|
On September 09 2010 08:40 drixta wrote:
Just a note I'd like to add.
All those accusations about Gretech and Blizzard want to eliminate proteam scene are false.
If you spend a little bit of time looking at GSL ladder. Over 80% of the competitors are from proteam such as Prime, Ogs, Werra, Nex...
Some of them are not even pro teams but clans, and you cant compare those names to the big pro teams in BW, only when GSL or whatever tourney of SC2 in Korea has enough viewers there will be real pro teams (of course if Blizz/Gretech are interested in that kind of format), so in conclusion the actual (real) pro team scene indeed will be erase for BW.
|
SC2 is the future of esports, good riddance to Kespa's useless organization. Korea will be a much better place when every friggin event dosnt need to be controlled bt Kespa.
|
On September 10 2010 01:43 IamAnton wrote:
SC2 is the future of esports, good riddance to Kespa's useless organization. Korea will be a much better place when every friggin event dosnt need to be controlled bt Kespa.
yeah! korea will be much a better place when blizzard controlls the events. and korea will be much a better place when they pay to blizz for every tournament they hold.
not to forget stupid pro gamer salary... korea will be much a better place when pro gamers can only earn money by winning individual leagues.
|
On September 10 2010 01:08 palexhur wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2010 08:40 drixta wrote:
Just a note I'd like to add.
All those accusations about Gretech and Blizzard want to eliminate proteam scene are false.
If you spend a little bit of time looking at GSL ladder. Over 80% of the competitors are from proteam such as Prime, Ogs, Werra, Nex... Some of them are not even pro teams but clans, and you cant compare those names to the big pro teams in BW, only when GSL or whatever tourney of SC2 in Korea has enough viewers there will be real pro teams (of course if Blizz/Gretech are interested in that kind of format), so in conclusion the actual (real) pro team scene indeed will be erase for BW.
Maybe it might be better to say that Gretech and Blizzard wants to eliminate corporate teams. Sponsored teams = okay, teams owned by companies = not okay. Corporations that own teams are not heavily invested into progaming, so they are less hurt by ditching leagues. Sponsored teams on the other hand...
|
The more I think about this whole thing the less I understand why people are pro-Gretech/Blizz. Sure, there are business reasons for Gretech to be doing what they're doing and sure KeSPA isn't exactly a saint in this issue, I'm certain that there can be good arguments (legal or otherwise) for both sides of this issue. But as a gamer and as someone who likes to watch Brood War and Proleague how could you possibly want Gretech/Blizzard to win the inevitable lawsuit? For starters, if they win Proleague is gone and without Proleague the Brood War pro teams are gone. This may not spell the end of Brood War, but it will drastically change it and unless it's continued to be supported with more money than StarCraft II the players will not stick around Brood War for long. Why would you play a game that's harder, requires more practice, and pays less than this other game over here?
But, let's assume you don't care about Brood War, Proleague, the pro teams, and you don't even know who Kim Taek Yong is. If Gretech/Blizzard wins this case it will establish a precedent not just in South Korea but likely the rest of the world. Game companies will be able to sell broadcasting rights to certain companies and restrict others from broadcasting. Imagine what will happen if this case is won by Gretech/Blizz for just a second. Let's say that Bungie decides it wants to sell the broadcasting rights to Halo (though why anyone would want to watch pro Halo is beyond me). Assume that ESPN decides they want to buy those broadcasting rights, now MLG can no longer broadcast Halo 3 unless they negotiate with ESPN who decide they won't want to let MLG broadcast Halo 3. While this may be ok for some people, because after all who cares about MLG, what happens even later when ESPN decides that after a year of broadcasting Halo 3 they don't get the viewers they wanted and stopped having a Halo 3 league. What do they do? Sell the broadcasting rights to someone like MLG? They could do that, but why would they as they certainly won't get anywhere near as much as they paid for to get the rights to broadcast the game. So, in all likelihood they'll hang onto the rights and maybe try again for when Halo Reach comes out effectively killing the Halo 3 pro scene. That may be a bleak scenario but I can't help but think that if Blizz/Gretech wins this case it'll just open up a pandora's box of professional gaming.
Beyond that, I think the court's decision will largely be impacted on whether or not they decide if the game is just software and that things people make are their property. Similar to how just because I make an image in Adobe Photoshop doesn't mean that Adobe owns my image.
|
[B]
But, let's assume you don't care about Brood War, Proleague, the pro teams, and you don't even know who Kim Taek Yong is.
Bis-who?
|
On September 10 2010 01:43 IamAnton wrote:
SC2 is the future of esports, good riddance to Kespa's useless organization. Korea will be a much better place when every friggin event dosnt need to be controlled bt Kespa.
No, an improved version of SC2 (without big balance issues, with LAN support, with new exciting adjustment to game-play, and without much control from a company) is the future of e-sport.
Korean people gonna stick with their beloved BW until that version of SC2 comes out imo.
And the mods have already said that those who make posts with pure hate on Kespa/Blizzard/Gretech and no arguments like this would be "dealt" with, hopefully they will do their duty.
|
But, let's assume you don't care about Brood War, Proleague, the pro teams, and you don't even know who Kim Taek Yong is. If Gretech/Blizzard wins this case it will establish a precedent not just in South Korea but likely the rest of the world. Game companies will be able to sell broadcasting rights to certain companies and restrict others from broadcasting.
You do realize this is the way every other major sport works? Every time you turn on the NBA, MLB, NFL, NHL, EPL, Tennis, Golf, or any other sport, the broadcaster you're watching paid for those rights.
And I don't get why teams are so necessary to a pro scene. What other individual sport/game has arbitrarily created teams? Roger Federer doesn't play for a team. Except when representing the US, Tiger Woods or Phil Mickelson don't play for teams. Poker players don't play for teams. Manny Pacquaio doesn't box for a team, and neither does Floyd Mayweather.
Teams in individual sports don't really make that much sense. Players in individual sports make money through prize winning, through sponsorship, and in some cases (as in boxing) through a cut of the proceeds of ticket and pay-per-view sales.
Can you name a single other sport that is structured the way Brood War is structured?
|
|
|
On September 10 2010 06:35 awesomoecalypse wrote:Show nested quote +But, let's assume you don't care about Brood War, Proleague, the pro teams, and you don't even know who Kim Taek Yong is. If Gretech/Blizzard wins this case it will establish a precedent not just in South Korea but likely the rest of the world. Game companies will be able to sell broadcasting rights to certain companies and restrict others from broadcasting. You do realize this is the way every other major sport works? Every time you turn on the NBA, MLB, NFL, NHL, EPL, Tennis, Golf, or any other sport, the broadcaster you're watching paid for those rights. And I don't get why teams are so necessary to a pro scene. What other individual sport/game has arbitrarily created teams? Roger Federer doesn't play for a team. Except when representing the US, Tiger Woods or Phil Mickelson don't play for teams. Poker players don't play for teams. Manny Pacquaio doesn't box for a team, and neither does Floyd Mayweather. Teams in individual sports don't really make that much sense. Players in individual sports make money through prize winning, through sponsorship, and in some cases (as in boxing) through a cut of the proceeds of ticket and pay-per-view sales. Can you name a single other sport that is structured the way Brood War is structured?
NASCAR. its setup almost exactly the same
|
All this still makes me extremely nervous.
|
On September 10 2010 06:35 awesomoecalypse wrote:
You do realize this is the way every other major sport works? Every time you turn on the NBA, MLB, NFL, NHL, EPL, Tennis, Golf, or any other sport, the broadcaster you're watching paid for those rights.
Yes, but who paid who, ABC paid NBA. This is like OGN paying KeSPA. There is no counterpart of Blizzard here.
And I don't get why teams are so necessary to a pro scene. What other individual sport/game has arbitrarily created teams? Roger Federer doesn't play for a team. Except when representing the US, Tiger Woods or Phil Mickelson don't play for teams. Poker players don't play for teams. Manny Pacquaio doesn't box for a team, and neither does Floyd Mayweather.
Teams in individual sports don't really make that much sense. Players in individual sports make money through prize winning, through sponsorship, and in some cases (as in boxing) through a cut of the proceeds of ticket and pay-per-view sales.
Can you name a single other sport that is structured the way Brood War is structured?
You can not compare starcraft to tennis, poker or Golf. This is e-sports, the proscene is too small compared to tennis, golf, poker, etc. There is too little money involved here. So people have to stick together for more people to get paid. Only in this way, more people can be involved, and then form a sport.
Tennis's scenario can be applied if and only if top SC player like Flash can make as much money as Federer just with individual league prizes. And that means SC individual league's prizes have to be raised 300 times more. Do you think this is possible in 5 years?
Can you name one individual sport which does not have teams make similar amount of money like SC?
|
Well I understand that Kespa almost killed GomTV with the cancellation of the last tournament due to lack of interest caused by big names boycotting it?
|
On September 10 2010 06:35 awesomoecalypse wrote:Show nested quote +But, let's assume you don't care about Brood War, Proleague, the pro teams, and you don't even know who Kim Taek Yong is. If Gretech/Blizzard wins this case it will establish a precedent not just in South Korea but likely the rest of the world. Game companies will be able to sell broadcasting rights to certain companies and restrict others from broadcasting. You do realize this is the way every other major sport works? Every time you turn on the NBA, MLB, NFL, NHL, EPL, Tennis, Golf, or any other sport, the broadcaster you're watching paid for those rights. And I don't get why teams are so necessary to a pro scene. What other individual sport/game has arbitrarily created teams? Roger Federer doesn't play for a team. Except when representing the US, Tiger Woods or Phil Mickelson don't play for teams. Poker players don't play for teams. Manny Pacquaio doesn't box for a team, and neither does Floyd Mayweather. Teams in individual sports don't really make that much sense. Players in individual sports make money through prize winning, through sponsorship, and in some cases (as in boxing) through a cut of the proceeds of ticket and pay-per-view sales. Can you name a single other sport that is structured the way Brood War is structured?
You do realise that there's an enormous difference in the amount of money and tournaments for these things?
|
On September 10 2010 06:55 Zholistic wrote:
Well I understand that Kespa almost killed GomTV with the cancellation of the last tournament due to lack of interest caused by big names boycotting it?
So... Acti-Blizz/Gretech is "evil" (or at least vindictive and/or spiteful) and acting irrationally instead of businessminded? And KeSPA are idiots for biting the hand that feeds them?
If that's what I have to choose from then "neither of them" is beginning to sound better and better.
|
On September 10 2010 06:50 hydraden wrote:
You can not compare starcraft to tennis, poker or Golf.
This is e-sports, the scene is too small compared to tennis, golf, poker, etc.
There is too little money involved here.
So people have to stick together for more people to get paid.
Only in this way, more people can be involved, and then form a sport.
Tennis's scenario can be applied if and only if top SC player like Flash can make as much money as Federer just with individual league prizes.
And that means SC individual league's prizes have to be raised 300 times more.
You are 100% right, First: e-sports dont have the massive audience that tennis or golf have and even the target segment of the market is different, so you are running a league with a very limited budget. Second: if you dont have proteams you hurt a stable enviroment that allows: having more than 5? S-Class players winning each tourney and all the money, develop a really excel skill cap by having practice partners. and last: having proteams allow to have more new skilled players into the scene (B-teamers), so it can be feed constantly. People who is against this model is against the only model in a RTS game that has proven to be succesful (and it is struggling). How much a Kespa team spend in total for one year? USD 1MM, 500k, more?, any of you really thinks that 11 companies are going to spend that amount of money sponsoring a solo man tourney without any asocciation to the brand name but some logos?, that is not even realistic.
|
You do realise that there's an enormous difference in the amount of money and tournaments for these things?
10 years ago, essentially nobody gave a shit about Poker. Once per year it would get a quick recap on the friggin Discovery Channel. If they were playing for "big money", it was purely because there was an expensive buy-in--in other words, the vast majority of poker players at the world series were losing money.
Did they get together and say, "hey guys, we should all form arbitrary teams so we can all make a decent living doing this?" No. They recognized that the only ones who "deserved" money were the ones who won something.
Did that attitude stop poker from taking off? Not at all. When networks figured out how to effectively broadcast it, and a few dramatic personalities brought some liveliness to the game, the combination of high stakes and human drama made it popular, and the rest is history. Of course, to this day, there are no poker player "teams", and no expectation that people who aren't winning deserve a cut. If you win, you make a shitload, if you lose, you really lose. Thats just the way it works.
E-sports and poker are not that dissimilar, except that games like BW and SC2 are more fun to watch than poker. If poker could take off due to a combination of human drama and effective broadcasting/promotion, there's no reason e-sports can't as well. Whether there are teams, or not.
|
On September 10 2010 07:16 awesomoecalypse wrote:Show nested quote +You do realise that there's an enormous difference in the amount of money and tournaments for these things? 10 years ago, essentially nobody gave a shit about Poker. Once per year it would get a quick recap on the friggin Discovery Channel. If they were playing for "big money", it was purely because there was an expensive buy-in--in other words, the vast majority of poker players at the world series were losing money. Did they get together and say, "hey guys, we should all form arbitrary teams so we can all make a decent living doing this?" No. They recognized that the only ones who "deserved" money were the ones who won something. Did that attitude stop poker from taking off? Not at all. When networks figured out how to effectively broadcast it, and a few dramatic personalities brought some liveliness to the game, the combination of high stakes and human drama made it popular, and the rest is history. Of course, to this day, there are no poker player "teams", and no expectation that people who aren't winning deserve a cut. If you win, you make a shitload, if you lose, you really lose. Thats just the way it works. E-sports and poker are not that dissimilar, except that games like BW and SC2 are more fun to watch than poker. If poker could take off due to a combination of human drama and effective broadcasting/promotion, there's no reason e-sports can't as well. Whether there are teams, or not.
This actually gives me the most hope of any assessment I've seen so far. I would still like to see Gretech/Blizzard actively support the formation of an SC2 proleague, but I'd definitely settle for the poker model.
|
On September 10 2010 07:16 awesomoecalypse wrote:Show nested quote +You do realise that there's an enormous difference in the amount of money and tournaments for these things? 10 years ago, essentially nobody gave a shit about Poker. Once per year it would get a quick recap on the friggin Discovery Channel. If they were playing for "big money", it was purely because there was an expensive buy-in--in other words, the vast majority of poker players at the world series were losing money. Did they get together and say, "hey guys, we should all form arbitrary teams so we can all make a decent living doing this?" No. They recognized that the only ones who "deserved" money were the ones who won something. Did that attitude stop poker from taking off? Not at all. When networks figured out how to effectively broadcast it, and a few dramatic personalities brought some liveliness to the game, the combination of high stakes and human drama made it popular, and the rest is history. Of course, to this day, there are no poker player "teams", and no expectation that people who aren't winning deserve a cut. If you win, you make a shitload, if you lose, you really lose. Thats just the way it works. E-sports and poker are not that dissimilar, except that games like BW and SC2 are more fun to watch than poker. If poker could take off due to a combination of human drama and effective broadcasting/promotion, there's no reason e-sports can't as well. Whether there are teams, or not.
So what would be your magical way to effectively broadcast SC?, and you are talking about korean SC players you cant expect dramatic personalities. If you recipe for succes is that, tell me then why in the US where are the most advanced broadcasting networks, where every year they add something new to see in the NFL and every sport, where everything is about Drama, even if a cat is stuck in a tree, SC is not a succesful e-sport?.
|
On September 10 2010 07:16 awesomoecalypse wrote:Show nested quote +You do realise that there's an enormous difference in the amount of money and tournaments for these things? 10 years ago, essentially nobody gave a shit about Poker. Once per year it would get a quick recap on the friggin Discovery Channel. If they were playing for "big money", it was purely because there was an expensive buy-in--in other words, the vast majority of poker players at the world series were losing money. Did they get together and say, "hey guys, we should all form arbitrary teams so we can all make a decent living doing this?" No. They recognized that the only ones who "deserved" money were the ones who won something. Did that attitude stop poker from taking off? Not at all. When networks figured out how to effectively broadcast it, and a few dramatic personalities brought some liveliness to the game, the combination of high stakes and human drama made it popular, and the rest is history. Of course, to this day, there are no poker player "teams", and no expectation that people who aren't winning deserve a cut. If you win, you make a shitload, if you lose, you really lose. Thats just the way it works. E-sports and poker are not that dissimilar, except that games like BW and SC2 are more fun to watch than poker. If poker could take off due to a combination of human drama and effective broadcasting/promotion, there's no reason e-sports can't as well. Whether there are teams, or not.
They're different in practically every way. For poker, you can play anywhere at any time and all you need is a deck of cards. For Starcraft, you need to buy the game, have a computer and an internet connection. For poker, you always have the chance of beating a top player if you get lucky; you can always get a hot streak going and win a bunch. Players with limited skill can throw in money and win, which gives them a big rush. With Starcraft, you need to train for hours a day to get anywhere close to good. With poker, you're gambling money, so casinos and sites can make enormous profits. It's to their benefit to advertise as much as possible to get more people playing. For Starcraft, Blizzard gets $20 when you buy the Battlechest. They're not the same at ALL, other than that they're both individually played games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
