|
Russian Federation405 Posts
On April 26 2010 07:26 Waxangel wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2010 07:21 nonduc wrote:On April 26 2010 07:12 Waxangel wrote:On April 26 2010 06:33 nonduc wrote:On April 26 2010 06:06 Waxangel wrote:I think people should keep something very important things in mind when they assess what KeSPA has done for e-sports. OnGameNet and MBCGame were running Starcraft tourneys perfectly fine for four years before KeSPA came into place. All of the early pioneering and laying of the foundations was done by the TV companies, the very early Pro-game teams (no big corporate sponsors for most of them, many of them were really quite poor), and the progamers who stuck through it when there was barely any money. After it became apparent that E-sports had a chance of having a viable mid-term future, KeSPA came into play. KeSPA is a strange organization by the way, it's more accurate to call it the "E-sports Team OWNER's association," as it's controlled by the interests of the pro-game teams (the NFL, MLB, NBA are ostensible different, tho one could say they cater to the owners to a fault). KeSPA's primary creation is the pro-league, not exactly the most original idea, but part of their vision to make Starcraft a team centric sport. The only league they actually operate is the proleague, the OSL and MSL are just tournaments they officially recognize. Five day proleague weeks is part of their strategy to make proleague the important league (and in many ways it is). KeSPA's gutsiest and most reckless move was when they tried to sell the broadcasting rights of their Starcraft leagues. Essentially, they were making OGN and MBCGame pay to broadcast the content they had created without KeSPA's help years ago, and without any design to pay Blizzard any royalties for the direct profit they would be making off their game. Anyway, some kind of organization was always going to be needed, but KeSPA is a very incompetent and selfish incarnation  You are wrong. KeSPA started back in 2000 — in August 2001 was the first KPGA Tour and the first KPGA ranking was published in November 2001. (KeSPA was named KPGA up to 2002.) KPGA can barely be called the previous incarnation of KeSPA, enough so that in practice it's irrelevant. In 2002 Korea Pro Game Association (KPGA) was just renamed in Korea e-Sports Association (KeSPA).  I did say in practice :o
Is KeSPA rankins started in November 2001 (when KeSPA was named as KPGA)?
Yes, it is.
Your “in practice” is irrelevant to practice. In practice KPGA and KeSPA was the same thing with two names.
|
United States33571 Posts
On April 26 2010 07:33 nonduc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2010 07:26 Waxangel wrote:On April 26 2010 07:21 nonduc wrote:On April 26 2010 07:12 Waxangel wrote:On April 26 2010 06:33 nonduc wrote:On April 26 2010 06:06 Waxangel wrote:I think people should keep something very important things in mind when they assess what KeSPA has done for e-sports. OnGameNet and MBCGame were running Starcraft tourneys perfectly fine for four years before KeSPA came into place. All of the early pioneering and laying of the foundations was done by the TV companies, the very early Pro-game teams (no big corporate sponsors for most of them, many of them were really quite poor), and the progamers who stuck through it when there was barely any money. After it became apparent that E-sports had a chance of having a viable mid-term future, KeSPA came into play. KeSPA is a strange organization by the way, it's more accurate to call it the "E-sports Team OWNER's association," as it's controlled by the interests of the pro-game teams (the NFL, MLB, NBA are ostensible different, tho one could say they cater to the owners to a fault). KeSPA's primary creation is the pro-league, not exactly the most original idea, but part of their vision to make Starcraft a team centric sport. The only league they actually operate is the proleague, the OSL and MSL are just tournaments they officially recognize. Five day proleague weeks is part of their strategy to make proleague the important league (and in many ways it is). KeSPA's gutsiest and most reckless move was when they tried to sell the broadcasting rights of their Starcraft leagues. Essentially, they were making OGN and MBCGame pay to broadcast the content they had created without KeSPA's help years ago, and without any design to pay Blizzard any royalties for the direct profit they would be making off their game. Anyway, some kind of organization was always going to be needed, but KeSPA is a very incompetent and selfish incarnation You are wrong. KeSPA started back in 2000 — in August 2001 was the first KPGA Tour and the first KPGA ranking was published in November 2001. (KeSPA was named KPGA up to 2002.) KPGA can barely be called the previous incarnation of KeSPA, enough so that in practice it's irrelevant. In 2002 Korea Pro Game Association (KPGA) was just renamed in Korea e-Sports Association (KeSPA). I did say in practice :o Is KeSPA rankins started in November 2001 (when KeSPA was named as KPGA)? Yes, it is. Your “in practice” is irrelevant to practice. In practice KPGA and KeSPA was the same thing with two names.
Er, if I reword it, then it would be that they're the same in theory, but very different in effect.
|
Russian Federation405 Posts
On April 26 2010 07:35 Waxangel wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2010 07:33 nonduc wrote:On April 26 2010 07:26 Waxangel wrote:On April 26 2010 07:21 nonduc wrote:On April 26 2010 07:12 Waxangel wrote:On April 26 2010 06:33 nonduc wrote:On April 26 2010 06:06 Waxangel wrote:I think people should keep something very important things in mind when they assess what KeSPA has done for e-sports. OnGameNet and MBCGame were running Starcraft tourneys perfectly fine for four years before KeSPA came into place. All of the early pioneering and laying of the foundations was done by the TV companies, the very early Pro-game teams (no big corporate sponsors for most of them, many of them were really quite poor), and the progamers who stuck through it when there was barely any money. After it became apparent that E-sports had a chance of having a viable mid-term future, KeSPA came into play. KeSPA is a strange organization by the way, it's more accurate to call it the "E-sports Team OWNER's association," as it's controlled by the interests of the pro-game teams (the NFL, MLB, NBA are ostensible different, tho one could say they cater to the owners to a fault). KeSPA's primary creation is the pro-league, not exactly the most original idea, but part of their vision to make Starcraft a team centric sport. The only league they actually operate is the proleague, the OSL and MSL are just tournaments they officially recognize. Five day proleague weeks is part of their strategy to make proleague the important league (and in many ways it is). KeSPA's gutsiest and most reckless move was when they tried to sell the broadcasting rights of their Starcraft leagues. Essentially, they were making OGN and MBCGame pay to broadcast the content they had created without KeSPA's help years ago, and without any design to pay Blizzard any royalties for the direct profit they would be making off their game. Anyway, some kind of organization was always going to be needed, but KeSPA is a very incompetent and selfish incarnation You are wrong. KeSPA started back in 2000 — in August 2001 was the first KPGA Tour and the first KPGA ranking was published in November 2001. (KeSPA was named KPGA up to 2002.) KPGA can barely be called the previous incarnation of KeSPA, enough so that in practice it's irrelevant. In 2002 Korea Pro Game Association (KPGA) was just renamed in Korea e-Sports Association (KeSPA). I did say in practice :o Is KeSPA rankins started in November 2001 (when KeSPA was named as KPGA)? Yes, it is. Your “in practice” is irrelevant to practice. In practice KPGA and KeSPA was the same thing with two names. Er, if I reword it, then it would be that they're the same in theory, but very different in effect.
In your last post your wording is bad too. The Association has a long history with many achievements and also failures — there is no “the Association in theory” and no “the Association in effect”.
|
On April 26 2010 07:28 nimoraca wrote:
What I really wanted to say is, IF Adobe was requesting such a thing in their EULA, no one would ever use Photoshop to create something of commercial value. That is the same thing that will happen to SC2 if Blizzard doesn't back off.
Who would even think about organizing a league, paying the players, bringing the sponsors, bringing the spectators, paying Blizzard. taking all the risks and in the end, not being the owner of the games played.
This exactly, Blizzard wants the money from esports but they want someone else (KeSPA/OGN/MBC) to take the risks associated. If Blizzard wants money from esports and wants esports to be a success then fine, why don't they organise it instead? What Blizzard wants is a zero risk gamble at making a huge amount of money. If KeSPA signs the contracts and starts organising SC2 leagues then SC2 flops they will lose huge amounts of money whereas Blizzard loses nothing. If SC2 is a success they will make heaps of money from royalties for doing nothing to help.
Blizzard's terms are a complete trap.
Although there seems to be a lot of hate towards KeSPA on TL (mostly for good reason but some unfounded) people have to see that it is Blizzard in the wrong and it is Blizzard being greedy in this case. Kespa won't agree to ridiculous terms that are designed to screw them over. I don't think any organisation would if they were in the same position.
No one else has the power to stand up to Blizzard being unreasonable so we should be glad that KeSPA are.
|
On April 26 2010 08:00 vek wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2010 07:28 nimoraca wrote:
What I really wanted to say is, IF Adobe was requesting such a thing in their EULA, no one would ever use Photoshop to create something of commercial value. That is the same thing that will happen to SC2 if Blizzard doesn't back off.
Who would even think about organizing a league, paying the players, bringing the sponsors, bringing the spectators, paying Blizzard. taking all the risks and in the end, not being the owner of the games played. This exactly, Blizzard wants the money from esports but they want someone else (KeSPA/OGN/MBC) to take the risks associated. If Blizzard wants money from esports and wants esports to be a success then fine, why don't they organise it instead? What Blizzard wants is a zero risk gamble at making a huge amount of money. If KeSPA signs the contracts and starts organising SC2 leagues then SC2 flops they will lose huge amounts of money whereas Blizzard loses nothing. If SC2 is a success they will make heaps of money from royalties for doing nothing to help.
But this is the same as a TV show or movie using licensed music in their show. Even if the TV show flops at the ratings, they still have to pay the record companies for use of their music.
If you think of SC as simply a tool like Adobe Photoshop, that would be different, but I'm not sure that you can. For the Photoshop example, you only see the end product, which has no direct connection to Photoshop itself, and could've been created with any other editing program. I think that if a movie ACTUALLY showed a guy using Adobe Photoshop on their computer and editing photos with it, they'd still have to pay Adobe for using their trademark.
|
On April 26 2010 08:08 teamsolid wrote:
But this is the same as a TV show or movie using licensed music in their show. Even if the TV show flops at the ratings, they still have to pay the record companies for use of their music.
If you think of SC as simply a tool like Adobe Photoshop, that would be different, but I'm not sure that you can. For the Photoshop example, you only see the end product, which has no direct connection to Photoshop itself, and could've been created with any other editing program. I think that if a movie ACTUALLY showed a guy using Adobe Photoshop on their computer and editing photos with it, they'd still have to pay Adobe for using their trademark.
I sort of get what you mean but that is called product placement and companies pay millions of dollars for their product to be seen being used in movies because it encourages people to buy that product. That is exactly what happens with Starcraft but Blizzard gets it for free. Now they decide they want more money (not just from the extra product sales). They are just being far too greedy.
|
On April 26 2010 08:08 teamsolid wrote:
I think that if a movie ACTUALLY showed a guy using Adobe Photoshop on their computer and editing photos with it, they'd still have to pay Adobe for using their trademark.
You mean Adobe would pay them, right?
|
"If SC2 is a success they will make heaps of money from royalties for doing nothing to help."
They've built the game, if it's being used(Shown even) to make heaps of money(And sc1 is, a royalties wouldn't actually kill Kespa's profit.) they are entitled to a part of it if they want it. Makes sense, no?
Oh wait, Teamsolid already said that... I feel repetitive now, but I'll post anyway.
"I think that if a movie ACTUALLY showed a guy using Adobe Photoshop on their computer and editing photos with it, they'd still have to pay Adobe for using their trademark."
Yeap, they would have to, profiting from a work of art made with a tool is not the same as showing the tool a profiting from it.
|
how can blizzard "stop" korean esports?
wouldnt the american military have to attack south korea and stop them from running tournaments if the korean government refused to force the tournaments to cease?
|
Sounds similar to private medicine care in the United States up until now.
Ultimately its the people that suffer, while Blizzard continues to feed their wallets.
|
On April 26 2010 08:38 roymarthyup wrote:
how can blizzard "stop" korean esports?
wouldnt the american military have to attack south korea and stop them from running tournaments if the korean government refused to force the tournaments to cease?
Oh God yes, please take down North Korea also in one big swoop too.
On more serious note, there are intellectual copyright debacle and basically KeSPA's inability to host SC2 tournaments will generally damage fledging SC1 industry as well.
|
Blizzard's already alienating every person on the planet who has a slow connection with it's no LAN option (see all of China), and now wants to claim a piece of the bw scene in Korea that it didn't create...
This is like shooting yourself in the foot, big mistake.
All this is going to do is motivate people even more to pirate SC2. How many lost dollars is that going to be??
|
On April 26 2010 08:37 Auronz wrote:
They've built the game, if it's being used(Shown even) to make heaps of money(And sc1 is, a royalties wouldn't actually kill Kespa's profit.) they are entitled to a part of it if they want it. Makes sense, no?
They made money from selling the game. In regards to royalties from televised matches I would say they are not entitled to a part of what they did not help create. So no, it doesn't make sense. Especially when (afaik) KeSPA does not make all that much money. The sponsers do when people buy their products after seeing their team win, the same way Blizzard makes money when people see Starcraft being played by pros and they think hey I want to do that too.
All this rubbish about royalties will only hurt Starcraft which is sad.
|
This together with the useless ladder system has killed alot of my interest in the SCII esports game.
I hope some russians wake up and make another TheAbyss.
|
Yeah I just don't understand the point of divisions and the fact the ladder is not global... is it to make people feel good about being 3rd in random platinum division #27 rather than 3074th in the world? So many decisions just make no sense to me...
I'll join you in hoping for iCCup 2.0 =D
|
K, here's the deal right. If you want ESPORTS to be a small quirky section of the community aspect of a game - you do what Blizz does.
A pretty good example is WoW. Several million players who are involved in competitive arena play. The interest-group is clearly there. The money is clearly there. So - with Blizzard at the wheel, what do they do? They charge a HUGE fee for hosting tournaments which has caused MLG to buckle and ESL to severely cut down their WoW coverage. The WoW stream of the MLG events was by far the most watched and most popular but Blizz was all like "we'll do this our way".
If this localized ladder bullshit sounds familiar - it's because it is. Sure there were no divisions on the WoW tournament realms, but it was the exact same format - online ladder, localized lan qualifiers, finals at Blizzcon. In Blizzards mind - that's EXACTLY where they want ESPORTS to be at. I think the proceeds from the ladder fees alone covered the cash prizes by far and Blizzcon basically pays for itself since demand for tickets outweighs supply.
Let's face it - in an ideal world, Blizzard would pour money into competitive play rather than into maintaining servers for casuals to play their few weekly games. In this world - the real one, Blizzard is not what ESPORTs need at the wheel. As a game developer, Blizz does fine - but in order to inspire growth of the ESPORT scene - we need some greedy men in suits with old-money connections and a proper business degree.
Blizzard wants to keep ESPORTs around as a self-promotion tool, a toothless pet dog that wags its tail every now and then and shows the world that their games are actually connecting people in RL. The most we can hope for is a GOM TV season like 'The Named' featuring StarCraft II instead of WoW which a few thousand foreigners will loyally watch. Korea won't care - for them it will be like coming from a World Cup final to bushleague.
Blizzard may be a game developer, but they sure aren't a community developer. Battle.net 2.0? More like DivideTheWorldIntoManagableSlices 2.0. In this case i'll have to side with Gordon Gekko - "Greed is Good.". However when greed turns into a controlling monopoly - everything just goes straight into the drain.
|
I don't know which to support, KeSPA or Blizzard. It feels like KeSPA is the lesser of two evils tho, and it also feels like there's the money aspect as always holding e-sports back.
|
Its extreamly delicate issue. Without korean bw scene, starcraft would died out long time ago and there wouldnt have been as much hype for sc2 as it is. I understand that blizzard wants the rights to their own product, but it just feels like the blizzard who made starcraft 1 is gone. The ones who goes after kespa now is high on WoW money and just want more, and dont care if starcraft would been forgotten many years ago if it had not been for korean scene.
|
On April 26 2010 08:00 vek wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2010 07:28 nimoraca wrote:
What I really wanted to say is, IF Adobe was requesting such a thing in their EULA, no one would ever use Photoshop to create something of commercial value. That is the same thing that will happen to SC2 if Blizzard doesn't back off.
Who would even think about organizing a league, paying the players, bringing the sponsors, bringing the spectators, paying Blizzard. taking all the risks and in the end, not being the owner of the games played. This exactly, Blizzard wants the money from esports but they want someone else (KeSPA/OGN/MBC) to take the risks associated. If Blizzard wants money from esports and wants esports to be a success then fine, why don't they organise it instead? What Blizzard wants is a zero risk gamble at making a huge amount of money. If KeSPA signs the contracts and starts organising SC2 leagues then SC2 flops they will lose huge amounts of money whereas Blizzard loses nothing. If SC2 is a success they will make heaps of money from royalties for doing nothing to help. Blizzard's terms are a complete trap. Although there seems to be a lot of hate towards KeSPA on TL (mostly for good reason but some unfounded) people have to see that it is Blizzard in the wrong and it is Blizzard being greedy in this case. Kespa won't agree to ridiculous terms that are designed to screw them over. I don't think any organisation would if they were in the same position. No one else has the power to stand up to Blizzard being unreasonable so we should be glad that KeSPA are.
with the amount of efforts/resources they've put into the development of the game, yea they have every right to decide what their intellectual property will be used for, no one really knew how much royalty fees would blizz actually charge, i don't know where u guys get the idea of evil blizzard will demand HUGE amount of cash for people to organise a tournaments. will u actually explain y the hell is the term offered by blizzard to kespa anywhere near unreasonable?
i wonder if u bunch of people that calls blizzard "greedy" actually knows blizzard, the game isn't even OUT yet, of course they aren't organising any tournaments for SC2 YET, they have made it pretty clear that they will push SC2 towards a golbal E-Sports development...
|
United States33571 Posts
On April 26 2010 07:54 nonduc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2010 07:35 Waxangel wrote:On April 26 2010 07:33 nonduc wrote:On April 26 2010 07:26 Waxangel wrote:On April 26 2010 07:21 nonduc wrote:On April 26 2010 07:12 Waxangel wrote:On April 26 2010 06:33 nonduc wrote:On April 26 2010 06:06 Waxangel wrote:I think people should keep something very important things in mind when they assess what KeSPA has done for e-sports. OnGameNet and MBCGame were running Starcraft tourneys perfectly fine for four years before KeSPA came into place. All of the early pioneering and laying of the foundations was done by the TV companies, the very early Pro-game teams (no big corporate sponsors for most of them, many of them were really quite poor), and the progamers who stuck through it when there was barely any money. After it became apparent that E-sports had a chance of having a viable mid-term future, KeSPA came into play. KeSPA is a strange organization by the way, it's more accurate to call it the "E-sports Team OWNER's association," as it's controlled by the interests of the pro-game teams (the NFL, MLB, NBA are ostensible different, tho one could say they cater to the owners to a fault). KeSPA's primary creation is the pro-league, not exactly the most original idea, but part of their vision to make Starcraft a team centric sport. The only league they actually operate is the proleague, the OSL and MSL are just tournaments they officially recognize. Five day proleague weeks is part of their strategy to make proleague the important league (and in many ways it is). KeSPA's gutsiest and most reckless move was when they tried to sell the broadcasting rights of their Starcraft leagues. Essentially, they were making OGN and MBCGame pay to broadcast the content they had created without KeSPA's help years ago, and without any design to pay Blizzard any royalties for the direct profit they would be making off their game. Anyway, some kind of organization was always going to be needed, but KeSPA is a very incompetent and selfish incarnation You are wrong. KeSPA started back in 2000 — in August 2001 was the first KPGA Tour and the first KPGA ranking was published in November 2001. (KeSPA was named KPGA up to 2002.) KPGA can barely be called the previous incarnation of KeSPA, enough so that in practice it's irrelevant. In 2002 Korea Pro Game Association (KPGA) was just renamed in Korea e-Sports Association (KeSPA). I did say in practice :o Is KeSPA rankins started in November 2001 (when KeSPA was named as KPGA)? Yes, it is. Your “in practice” is irrelevant to practice. In practice KPGA and KeSPA was the same thing with two names. Er, if I reword it, then it would be that they're the same in theory, but very different in effect. In your last post your wording is bad too. The Association has a long history with many achievements and also failures — there is no “the Association in theory” and no “the Association in effect”.
No, in theory they would KPGA and KeSPA are the same organization since the founding. In effect, early KPGA was a small organization that lent its name to gembc/mbcgame who was looking for a name to lend itself legitimacy, although it did perform the function of handing out progaming licenses from that early date. KeSPA after the chair passed to SKTelecom is the organization that started pro-league and represented the team owner's interests almost exclusively, while trying to sell OGN and MBCGame the rights to broadcast their own product.
Whatever, the semantics don't interest me as long as you seem to get my point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
