone.
  
|
I really disagree with this. There were issues with KeSPA, they weren't completely great in all aspects. Also especially in SCII, I love the large amount of leagues and competitions with GOM always being the pinnacle of acheivement. It allows us to see the players so much more and spread so much more wealth around. The issue with BW is that there are a ton of tourneys and leagues, they are just much smaller than that of the IPTL, IPLFC, HSC, MLG, WSC, WCG, etc. I personally like that style a lot more. Thats just my opinion though.
|
Too many people and organizations are still vying for a piece of the pie that the infancy of eSports offers in comparison to others sports. It's a race to the top, and once that happens, then maybe a real governing body can emerge. It's going to take awhile before something like that happens though, if ever.
|
At this point there will be no consolidation since the arena is relatively new. What you're talking about is the natural progression of the "sport," but since it's easier in today's world to run a tournament or host a league, you're going to get a high level of fragmentation, and that consolidation point is far off.
Monopolies on it are easier, yes, but can be easily mismanaged and exploited. Wanna pay $25 to watch even ro64 games? That's what monopolies promise to deliver: anything they want.
How does your analogy to pro sports compare to Soccer and the amount of different leagues that abound for that sport? There's more than one national level league, annual leagues, national tournaments, regional leagues, etc.
|
Honestly, I don't think the massive content overload is as much of a problem as people make it out to be. In my head, there's the GSL, which is awesome, whenever a Dreamhack event runs it's always great, and MLG events are pretty cool. Everything else is sort of a wash of whogivesashit for me. Oh, and TSL should be up there, but #4 clearly didn't live up to the previous 3. In all cases, I'll watch if I happen to catch the stream, but I won't really follow results until the RO8, or day 3 of 3 day events.
|
BW progaming was a sustained local phenomenon in Korea, of course it was bound to have more narrative and consistency, it was far more intimate. SC2 is global, therefore you need all these different leagues in different continents, catering for different demographics in order for it to sustain itself and grow. There are pros and cons to both scenes.
|
While I agree with the fact that there is too much bush leauge bs there and no unity even in SC2 (I won't even touch base on the other games played competitively because that is a completely different sack of potatoes) I would akin SC2 more like the different leagues and divisions of football/soccer. Although, lots of people look at the premiere league as the hottest compared to the rest, which is subjective but I think you get my point. At least the rule sets are in stone.
Yes, at times I wish the SC2 scene had more focus.
Still waiting on the organizers to band together more and say we need to bring it altogether.
On September 29 2012 01:46 FireBlast! wrote:
BW progaming was a sustained local phenomenon in Korea, of course it was bound to have more narrative and consistency, it was far more intimate. SC2 is global, therefore you need all these different leagues in different continents, catering for different demographics in order for it to sustain itself and grow. There are pros and cons to both scenes.
I don't agree at all with this assessment.
It's far to vague to address the intimacy. Korea knew about the other markets in China and globally at the same time.
Localization does help development but that by no means means we cannot have a world tour like other sports like the Formula 1 and so forth.
|
I see where you're coming from but you're comparing eSports too much to regular sporting events. It should be treated more like Golf, or Poker.
Not to mention there ARE multiple leagues for multiple tiers if you look closely enough in most traditional sports.
|
On September 29 2012 04:27 StarStruck wrote:While I agree with the fact that there is too much bush leauge bs there and no unity even in SC2 (I won't even touch base on the other games played competitively because that is a completely different sack of potatoes) I would akin SC2 more like the different leagues and divisions of football/soccer. Although, lots of people look at the premiere league as the hottest compared to the rest, which is subjective but I think you get my point. At least the rule sets are in stone. Yes, at times I wish the SC2 scene had more focus. Still waiting on the organizers to band together more and say we need to bring it altogether. Show nested quote +On September 29 2012 01:46 FireBlast! wrote:
BW progaming was a sustained local phenomenon in Korea, of course it was bound to have more narrative and consistency, it was far more intimate. SC2 is global, therefore you need all these different leagues in different continents, catering for different demographics in order for it to sustain itself and grow. There are pros and cons to both scenes. I don't agree at all with this assessment. It's far to vague to address the intimacy. Korea knew about the other markets in China and globally at the same time. Localization does help development but that by no means means we cannot have a world tour like other sports like the Formula 1 and so forth.
There were no other markets outside of Korea, with the negligible exception of China, for Starleagues. Neither were OnGameNet and MBCGame affluent enough to start expanding their franchises outside of Korea. You are confusing the success of BW with the scale of BW.
You are also confusing industry and community.
People keep fantasising about this idea of a world tour as some solution, but why would MLG, Dreamhack, IGN, NASL, GSL etc give up their stake in a growingly saturated market and compromise their formats so that the audience can find Starcraft easier to follow? WCS is as good as its going to get, for a very long time.
|
On September 29 2012 00:46 Eywa- wrote:
Every other sport out there has one major league and that's pretty much it...
NBA, WNBA
NASCAR, Indy, etc
|
On September 29 2012 04:52 FireBlast! wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2012 04:27 StarStruck wrote:While I agree with the fact that there is too much bush leauge bs there and no unity even in SC2 (I won't even touch base on the other games played competitively because that is a completely different sack of potatoes) I would akin SC2 more like the different leagues and divisions of football/soccer. Although, lots of people look at the premiere league as the hottest compared to the rest, which is subjective but I think you get my point. At least the rule sets are in stone. Yes, at times I wish the SC2 scene had more focus. Still waiting on the organizers to band together more and say we need to bring it altogether. On September 29 2012 01:46 FireBlast! wrote:
BW progaming was a sustained local phenomenon in Korea, of course it was bound to have more narrative and consistency, it was far more intimate. SC2 is global, therefore you need all these different leagues in different continents, catering for different demographics in order for it to sustain itself and grow. There are pros and cons to both scenes. I don't agree at all with this assessment. It's far to vague to address the intimacy. Korea knew about the other markets in China and globally at the same time. Localization does help development but that by no means means we cannot have a world tour like other sports like the Formula 1 and so forth. There were no other markets outside of Korea, with the negligible exception of China, for Starleagues. Neither were OnGameNet and MBCGame affluent enough to start expanding their franchises outside of Korea. You are confusing the success of BW with the scale of BW. You are also confusing industry and community. People keep fantasising about this idea of a world tour as some solution, but why would MLG, Dreamhack, IGN, NASL, GSL etc give up their stake in a growingly saturated market and compromise their formats so that the audience can find Starcraft easier to follow? WCS is as good as its going to get, for a very long time.
Um no I'm not? You know how long it took us to get sponsors for a lot of those international teams?
WCS isn't as good as it's going to get. Not only that, but Blizzard is hanging onto the coattails of every other league, which is laughable. They didn't know how to do it back then and they certainly aren't the go-to guys for it now.
WCS isn't the best we have to offer by any stretch of the imagination. Once again that's only your opinion and more power to you if you think that's the best we have to offer at the moment on the global scale but I don't agree. Just like I'm sure many more don't agree with you either. Maybe some do, but from everything I've seen everyone's on the fence or appreciates/depreciates every other thing on the market today.
There's your saturation.
I prefer quality over quantity myself and how about we try not to be so terribly near-sighted.
I find it hard to believe that you think the WCS is the best thing we have going atm let alone the only thing for a very long time.
|
On September 29 2012 05:35 StarStruck wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2012 04:52 FireBlast! wrote:On September 29 2012 04:27 StarStruck wrote:While I agree with the fact that there is too much bush leauge bs there and no unity even in SC2 (I won't even touch base on the other games played competitively because that is a completely different sack of potatoes) I would akin SC2 more like the different leagues and divisions of football/soccer. Although, lots of people look at the premiere league as the hottest compared to the rest, which is subjective but I think you get my point. At least the rule sets are in stone. Yes, at times I wish the SC2 scene had more focus. Still waiting on the organizers to band together more and say we need to bring it altogether. On September 29 2012 01:46 FireBlast! wrote:
BW progaming was a sustained local phenomenon in Korea, of course it was bound to have more narrative and consistency, it was far more intimate. SC2 is global, therefore you need all these different leagues in different continents, catering for different demographics in order for it to sustain itself and grow. There are pros and cons to both scenes. I don't agree at all with this assessment. It's far to vague to address the intimacy. Korea knew about the other markets in China and globally at the same time. Localization does help development but that by no means means we cannot have a world tour like other sports like the Formula 1 and so forth. There were no other markets outside of Korea, with the negligible exception of China, for Starleagues. Neither were OnGameNet and MBCGame affluent enough to start expanding their franchises outside of Korea. You are confusing the success of BW with the scale of BW. You are also confusing industry and community. People keep fantasising about this idea of a world tour as some solution, but why would MLG, Dreamhack, IGN, NASL, GSL etc give up their stake in a growingly saturated market and compromise their formats so that the audience can find Starcraft easier to follow? WCS is as good as its going to get, for a very long time. Um no I'm not? You know how long it took us to get sponsors for a lot of those international teams? WCS isn't as good as it's going to get. Not only that, but Blizzard is hanging onto the coattails of every other league, which is laughable. They didn't know how to do it back then and they certainly aren't the go-to guys for it now. WCS isn't the best we have to offer by any stretch of the imagination. Once again that's only your opinion and more power to you if you think that's the best we have to offer at the moment on the global scale but I don't agree. Just like I'm sure many more don't agree with you either. Maybe some do, but from everything I've seen everyone's on the fence or appreciates/depreciates every other thing on the market today. There's your saturation. I prefer quality over quantity myself and how about we try not to be so terribly near-sighted. I find it hard to believe that you think the WCS is the best thing we have going atm let alone the only thing for a very long time.
I'm just being pragmatic, there's no need to feel offended because I'm not bought into the idea of eSports as passionately as you are.
|
United States47024 Posts
The problem is that centralization like you're asking for is a lot harder than you're making it out to be. It worked in Korea because geographically, the player pool and teams are fairly centralized. This means you can build centralized leagues/organizations that are accessible to players and teams.
This isn't that easy in an international environment. Teams are too sparse and too spread out. Simply put, games aren't "big" enough outside of China and Korea for you to build centralized organizations like this. You can't build regular leagues (at least, not LAN leagues--which are what really bring the attention) that are accessible to enough of the teams because of the repeated travel expenses of flying teams back and forth. This isn't a problem in Korea because the locations for these leagues are in reasonable traveling distances for the teams already.
On September 29 2012 04:27 StarStruck wrote:
Localization does help development but that by no means means we cannot have a world tour like other sports like the Formula 1 and so forth.
World Tours are build on a foundation of local competition. Making the jump directly to a World Tour-type competition is an incredible gamble.
|
Why do people keep thinking the best model for a non-traditional sport is copying traditional sports?
|
On September 29 2012 05:57 TheYango wrote:The problem is that centralization like you're asking for is a lot harder than you're making it out to be. It worked in Korea because geographically, the player pool and teams are fairly centralized. This means you can build centralized leagues/organizations that are accessible to players and teams. This isn't that easy in an international environment. Teams are too sparse and too spread out. Simply put, games aren't "big" enough outside of China and Korea for you to build centralized organizations like this. You can't build regular leagues (at least, not LAN leagues--which are what really bring the attention) that are accessible to enough of the teams because of the repeated travel expenses of flying teams back and forth. This isn't a problem in Korea because the locations for these leagues are in reasonable traveling distances for the teams already. Show nested quote +On September 29 2012 04:27 StarStruck wrote:
Localization does help development but that by no means means we cannot have a world tour like other sports like the Formula 1 and so forth. World Tours are build on a foundation of local competition. Making the jump directly to a World Tour-type competition is an incredible gamble.
Like owning your own team isn't?
Like what NASL, IPL, etc. where they have been losing money? It's an investment.
Am I missing something here?
o-O
lol
It is no more of a gamble than what we're doing right now. The thing is you have to get everyone on the same page (problem number 1) and have to re-think your branding strategy when it comes to the MLGs, NASLs, IPLs, DH's, etc. etc.
They become the hosts/channels.
List goes on.
To the other guy, I'm not offended at all man. I come to the TL forums to be entertained and entertained I am.
On September 29 2012 06:13 Diamond wrote:
Why do people keep thinking the best model for a non-traditional sport is copying traditional sports?
Who says we have to copy their exact structures? They're merely examples. Keyword here is a more unified community and scene.
I'd certainly like to see more consistency with the viewers and player pools that show up to tournaments under better scheduling.
|
On September 29 2012 06:13 Diamond wrote:
Why do people keep thinking the best model for a non-traditional sport is copying traditional sports?
Because traditional sports have a ridiculously successful business model... Why not copy something who has already laid down proven successful infrastructure?
|
But I like having options.
Also money isn't everything.
|
On September 29 2012 07:26 Zombo Joe wrote:
But I like having options.
Also money isn't everything.
Money is the only thing.
|
On September 29 2012 07:26 Eywa- wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2012 06:13 Diamond wrote:
Why do people keep thinking the best model for a non-traditional sport is copying traditional sports? Because traditional sports have a ridiculously successful business model... Why not copy something who has already laid down proven successful infrastructure?
Yet MMA is the fastest growing sport in the world. They are successful because they are games that have been around 100+ years and played professionally all that time. None of which apply to E-Sports.
Stop trying to copy shit that's 100+ years old, copy the new hot shit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
