|
I agree with HuK, but it won't be easy to convince the masses that a replay directly after game is pretty much the exact same thing (assuming it's a blind cast) as casting live. Unfortunately, you HAVE to convince the masses, because sports is 100% dependent on the viewers. Without the viewers, you have no sponsors. Without the sponsors, you have no money. Without money, you are just playing a game.
To play the devil's advocate: What's to say that, if this change were implemented, the players wouldn't view the chore of sending out the replays as an inconvenience on par with, or greater than that of the casters hounding them to obs games? I would guess that it will be even worse as the availability of these games in a timely manner is suddenly open to anyone who can talk the players out of it. No-name casters that might not have approached before will suddenly start thinking "well why SHOULDN'T he send the replay to me too. It's not like it costs him anything."
Another reason people prefer the games live is because you know there will be no spoilers, intentional or not. One could possibly make an argument about the caster knowing the outcome of a game/series affecting their casting of it, but that topic has too many variables to really go in depth...
That's about all I could come up with for Cons of Instant-Replay casting, and they are admittedly weak.
|
On September 06 2010 11:05 FliedLice wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:56 yh8c4 wrote:
i don't really understand why the discussion doesn't end with the "livestreaming enables cheating" argument. So does internet, should we now play LAN-events only?
well, you can never be sure that there's no cheating happening, even at a lan. but just because you can't 100% avoid cheating, you shouldn't just totally neglect the issue. cars get stolen all the time, but does that mean they should not have lockable doors?
|
On September 06 2010 10:44 Aquafresh wrote:
Alright I'll play devil's advocate. I guess the advantage would be no spoilers. Even TSL2, which was a great event by all standards, had some results spoiled. I believe it was Tarson who accidentally spoiled the result of his match with NonY on some polish forum. I don't see how this would be an issue outside of the most unlikely circumstances with replays being cast immediately after the end of a match though so it's probably not a big deal.
It's worse with live events. Add a player on your friendslist, watch how many times a player goes into a game. Proceed to spoil the results based on number of games in streamchat "for the lulz".
|
Osaka27174 Posts
On September 06 2010 10:16 TotalBiscuit wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:10 Innsmouth-Zerg wrote: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. Indeed it is true that Good Players, need Good Casters, need Good Tournaments. But what do they all need? Viewers, without public interest there are no big tournaments. What do viewers want? Good Players performing on there very best resulting in awesome games. How do we fuck that up? Putting a bunch of bad casters in a game lagging everything up resulting in a bad performance and therefor a bad game resulting in unhappy and stream leaving viewers. Thats that. The stupid thing about this thread and every other that spawns off it, is that it's thanks to a bunch of people acting like idiots and has lead to a widespread indictment of tournament organisers, casters and players in general. The following, acted like idiots, in no particular order or proportion. MorroW ESL The legion of casters who dogpiled the game Now, thanks to those 3 entities and a bunch of vitriolic mouthy fanbois from all sides, we've got this so-called 'debate' which, thanks to being lead by a prominent player with an obvious (and justifiable) bias, is going to descend into pages worth of caster bashing and wankery with no actual progress being made. Casters aren't going to dare wade into this thread in large numbers to defend themselves (I'm too dumb to know what's good for me, I don't count), TL has a natural bias towards pro-players (also totally justifiable, bias isn't necessarily a bad word), how do you think this thread is going to turn out exactly? Some people are interested in community building and those people understand the co-dependent relationship between players, casters, tournament organisers and sponsors. There has to be give-and-take from all sides because if even one of those four is marginalised, you end up with a bad eSports scene that nobody wants to inject money into. So perhaps, in future, when we start threads like 'Players vs Casters', we could take a moment to think about just how constructive such a thread will turn out to be and whether one's time could have better been spent in providing solutions to the problems facing all of us as opposed to drawing battlelines and planting flags in the ground with inflammatory language. I'm going to bed, I'm too old for this shit.
Did you even read Huk's post? He is just suggesting you cast off of replays rather than live. He isn't bashing casters at all.
If casters get bashed in that thread it is only because you typed before actually understanding anything. Players vs Casters is not a provactive title, but your posts fanned the flames more than anything else.
|
On September 06 2010 11:12 Martijn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:44 Aquafresh wrote:
Alright I'll play devil's advocate. I guess the advantage would be no spoilers. Even TSL2, which was a great event by all standards, had some results spoiled. I believe it was Tarson who accidentally spoiled the result of his match with NonY on some polish forum. I don't see how this would be an issue outside of the most unlikely circumstances with replays being cast immediately after the end of a match though so it's probably not a big deal.
It's worse with live events. Add a player on your friendslist, watch how many times a player goes into a game. Proceed to spoil the results based on number of games in streamchat "for the lulz".
Bnet tells you each time your friends joins a game?
Also, regarding the "need for LAN being being expressed doesn't solve anything. The number of quality tournaments we have are many times being played globally, thanks to the Internet. How are euros and our friends in Korea and even on other sides of the united states suppose to make a living as gamers if their only option was to play LAN?
|
On September 06 2010 10:30 Martijn wrote:There's definitely issues with streaming, but there's also issues with a few assumptions you're making HuK. 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. Show nested quote +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.
1. I never send dont stream the games, i said dont stream the games live. get the replays as soon as 1 game is played by the players or a referee in the game and stream that (the most successful tournaments as stated in the OP were from replays not LIVE games.)
2. You knew the results because you looked them up, have some self control
3. Even gosucup this morning, when they were casted "live" it was barely at 3k~, when it ended (last 4 games from replays) it was at like 3.2-3.5k viewers. I really don't think live viewership adds that many people. It becomes an issue when 1 person get live and another person casts replays so ofc ppl will watch from the live just so they can watch it first.
4. What tournament does this happen? You think 1k admins are going to host games for 1k players in every weekly esl? get real plz 
5. your not effected by lag tho we are. its very different trying to play and trying to cast a game in lag.
6. I dont really understand what your point is here?
|
I have absolutely no problem with replays being livecast 5-10 minutes after a game has been played.
It would reduce the amount of time casters "lounge" around looking for games to obs, and they can also pick and choose which games they want to cast.
I see absolutely nothing negative from a viewers perspective from casting replays.
|
On September 06 2010 11:12 Martijn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:44 Aquafresh wrote:
Alright I'll play devil's advocate. I guess the advantage would be no spoilers. Even TSL2, which was a great event by all standards, had some results spoiled. I believe it was Tarson who accidentally spoiled the result of his match with NonY on some polish forum. I don't see how this would be an issue outside of the most unlikely circumstances with replays being cast immediately after the end of a match though so it's probably not a big deal.
It's worse with live events. Add a player on your friendslist, watch how many times a player goes into a game. Proceed to spoil the results based on number of games in streamchat "for the lulz".
Live events are different Martijn because tournament organizers are not retarded to allow multiple streamers in one game and lag issues don't happen that often. Either way there will be spoilers due to the large amount of esports journalist doing live coverage.
|
It shouldn't even be discussed.. any online tourney should be casted on replays.. why? Beacuse
A) Lesser risk of cheating
B) Less lag with no extra obs
C) No stress / delays of scheduele
Two of the most successful BW tournies were casted on replays ( TSL / TSL 2 ).
Simply make a rule that says if any results get leaked by either player they get disgualified. Worked like a charm for TSL.
|
why can't people just cast like an hour later after all the games are done? it makes sense and it's not hard to do.
|
I have to wonder how much of this is on Blizzard for totally dropping the ball with b.net.
1.) Lag. The way obsing works now is so utterly stupid. An observer who lags should only feel the effects on his own end, the server should never wait for an observer to catch up to the game. I could understand the need for the referee player type being fully synced to the server, however.
2.) Cheating. I think the best way to cast would be if Blizzard allowed for groups of people to view replays, with one person in control of the playback. Also, give us an option to hide the damn controls! Alternatively/additionally casters finding ways to buffer the stream on their own end, or through a middleman, would allow for a delay even when livecasting. Another benefit of this is that it can be used to smooth out any upload jitters.
3.) Stress. Tournaments need private chat rooms, then nobody would have to be worrying about messaging anyone or receiving unwanted messages from random idiots. The only people in chat would be the people given the password to the chat by the tournament organizers. Games, streams, rule disputes, etc could all be fairly easily sorted out if everyone had an easy way to contact one another from within b.net.
4.) Live Games. The only real benefit to live games is that it allows a player to see a game with no opportunity for spoilers. Blizzard needs to add the ability for players to hide their custom game results, or to hide individual games, or to hide them for x days, etc.
|
HuK, are you talking about online tournaments specifically, or do you also think LAN events shouldn't have live streaming?
|
On September 06 2010 11:25 kojinshugi wrote:
HuK, are you talking about online tournaments specifically, or do you also think LAN events shouldn't have live streaming?
lans arent really a problem and since there is a live audience there will live camera on the players to see reactions (facial/body) to what happen in game so i think its important to have livestream for LAN as long as it doesn't effect the quality of games.
and obviously things like cheating aren't issues
|
On September 06 2010 11:08 DreamScaR wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:03 gogogadgetflow wrote:
I also agree with there being a single referee in the game, personally handling the replay and being the sole arbiter of decisions (with backup from admins as necessary)... the casters should have absolutely no say in any decision.
Yeah I remember QQing so hard (along with many many others) in the first HDH thread about how they wouldnt be live and how it wouldnt be the same, but 2 minutes into the game I completely lost myself and just straight up enjoyed them as much as I could have enjoyed them live.
That said if LAN tourneys start casting replays instead of Live games I will complain, maybe because of the sheer number of people who would know the outcome before me
ps. Huk I really feel for you, the casters sense of self-importance during your game vs. Adelscott was abominable It wasn't self-importance, it was what we were told. A lot of the issue came down to the casters/players/admins all talking with each other to see what would happen. Once we found out it would be done by replay, if you were watching. There was no bitching, everything went smooth except for the odd time that my replay would be slightly ahead.
OK. If the admin's advice to you was to stay in game after being asked to leave by a player, then it seems like an administrative mistake. I don't know if I would have stayed in that game to the point where the player got fed up and left himself regardless of what my instructions were, because I know it's the players that make the game so great and I would feel really bad.
I know you weren't saying anything bad about the players, it was pretty professional.
|
4. What tournament does this happen? You think 1k admins are going to host games for 1k players in every weekly esl? get real plz
A) 1k players = 500 matches.
B) You don't need a 1:1 ratio of admins to matches. The admins don't have to stay in the game. Host it, invite casters, invite players, start game, leave, host next match, and so on.
|
I cast stuff and I've been agreeing with HuK and IdrA about the whole live streaming issue. MorroW being added to the pile is just more evidence for me that we should think about changing the way we cast tournaments.
The ONLY issue that sucks and is out of everyone's control is the fact that Match Histories are so easily accessed by anyone. People will spoil results because people suck. =(
|
For me I just find it a lot more fun to watch live streams. There is just something about watching the game live that makes it more exciting. For cheating I think when top players look back at the replay they might notice something strange like they prepare for a drop that they never see coming. Also I think it is very rare that 4 obs cause the players to lag unless Bnet is the problem. 14 obs is unacceptable and there should really never be more then 4 obs in a game. I also think that some players just blame the obs when the game lags for a second even though it could just be their own comp. Another thing is that pressing the red button on procaster is a lot simpler than waiting for both players confirmation to get the replays than getting the replays than casting. That puts a lot more work onto the players and the casters.
|
1 or 2 streamers is ok, max 3. More than that is just bullshit. It's no big deal to have a game streamed as long as it doesn't take 14 people to do it.
|
On September 06 2010 11:28 HuK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:25 kojinshugi wrote:
HuK, are you talking about online tournaments specifically, or do you also think LAN events shouldn't have live streaming? lans arent really a problem and since there is a live audience there will live camera on the players to see reactions (facial/body) to what happen in game so i think its important to have livestream for LAN as long as it doesn't effect the quality of games. and obviously things like cheating aren't issues
Okay, then this is a moot issue. Any caster that thinks they should stream online tournaments is obviously off his rocker.
Go4SC2 should run all games with 2 observers, then immediately after the match send the replay file to whoever is doing the casting. There's absolutely no reason for it to be "live".
|
On September 06 2010 11:09 I_Love_Bacon wrote:
The major difference being live streaming adds an insane level of cheating that can't be detected. Use of maphacks etc can be found out and when replays are looked at discrepancy in keybinds etc can sometimes become obvious. Simply watching a live stream or somebody relaying you advice who is watching it? Virtually impossible. And one of the major things is how many more events and how much more $$$ is on the stake with more players than ever.
Actually admins have the >exact< same tools to spot cheating this way as they did in broodwar.
I do think players should always be on dnd by the way because some people do grief at times and fuck with games just because they dislike the other player, and maybe we can get a tool to monitor processes and have messengers like skype/vent disallowed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
