EPTPlayers vs Casters - Page 3
| Forum Index > Closed |
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
| ||
|
HuK
Canada1591 Posts
| ||
|
piegasm
United States266 Posts
I think the tournaments (if they feel they must have live casts) should implement a policy whereby 1) casters have to register and be approved by an admin 2) the tournament determines who casts what and makes sure that there aren't redundant casts 3) casters leave if there is lag with the understanding that they will be provided with replays in a timely manner. With regard to deciding who casts which matches, I think the tournament should make a reasonable effort to accommodate the players' wishes. Using IdrA as an example: yes he makes a choice to participate in NA tournaments from Korea but in a major tournament, there are plenty of matches going on. There's no reason to force casters on IdrA in particular if you've got plenty of different top players in the tournament to choose from. There are a lot of holes in how these tournaments are run, IMO. Don't leave it up to the players to host their own games. Have an admin invite the players and caster(s). That way there's no confusion with the players not knowing their match was scheduled to be streamed and there's minimal downtime on the stream while the casters scrounge around for a match. | ||
|
NeoOmega
United States495 Posts
On September 06 2010 10:13 cyprin wrote: Didn't the HDH finals have like 20k viewers? Have any live Starcraft 2 casts reached that level? IEM and MLG probably did, but I dont think they ever released their numbers. | ||
|
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
the players should come first, and observers do indeed add to the lag | ||
|
Frunkis
United States146 Posts
| ||
|
GenoZStriker
United States2914 Posts
| ||
|
Lennon
United Kingdom2275 Posts
On September 06 2010 10:19 HuK wrote: I want to know what is the huge advantage of casting a live game compared to waiting 5-10 minutes and casting the same exact game without any on the negative reasons I listed. sorry if u dont feel like discussing things but from where i can come from when ppl are mature and do so good things usually come out of it Where are you getting 5-10 minutes from? The average game time length is around 16 minutes. Watching a casted replay doesn't have the same feel as watching a live game. 1 streamer e.g. TaKe doesn't make much of a difference in terms of latency. | ||
|
nextstep
Canada705 Posts
agreed too. personally, i had no problem watching the HDH and KOTB tournament. so what if it's not live, as long as the results are unknown, it's as though watching live. doesn't hurt the game, as tons of people still tune in to it, and it avoids all the problems huk described. | ||
|
GenoZStriker
United States2914 Posts
On September 06 2010 10:22 Fantistic wrote: Watching a casted replay doesn't have the same feel as watching a live game. Yet a lot of people still tune in to watch that replay get caster. At the end of the day the number is important and will be remembered + talked about. | ||
|
Aquafresh
United States824 Posts
The cheating is much harder to stop, and a more serious issue. You would have to have all casters agree on introducing a delay into their streams, which could get messy as the only way to enforce such an agreement would be community bans. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
I think replay casting is really the switch that needs to happen. It's the optimal balance for both users and players. | ||
|
GenoZStriker
United States2914 Posts
| ||
|
vileChAnCe
Canada525 Posts
On September 06 2010 10:06 TotalBiscuit wrote: This thread isn't going anywhere with such a blatantly provocative title as 'Players vs Casters'. It's already set it up for days worth of partisan, biased nonsense. Casters need Players for content. Players need Casters for cash. Simple, inescapable fact that none of you are going to get anywhere splitting off into camps and taking sides against each other. HuK isn't trying to be offensive and gauging the majority of the responses none of them seem to be very hostile... The point he's bringing up is probably the Players preferences versus that of the Caster and who's should take priority. Yeah they need one another but the argument is how they should co-exist IE through live material or replay and the pro's and cons between the two. That being said your post is seemingly more provocative then the title.. | ||
|
mufin
United States616 Posts
When you do the replay system, you get the most out of the players and have a much higher chance for epic games which is ultimately what viewers want to see. and biscuit, have my babies!  | ||
|
DreamScaR
Canada2127 Posts
As a caster, live games are more enjoyable to cast and more enjoyable for the viewers for the most part. If a shift were to happen where unless it's an offline event to have it be casted via replays, I wouldn't be against it in the least. Though to me, this all seems like we're trying to take a page from the New England Patriots video taping shit from the other team. (ps I was one of the casters during the gosucup finals, so this is from me.. not from GosuGamers). | ||
|
skeldark
Germany2223 Posts
( there is a good thread over it) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=144716 people like live so i think the tournement maker dont stop livestreaming. ---- the messiges are another thing. this is something the tournement manager could fix. that there is only 1-x people who contakt the players and sug overs and not that every streamer is messiging the players. i once played against you (huk) in a trounement. and streamer and other players i dont know mes me: they want to obs, i should invite them, if they should open the game, when we start, if a other one can watch too, if we allready startet (IN the GAME) .... must be hard to have it every match... | ||
|
Lennon
United Kingdom2275 Posts
On September 06 2010 10:24 Aquafresh wrote: IMO it's the potential for cheating that is the biggest issue here for online events. The observer lag can be managed, or even fixed entirely if blizzard decides to tweak it in a patch or something. The community leaders should implement some sort of rule system for casters looking to stream games live. Either have a max limit or latency for potential casters, or limit games to just a referee and an official observer and have anyone else who wants to join subject to the approval of the players. I think enforcement of such rules would not be too difficult as most tournaments and players are very accessible to the community, more so than other gaming communities that have similar unwritten rules for all their events. The cheating is much harder to stop, and a more serious issue. You would have to have all casters agree on introducing a delay into their streams, which could get messy as the only way to enforce such an agreement would be community bans. Using a stream to cheat should result in a temporary ban for about a year which is almost as devastating as a permanent ban. This rule should be implemented to scare players away from cheating. | ||
|
Martijn
Netherlands1219 Posts
For one, you didn't consider that coverage->sponsors->prizes. Streaming matches greatly increases interest in the tournament. As harsh as it sounds, you wouldn't be competing for prices nearly as significant if the only coverage of a tournament was a webpage with results and replays. Sure, people would download and watch replays of highlevel play, but a lot more people will watch a lot more matches if they are streamed. Secondly, ironically for the tournaments you mentioned, I already knew the results before they were streamed. If I can find out the results, then so can others. You can deny this, but push comes to shove, these results won't be hidden. Third, again, you mention two tournaments as the "most successful". Not by coincidence they also had the biggest prize-pools. They were single events, with a lot hype and advertisement, not something that can done on a regular basis. Weekly tournaments are much better off with live streaming. Fourth, you mention stress, but really, this should be one for the admins. The admins should be hosting the games, inviting the streamers, then inviting the players so everything is set and ready to go. This is a matter of poor organization, which hardly lies with the casters. Fifth, the casters want lag free high quality games as much or if not more so then the players. If you play the shittiest game of your life, but still win, you still get paid. Meanwhile the streamers are grinding their teeth. Sixth, no pro-gaming teams without coverage. It'll be relegated right back to good old fashioned clans where everyone had to pay their own way to tournaments. I'll be the first to agree that the ridiculous amount of streamers in some games are completely out of control and there should be restrictions and rules enforced by the admins. But you shouldn't be thinking Players vs Casters, you should be thinking Players AND Casters. On September 06 2010 10:20 NeoOmega wrote: IEM and MLG probably did, but I dont think they ever released their numbers. I can confirm one of them bypassed that by far. But they're lan events and have little to do with the argument, because they happen on lan and there's no lag because there's no intern.. Wait.. Still, at least there's no worries about cheating there, except for the commentary blasting through the hall and no soundproof booths. | ||
|
TotalBiscuit
United Kingdom5437 Posts
But you shouldn't be thinking Players vs Casters, you should be thinking Players vs Casters. Go to bed Martijn, you're making no bloody sense  | ||
| ||
