|
Hi I'm really bad at this but I'm going to try since it comes up so often.
Almost all top players as far as I can think at some point or another have had some issues with this (including Idra, morrow, myself, etc. etc.) so I think it would be healthy for it to be discuss publicly.
The issues with games being livestreamed:
Negatives
- Lag
Lag with usually 1 video guy, 2 casters, 1 admin ( 4 people in general) for the main stream is a lot of players even if it only adds a slight amount of lag/delay to game play on top of other issues players might be having including cross realm play. This in no way includes every other person who wants to cast/stream the games.
- Cheating
Believe it or not people are not always moral. On the contrary I find it hard to believe as an intelligent human being that people won't cheat. As far as I know no "livestreams" have any delay besides a few seconds added to their stream. So something such as Gosucup which I played today where 900 euro is the 1st place and the games are being live streamed sooner or later someone will cheat if it hasn't already happened (which I'm sure it has). Other then that it is also almost undetectable and can't be proven. I am no way accusing adelscott of doing this just saying it is a possibility in the past/future/present for such especially with money involved. Obviously at LANs this is not an issue.
- Stress
Thats right boohoo stress to the players, but you have no idea from week to week to play in ESL how many messages from legit and unlegit people you get asking to stream your games. If people had it their way every single game I play and most top players in general would be full with different streamers who constantly lag and complain about how they are more important to the other. More importantly when there is lag even on screen peoples names popping up, they don't leave. This is ontop of trying to focus on playing, dealing with admins, other players, etc. etc.
Positives
-Live games
You get to watch games 5-10 minutes before they could just be streamed as replays when players send them in is the only real advantage I see from "live games". But is it really worth it considered the negative effects?
Now many people are going to say, "but if its live it will attract more viewers." Which isn't really true, two of the biggest tournaments/most successful were both done off of pure replays. (HDH / DAY9 KOTB)
I will do my best to keep this thread very open and edit any good input people have to the OP from either side, if I fall behind feel free admins to do it if you wish.
EDIT:
Clarifications:
-The main issue above all others are cheating
-This is obviously is 300x more important as the tournament/prizepool gets bigger
-LAN events obviously should always be casted LIVE when possible (especially since the biggest issue isn't an issue)
- I am still not convinced that people are so eager over live games, as seen in this forum most people are more then willing to compromise a delayed cast or replays over "live" games. The only problem is if one person does get a chance to "live" stream obviously they are going to get a majority of the viewers vs another streamer who is going to stream the exact same thing 10 minutes later as replays.
Problems:
-Spoiled results
-Players not sending in replays
-Other people getting a hold of the replays before designated casters
Compromises/solutions:
-Consequences for people who post/spoil results in forum area as usual. (good job tl) Also maybe close chat in streams so people don't flood/spoil results if becomes that big of a problem.
-Players should be forced to send replays immediately to a specified email or upload so games are received first by designated streamers. (not doing so should results and punishment so to's and casters don't have to chase around players).
-1 Admin should attend the game and afterward send in replays to designated email address or upload
|
I think in most cases it should be up to the player if they want casters in their games or not
|
people need to show way more respect for the players
every terrible caster wants to get their stream going with absolutely no regard to players. the amount of time i see players asking just random obs to leave when they get drop screen and the obs just being like "WONT HAPPEN AGAIN" even after its happened 7 times already is appalling
|
I personally dont mind watching VODs over livestreams. I mean livestreams are the way to go when it comes to something that can be interactive and fun, kinda like TL Attack or something, but for serious events I dont see why people dont at least delay the stream a few minutes or just release VODs after.
|
Personally I watch VODs most of the time because I can't be bothered to figure out what time the event is going on in my timezone.
KOTB as you said was done purely off replays and it was one of the best tournaments I've watched. (And one of the few I've watched "live")
Lagging casters are annoying for all involved. Terrible for the players, terrible for viewers who just want to watch a good game, and probably pretty annoying for the caster as well.  It should be a one strike (maybe two if you're feeling generous) rule with the players calling the shots. If they don't leave you (the player) should be allowed to ban them from casting anymore of your games.
|
I couldn't agree more. I don't understand why more tournaments can't just make it mandatory to send in replays and then casters can just cast the ones they want. No missing games because they already started. No getting rejected because they don't want lag. No down time, wait between rounds? Get another replay.
It makes sense.
|
It's likes obs for BW, everyone just knew the informal rule that more than 4 on ICCUP lags the game. They should just have a main cast with a good known caster and a "dead cast" with just the game noises. The dead cast should be easy to find for other casters to be able to restream with their own cast on top of it.
I feel for you and I hope this all works out in the end.
|
I personally would never have gotten into the "foreigner casting scene" if it weren't for the live cast of the GOM invitational. But, i'm terribad. But, I feel a good deal of those tuning in are around my level of terribad.
|
Cheating has always been my biggest concern w/ live streams in games. The smaller tournaments with less at stake and less organization I understand. But when there is serious $ at line, people have cheated over a lot, lot less. And with streaming it's 100x easier to do it and get away with it.
|
I don´t know if this is possible or not but Blizzard should make lag for Observer like it is in HoN.
Wich is to say that if a Observer is lagging than the game is only lagging for the Observer and not for the players.
This should in my eyes resolve the exact problem. but i don´t know all the tech stuff but maybe someone can say if it´s possible or not.
|
This is definitely a tightrope issue, and I'm sure there will be plenty of flame ahead in this topic, but you do bring up a good point about streams being usable during matches in tournaments. Tackling that problem is very difficult, and I doubt there will be a fix to it in the near future. If lag is that much of an issue, I would consider only letting casters with reliable connections cast your games. Or maybe have live casts delayed be sending the replays to the casters to cast right after the match has ended, which would technically solve the problem of lag. Anyways that's my 2c..
|
Yep, the truth is every live streaming could have been just instant replay-cast, right after the game had already finished. No one would be hurt. It's simply a matter of custom. If people agree to do it that way, I don't see it causing more trouble compared to how it is done now. Also, in the end the player's comfort is the most important; otherwise there won't be quality games to watch anyway.
|
I think games should be casted as replays unless both players are at a LAN and there should also be no observers in any games that matter. There are no negatives this way and all positives  ) +++++
|
|
|
I 100% agree, it should always be replays casted (other than at events such as GSL/gom tv tournament where the games are played in front of huge audiences .
A lot of the casters fight over who gets to watch games and who should be outted. An easy example is when the gosugamer casters were furious at BigT and drama evolved. Realistically a player should just be sending their replays to both these parties and they can both cast it and people can choose who to listen to rather than different caster-fanboys bombing other livestream channels and bm-ing.
Another thing is that some of the players could join in on the cast and give valuable incite to what they were thinking instead of what the caster thinks they were thinking. I'm sure at least a few of the players would volunteer their team to put in some input. I use a lot of these casts to learn and hate when casters get it wrong and trash on the players strategies when it is clear to me that these players have ulterior motives. Ex. When the casters for your showmatch were constantly questioning your decision to not get extended lasers for your colossus. To me, there were a number of reasons why you weren't upgrading it, and if you were to be a part of the cast for the replay you could have explained yourself rather than 300 posts going up in the showmatch thread theorizing each of your plays.
|
I agree with this - something that crossed my mind just the other day, with regards to cheating - unless the players are sitting in the same location with a live audience for spectating, online the possibility of cheating is way too high
|
I honestly don't think it should even be up for discussion if its affecting your gameplay and the large majority of pro players then agree to not to do it unless your conditions are to be met. I'd rather have optimal conditions for you then a small inconvenience of waiting a couple minutes for release.
What I would love to see happen is having the caster getting a few details of what was going on in specific moments from the player so instead of stupid shit comments like "spreading creep is really necessary" the caster could actually shed some light on game breaking moments that otherwise would be missed. So yes Replays Over Live any day
|
On September 06 2010 09:47 Clamev wrote:
I don´t know if this is possible or not but Blizzard should make lag for Observer like it is in HoN.
Wich is to say that if a Observer is lagging than the game is only lagging for the Observer and not for the players.
This should in my eyes resolve the exact problem. but i don´t know all the tech stuff but maybe someone can say if it´s possible or not.
Agreed. The only thing that needs to be done in that situation is when an observer is lagging, their client pauses until the next wave of packets come in, at which point the client synchronizes. It seems tricky but possible to implement.
|
I'm still amazed blizzard didn't code like other games does where obs has no effect on the game being played itself. Also, no reconnect/save option, wtf?
They really ought to take a lesson from HoN cause their reconnect feature and obs possibilities are just amazing compared to sc2.
|
live casting is good for lan style events
bad for online tourneys
|
My only problem with replays is you sometimes can hear spoilers of the game before it's casted, and that just plain sucks for a viewer.
|
Yeah, ladder streaming isnt smart. LAN streaming is another story. But then again, someone could be getting signals to their headphones from a guy watching the live stream? haha i duno
|
This is all true.
However, live games are much more exciting than replays. ESL has the right to stream their own tournaments. Remember that Day[9]'s KotB was popular because the beta had finished at that point so even replays were exciting back then.
|
On September 06 2010 09:55 rackdude wrote:
My only problem with replays is you sometimes can hear spoilers of the game before it's casted, and that just plain sucks for a viewer.
Not if you just watch the plain replay. replay casting is getting old, its a lot more fun to cast them to yourself! =)
|
On September 06 2010 09:50 Innsmouth-Zerg wrote:
I agree with HuK ^^
I agree with HuK ^^
|
People like live events. *Hopefully* Blizz implements some sort of in-game TV where casters can just tune in and cast (or more knowledgeable players can just tune in directly) so there won't be any negative effects on the players.
Until then, it's these casters that are paying your bills (more viewers = more $$). Get used to them and stop whining imo.
|
Pecking order is and should always be Event Sponsors > Players > Casters. It's reasonable for event sponsors to want a referee in every game, and IMO the sponsors can make that one of their own casters if they want to do so.
Otherwise, you get players having to deal with laggy games and casters who think they're more important than the players are. If anyone thinks 15-30 minutes wait on their stream is more important than a player's ability to be at their best in a tournament with a prize pool that matters and any type of public exposure for the final sets of games, they shouldn't be casting SC2, period.
|
Registered an account on team liquid just to express how much I agree with the OP. A lot of the time I think its blatantly obvious when people are cheating especially if you pay attention to what they've scouted / are scouting. Replay's should be the only thing casted in competitive play unless they add some sort of large delay to the spectator.
|
With the lack of LAN you now have an issue where streamers can be from anywhere in the world, even if the players are in the same room. Streaming LANs with 20 casters doesn't seem to do any good. Might as well have 1-2 admins + a few dedicated obs. Obs can stream to their corresponding casters.
Definitely agree with high money tournaments needing to have a delay of minimum 5 minutes, or just run off replays.
On the other hand, a lot of small tournaments are going to want to be done all at once because people don't have the time to run it then go back and supervise casting. However, if there's serious money involved, preventing cheating is essential to having successful events, otherwise players may stop entering them.
|
On September 06 2010 09:59 SharkSpider wrote:
Pecking order is and should always be Event Sponsors > Players > Casters. It's reasonable for event sponsors to want a referee in every game, and IMO the sponsors can make that one of their own casters if they want to do so.
Otherwise, you get players having to deal with laggy games and casters who think they're more important than the players are. If anyone thinks 15-30 minutes wait on their stream is more important than a player's ability to be at their best in a tournament with a prize pool that matters and any type of public exposure for the final sets of games, they shouldn't be casting SC2, period.
Very well said. Agree with this post entirely.
|
I believe the players need to play as best as they can, and this means reducing the lag as much as possible. The integrity of the game is also crucial. A 5 second delay on a game being cast live is terrible, as it allows someone to hack the screen by watching the stream on another monitor.
Would you mind if the game was casted live with one (perhaps two) observers, and the stream was delayed 5 minutes?
|
I wanted to write something just like this because I was sick of how casters felt entitled to stream games and end up lagging up the whole tournament and cause drama. Of course, I'm not a pro-gamer or a known caster so I'm glad HuK went to address this.
I just find its absolutely insane that casters > players in these tournaments. The tournament should revolve around the players, not to jumpstart an amateur's casters career.
I have to strongly agree with the notion that tournaments should livecast replays instead of doing things actually live. Its just more respectable and sensible to the players. I'm behind any player 100% anytime they argue against casters in their stream.
Also, I live a pretty busy life and catching a live event 3pm on a Tuesday is ridiculous for me. If people really want more viewers, they should live cast replays at "prime times".
|
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.
|
I agree with HuK. It almost cost him the GosuGamers NVIDA tournament had he not man up and tell the admins/streamers to fuck off.
|
Some tournament administrators need to come up with a way for players to report their games and then have casters show them without the brackets updating so that we "simulate" a live tournament aka TSL.
|
|
|
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.
|
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.
Except for the fact that I imagine all of the players aren't fucking retards. They understand that if they'll be required to have Streamer-X in their game, that they'll allow it if it is required. However, where they become more combative is when it's Streamer-X.... plus Y, W, Z, and Q. There are no sides to this issue: There is a right side and the wrong side. This isn't an opinion.
|
Didn't the HDH finals have like 20k viewers?
Have any live Starcraft 2 casts reached that level?
|
On September 06 2010 10:10 Innsmouth-Zerg wrote:Show nested quote +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.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
United States7166 Posts
agreed on all points, but really point 1 is more than enough reason imo for players to be able to remove obs
|
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
|
As long as the players are cooperative about getting replays to the casters, I have no problem at all with it being done that way. Unfortunately, I've heard a lot of casters saying that it practically takes an act of divine intervention to extract replays from some people.
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.
|
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.
|
United States7166 Posts
it doesnt even matter what the advantages are, which are actually limited (and there are pros/cons for each)
the players should come first, and observers do indeed add to the lag
|
As a viewer I'd prefer they do replays instead of live games. Sitting around waiting for them to catch a game and bug players is really annoying. It seems like there would be a hell of a lot less downtime if they just did replays.
|
LAN events obviously reach a higher number of viewers due to the massive hype. But an online tournament doesn't matter that much which is what HDH invitationals and KOTB kinda proved and what HuK is trying to point.
|
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.
|
On September 06 2010 09:57 UberThing wrote:I agree with HuK ^^
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.
|
On September 06 2010 10:22 Fantistic wrote:Show nested quote +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 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.
|
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.
|
United States22883 Posts
I agree completely and I'm glad you made this, HuK.
I think replay casting is really the switch that needs to happen. It's the optimal balance for both users and players.
|
The cheating is not soo much something you can avoid unless you decide to not stream the match live. But things such as avoiding lag during games and frustration, having to wait 10 minutes for 14 different casters can be avoided.
|
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..
|
events with a stage performed live (mlg/gsl/iem) need to be livestreamed but everything else should be replays. I've seen quite a few games that ended retardedly (if thats a word) because the players simply couldn't micro well enough to play the game their used to. Lag can also mess up your timings or "feel" for when you know your opponent may have access to certain tech options.
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!
|
I agree with not wanting to start a debate, and yes I obviously get the point of players being afraid that cheating is going on via either watching the stream or having someone tell them what's going on.
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).
|
the lag is one thing and i think bliz should fix it
( 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...
|
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.
|
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.
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.
|
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 
|
As much as i love watching streams, I agree. As much as it benefits the fans and viewers, there aren't many upsides for the players themselves. All they get out of it is lag, nervousness, and tons of messages from the "next big" streamer.
|
On September 06 2010 10:06 TotalBiscuit wrote:
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.
Seems to me that good players are hard to come by, while everyone with a stream and a mic is trying to be a caster these days. As a player I don't need commentaries, just a good cameraperson: I can tell that the force fields were well placed without someone telling me that every single time a force field is placed in a tournament game. In fact I am more than happy watching replays myself.
Go ahead and take the replay and cast it all you want, please don't lag the game and create a logistic nightmare.
Several things:
- if replays are casted right after a match finishes, it would be very similar to a live tournament. A 1/2 an hour wait imo is worth the legitimacy and quality of the game You are less likely to be spoiled unless you check bnet
- 100 casters can cast that replay at the same time without lagging the game!
- Using replays save a lot of downtime and add flexibility to schedules.
- it allows various types of cast to exist: some may want to cast the replay fresh out of the oven, while others may delay and do a higher quality production.
|
I agree with you huk. I cannot count the number of times people have been obs'ing and a streamer lags. However i think the issue arises with people (smaller streams in general), being BM. I really think the larger leagues should only have 1-2 people casting, and anything ro8 and above, should be done by replay. (unless its at an event/LAN location) Once you get to that level, with pro players, you really need to respect the ability of the players.
People can argue that its the casters that bring everything in, or that without streams and viewers, no one would care. I find this view biased. People want to watch top players play. No one would watch a bronze level stream for the game play. Very few even watch mid-diamond streams. It really is the players who are the people providing the "entertainment". The casters are the "middleman" between the player and the viewer. There are a few respected casters though that actually make the game fun.
I do think that casters should be allows to cast games, and players can't refuse being cast (in regards to the "official" casters). Each league/event that uses multiple streams to cover it should have a list of "official supported" casters. You cant refuse them to cast your games, unless its ro8 or above.
There also really should be a zerg tolerance policy with lag. If there is one bit, that person has to leave. They should still be allowed in the next game, which gives them time to sort out their issues. The only reason to not have a caster be allowed to cast the next game in the series is if they lag for more then 5 seconds, or if they dis-obey the lag policy (or are known laggers. then why are they on the list?)
I do agree that while blizzard should have implemented something, we as a community must dictate what is right and what is wrong. As far as the ro8 and up, and why i believe those should only be replay cast, i don't want the fate of a tournament hinging on the unfair advantage given if the games are cast live.
With the rules stated above, i feel those would be best for both worlds. Casters would be happy. Players would be happy. Viewers would be just as they are, happy. In order for esports to really climb, there should be some type of rule set that is followed by all. If you look at sports, you have a governing body and set rules and standards in regards to the broadcasts. Shouldn't there be the same, to add legitimacy? Those who are "accepted" would be seen as beatifically to both sides, and held in higher regard.
|
On September 06 2010 10:32 TotalBiscuit wrote:Show nested quote +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
I blame my girlfriend for distracting me.
|
I think all events should be cast live. We should be discussing how to ease that process rather than going back in time to casting replays (which just is NOT the same).
Livestream casting is changing competitive gaming - for the better. I agree there are some technical hurdles to overcome, but rejecting it completely is nothing short of a step backwards.
|
Kentor
United States5784 Posts
If it's a lan type of event then it should be casted live. If it's not then it should be casted replays.
|
On September 06 2010 10:05 shindigs wrote:
I just find its absolutely insane that casters > players in these tournaments. The tournament should revolve around the players, not to jumpstart an amateur's casters career.
Actually it's viewers > players. Go ahead, make a tournament that has no commentary whatsoever, you just upload sc2 replay files. Enjoy your 50 viewers and a prize pool of tree fitty.
EDIT:
On September 06 2010 10:36 Kentor wrote:
If it's a lan type of event then it should be casted live. If it's not then it should be casted replays.
Agree with this 100%. Poker tournaments are broadcast live too, even though there's the risk of someone watching the broadcast and telling one of the players what the other cards are.
As to observers slowing down the game, that's a technical issue that should be solved by Blizzard, and if they don't, well, then live with the lag or stop playing competitively.
|
biggest problem i have with casting replays is about 95% of time the streamer will fuck up somehow, either forgetting to make fake replays to hide the # of games, or accidentally revealing the replay time on the replay menu screen or ingame, or sync issues between multiple casters, etc. if everyone could manage to tighten up the process a bit so that didn't happen as much it'd be a lot nicer.
|
I think they just need to lessen the number of people obsing. 1 ref, 2 casters seems to be a good number, if it's an event like ESL you could have a 3rd caster for a different language (german etc).
I've heard these horror stories of 6+ obs in 1 game, just unnecessary imo. But at the same time players shouldn't rage at having their games casted by 1 or 2 casters. Without viewers these money tournaments won't take place, and personally I prefer live tournaments to replays.
|
I've heard it's possible to delay a stream for like 5 minutes.. right?
As for that gosucup final incident, I personally thought it was handled very immaturely by both player and organizers.4000 people were watching a player having a hissy fit and casters being emo about it but swallowing it anyways.
|
On September 06 2010 10:34 Hikari wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:06 TotalBiscuit wrote:
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. Seems to me that good players are hard to come by, while everyone with a stream and a mic is trying to be a caster these days. As a player I don't need commentaries, just a good cameraperson: I can tell that the force fields were well placed without someone telling me that every single time a force field is placed in a tournament game. In fact I am more than happy watching replays myself.
I see so many people saying things like this but it's so flawed. Your average TL community member probably doesn't need Gunrun telling them that was a really clutch force field, you're right. But ESports will never be more than a niche thing if you don't make fans out of non-players. You're not going to get non-players to give a crap by handing them a replay.
|
I think the problem is too many people in games. When you only have one streamer+co caster in a match there never really seems to be much lag.
|
On September 06 2010 10:36 comis wrote:
I think all events should be cast live. We should be discussing how to ease that process rather than going back in time to casting replays (which just is NOT the same).
Livestream casting is changing competitive gaming - for the better. I agree there are some technical hurdles to overcome, but rejecting it completely is nothing short of a step backwards.
I really don't get why lag is what is talked about so much. Seriously, how are people not worried about the integrity of the game and obvious ways to cheat? People cheated when there was less on the line and a couple of well known sc2 players have dark pasts regarding such events. What suddenly makes you think that now, when there are even more events and more money at stake, some people wont try to get a leg up and cheat?
Everybody wants live events, but we have to be realistic with the options in front of us. Until streams can all operate on a legitimate delay then there can be cheating. Until tournament organizers put their foot down in regards to 1 stream per game (2 maybe in some cases) then lag can be an issue.
|
Pretty much we just need waaaghtv for sc2
Only 1 observer but everyone get's to watch live...
Unfortunetly blizzards multiplayer implementation makes this next to impossible...
|
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
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.
Other than that I think the only other issue is the novelty of a live cast for both the caster and the viewers. Personally I don't think this outweighs the downsides, but enough people might that it could be worth compromising instead of eliminating live casting all together. I think they should just have all online events have a referee and thats it. Have him be in charge of uploading the replay to some place where the casters can easily access it in a timely fashion.
|
On September 06 2010 10:44 tertle wrote:
Pretty much we just need waaaghtv for sc2
Only 1 observer but everyone get's to watch live...
This. This is what we need. Sadly there is no LAN for SC2 but it would rid most of the problems players like HuK, MorroW and Idra are pointing out.
|
just only allow 1 streamer and 2 casters....
problem solved??
|
What's the problem with there being one referee, and this one referee privately handing the replays over to specific casters?
This game is too information and precision based for the blatantly game degenerate system that's in place now. I really feel like multiple casts for a single event is outrageous but I'm only really experienced in offline tournaments for super smash bros brawl.
I really feel like the game is too laggy to actually even take results seriously when there are multiple people observing.
|
Anyone want to guess how many times I have heard the phrase, "not live, no thanks"?
|
|
|
I agree completely with huk on every point. I think casters should just cast the replays and the viewers can deal with the 10 minute delay from when the actual game occurred. It's not that big of a deal, in my opinion. It's not worth the risk of lag and/or cheating.
|
On September 06 2010 10:45 Anther wrote:
What's the problem with there being one referee, and this one referee privately handing the replays over to specific casters?
I think that's a pretty good idea
|
On September 06 2010 10:43 I_Love_Bacon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:36 comis wrote:
I think all events should be cast live. We should be discussing how to ease that process rather than going back in time to casting replays (which just is NOT the same).
Livestream casting is changing competitive gaming - for the better. I agree there are some technical hurdles to overcome, but rejecting it completely is nothing short of a step backwards. I really don't get why lag is what is talked about so much. Seriously, how are people not worried about the integrity of the game and obvious ways to cheat? People cheated when there was less on the line and a couple of well known sc2 players have dark pasts regarding such events. What suddenly makes you think that now, when there are even more events and more money at stake, some people wont try to get a leg up and cheat? Everybody wants live events, but we have to be realistic with the options in front of us. Until streams can all operate on a legitimate delay then there can be cheating. Until tournament organizers put their foot down in regards to 1 stream per game (2 maybe in some cases) then lag can be an issue.
You can't bring cheating into the discussion of an online tournament imo. Back when I was involved in BW tourneys there were constant accusations of maphacking, players playing for others (anyone remember the massive Elky WCG drama or Artosis/Pieux mini-fiasco?), intentional dc's etc etc.
Not to mention the fact that you can simply download a maphack and have a much easier time of cheating than going through all of the above. Or be friends with the ref.
There's so much potential cheating with an online event that you just can't account for - it should not be included in this discussion imo. Cheating in online events will always be a "benefit of the doubt" type of thing.
|
Personally i believe if you dont want people to stream the games dont play in the tournaments that they require it. Whoever is hosting the tournament has the right to make whatever rules they would like it is their tournament. Now where i personally wouldn't want laggy games but if there was a 100$ prize pool id deal with it if i wanted a chance to win the money. Now when I would play my ladder games i would never stream because i wouldnt want to deal with the lag. Everyone reads the rules before they sign up for tournaments so they know what they are getting into. ( i have no idea what you are regarding to with the lag happening to you if i was a tournament or a friendly game but im considering it was a tournament since ina friendly game you can tell the person to leave)
|
On September 06 2010 09:49 figq wrote:
Yep, the truth is every live streaming could have been just instant replay-cast, right after the game had already finished. No one would be hurt. It's simply a matter of custom. If people agree to do it that way, I don't see it causing more trouble compared to how it is done now. Also, in the end the player's comfort is the most important; otherwise there won't be quality games to watch anyway.
Yeah I think this would be great at least for online events. As for live events I wouldn't see much of a problem with streaming it as it is being played IF there was LAN in SC2. We all know that Blizzard is pretty stubborn with their new no LAN policy, but even if they only made it available to people who get Blizzard tournament licenses I think that would suffice. They could simply give some sort of key or something to people who are running tournaments so they can download a patch to provide them with the ability to play on LAN. Afterward, they would have to download the old patch in order to play on live again.
Is this a realistic suggestion or not? Personally I don't see any problems but I don't know all the tech stuff and maybe I am just missing something. Feel free to call me out on it if I am.
|
Wannabe casters are pretty much a dime a dozen, damn good players are more rare. Casters need players more than players need casters. Respect the players wishes or don't cast their games.
|
I'd imagine that things would be much simpler if people could host replays in a party so all the streamers could get in a party and just watch it together.
Blizzard's attempt to make SC2 into a great E-Sports game seems to be riddled with holes..
|
I 100% agree with HuK. All casting should be done via replays, with the exception of maybe Live events/lans.
As a tournament caster myself, I prefer replays. Pause and rewind are an under used tool available to us. Recently I have begun using it more, and it is absolutely amazing. I can rewind a key battle, show the micro, show the mistakes, and just let everyone see epic battles over again, in a slow motion type effect.
It gives the players less lag, and less things to blame mistakes on. It almost completely eliminates cheating (maphacking can still exist)
It also gives us the ability to stream/cast games back to back with almost zero delay. We can wait a few hours or so after the tournament games actually start, start gathering replays, and then just cast for many straight hours. In these live events, with livestreamers in the games, we often get 15mins-1hour breaks in between matchups. This is awkward for viewers, because it takes a significantly larger portion of time to view an event.
Thanks for making this write-up HuK.
|
On September 06 2010 09:40 HuK wrote:
. As far as I know no "livestreams" have any delay besides a few seconds added to their stream.
Really seems like a good idea to put on the forums of ALL streaming services: ustream, Justin.tv,own3d.tv, and
Livestream
(p.s. Please stop using livestream, they are the lowest quality and have the most commercials. But that's just me...)
On September 06 2010 09:46 rackdude wrote:
They should just have a main cast with a good known caster and a "dead cast" with just the game noises. The dead cast should be easy to find for other casters to be able to restream with their own cast on top of.
I think this is a really good idea, having a verified lagless ob provide a stream for casters to restream would be a great solution to lag. Only problem would be video quality of restreaming an already reduced quality stream.
|
i don't really understand why the discussion doesn't end with the "livestreaming enables cheating" argument. with money on the line the probability of no cheating going on should be about 0% and this issue is 1000x more problematic than any lag isues?
|
On September 06 2010 10:45 GenoZStriker wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:44 tertle wrote:
Pretty much we just need waaaghtv for sc2
Only 1 observer but everyone get's to watch live... This. This is what we need. Sadly there is no LAN for SC2 but it would rid most of the problems players like HuK, MorroW and Idra are pointing out.
This is what happens when Blizzard fail to implement a LAN feature.
It was obvious that these problems would occur. Here's to hoping that they'll include it in the expansion.
|
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
|
On September 06 2010 11:00 Fantistic wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:45 GenoZStriker wrote:On September 06 2010 10:44 tertle wrote:
Pretty much we just need waaaghtv for sc2
Only 1 observer but everyone get's to watch live... This. This is what we need. Sadly there is no LAN for SC2 but it would rid most of the problems players like HuK, MorroW and Idra are pointing out. This is what happens when Blizzard fail to implement a LAN feature. It was obvious that these problems would occur. Here's to hoping that they'll include it in the expansion.
I doubt Blizzard will release a LAN feature to the public, It is much more likely that they would release a LAN feature(I would guess a mini version of Bnet 2.0 for a server) for "Blizzard Supported Tournaments." LAN opens the door to numerous things both good and bad that blizzard does not want to deal with.
On September 06 2010 10:48 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:45 Anther wrote:
What's the problem with there being one referee, and this one referee privately handing the replays over to specific casters? I think that's a pretty good idea
^
|
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?
|
And here I thought this would be about some epic tournament where top players stomp casters in Bo5's.
Personally, the only issue I have when it isn't live is that the caster often knows who won already, so it isn't much of a surprise. Sometimes you can avoid getting spoiled, and they won't outright tell you who won, but you can sort of tell in their voice, and there are always Freudian slips.
But yes, if players don't want casters, they shouldn't be forced on them.
|
Anything with worthwhile players should be live (finals/semifinals). Bo64 can be delayed or w/e if you suspect cheating which is always a possibility.
Anyone who would cheat via livestream has the option of cheating via maphacking, so =/
|
Games are definitely more exciting to watch live, but I still think the replays should be casted.
|
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.
|
On September 06 2010 10:50 comis wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:43 I_Love_Bacon wrote:On September 06 2010 10:36 comis wrote:
I think all events should be cast live. We should be discussing how to ease that process rather than going back in time to casting replays (which just is NOT the same).
Livestream casting is changing competitive gaming - for the better. I agree there are some technical hurdles to overcome, but rejecting it completely is nothing short of a step backwards. I really don't get why lag is what is talked about so much. Seriously, how are people not worried about the integrity of the game and obvious ways to cheat? People cheated when there was less on the line and a couple of well known sc2 players have dark pasts regarding such events. What suddenly makes you think that now, when there are even more events and more money at stake, some people wont try to get a leg up and cheat? Everybody wants live events, but we have to be realistic with the options in front of us. Until streams can all operate on a legitimate delay then there can be cheating. Until tournament organizers put their foot down in regards to 1 stream per game (2 maybe in some cases) then lag can be an issue. You can't bring cheating into the discussion of an online tournament imo. Back when I was involved in BW tourneys there were constant accusations of maphacking, players playing for others (anyone remember the massive Elky WCG drama or Artosis/Pieux mini-fiasco?), intentional dc's etc etc. Not to mention the fact that you can simply download a maphack and have a much easier time of cheating than going through all of the above. Or be friends with the ref. There's so much potential cheating with an online event that you just can't account for - it should not be included in this discussion imo. Cheating in online events will always be a "benefit of the doubt" type of thing.
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.
|
completely agreed.
livestream also tend to give buffering problems, which will cause you to miss out on a few things.
plus, livestreams always have way worse quality than replay commentaries
edit:
watching a stream of the IEM group stage right now, it is soooo obvious that both players have the stream running / someone giving them information from it. they always react exactly to what the caster says. :/
|
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".
|
Osaka27151 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.
|
Every tournament/cash game has to be casted with a delay unless it's a LAN. There is no other option, it just won't work. I'm surprised someone even argues against it. The part about cheating is the most essential because the lag can eventually be dealt with.
|
On September 06 2010 11:38 Martijn wrote:
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
That's ridiculous. Just wait 20 minutes for the replay to be available and cast that. Problem solved, without demanding that players put some sort of spyware on their computers.
and have messengers like skype/vent disallowed.
Alexander Graham Bell says hello.
As do the inventors of text messaging, having a second computer, and friends yelling from another room.
|
I think someone mentioned it already in the thread but the problem really is an over abundance of "casters" or people who think they're casters. Honestly, if you youtube starcraft 2 commentary you'll probably get a butt ton of games casted by people who a) have no idea what they're talking about b) are boring ) and c) sound weird, stupid, nerdy, etc.... not to mention they get like 500 views per video.
Now really, it isn't necessary for those guys to ruin games for other the pros. Pro-gamers should be casted by pro-casters, it's really that simple.
Pro-caster = someone with personality, doesn't lag a game, and knows what they're talking about.
|
Casting replays is fine so long as the results do not get out. That's what made HDH and KOTBH work was that people for the most part kept quiet about who the winners of each match were.
So long as the players, casters, and organizers keep the results secret then it is just as good if not better than being live. That includes not updating brackets until after a cast is done.
I agree that casting off replays is the better solution. I always empathize with the frustrations of the players when they are battling lag as well as their opponent.
|
I see both sides of the arguments but I think people saying, "Oh hey, replays are definitely the way to go" don't take into account how hard it is to get players to upload their replays. There was another thread where this was brought up where it was mentioned that some players will only upload their replays after constant prodding and threats of suspension from whatever tourney or league they're in. So saying, "just wait 5 minutes" isn't really feasible unless the problem of players being confrontational about uploading their replays is fixed.
|
On September 06 2010 11:51 Aurdon wrote:
Casting replays is fine so long as the results do not get out. That's what made HDH and KOTBH work was that people for the most part kept quiet about who the winners of each match were.
So long as the players, casters, and organizers keep the results secret then it is just as good if not better than being live. That includes not updating brackets until after a cast is done.
I agree that casting off replays is the better solution. I always empathize with the frustrations of the players when they are battling lag as well as their opponent.
Sometimes players cannot keep their mouths shut however. I had iNcontroL spoil the ITL Grand Prix over and over.
This idea is all good in theory but there is a metric ass-ton of things that can go wrong also.
It's tough and both sides make good points..
On September 06 2010 11:57 RxN wrote:
I see both sides of the arguments but I think people saying, "Oh hey, replays are definitely the way to go" don't take into account how hard it is to get players to upload their replays. There was another thread where this was brought up where it was mentioned that some players will only upload their replays after constant prodding and threats of suspension from whatever tourney or league they're in. So saying, "just wait 5 minutes" isn't really feasible unless the problem of players being confrontational about uploading their replays is fixed.
Very good point. Getting the ITL Grand Prix replays was a total nightmare and that was only 15 people...
|
I never understood the need to have more than 1-2 casters present.
|
I agree with this 100%.
I can't imagine how frustrating it must be trying to play, or for you progamers, do your job while others hinder your ability and are to stuborn to leave.
I don't see why live casting is so important. If your not patiant enough to wait 10 minuits, then don't watch at all.
|
On September 06 2010 11:19 HuK wrote:Show nested quote +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. 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.)
Again you go with "the most successful tournaments" after I already pointed out why that's a terrible argument to use. If you want to have a discussion, discuss, don't repeat the same points.
On September 06 2010 11:19 HuK wrote:
2. You knew the results because you looked them up, have some self control
And luckily I'm not an ass and would throw them all over the chat channel during a stream, but if you think that's not going to happen, well you present an extremely one-sided argument.
On September 06 2010 11:19 HuK wrote:
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.
It becomes the EXACT same issue if multiple people cast the same replay, or do you expect multiple streamers to all start a replay at the same time across several stream? So if a German caster needs a biobreak, we all have to wait for him to get off the toilet before we cast the game?
On September 06 2010 11:19 HuK wrote: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
No, but top 8, yes they should.
On September 06 2010 11:19 HuK wrote:
5. your not effected by lag tho we are. its very different trying to play and trying to cast a game in lag.
If you're playing poorly but win, you still get paid. If you're playing poorly but win, people don't want to watch. Casters benefit from minimal lag. It's not like casters want to lag you and if SC2 had something like WC3's Waaagh!TV or CnC3's battlecast, we'd be all over it. Streamers don't want to be lagging you and I'm sure a lot of people have heard us growl over lag.
On September 06 2010 11:19 HuK wrote:
6. I dont really understand what your point is here?
Point is, if you hadn't gotten all the coverage you did during beta, you wouldn't have gotten picked up by an international team. As I remember it, you weren't an established BW player, odds are that without all the coverage you got and earned during beta, you wouldn't have gotten an invite to IEM Cologne and I'd have never gotten to meet you.
|
On September 06 2010 11:38 Martijn wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Which is why I said it? The difference being live streams in broodwar during tournaments were fairly rare. Now, every day there are live streamed tournaments for sc2 which is why it is a problem. The same old issues exist but the same countermeasures still exist. Livestreaming is a relatively new one.
|
Match history allows anyone to spoil matches, and sometimes you can't avoid them. Coming to TL forums, watching people who livestream their ladder games and being in chat, hanging out in IRC.
Also, if an organization/sponsor wants their caster to cast the event, it's based off replays, and one of the players sends replays to other casters? Do they get punished for that? It's basically the only way to make sure you get the content when its hot. If JoshSuth is the "official caster" chosen by the organizer, and HuK sends his replay to Raelcun too so that Raelcun can cast it, how do you handle that? How do you even prove it was HuK and not the other player? My example as is would never happen, but could something similar happen? It's as likely as cheating is using livestream info right now.
I do agree however that there are way too many people observing games right now. Pulling up a "tournament" stream and seeing 8 observers... wtf? Are you kidding me? First of all, where are your manners people- just because a caster/famous player joins a game doesn't mean you can automatically join too and try and observe. And secondly- what kind of tournament representative allows that to even happen? There should be 2 people, max.
|
On September 06 2010 11:44 kojinshugi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:38 Martijn wrote:
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 That's ridiculous. Just wait 20 minutes for the replay to be available and cast that. Problem solved, without demanding that players put some sort of spyware on their computers. Alexander Graham Bell says hello. As do the inventors of text messaging, having a second computer, and friends yelling from another room.
The point was that this was argued to be easier than using a maphack, so make it harder. Do you think downloading/running a maphack is harder than having a second person on the phone all game?
|
My 2c:
Save livestreaming for televised events under controlled conditions. Remote tournaments where people play from their home PCs and the casters are hundreds of miles away from the players should be casted off of replays. Nobody is going to notice a 1 or 2 hr delay and it makes things so much better and more fair for the players.
|
you know, for some strange reason, i prefer streams way more when its live
|
On September 06 2010 12:02 Martijn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:44 kojinshugi wrote:On September 06 2010 11:38 Martijn wrote:
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 That's ridiculous. Just wait 20 minutes for the replay to be available and cast that. Problem solved, without demanding that players put some sort of spyware on their computers. and have messengers like skype/vent disallowed. Alexander Graham Bell says hello. As do the inventors of text messaging, having a second computer, and friends yelling from another room. The point was that this was argued to be easier than using a maphack, so make it harder. Do you think downloading/running a maphack is harder than having a second person on the phone all game?
The difference being running a map hack, when blizzard suddenly bans in waves and that person is banned. Guess who wont be in tournaments anymore because they're a known hacker? The guy who just got banned. Obviously map hacking is easier, but simply ghosting in the stream or somebody else doing it for you is 100% undetectable.
|
On September 06 2010 11:59 Martijn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:19 HuK wrote: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. 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.) Again you go with "the most successful tournaments" after I already pointed out why that's a terrible argument to use. If you want to have a discussion, discuss, don't repeat the same points. Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:19 HuK wrote:
2. You knew the results because you looked them up, have some self control
And luckily I'm not an ass and would throw them all over the chat channel during a stream, but if you think that's not going to happen, well you present an extremely one-sided argument. Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:19 HuK wrote:
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.
It becomes the EXACT same issue if multiple people cast the same replay, or do you expect multiple streamers to all start a replay at the same time across several stream? So if a German caster needs a biobreak, we all have to wait for him to get off the toilet before we cast the game? Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:19 HuK wrote: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 No, but top 8, yes they should. Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:19 HuK wrote:
5. your not effected by lag tho we are. its very different trying to play and trying to cast a game in lag.
If you're playing poorly but win, you still get paid. If you're playing poorly but win, people don't want to watch. Casters benefit from minimal lag. It's not like casters want to lag you and if SC2 had something like WC3's Waaagh!TV or CnC3's battlecast, we'd be all over it. Streamers don't want to be lagging you and I'm sure a lot of people have heard us growl over lag. Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:19 HuK wrote:
6. I dont really understand what your point is here?
Point is, if you hadn't gotten all the coverage you did during beta, you wouldn't have gotten picked up by an international team. As I remember it, you weren't an established BW player, odds are that without all the coverage you got and earned during beta, you wouldn't have gotten an invite to IEM Cologne and I'd have never gotten to meet you.
The only reason I restated what was already written is because you obviously didn't read it or else you wouldn't of posted what you posted.
Close Chat.
So like gosucup this morning have the players send the replays to one email address as soon as each game ends, I would much rather take 10 seconds and do that then have to deal with all the other bigger issues with live streaming.
It's not an issue they want its and issue that they do.
Yes but I could of gotten the save "coverage" had it been replays instead of "live", I'm not arguing there should never be any casters ever, I hate to repeat myself but it seems you don't understand. I'm arguing "live" casting vs "replay casting" right after the game is ended, not "casting" vs "replays".
|
i never really wanted to ask why the player on tournaments dont just turn on the stream on a second computer screen... because i thought nearly every stream was 20min delayed or something.
but, wow, thats stupid. what an easy way to cheat. very effective and undetectable. O_O
|
On September 06 2010 11:20 GenoZStriker wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:12 Martijn wrote: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.
So have good rules and regulations when it comes to streaming, which I'm pretty sure I included in my first post. I myself have gone to the CraftCup admins and to the ZOTAC Cup admins and told them there really needs to be a set of clear rules and both cups are since taking action to ensure exactly that. Meanwhile I'm hearing go4sc2 is launching an initiative as well to set up rules for streamers.
|
Martijn, you are not getting anything that people say and you keep repeating yourself. It doesn't matter that casters are trying not to lag, as long as they lag they are in the way and the game outcome is being fucked with. Another thing, cheating is the biggest issue here, if you don't get it you have no place arguing in this thread. If you played bw you should know at least a little bit about many well-respected foreign players getting caught hacking multiple times; and everyone in bw community was really paranoid about hacking constantly keeping an eye on every suspicious thing. Still only accidentally those players were caught. Allowing people to play for cash while streaming it live is absolutely idiotic. IDIOTIC.
Also saying that casting replays instantly after the game would affect the viewer in any way is absurd, whoever wanted to watch will still watch, just like everyone religiously watched TSL. It seems to me that you haven't been following actual STARCRAFT at all; not sure what community you came from but this is not how you deal with issues at all.
|
On September 06 2010 12:10 Martijn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:20 GenoZStriker wrote:On September 06 2010 11:12 Martijn wrote: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. So have good rules and regulations when it comes to streaming, which I'm pretty sure I included in my first post. I myself have gone to the CraftCup admins and to the ZOTAC Cup admins and told them there really needs to be a set of clear rules and both cups are since taking action to ensure exactly that. Meanwhile I'm hearing go4sc2 is launching an initiative as well to set up rules for streamers.
If I remember reading right, leading up to the quarters or semi's anyone can cast if they so see fit and the players agree. Once it reaches said quarter/semi only a certain group will be able to.
|
On September 06 2010 12:00 I_Love_Bacon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:38 Martijn wrote: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. Which is why I said it? The difference being live streams in broodwar during tournaments were fairly rare. Now, every day there are live streamed tournaments for sc2 which is why it is a problem. The same old issues exist but the same countermeasures still exist. Livestreaming is a relatively new one.
I'm referring to maphacks in broodwar. The same things that got maphackers in BW caught, would get "stream"hackers (if you will) caught.
|
On September 06 2010 12:17 Martijn wrote:
I'm referring to maphacks in broodwar. The same things that got maphackers in BW caught, would get "stream"hackers (if you will) caught.
Obviously not, you can't "catch" a maphacker without any proof because I can turn my whole army around simply by instinctively realizing something fishy is going on and it would just so happen that the opponent is trying to drop my main. Dino hacked constantly yet no one could prove it until a certain program came out and detected it. Same with hullah and many others. You simply don't know what you are talking about.
Any smart player like white ra will be at such a huge disadvantage if people knew what he was doing lmao. Because his macro alone isn't up to par with what top macro monsters can provide.
|
On September 06 2010 12:11 News wrote:
Martijn, you are not getting anything that people say and you keep repeating yourself. It doesn't matter that casters are trying not to lag, as long as they lag they are in the way and the game outcome is being fucked with. Another thing, cheating is the biggest issue here, if you don't get it you have no place arguing in this thread. If you played bw you should know at least a little bit about many well-respected foreign players getting caught hacking multiple times; and everyone in bw community was really paranoid about hacking constantly keeping an eye on every suspicious thing. Still only accidentally those players were caught. Allowing people to play for cash while streaming it live is absolutely idiotic. IDIOTIC.
Also saying that casting replays instantly after the game would affect the viewer in any way is absurd, whoever wanted to watch will still watch, just like everyone religiously watched TSL. It seems to me that you haven't been following actual STARCRAFT at all; not sure what community you came from but this is not how you deal with issues at all.
At least have a civil discussion, you don't have to be on the debate team to understand that "if you don't get it, well you don't belong here" has no place in a properly formulated argument. What you need to grasp that running a maphack is still just as effective as it was in bw and has almost no disadvantage compared to cheating through a stream while giving players a myriad of information they couldn't get off a stream and whenever they want it. That's what cheating is a whole separate argument and there being a need for a whole different set of countermeasures.
I don't want to get on bad terms with the players, so I don't publicize this and I hope this stays in this thread, but during beta phase one alone I've asked admins to review replays on 4 different occasions because I thought they were fishy. Turns out, they were legit, but that didn't stop me from asking the admins for a review next time it occurred.
On September 06 2010 12:22 News wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 12:17 Martijn wrote:
I'm referring to maphacks in broodwar. The same things that got maphackers in BW caught, would get "stream"hackers (if you will) caught. Obviously not, you can't "catch" a maphacker without any proof because I can turn my whole army around simply by instinctively realizing something fishy is going on and it would just so happen that the opponent is trying to drop my main. Dino hacked constantly yet no one could prove it until a certain program came out and detected it. Same with hullah and many others. You simply don't know what you are talking about. Any smart player like white ra will be at such a huge disadvantage if people knew what he was doing lmao. Because his macro alone isn't up to par with what top macro monsters can provide.
I helped design and implement an anticheat client for league play for what at the time was the biggest dota league. I've done 4 years of league administration for arguably the biggest and most notorious gaming league there was. Saying I don't know what I'm talking about is nothing but a snide remark when I'm one of the few people who has been on all 3 sides of the fence. As a player, an admin and a streamer. Try looking at the situation from a different perspective.
|
Surely someone out there is working on a delayed stream solution. R1CH, think of the children!
|
I don't much have the time to browse through seven pages at the moment, but there are other gaming communities out there who have had similar issues that were resolved by the game developers coding a delayed live view of the match to be played on a different server so it wouldn't lag the players.
Blizzard wanting to bring SCII into the limelight of e-sports would be wise to consider such an under taking. From a competent group of code-monkeys it wouldn't exactly be hard to implement either.
-Two players enter custom match with one ref as the Host
-Host checks "remote viewing" option from side panel
-Game gets put on a five to ten minute queue to prevent cheating
-New tab for remote viewing gets added to the main SCII options
-List of all games being remotely streamed can be selected and watched from there via another server to prevent player lag
-Magic happens; it would be like watching any other replay, only live on a slight delay
Alternatively, people can stop using cardboard boxes for computers and carriers that use dental floss for fiber optics, but not likely. Blizzard has the resources and bandwidth to pull off the aforementioned "streaming" and would put them on par with other e-sport communities who implement similar features.
|
On September 06 2010 12:28 Hold-Lurker wrote:
Surely someone out there is working on a delayed stream solution. R1CH, think of the children!
We have, it's a pain with the current architecture of the streaming platforms, we haven't given up. Optimally we'd get Waaaghtv/hltv/battlecast or such, but we don't have the time nor resources for that. Would be great if the community stepped up here.
|
On September 06 2010 09:55 jamesr12 wrote:
live casting is good for lan style events
bad for online tourneys
I agree. I'm getting kind of sick of all the live casts of online tourneys that wait around for a match to start when there's a dozen other matches going on in the tourney. Doing a delayed replay cast would solve the laggy caster problem for players, allow the casters to cover more of the matches, allow the casters to rewind and look at a different perspective when multiple important things are going on, and prevent players from cheating by watching casts of their own matches while they play. Live casting only belongs at a live event where the organizers can be sure the players aren't cheating.
|
I think having one Referee in the matches and sending replays off to casting teams is by far the easiest idea, everybody wins.
What really appalls me is the lack of respect for the players when obs and casters are asked to leave. I've only seen 1 observer leave the second they were asked, and I have yet to ever see a caster leave the first time they are asked. And I watch a lot of live casts.
Having 1 official caster for an event that is required is a different story and if that person is causing lag it should be changed for the next game so the players can play the game. Casters shouldn't be inherently entitled to cast games even if they're the official stream (if problems are arising), and it feels like every caster and their grandma acts like they're more important than the players. It's pretty disgusting.
Each event should get 1 email address per casting team far prior to the event starting. Delegate X amount of referee's who will spec major games with the big names and distribute the replays once the games are complete. Email is instant, it's not like it's a big deal. If a casting team would like to cast a replay from someone in the tournament that doesn't get caught by one of the official ref's, go talk to one of the players and get the replay. It's by far the simplest way to make this entire issue disappear.
This comes from someone who watches a lot of streams and casts, and I greatly prefer live games to replays. However what I prefer even more is not watching 5 casting teams bicker and fight like little bitches about who can cast what while causing lag that is detrimental to the game quality for the players.
|
On September 06 2010 12:02 Martijn wrote:
The point was that this was argued to be easier than using a maphack, so make it harder. Do you think downloading/running a maphack is harder than having a second person on the phone all game?
Yes, and riskier. Maphacks can be detected, "my friend called me on the phone/yelled from another room/has his laptop next to my computer" can't.
My point was that your "make players run software that blocks IM clients" suggestion was dumb, since there's countless other ways to communicate that information. The only sensible solutions are "don't cast online games live" or "trust professional players to act honorably".
One of those solutions works 100%, the other doesn't, but it has the exact same success rate as your spyware suggestion.
EDIT:
during beta phase one alone I've asked admins to review replays on 4 different occasions because I thought they were fishy. Turns out, they were legit, but that didn't stop me from asking the admins for a review next time it occurred.
I don't understand what your point is, other than "I am paranoid and here's proof".
|
On September 06 2010 12:34 sircuddles wrote:
I think having one Referee in the matches and sending replays off to casting teams is by far the easiest idea, everybody wins.
What really appalls me is the lack of respect for the players when obs and casters are asked to leave. I've only seen 1 observer leave the second they were asked, and I have yet to ever see a caster leave the first time they are asked. And I watch a lot of live casts.
I've left games when asked and I have seen others do it too. Hell, people have probably heard me complain about observers not leaving when asked. When things like this happen, tournament admins should take action against the streamers.
|
Cheating off of a stream is far more effective than cheating using a maphack program because it is nearly impossible to determine the difference between someone who "guessed the right units" and someone who watched the stream. If you aren't incredibly careful with a maphack program, eventually you will look into fog randomly, and get caught. However, streamhacking is much harder to tell from good game sense.
A third party program that delays the stream works incredibly well in HoN, and would be just as effective in SC2. Who cares if you know where the Dark Shrine is 5 minutes after your opponent destroyed 20 of your workers with DTs?
|
If games were played and then the replays sent off to a casting team games could still be live streamed, the only ones knowing the results would be the players and those who they told. This removes the ability to cheat, besides a maphack, because the game would be played before being streamed at all.
On September 06 2010 12:33 phuzi0n wrote:
I agree. I'm getting kind of sick of all the live casts of online tourneys that wait around for a match to start when there's a dozen other matches going on in the tourney. Doing a delayed replay cast would solve the laggy caster problem for players, allow the casters to cover more of the matches, allow the casters to rewind and look at a different perspective when multiple important things are going on, and prevent players from cheating by watching casts of their own matches while they play. Live casting only belongs at a live event where the organizers can be sure the players aren't cheating.
This is right on.
|
^ Well that's just you Martijn. Don't forget you're not the only casters around and it has happened multiple times where players ask the obs to leave and they don't. And when admins are not obsing the game it's worst.
|
On September 06 2010 12:35 kojinshugi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 12:02 Martijn wrote:
The point was that this was argued to be easier than using a maphack, so make it harder. Do you think downloading/running a maphack is harder than having a second person on the phone all game? Yes, and riskier. Maphacks can be detected, "my friend called me on the phone/yelled from another room/has his laptop next to my computer" can't. My point was that your "make players run software that blocks IM clients" suggestion was dumb, since there's countless other ways to communicate that information. The only sensible solutions are "don't cast online games live" or "trust professional players to act honorably". One of those solutions works 100%, the other doesn't, but it has the exact same success rate as your spyware suggestion. EDIT: Show nested quote +during beta phase one alone I've asked admins to review replays on 4 different occasions because I thought they were fishy. Turns out, they were legit, but that didn't stop me from asking the admins for a review next time it occurred. I don't understand what your point is, other than "I am paranoid and here's proof".
Really, you think maphacks get detected 100%? In most any gaming community there's 2 classes of hacks, 1 the public ones which the anticheat clients attempt to spot, 2 the private ones which are practically never banned. I know of leagues that have gone as far as to buy private hacks in a futile attempt to catch them. A day after the next version of the AC comes out, they're updated and undetectable again. Hell, I've seen leagues resort to activities which I'm pretty certain break laws just to find cheaters heh, but that's nothing to talk about in public.
On September 06 2010 12:41 GenoZStriker wrote:
^ Well that's just you Martijn. Don't forget you're not the only casters around and it has happened multiple times where players ask the obs to leave and they don't. And when admins are not obsing the game it's worst.
Tournaments should get rid of those streamers. Hell, the admins are often watching the stream instead of obsing so should know if it occurs.
|
If players are interested in bigger prize pools and being able to actually make a living off of a video game, then they are going to have to put up with spectators and the media circus that surrounds the delivery of such content to the people paying the bills.
|
On September 06 2010 12:02 Martijn wrote:The point was that this was argued to be easier than using a maphack, so make it harder. Do you think downloading/running a maphack is harder than having a second person on the phone all game?
Using map-hacks would be pre-meditated cheating, whereas leaving a stream on while playing would be opportunistic. It's a fact of human nature that people who would never break the rules with pre-meditation, sometimes succumb to opportunistic rule-breaking (because the temptation arises). (It's easy, after all. Many players in tournaments watch streams in between rounds etc.)
|
On September 06 2010 12:44 Martijn wrote:
Really, you think maphacks get detected 100%?
No, which is why I didn't say anything of the kind?
|
I've always wondered how many games people like Trump lose because they cast their games.
I'm sure even in tournaments cheating off streams happens all the time. Why wouldn't it?
|
i agree with this.. but I think its necessary for big LAN events. being "live" just makes it worth watching. However, they do need to somehow include a 3-5 minute delay. i definitely know that people have cheated this way, there are too many other there who would, and too many prize tournies.
|
It should be up to the players I'd they want their games casted. I watched the first Iccup live stream tournament one time and a player was concerned about cheating in the game . But thy could see if you were giving tips to the other player about their opponent . But they knew the ip adress of the person and if they were watching they knew and would be dQ. I don't think they the battle.net would have that and major tournaments. Those casters could just cast replays like what husky and HD do aswelll as day9.
|
I think the idea of simply playing the game, saving the replay, and having that replay IMMEDIATELY casted is a good one.
Like HuK says I mean there's no opportunity really for spoilers, we'll be watching the game with possibly as little as a 2 minute delay.
|
On September 06 2010 11:33 JoshSuth wrote:
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. =(
In other sports, when we had a spoiler free discussion or broadcast, those who spoiled were banned.
End of discussion.
IP Banned, Account banned.
We had a seperate location where people could "live discuss" ie spoilers were allowed.
It was widely used by journalists and professional analysts.
|
JW... Wasn't the TSL2 casted off of replays? Personally I didn't see a problem with that, even if the game is played before the streams start, as long as Games start at X and everything is ready... I personally wouldn't mind if its a replay or not, as long as its a live event.
|
I think it should definitely be up to the player. If it is effecting their performance, and possibly costing them games, it just doesn't seem worth it. And it also seems detrimental to the people watching, not being able to see the game being played at the highest possible level due to lag or other factors.
I can handle waiting an hour or so to watch a game if I know me watching the game had no negative effect on the players. Don't get me wrong, I love livestreams, but I can go without them if it means everything works out better that way.
|
You guys do realize that for E-Sports to grow, there must be live games right? If you guys ever been to a live performance, a live game, a live anything, then you should know that it just isn't the same. A replay simply does not invoke the same feel as a live performance. Now, I'm all for player's choice, but I'm saying there's a cost to it. So yeah, just think about it. It really is easy to side with the players for all the moral reasoning, but if you just think as devil's advocate for a second, then you'd see the other side.
|
Honestly I think it'd work a lot better with just the admin in there to observe games. Send in replays to the people you want to stream/cast the games, or make the replays public so that anyone who wants to stream/cast games can. Hell if you made them public I could just watch the replay myself and not have to put up with a commentator I dislike which is what happens sometimes now if there's only one person commentating.
Live commentating would be fine for LAN events, but shouldn't be done for all of these online tourneys that are taking place. It just isn't practical for the players at all.
|
I love watching good players on the tournaments they play, but i really dont need it to be live.
Players should be able to perform under the best circumstances possible.
This includes games performance and cheating
The cheating issue is a big factor, games would need a huge delay to minimize this problem.
Instant casts after a game are definatly reasonable.
|
On September 06 2010 09:44 Torture wrote:Personally I watch VODs most of the time because I can't be bothered to figure out what time the event is going on in my timezone. KOTB as you said was done purely off replays and it was one of the best tournaments I've watched. (And one of the few I've watched "live") Lagging casters are annoying for all involved. Terrible for the players, terrible for viewers who just want to watch a good game, and probably pretty annoying for the caster as well. It should be a one strike (maybe two if you're feeling generous) rule with the players calling the shots. If they don't leave you (the player) should be allowed to ban them from casting anymore of your games.
I was goanna type something out, but then this guy basically said exactly what I wanted to.
+1 to you sir!
|
Been busy all day so weighing in on this late, I think casting vs players needs to be a certain amount of give and take involved. Like both have be willing to compromise, having a lightweight crew usually only 2 people in a game as one of the casters is running the stream we don't usually run into lag issues.
The issue lies in the whole concept of "live" there a tournaments that go out of their way to never tell you that the games are being cast from replays so people think it is still "live" like it is being played right now because there is a whole group of viewers who are snobs about the whole "live" thing. So because of the whole thing about big tournaments with big prizes are as much about the viewers as the players sometimes you have to make accomodations. Without the viewers there's no sponsors, without sponsors there are no big prize pools. So in the big events yeah lag is going to happen sometimes but it should not be a common occurance.
At the same time IEM Cologne actually stopped games while bnet was taking a dump on them and causing mad lag everywhere because since there was so much $$ they didnt want the lag to influence the games. The issue of delay is always going to be controversial minor issues are going to be brushed aside as hte cost of bringing the viewers what they want to see. But when there are major lag issues and there is a good amount of money on the line they should be willing to cut down on the in game staff as well.
When it comes to small events it depends, the gosucoaching weekly model is designed around doing it live so that it's a long event with their logo up constantly but not a ton of $$ on the line. Without the live part of it if they do just replays they dont get as much exposure for their money. It's a difficult issue but there is a real issue of admin overload getting too many people in game and especially when it's a tournament admin lagging the game. What are you supposed to say to that in those situations you can't really say "dude you're lagging get out." Because it is his tournament he can just say "no."
tl;dr lag happens minor issues are going to have to be dealt with but major issues should be dealt with by trying to fix them. Tournaments and players both need to learn to compromise on this issue.
|
On September 06 2010 13:37 jeddus wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 11:33 JoshSuth wrote:
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. =( In other sports, when we had a spoiler free discussion or broadcast, those who spoiled were banned. End of discussion. IP Banned, Account banned. We had a seperate location where people could "live discuss" ie spoilers were allowed. It was widely used by journalists and professional analysts.
Sadly if you google xproxy and if you know what you're looking for you have a new ip to spoil the next match faster than a 6pool. Tournaments that are played on a set schedule are going to get spoiled. Whether it's because only certain people get the replays, upsetting other streamers, players wanting to ruin matches of others they don't like or just plainly people that set out to ruin games purely for the sake of being that guy.
In the end it's the tournament admins that make the prizes available. They deal with the sponsors and have to show that they're getting good exposure. It's their decission what rules are in place for streamers. Up to the players to decide which tournaments they want to play in.
|
On September 06 2010 13:44 HardcoreBilly wrote:
You guys do realize that for E-Sports to grow, there must be live games right? If you guys ever been to a live performance, a live game, a live anything, then you should know that it just isn't the same. A replay simply does not invoke the same feel as a live performance. Now, I'm all for player's choice, but I'm saying there's a cost to it. So yeah, just think about it. It really is easy to side with the players for all the moral reasoning, but if you just think as devil's advocate for a second, then you'd see the other side.
QFT, if you players want more money for tournaments, live casting is the going to be the thing that grows the community.
Watching replays? Meh, don't sign me up for that, I would rather pay for live then replay.
|
Another vote for no need for live. Delay / Complication > possibility of cheating and degraded environment for players.
Though Blizzard should have something like this in the interface. You should be able to organize a tourney and it would auto upload the replays to the organizers. Or better yet maybe a separate ob interface that has a 5 minute delay built in. Running a tourney with B.Net 2.0 could/should be much better.
|
On September 06 2010 13:54 Martijn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 13:37 jeddus wrote:On September 06 2010 11:33 JoshSuth wrote:
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. =( In other sports, when we had a spoiler free discussion or broadcast, those who spoiled were banned. End of discussion. IP Banned, Account banned. We had a seperate location where people could "live discuss" ie spoilers were allowed. It was widely used by journalists and professional analysts. Sadly if you google xproxy and if you know what you're looking for you have a new ip to spoil the next match faster than a 6pool. .
The issue is not whether or not someone can still spoil.
The point is they get the message it is not tolerated.
Oh, sure, they can make a new account, they can find a way to ruin people's fun.
But eventually they get tired and bored of being trolls.
Eventually they grow up.
|
Live casting belongs in LAN events only.
Nothing stopping a player putting the cast up in 1 monitor, the game in another and ghosting the entire match in an online tournament
|
On September 06 2010 13:44 HardcoreBilly wrote:
You guys do realize that for E-Sports to grow, there must be live games right?
Right, and those are usually out of our LAN events with live coverage, such as WCG.
Where were you for TSL or TSL 2?
I think both of those events helped eSports grow tremendously.
Just because a live broadcast is ALWAYS possible doesn't mean it is ALWAYS the best option.
In an ideal world, sure, they should all be live.
We don't have the ideal though, we need a case by case decision.
|
On September 06 2010 13:58 jeddus wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 13:54 Martijn wrote:On September 06 2010 13:37 jeddus wrote:On September 06 2010 11:33 JoshSuth wrote:
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. =( In other sports, when we had a spoiler free discussion or broadcast, those who spoiled were banned. End of discussion. IP Banned, Account banned. We had a seperate location where people could "live discuss" ie spoilers were allowed. It was widely used by journalists and professional analysts. Sadly if you google xproxy and if you know what you're looking for you have a new ip to spoil the next match faster than a 6pool. . The issue is not whether or not someone can still spoil. The point is they get the message it is not tolerated. Oh, sure, they can make a new account, they can find a way to ruin people's fun. But eventually they get tired and bored of being trolls. Eventually they grow up.
And then the next one steps up.. It being "not tolerated" even encourages some of them even more. Or people are just spiteful, say because they got banned for a different reason. Believe me when I say that I really wish it were that easy :/
And that's all aside from the fact that some people might just check out the results for themselves and then decide whether to watch or not. Costing streams viewers and as such costing tournament metrics.
|
On September 06 2010 11:00 Fantistic wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:45 GenoZStriker wrote:On September 06 2010 10:44 tertle wrote:
Pretty much we just need waaaghtv for sc2
Only 1 observer but everyone get's to watch live... This. This is what we need. Sadly there is no LAN for SC2 but it would rid most of the problems players like HuK, MorroW and Idra are pointing out. This is what happens when Blizzard fail to implement a LAN feature. It was obvious that these problems would occur. Here's to hoping that they'll include it in the expansion.
Id like to know how LAN would resolve this lag issue when some tournaments are played exclusively over Battle.Net, with casters and both players all far apart from eachother.
|
^ If you read what he is quoting you would understand. Are you familiar with programs such as Garena and WaaaghTV? Commonly used in the Warcraft 3 and DotA scene where you can observe games through LAN (you'd still need internet connection) but it did not affect the ongoing game at all because you were technically not in the game. It was like watching CS through HLTV. All you needed in the game were the players and the one who broadcasts it and anyone can see it. It had a delay as well.
|
If its a LAN, cast it live, if its online, wait till the match is over and cast the replay... Honestly...
|
Is there no possible way for the stream to be delayed a few minutes?
Get some of our genius programmers on the case!
|
1. Limit the number of casters
2. Only allow verified, professional casters (e.g. people who will leave if they cause lag)
3. Add a delay to the live streams, but not too heavy of a delay
I think the IEM Group Stages went really well today with just the two dedicated casters (iccup & glhf.tv), one on each match at each time. I don't like it when there's like 3 casters and a few obs too, people end up talking, lagging, and just being annoying. Also I've seen instances where it really felt like one of the players was watching the stream.
Cheating is definitely the big issue here, not lag or "pressure to the players" (<- nonsense).
|
If I was playing for money I would not let any live stream of my games happen its just dumb as much as you want to please the community you need to eat and anyone with a friend or an extra laptop can see what is happening and no one has to know they cheated.
|
On September 06 2010 14:20 alphafuzard wrote:
Is there no possible way for the stream to be delayed a few minutes?
Get some of our genius programmers on the case!
It would cost whoever runs the RTMP server some serious memory usage, so basically good luck. I'm not sure if it would be possible to do it on the streamers desktop, maybe if he had a beastly machine you could figure out a way to rig a delay, but honestly, why not just give the players a clean, lag free game, and cast the match when its over 10 mins later.
|
Totally agree. Even LAN events can leave open the possibility for cheating (depending on the streams delay), via spectators filling people in on missed scouting information and the like. Or worse still, players overhearing the casters at a live LAN event.
When there's money on the line, people will cheat if they are able to.
|
As someone who has run various tournaments that ask for replays to be sent in, I find it amusing for players to suggest that people just cast replays, when players never give them out. It takes so much time and harassment of a player just to get the replays you require for a tournament. Most players are under the idea that they're doing me or another tournament organizer a favor by playing. They think they can just show up without reading anything about the tournament, such as where to send replays, how to report results, or what the map pool is. There are the individual few who have of course been great and take the time to make sure they're doing everything right. But 80% of players don't read rules or news about tournaments and just look for the prize pool and time.
I'll happily organize tournaments in the future that have delayed casts of one hour (any sort of tournament that has games casted a week after they are done is asking for leaks and spoils) that are from replays, when all the players in a tournament actually take the time to give me the replays that I ask from them.
|
100% support. I watch many casts of pro matches, and the only thing I care about is seeing good games where both players played to their best.
If live casting affects this in any tiny way at all, for God's sake, just cast it 15 minutes later off a replay.
But players, please provide us the replays ;D
On September 06 2010 14:40 Alou wrote:
As someone who has run various tournaments that ask for replays to be sent in, I find it amusing for players to suggest that people just cast replays, when players never give them out.
It's so easy, put in your tournaments rules that not uploading a replay gets you booted, worked nicely at IEM.
|
Even easier, have 1 tounry rep in each game and have HIM save the replay to give out to the casters after. No lag for players, guaranteed replays, and the fans get to see the games. E z p z
Dont say there is too many games going on, im sure u could find enough volunteers in the community to obs and save replays.
The point is that the players should be #1 priority. If a player is lagging, like huk was, playing from Canada on eu, every bit of lag is amplified. Casters need to show some respect for the people giving them something to cast.
|
I agree 100%. The only streamer should be whoever runs the tournament. Even then the issue of cheating is pretty big if it has no delay (even with delay).
On September 06 2010 09:55 jamesr12 wrote:
live casting is good for lan style events
bad for online tourneys
Summed up it quite nicely.
|
I find it surprising that so many games are cast 100% live solely for the reason people can easily have the stream open in the background, especially the higher rounds. It benefits everyone to cast the replays (fair games are much more enjoyable, right?)
|
The only tournament I've watched all the way through was the HDH. I like replays because you can watch them at your own pace. As long as the shoutcasters sound like the action is as new to them as it is to you then I don't care if it's already happend (and unlike most people I don't have a problem with HD or husky). All things considered between lagging obs and cheating I think replays are far superior to live casts.
|
Organizers really need to be prepared for both live casting and replay casting possibilities. Sometimes unforeseen issues come up where live casting isn't really a good option, and I think these rules which force players to have streamers is kind of unfair to the players if an issue comes up. Not to mention when a famous player like Idra is playing in the early round of a tourny, a streamer could demand to stream the game when everyone else can just play their opponent on their own, so I'd imagine that would get really annoying for the more famous players to have to be bothered/slowed down by casters in the early stages of a tournament.
|
I watch progames for the quality of the play. If the lag kills the quality I may as well be watching random VODs of any Diamond player.
|
On September 06 2010 15:33 Grond wrote:
I watch progames for the quality of the play. If the lag kills the quality I may as well be watching random VODs of any Diamond player.
same... i hate it when im watching a replay pack and you start seeing things like both players saying leave leave leave leave over and over =/
|
Look at every sport in the world!!
Premier League Football, baseball in the USA etc etc. In ALL of these sports there is not a single commentator that is more important than the player. How many casters get paid in non esports more than say Wayne Rooney? NOT ONE!!
If we want esports to grow to like it is in Korea, companies need one official and maybe 2 casters max!! And alot better organisation.
Some of the casters think they have a god given right to be there, there are only two people that have that, the two players.
14 observers in a game is totally ridiculous.
Tell me what is the point? I would love to be an observer in a pro game, but if I lagged the joint up and I was asked by a player to leave I would have no hesitation in doing so, but I have lost count how many times in vods or replays I have seen an observer asked to leave and they just stay right where they are.
Very bad manners in my honest opinion.
I totally agree with Huk on this one.
If it weren't for the players people would have no one to watch.
|
What's so great about live? Upload the replays as soon as the game is done and watch it 2 minutes after. I"d rather watch a game where both players played to the best of their ability under optimal conditions. I have watched many a replay of HuK - and when the game ends you see "HuK has left the game, player x has left the game" - which is them followed by 59 randoms also leaving the game; so I can see where he is coming from.
To be honest, it should and is always is up to the players. Let them decide how they want to play. They should not feel pressured to allow unnecessary others to live steam / observe their games.
|
On September 06 2010 15:01 azzu wrote:100% support. I watch many casts of pro matches, and the only thing I care about is seeing good games where both players played to their best. If live casting affects this in any tiny way at all, for God's sake, just cast it 15 minutes later off a replay. But players, please provide us the replays ;D Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 14:40 Alou wrote:
As someone who has run various tournaments that ask for replays to be sent in, I find it amusing for players to suggest that people just cast replays, when players never give them out. It's so easy, put in your tournaments rules that not uploading a replay gets you booted, worked nicely at IEM.
We've still had to do our fair share of threatening and harassing to get replays uploaded also. I doubt a single tournament can have even 50% of matches upload replays without having to harass some people to do it since most players seem to not even bother to learn how to properly report results. (Talking about qualifiers)
On September 06 2010 15:08 Fodder03 wrote:
Even easier, have 1 tounry rep in each game and have HIM save the replay to give out to the casters after. No lag for players, guaranteed replays, and the fans get to see the games. E z p z
Dont say there is too many games going on, im sure u could find enough volunteers in the community to obs and save replays.
Yea, sure. I highly doubt you can find 250ish volunteers to trust to obs and save the replay and send it in without a fair bit of failure and possibly cheating involved.
On September 06 2010 15:42 Danze wrote:
What's so great about live? Upload the replays as soon as the game is done and watch it 2 minutes after.
If you can find a way to get players to upload the replays without constantly having to threaten them with bans because they refuse to, then that might be a possibility. Until then, it's not an option because too many players feel the need to refuse to upload replays until someone personally has to threaten them to do it.
On September 06 2010 15:37 Drteeth wrote:
Look at every sport in the world!!
Premier League Football, baseball in the USA etc etc. In ALL of these sports there is not a single commentator that is more important than the player. How many casters get paid in non esports more than say Wayne Rooney? NOT ONE!
John Madden got paid roughly 8x the average salary in the NFL.
|
|
|
Martijn, as a viewer, I personally will be making sure not to watch the stream of anyone I see streaming live. I feel like it is utterly selfish for Casters to refuse to wait like 10 minutes...ridiculous. After reading this post, I'm only watching replays or casters doing replays.
|
The issue was raised because of "a lot" of casters in the games. I don't think anyone is arguing for 10+ casters in the games.
That issue is easy to fix: only a few casters in the games.
Replay vs live is another matter. I remember Day9 telling how difficult it was to get the replays from the players. Besides, if you cast from replays there is no way to schedule the final as the start time depends on the duration of the first game. While everyone waits some moron spiols the results.
|
Like Raelcun and a billion other people in this thread have said, if only 1 official streamer streams (maybe 2-3 MAX for different languages in certain circumstances) the problem is solved and lag won't be an issue. if there is any lag from the casters, they leave, and they cast the replay. done. having a fuckton of casters is stupid and only makes for worse game quality, especially when people who spend hours a day practicing get screwed over because of lag
|
On September 06 2010 16:02 Elegy wrote:
Like Raelcun and a billion other people in this thread have said, if only 1 official streamer streams (maybe 2-3 MAX for different languages in certain circumstances) the problem is solved and lag won't be an issue. if there is any lag from the casters, they leave, and they cast the replay. done. having a fuckton of casters is stupid and only makes for worse game quality, especially when people who spend hours a day practicing get screwed over because of lag
How does this fix cheating? Do you not think that 900 Euro is enough to make someone open their browser and be able to view a stream in a few clicks?
|
On September 06 2010 15:57 Mohdoo wrote:
Martijn, as a viewer, I personally will be making sure not to watch the stream of anyone I see streaming live. I feel like it is utterly selfish for Casters to refuse to wait like 10 minutes...ridiculous. After reading this post, I'm only watching replays or casters doing replays.
And so the narrowminded bandwagoning against casters begins full-on. This is exactly the sort of thing that TotalBiscuit warned against, and ironically got banned for.
|
For replay casts the result of a game is already clear the the caster most of the time and that will spoil the cast, because the excitement is lost. Live casts for big tournaments (number of players and not the prize money) are really the best way to do it, because there are too many people to check up and the results will be easily visible in the tournament brackets. Spoilers are no fun.
I think the players need to get used to the pressure too, because SC2 is becoming an eSport and every sport lives and falls with the spectators. Sport without spectators does not work and even the pressure of being watched by thousands of nerds live can work to some players advantage.
|
On September 06 2010 16:03 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 16:02 Elegy wrote:
Like Raelcun and a billion other people in this thread have said, if only 1 official streamer streams (maybe 2-3 MAX for different languages in certain circumstances) the problem is solved and lag won't be an issue. if there is any lag from the casters, they leave, and they cast the replay. done. having a fuckton of casters is stupid and only makes for worse game quality, especially when people who spend hours a day practicing get screwed over because of lag How does this fix cheating? Do you not think that 900 Euro is enough to make someone open their browser and be able to view a stream in a few clicks?
oh wow, could have sworn i typed in a part about stream delay. weird T_T.
Surely it is possible for a streaming service to implement a delay of, say, 10 minutes to the stream. Arbitrary number of course and might not be sufficient, but its either that or cast the replays (and as G2wolf said, getting replays can be very difficult and i imagine its a frustrating process).
|
On September 06 2010 16:04 Alphaes wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 15:57 Mohdoo wrote:
Martijn, as a viewer, I personally will be making sure not to watch the stream of anyone I see streaming live. I feel like it is utterly selfish for Casters to refuse to wait like 10 minutes...ridiculous. After reading this post, I'm only watching replays or casters doing replays. And so the narrowminded bandwagoning against casters begins full-on. This is exactly the sort of thing that TotalBiscuit warned against, and ironically got banned for.
I realize I am being very
stubborn on the issue, but I just see it as such an easy way to cheat. I feel like it is too much of a temptation for some people. In a 200+ player huge tournament, its hard to be confident every game was legit.
|
On September 06 2010 16:04 Alphaes wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 15:57 Mohdoo wrote:
Martijn, as a viewer, I personally will be making sure not to watch the stream of anyone I see streaming live. I feel like it is utterly selfish for Casters to refuse to wait like 10 minutes...ridiculous. After reading this post, I'm only watching replays or casters doing replays. And so the narrowminded bandwagoning against casters begins full-on. This is exactly the sort of thing that TotalBiscuit warned against, and ironically got banned for.
Honestly, I think this isn't a bad thing at all. The majority of amateur casters are mediocre/sub-par and the fact that they all feel entitled to lag up an event is absurd. If anything it'll at least weed out this nasty attitude that has plagued new casters and at least force them to be courteous and just live-cast reps.
Ok I guess my tone is a bit harsh. The biggest problem I think is when casters feel that they NEED to be in a game. I just am wondering where common courtesy went - if you lag the game, just leave. Anytime I try to cast a friends game just for a group of other friends, and lag issues come up, I instantly stop since I know how frustrating lag can be.
If anyone has played a game with unberable lag they should sympathize with the players. That means anyone who's played SC2 at all. It seems that "bandwagonning" against this mass casting issue would produce a lot more good at this point.
|
I really don't know why people care so much about the games being casted live, as long as the players don't spoil the game results seeing the replay 10 minutes after the game was played is the same thing as watching it live...
|
The most important thing is the integrity of the game. VOD please.
|
Osaka27151 Posts
On September 06 2010 16:04 Alphaes wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 15:57 Mohdoo wrote:
Martijn, as a viewer, I personally will be making sure not to watch the stream of anyone I see streaming live. I feel like it is utterly selfish for Casters to refuse to wait like 10 minutes...ridiculous. After reading this post, I'm only watching replays or casters doing replays. And so the narrowminded bandwagoning against casters begins full-on. This is exactly the sort of thing that TotalBiscuit warned against, and ironically got banned for.
Dude, it is one guy. Don't go nailing yourself to a cross just yet.
|
People who say, Players should be allowed to say that caster or obs cant be in the game.
I'd say its completely up to the casters and the admins of the tournie, as its their money they put into it, if they want coverage of it, they should be able to cover the a match.
Its just bullshit to say that its up to the player, if they dont wanna get casted, cus it lags? dont play then, no one force you to play.
Go make a tournie yourself with your own money as prizes, and then suddenly, you are not allowed to watch the game, cus the player dont want to. its unfair to the host, and he wants coverage, he should be allowed that.
|
I feel like one caster could be put into the game... I mean is the lag that bad compared to just having no casters? I feel like some events being live streamed is fun and quite neat, I mean there's definitely a difference in watching something live and something that's pre-recorded.
That being said however, from a player perspective I can see totally see the desire to have the most desirable and comfortable gaming environment.
I really feel like this is an issue that Blizzard should have dealt with.
|
On September 06 2010 15:43 G2Wolf wrote:
Yea, sure. I highly doubt you can find 250ish volunteers to trust to obs and save the replay and send it in without a fair bit of failure and possibly cheating involved.
Why would you need 250 people? If there are 3 groups of casters casting a single event, you would need a maximum of 3 people. They can only cast one game at a time, and if they were casting live only a maximum of 3 games could be casted. This puts 3 observers (not including admins) with a maximum of 1 per game out there instead of 8+ with possible overlap.
(This isn't directed to you in particular, just in general) I don't think it's a lot to ask for, especially considering the stance most casters are taking. If viewership and casting are so absolutely integral to the propagation of SC2 as an online e-sport, then get organized and put some effort into how it's done instead of letting 10 groups of people fumble around randomly lagging games at every online event.
|
Wouldn't a simple rule of making the winner of every match have to upload/send the replays to an admin/tourney site to be able to advance eliminate the problem of having to 'threaten' or 'hassle' players to send their reps in? I mean.. you don't wanna send in your reps? np, get dq'd. Then have the replays casted to eliminate all the other cheating/lag/retardedness/stress issues that are being piled up on top of the players.
offtopic
ps; martijn, are you the same one from CAL?
|
There is something different about watching events live. Why do people stay up late night to watch IEM or GSL ? Because there is a bit of magic to watching something live. When you watch a football match , you want to watch it live. Unless you are specially interested in the game there is very little chance people watching it when they send it later on.
|
On September 06 2010 16:46 Sqq wrote:
There is something different about watching events live. Why do people stay up late night to watch IEM or GSL ? Because there is a bit of magic to watching something live. When you watch a football match , you want to watch it live. Unless you are specially interested in the game there is very little chance people watching it when they send it later on.
i'd be more inclined to believe it's impatience
|
On September 06 2010 16:15 Skeyser wrote:
I really don't know why people care so much about the games being casted live, as long as the players don't spoil the game results seeing the replay 10 minutes after the game was played is the same thing as watching it live...
With any tournament with more than 16 players and has 359374953475 viewers, there's absolutely no way that the results won't get leaked almost instantly.
On September 06 2010 16:35 sikatrix wrote:
Wouldn't a simple rule of making the winner of every match have to upload/send the replays to an admin/tourney site to be able to advance eliminate the problem of having to 'threaten' or 'hassle' players to send their reps in? I mean.. you don't wanna send in your reps? np, get dq'd. Then have the replays casted to eliminate all the other cheating/lag/retardedness/stress issues that are being piled up on top of the players.
offtopic
ps; martijn, are you the same one from CAL?
The problem is with the big (128+ person tournaments) is that people want to just play their matches and start on their next match right away without uploading. The problem is too widespread, it would result in 40% of a tournament being dq'd after the first round.
|
Good point HuK, however, there are a few problems with this in a tournament format.
For one, LANs.
LANs, due to them attracting real audience (and with real I mean that the people are actually there), can't be played without a live stream. It just wouldn't work, and it wouldn't be as enjoyable for the people watching as it should.
Secondly, as far as I know, tournaments follow a tight scheduale, which means you can't get rid of the Admin in there, anyway. And if we look at this, too, from a LAN perspective, you would end up with a delay of the games(due to them getting casted after the actual game finishes) , which means the event will go on for a longer time, which, from a spectator PoV, can't be a good thing. What if you end up in an epic 45 minute long macro game vs IdrA in the 7th game of a BO7 in the finals, and as you've finished, the casters simply wont have enough time to cast the match, due to the event ending (Again, LAN perspective here).
I like the general idea you posted about, however I do not see any simple ways to get around the problem at hands, especially at a LAN event.
|
I prefer live streams, tbh.... Feels moar epix :D
There's no way to stop cheating anyway (like map hax), so if players want to cheat, there's nothing stopping them. The stream makes it easier, though.
If any observers lag, they should leave immediately, no matter what. And if they don't, there name should go on a public list of blocked observers and be barred from observing any other games in the tourney.
|
For me replays take away most of the fun at such daily tournaments, since results spread too fast and i'm one of the type who checks every coverage site to see results. For example, you have to report your lose at Zotac Cup. So you can check the bracket and see the result.
Given i know the result, live games are boring and i'd rather watch a stream like the one of CellaWeRRa. I know it's my fault for checking results, but it also makes those coverage sites, they try to get results as fast as possible to be the best coverage site!
|
Get rid of livestreams and just send the replays after the game for people to cast it. It wouldn't really make much of a difference for people who watch it.
The guy who streams just waits for the replay, talks whatever he wants to talk about in the meantime, he downloads the replay and he starts casting. Everyone would watch the game just 2-4 minutes after it has been played.
|
I think this thread needs a new title.
Can't a compromise be reached? Maybe just 1 caster per game? The admin should not be in-game. The admin's responsibility is to pick a responsible caster, and give that caster the responsibility of judging some things, including whether DCs were close or not.
|
players and casters should fight it out in the arena, like uwe boll with his critics
|
huk is right about the problem, but its neither the players fault to complain nor the casters fault to join the games. biscuit is right about the fact that this thread has to be full of trolls, so i read only posts from people i know.
1. games need a lock button to prevent people from f list following
2. admins need to create all games beginning with the quarters with one english and maybe one stream in their native language (for their local sponsor). so we come down to players + 1-4 (co)caster + 1 admin that leaves the game after creation.
3. i can not understand why observers are allowed in any kind of serious tournament. Especially when the tourney is online everybody feels free to join and sneaks in.
that is the best solution and it is already fact for ESL tournaments. sadly its tough to organize and there are still waiting periods, but this method solves tons of problems.
|
On September 06 2010 09:40 HuK wrote:
Hi I'm really bad at this but I'm going to try since it comes up so often.
Almost all top players as far as I can think at some point or another have had some issues with this (including Idra, morrow, myself, etc. etc.) so I think it would be healthy for it to be discuss publicly.
The issues with games being livestreamed:
Negatives
- Lag
Lag with usually 1 video guy, 2 casters, 1 admin ( 4 people in general) for the main stream is a lot of players even if it only adds a slight amount of lag/delay to game play on top of other issues players might be having including cross realm play. This in no way includes every other person who wants to cast/stream the games.
- Cheating
Believe it or not people are not always moral. On the contrary I find it hard to believe as an intelligent human being that people won't cheat. As far as I know no "livestreams" have any delay besides a few seconds added to their stream. So something such as Gosucup which I played today where 900 euro is the 1st place and the games are being live streamed sooner or later someone will cheat if it hasn't already happened (which I'm sure it has). Other then that it is also almost undetectable and can't be proven. I am no way accusing adelscott of doing this just saying it is a possibility in the past/future/present for such especially with money involved. Obviously at LANs this is not an issue.
- Stress
Thats right boohoo stress to the players, but you have no idea from week to week to play in ESL how many messages from legit and unlegit people you get asking to stream your games. If people had it their way every single game I play and most top players in general would be full with different streamers who constantly lag and complain about how they are more important to the other. More importantly when there is lag even on screen peoples names popping up, they don't leave. This is ontop of trying to focus on playing, dealing with admins, other players, etc. etc.
Positives
-Live games
You get to watch games 5-10 minutes before they could just be streamed as replays when players send them in is the only real advantage I see from "live games". But is it really worth it considered the negative effects?
Now many people are going to say, "but if its live it will attract more viewers." Which isn't really true, two of the biggest tournaments/most successful were both done off of pure replays. (HDH / DAY9 KOTB)
I will do my best to keep this thread very open and edit any good input people have to the OP from either side, if I fall behind feel free admins to do it if you wish.
Ok lets review this.
Lag.
If some one plays in EU tournament against other EU players (with EU casters) and lags... well thats his fault not the casters.
Also many "friends" of players join the games instead of casters. And most of the time its them that are lagging.
Ok its been posted before that tournament should have official streamers, and only those streamers should be permitted to stream that tourney. If there are few streamers the admin should assign them before the tournament the "path" in the bracket that they keep on no matter what. (Admin could have set the rules of assigning path like this. 1. language of the player 2. number of viewers last week 3. some other way.)
Basically the tourney admins can do a lot to minimize the so called lags.
Cheating
Well there arent many players with a mind eye to quess the tech switch or path ideally. Good admins and streamers would pick this up and report to tournament admins for a check.
And no this kind of cheating is almost the easiest to discover.
Stress
Okay so a 24h long tournament is less stressful than a few PM about if they can cast the game?
Cause in a Bo3 there is a chance that it can take even up to a 1h30minutes. So the each round of the tournament will be delayed by such time. Why? cause viewers dont like the spoilers (match history or brackets). People like watching Live cause there is always a hint of uncertainty. Will there be a turnaround victory? Will the underdog win?. Watching the replay when they now the results its bad. One of the reason i switch off chat during the HDH (people always spoiling reasults). In Live events you always discuss the plays in chat. Exchange your views between other viewers.
Oh btw.
Niether Huk or Morrow respect viewers or sponsors. Look at MGL (for Huk) and first day of IEM for Morrow.
|
I ignored the cheating part because my stream is consistantly a good several minutes behind anyway. I've had people try to cheat off my stream in ladder games only to realize oh fuck it's behind and I'm not getting any useful information. I had one guy even tell me this straight up, cheating is easily solved by delaying the stream. There are easy ways to do this by making your stream lag intentionally if you're on ustream for instance before you start the even where you will be casting live start your stream and open as much shit as you can on your computer so it slows down your stream misses frames and ustream will cause a delay because ustream does not skip frames to catch up when it's on the streamer's end.
Livestream is harder but it still works, you can also stream on bad internet it works basically the same way. There are also more elegant ways to delay the stream but that is by far the most simple.
edit: This is why after loading screens on big maps in particular or spending far too long on loading screens the streams will lag ever so slightly adding to some minor delay that adds up over time.
|
mm... imo, it should be that the admins can make up whatever rules they want for their tournament. if the players don't want to follow those rules, then they shouldn't sign up for the tournament, or talk to the admin about getting the rules changed.
I personally, don't think there's much of a difference between watching casted replays or watching livestreams, and think that as long as the players are forced to submit their replays or be kicked from the tournament, that it seems practical.
|
I definitly agree to HuK's OP. Players should be granted the right to deny livestreams, IF they promise to send replays directly afterwards to an admin or a caster.
I have to admit, personally I like real live streams much more, because I feel like being in the games, but if this hurts the gaming experience of the players, this can not be done.
And the only caster that should have (if it has to be) the right to force the players to let him observe, should only be the official caster (f.e. in ESL TaKe, all other get a "bye").
|
Players should always respect the rules of the tournament organisers, and that's all there is to it. There are issues, and organisers know this. I don't know why this is called "Players vs Casters". I think it should be renamed "Some Issues With Live Casting" or "How Live Casting Can Negatively Impact Play" or something like that.
|
On September 06 2010 17:40 chrisolo wrote:
I definitly agree to HuK's OP. Players should be granted the right to deny livestreams, IF they promise to send replays directly afterwards to an admin or a caster.
And then, you have to delay the next round of the tournament by the length of that match +5-10 min so that the result doesn't get leaked, or the replay doesn't get shown because casters will be busy casting the next round already and, unless the match was an upset, nobody will bother to go back to watch the replay.
Sorry, tournaments have schedules to stick to and can't have one random match delay a whole round by 30min when the tournament should be done after 3-4 hours without delays. There's no way the replay-streaming option can work for most online tournaments when they are trying to get 512 people to finish a tournament in one day because it'll add so many delays and spoilers all around.
Replay-streaming could work for small player cups, but for a lot of the big (128+) tournaments like Go4SC2, it simply has to be live or it can't be casted.
|
Hello as a player I'd like to weigh in on this issue.
The lag issue is a problem and should not be ignored, if you want the best competitions you have ever seen, every second counts.
Cheating is a possible problem since game-sense and cheating are hard to distinguish.
Stress? Well, I don't know if that will be going away but we can at least mitigate it...
Ideally I think the future of streams should look like this:
[people in the game]
players
admin who video captures (who does not cast)
Admin (otherwise called 1st streamer) lags video by 2 minutes to a hub with a password.
Caster (otherwise called 2nd streamer) picks up the stream and recasts with audio to general public.
Spectators watch 2nd stream.
benefits:
-keeps game almost-live
-limits lag
-minimize the effectiveness of cheating
drawbacks:
-more coordination for admin/streamers/casters
The drawback will be dealt with by formalizing the process by which the admin and casters interact (which will naturally happen after an initial testing period).
|
Tournament organiser should listen to players, i cant wait for idra, morrow and huk to find many players and announce a systematic boycott of every tournament involving livecast without a huge delay or replay casting.
You can argue as much as you want about players not beeing that important, i m sure one less good player dont matter, but once gaming sites start to announce that many great players refuse to play in your tournament because you cant run them properly, you ll give up all your business to other tournament that will listen to players and will have a much more interesting playing field than yours.
|
On September 06 2010 18:00 Silver~Guy wrote:
Hello as a player I'd like to weigh in on this issue.
The lag issue is a problem and should not be ignored, if you want the best competitions you have ever seen, every second counts.
Cheating is a possible problem since game-sense and cheating are hard to distinguish.
Stress? Well, I don't know if that will be going away but we can at least mitigate it...
Ideally I think the future of streams should look like this:
[people in the game]
players
admin who video captures (who does not cast)
Admin (otherwise called 1st streamer) lags video by 2 minutes to a hub with a password.
Caster (otherwise called 2nd streamer) picks up the stream and recasts with audio to general public.
Spectators watch 2nd stream.
benefits:
-keeps game almost-live
-limits lag
-minimize the effectiveness of cheating
drawbacks:
-more coordination for admin/streamers/casters
The drawback will be dealt with by formalizing the process by which the admin and casters interact (which will naturally happen after an initial testing period).
Care to provide the hundreds possibly thousands of dollars on server support for this setup?
edit: When it comes down to it lag happens even without streams, in normal situations with the minimum number of streamers in game it's not an issue. Only in stupid situations in which there are too many people saying "let me cast" and the admins dont put their foot down does this ever become an issue.
Players need to accept that in order to be competing for the money they will have to have streams in their games, and streams have to recognize that if they're causing undue lag they need to fix their shit. This is a give and take situation.
|
On September 06 2010 17:32 Frankon wrote:
Cheating
Well there arent many players with a mind eye to quess the tech switch or path ideally. Good admins and streamers would pick this up and report to tournament admins for a check.
And no this kind of cheating is almost the easiest to discover.
that makes no sense at all. of course you can benefit easily from a stream without being caught.. theres so much information to be had that can be used in ways that you'd never be able to prove.
as far as i know no one has been caught cheating off a stream in any real tournament so far. you really think no one has even tried it in all those tournaments? every streamed game? of course people are cheating. the thing is theres no way to prove it or prevent it.
On September 06 2010 17:38 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:
I ignored the cheating part because my stream is consistantly a good several minutes behind anyway. I've had people try to cheat off my stream in ladder games only to realize oh fuck it's behind and I'm not getting any useful information. I had one guy even tell me this straight up, cheating is easily solved by delaying the stream.
games can be changed by an expo remaining hidden for the entire game, well over 5 minutes after its built. thats not a valid argument. its less dangerous than a normal live stream, its still bad.
|
Bad players will get caught, or even will still lose because they sux even with that kind of information, but great players would be close to impossible to catch if using the info properly. I m pretty sure most of the top pro would look like superstars without any suspicion of cheating.
|
On September 06 2010 18:02 chaudepisse wrote:
Tournament organiser should listen to players, i cant wait for idra, morrow and huk to find many players and announce a systematic boycott of every tournament involving livecast without a huge delay or replay casting.
Im all for it... Normal pro-players (or even casual players) would be hurt by this the most since the price poll would shrink dramatically. Then most sponsors would pull out and Huk, morrow but not Idra (he has a brain. He plays in serious tournaments - with live streaming ;P not the weekly ones) will be fighting for carrots/
|
On September 06 2010 18:02 chaudepisse wrote:
Tournament organiser should listen to players, i cant wait for idra, morrow and huk to find many players and announce a systematic boycott of every tournament involving livecast without a huge delay or replay casting.
You can argue as much as you want about players not beeing that important, i m sure one less good player dont matter, but once gaming sites start to announce that many great players refuse to play in your tournament because you cant run them properly, you ll give up all your business to other tournament that will listen to players and will have a much more interesting playing field than yours.
So like, every tournie then?
If they boycott tournies, what will that profit them? nothing, maybe abit drama in the start but it wud be shrugged off in like 1 week, and maybe we get to see new players shine, the boycotting players lose money by not playing, yeah, seems like a viable choice ._.'
|
Why do we need casters at all? Everyone watching knows what the Starcraft 2 units are. We don't need someone to explain what a destructible rock is or that a siege tank can cause trouble when placed on a cliff. We really don't need people doing fake enthusiasm during each attack or drop.
Not a single caster has any experience in broadcasting. Broadcasting is something you need to be trained to do. This is how it is done in real sports. This is why SC2 broadcasters sound so bad. If we have pro players, we need pro casters. Casting is probably putting people away instead of drawing them in.
Best of all worlds: have the players stream themselves and cast themselves. Instead of having people on the Internet who shouldn't even be in the game, who are probably Bronze Level players with big egos, the players know what they are thinking and can commentate on themselves. There are already plenty of live streams where this is occurring. It is far more fun, from an audience's perspective, to hear the player's thoughts come directly from the player instead of some "caster". Granted, many players don't speak English (or whatever language is the audience).
If someone wants to 'cast', let them download the replay and see if they can pull an audience with their 'amazing commentary'. But I think it is torture to force the audience to go through a caster in order to watch a game.
(There is an advantage to live streaming where it is only when seeing it from the player's perspective. Sure, I can download BratOK's replays. But it is a different experience actually watching him click a gazillion times everywhere. But for the most part, I am fine with casting from replays such as was done with the King of the Beta Tournament. Our 'caster' friends should go get a real job.)
|
On September 06 2010 18:26 Macavity wrote:
Why do we need casters at all?
Ok lets put it like this.
No casters = no sponsors = tourneys for carrots.
If there are no casters then who will say who sponsored the toruney or put the sponsor overlay? You cant do it to a replay. So no advertisment for sponsor means no money from sponsor.
Do the math.
As Martjin posted before players are dependant on casters.
Who ever heard about Huk before Attero hyped him during beta as best Protoss in NA when he was still in VT.
|
On September 06 2010 18:06 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 17:32 Frankon wrote:
Cheating
Well there arent many players with a mind eye to quess the tech switch or path ideally. Good admins and streamers would pick this up and report to tournament admins for a check.
And no this kind of cheating is almost the easiest to discover.
that makes no sense at all. of course you can benefit easily from a stream without being caught.. theres so much information to be had that can be used in ways that you'd never be able to prove. as far as i know no one has been caught cheating off a stream in any real tournament so far. you really think no one has even tried it in all those tournaments? every streamed game? of course people are cheating. the thing is theres no way to prove it or prevent it. Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 17:38 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:
I ignored the cheating part because my stream is consistantly a good several minutes behind anyway. I've had people try to cheat off my stream in ladder games only to realize oh fuck it's behind and I'm not getting any useful information. I had one guy even tell me this straight up, cheating is easily solved by delaying the stream. games can be changed by an expo remaining hidden for the entire game, well over 5 minutes after its built. thats not a valid argument. its less dangerous than a normal live stream, its still bad.
Point taken, but players need to realize that this is not a situation in which they get the final say. The sponsors do as they are the ones providing the $$ in which they are fighting over. Not every tournament will be in a lan situation where you can be certain no one is cheating, playing online tournaments has certain risks such as battlenet deciding to drop you randomly, lag (it happens even with no stream), and possibilities of cheating with or without the stream. Tournaments can help minimize these risks to the best of their abilities but they will still occur no matter what happens because of the very nature of it being an online tournament.
When it comes down to it the portion of viewers who want to see it live for that extra excitement factor is a large percentage this is why we've had tournaments who went out of their way to keep the fact that they were from replays or pre recorded hidden for as long as possible until the viewers were already hooked. There are certain measures to help reduce cheating such as making players set busy status in game but this can be circumvented with ventrilo, listening in on their own etc etc. But when it comes down to it the extra level of organization required for replay casting is too much for the smaller scale tournaments (who cares if you get a DQ cuz you didnt send the replay if the tournament prize is unimportant to the player.)
Oh and by the way delaying tournaments for replays causes issues with games being spoiled. Lets be frank people are jerks, they will look through player profiles and spoil results in chat they will post on threads just enjoying messing with people who dont want to know the results. There have been situations in the past where a top player has intentionally posted a spoiler on the tournament thread that was casting from replays after they were eliminated and refused to edit the post.
As a tournament admin for 3 years on PGTour and iCCup even when there are rules to require replay uploads enforcing them for every game in a large scale tournament is largely impossible. Players can upload dummy replays, especially with blizzard changing the replay formatting every patch so the file can go back to view the proper patch. This causes an issue where automatic parsing of replays isnt always possible and sorting through every replay to make sure the ones provided are in fact the correct games is not possible. And trust me over many years on iCCup a lot of players just uploaded fake replays instead of putting in the effort they did not care because the prize was not enough. Once you catch on to the fact that it is a fake replay it is most likely too late as they are playing in further round(s) of the tournament in a large scale event. Even wrangling replays from top players can be tough see IEM group stages still missing Huk vs Machine replays http://www.esl-world.net/masters/season5/america/sc2/championship/match/19676021/ in a major event with several thousand dollars on the line. Ironically involving the OP who claims we should just cast from replays.
So basically in the small tournaments players might not care enough to provide replays and take the DQ, big tournaments are either playing too many games to keep track of this or are too high profile and big scale so that disqualifying someone for merely not providing replays causes massive controversy and rage. Can you imagine if ESL disqualified Huk for not uploading those replays in a timely manner? Machine won but did not advance so whose responsibility is it? Stop and think about how much backlash there would be about that. Ultimately dealing with replays causes so much more time and effort from everyone involved and causes so much trouble on all ends of the equation that what is the plus side? The third part of the OP about stress? Yeah worse with replays for every player involved. Most of the top players know eachother they practice with eachother and are pretty confident that they are not cheating even in online play. Most of the time if someone is it becomes rather obvious as I've been in situations where it was in question if someone was cheating off my stream so we backed off the casting to test it and the player made it very obvious by the way they react to the change of casting. It's not the perfect solution but ultimately it's what the sponsors and viewers want to see and they're the ones providing the $$ for you to play over.
|
On September 06 2010 18:26 Macavity wrote:
Why do we need casters at all? Everyone watching knows what the Starcraft 2 units are. We don't need someone to explain what a destructible rock is or that a siege tank can cause trouble when placed on a cliff. We really don't need people doing fake enthusiasm during each attack or drop.
Not a single caster has any experience in broadcasting. Broadcasting is something you need to be trained to do. This is how it is done in real sports. This is why SC2 broadcasters sound so bad. If we have pro players, we need pro casters. Casting is probably putting people away instead of drawing them in.
Best of all worlds: have the players stream themselves and cast themselves. Instead of having people on the Internet who shouldn't even be in the game, who are probably Bronze Level players with big egos, the players know what they are thinking and can commentate on themselves. There are already plenty of live streams where this is occurring. It is far more fun, from an audience's perspective, to hear the player's thoughts come directly from the player instead of some "caster". Granted, many players don't speak English (or whatever language is the audience).
If someone wants to 'cast', let them download the replay and see if they can pull an audience with their 'amazing commentary'. But I think it is torture to force the audience to go through a caster in order to watch a game.
(There is an advantage to live streaming where it is only when seeing it from the player's perspective. Sure, I can download BratOK's replays. But it is a different experience actually watching him click a gazillion times everywhere. But for the most part, I am fine with casting from replays such as was done with the King of the Beta Tournament. Our 'caster' friends should go get a real job.)
Thought I'd put my little bit on one part here.. allow me to bold it =] I work in Radio Broadcasting, I was also shoutcasting Broodwar before Livestream was even a concept and WGTour was still the dominating force with PGTour getting it's early starts. Yes, none of us have experience or are actual broadcasters.
|
Just ONE of Huk's points should be enough to stop this nonsense.
1) Cheating. This is a ticking time bomb. Whether someone actively plays with the stream next to them or by semi-accident as a flat-mate sitting nearby starts giving a few tips this WILL happen. It's completely untracable too.
2) Stress. The players and good games are by far the most important thing.
3) Lag. Again, game quality is most important. Lag completely ruins the spectacle and validity of the result.
|
so Klive what is more stressfull. A few PM's or a tournament which normally took 4-5h will now be 24h+?
|
Katowice25012 Posts
On September 06 2010 18:37 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:As a tournament admin for 3 years on PGTour and iCCup even when there are rules to require replay uploads enforcing them for every game in a large scale tournament is largely impossible. Players can upload dummy replays, especially with blizzard changing the replay formatting every patch so the file can go back to view the proper patch. This causes an issue where automatic parsing of replays isnt always possible and sorting through every replay to make sure the ones provided are in fact the correct games is not possible. And trust me over many years on iCCup a lot of players just uploaded fake replays instead of putting in the effort they did not care because the prize was not enough. Once you catch on to the fact that it is a fake replay it is most likely too late as they are playing in further round(s) of the tournament in a large scale event. Even wrangling replays from top players can be tough see IEM group stages still missing Huk vs Machine replays http://www.esl-world.net/masters/season5/america/sc2/championship/match/19676021/ in a major event with several thousand dollars on the line. Ironically involving the OP who claims we should just cast from replays. So basically in the small tournaments players might not care enough to provide replays and take the DQ, big tournaments are either playing too many games to keep track of this or are too high profile and big scale so that disqualifying someone for merely not providing replays causes massive controversy and rage. Can you imagine if ESL disqualified Huk for not uploading those replays in a timely manner? Machine won but did not advance so whose responsibility is it? Stop and think about how much backlash there would be about that. Ultimately dealing with replays causes so much more time and effort from everyone involved and causes so much trouble on all ends of the equation that what is the plus side? The third part of the OP about stress? Yeah worse with replays for every player involved. Most of the top players know eachother they practice with eachother and are pretty confident that they are not cheating even in online play. Most of the time if someone is it becomes rather obvious as I've been in situations where it was in question if someone was cheating off my stream so we backed off the casting to test it and the player made it very obvious by the way they react to the change of casting. It's not the perfect solution but ultimately it's what the sponsors and viewers want to see and they're the ones providing the $$ for you to play over.
Why is having a ref in the match not a solution here? He can deal with replays as well as be there to enforce any possible rulings (ie making sure players are on time).
|
Having a ref in every single match isn't all that realistic in most tournaments. Larger tournaments maybe, but your monthly/weekly/whatever tourney where everyone involved in running it is strictly volunteer?
|
On September 06 2010 18:59 heyoka wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 18:37 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:As a tournament admin for 3 years on PGTour and iCCup even when there are rules to require replay uploads enforcing them for every game in a large scale tournament is largely impossible. Players can upload dummy replays, especially with blizzard changing the replay formatting every patch so the file can go back to view the proper patch. This causes an issue where automatic parsing of replays isnt always possible and sorting through every replay to make sure the ones provided are in fact the correct games is not possible. And trust me over many years on iCCup a lot of players just uploaded fake replays instead of putting in the effort they did not care because the prize was not enough. Once you catch on to the fact that it is a fake replay it is most likely too late as they are playing in further round(s) of the tournament in a large scale event. Even wrangling replays from top players can be tough see IEM group stages still missing Huk vs Machine replays http://www.esl-world.net/masters/season5/america/sc2/championship/match/19676021/ in a major event with several thousand dollars on the line. Ironically involving the OP who claims we should just cast from replays. So basically in the small tournaments players might not care enough to provide replays and take the DQ, big tournaments are either playing too many games to keep track of this or are too high profile and big scale so that disqualifying someone for merely not providing replays causes massive controversy and rage. Can you imagine if ESL disqualified Huk for not uploading those replays in a timely manner? Machine won but did not advance so whose responsibility is it? Stop and think about how much backlash there would be about that. Ultimately dealing with replays causes so much more time and effort from everyone involved and causes so much trouble on all ends of the equation that what is the plus side? The third part of the OP about stress? Yeah worse with replays for every player involved. Most of the top players know eachother they practice with eachother and are pretty confident that they are not cheating even in online play. Most of the time if someone is it becomes rather obvious as I've been in situations where it was in question if someone was cheating off my stream so we backed off the casting to test it and the player made it very obvious by the way they react to the change of casting. It's not the perfect solution but ultimately it's what the sponsors and viewers want to see and they're the ones providing the $$ for you to play over. Why is having a ref in the match not a solution here? He can deal with replays as well as be there to enforce any possible rulings (ie making sure players are on time).
TSL 1&2: ref lags players tell him to leave
Plus the fact that in big tournaments ie the one that Huk keeps citing from this morning having a ref in every game is not possible.
In SC2 the ref can be put into a situation where the players pause the game and refuse to resume until you leave because of lag. Happened in IEM cologne again top players demanding that the stream leave the game when without the stream the prize pool doesn't exist.
|
i totaly agree with HuK here - especialy since i saw last wednesday. normaly in dont call names but this story really shocke me:
cup was go4sc2. i was watching the stream linked here on TL -> gosucoaching stream
after some games i realized that there were THREE observer in a game for this ONE stream.
one guys streamed and 2 other comment it.
that beeing not enough ... everyone who followed the last games should remember the MASSIVE lag which made e.g. DIMAGA fail an banelingbust out of bunker contain vs. Morrow.
now to get to the really BM shit those "three" caster pulled off:
im dead sure that all the lag was caused by that third - nontalking - caster who just streamed and set camara to follow on someone else.
at one game on kulas ravine the camera follow stoped and you were looking at some random spot all the time. shortly after the "streamer" typed in chat about himself playing HON.. even if he did it on another comp.... i just can find words how fucked up such behavior is.
3 observer in a game, 2 casting 1 streaming and the streamer not even beein interested in the game and playing something else.....
OH and not to forget: HE LAGGED LIKE FUCKING HELL....
i switched to another stream after that BM shit on about every game there was the notice that the one streamer laged or whatever.....
sadly my english isnt good enough to express really how unbelivable insolent that was to me..
i think in near future there should only be replayes casted... i dont care about seeing the games 10minutes lader. in addition there should only be the players +1 tournament admin in the game - thats it.
first and highes focus should be the players as many of the work to earn their living and even if they arent fulltime pro its their time and their work put into the game and no streamer nor viewer have the right to demand anything from the players than getting the reps casted.
Zira
|
On September 06 2010 18:26 Macavity wrote:
Why do we need casters at all? Everyone watching knows what the Starcraft 2 units are. We don't need someone to explain what a destructible rock is or that a siege tank can cause trouble when placed on a cliff. We really don't need people doing fake enthusiasm during each attack or drop.
Not a single caster has any experience in broadcasting. Broadcasting is something you need to be trained to do. This is how it is done in real sports. This is why SC2 broadcasters sound so bad. If we have pro players, we need pro casters. Casting is probably putting people away instead of drawing them in.
Why do we need casters? We need them to cast the games LIVE, what do you suggest how people would do it? 2k+ people joining 1 game to obs it? lag fixd yo.
secondly, what are you basing that fact off?
Casters like Totalbiscuit have run his own successful radio show talking about WoW, for like, 5 years. Now im no fan of WoW, but i can say thats impressive and say that he aint got no experience is total bullshit.
And SC2 broadcasters dont sound bad, i enjoy watching people like raelcun and gunrun/martijn, and lots of others.
and what if people were only allowed to view to replays, no casters what so ever, what about people who dont own SC2? what wud you say to them? or total new people to the game who dont understand anything about the game, i myself can say i have learned alot from casters like totalbiscuit, he was the guy who got me into sc2 in the first place. When i first got my beta key, i wouldnt have known anything about the game if it werent for caster like him.
|
Personally, i wouldnt have any problem on having all the shoutcasting / commentary from online tournaments made out of the replays. Players would just play the first match and send the replay of the respective match right away so it could be shoutcasted while the second match was going on.
I do understand the problem that uploading fake replays that wont be properly checked might be and the only thing i can come up with this instant is having 2/3 min breaks between matches so the player could send the replay and this could be checked and failng to send the proper replay would result in some penalty.
|
On September 06 2010 18:26 Macavity wrote:
Why do we need casters at all? Everyone watching knows what the Starcraft 2 units are. We don't need someone to explain what a destructible rock is or that a siege tank can cause trouble when placed on a cliff. We really don't need people doing fake enthusiasm during each attack or drop.
People also know the rules of football but still there are commentators... I really wouldn't want to watch a stream without somebody casting, would be totally boring to me.
|
Katowice25012 Posts
On September 06 2010 19:02 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 18:59 heyoka wrote:On September 06 2010 18:37 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:As a tournament admin for 3 years on PGTour and iCCup even when there are rules to require replay uploads enforcing them for every game in a large scale tournament is largely impossible. Players can upload dummy replays, especially with blizzard changing the replay formatting every patch so the file can go back to view the proper patch. This causes an issue where automatic parsing of replays isnt always possible and sorting through every replay to make sure the ones provided are in fact the correct games is not possible. And trust me over many years on iCCup a lot of players just uploaded fake replays instead of putting in the effort they did not care because the prize was not enough. Once you catch on to the fact that it is a fake replay it is most likely too late as they are playing in further round(s) of the tournament in a large scale event. Even wrangling replays from top players can be tough see IEM group stages still missing Huk vs Machine replays http://www.esl-world.net/masters/season5/america/sc2/championship/match/19676021/ in a major event with several thousand dollars on the line. Ironically involving the OP who claims we should just cast from replays. So basically in the small tournaments players might not care enough to provide replays and take the DQ, big tournaments are either playing too many games to keep track of this or are too high profile and big scale so that disqualifying someone for merely not providing replays causes massive controversy and rage. Can you imagine if ESL disqualified Huk for not uploading those replays in a timely manner? Machine won but did not advance so whose responsibility is it? Stop and think about how much backlash there would be about that. Ultimately dealing with replays causes so much more time and effort from everyone involved and causes so much trouble on all ends of the equation that what is the plus side? The third part of the OP about stress? Yeah worse with replays for every player involved. Most of the top players know eachother they practice with eachother and are pretty confident that they are not cheating even in online play. Most of the time if someone is it becomes rather obvious as I've been in situations where it was in question if someone was cheating off my stream so we backed off the casting to test it and the player made it very obvious by the way they react to the change of casting. It's not the perfect solution but ultimately it's what the sponsors and viewers want to see and they're the ones providing the $$ for you to play over. Why is having a ref in the match not a solution here? He can deal with replays as well as be there to enforce any possible rulings (ie making sure players are on time). TSL 1&2: ref lags players tell him to leave Plus the fact that in big tournaments ie the one that Huk keeps citing from this morning having a ref in every game is not possible. In SC2 the ref can be put into a situation where the players pause the game and refuse to resume until you leave because of lag. Happened in IEM cologne again top players demanding that the stream leave the game when without the stream the prize pool doesn't exist.
I'm confused, this is 1 person to gather replays instead of 2 casters 1 admin 1 streamer, how is this a worse situation?
|
Hyrule19086 Posts
I mostly agree with HuK. Good casters have good computers and good internet, it's just the requirements for casting. Yeah, there's at least 1 more person, but it's not that bad.
However, as a caster, camera, and sponsor, I'll always back out of a game if a player asks me to.
|
Very important topic here, and bravo for starting off this important discussion. The casters are trying to satisfy the audience with up-to-the-moment commentary, but at what cost? Lag, player listening in/peeking at streams maybe, stress to players, even competitive grudges on all levels.
Sponsors will have their rules, depending how flexable they are they may adjust how matches are handled.
A few things to consider:
Will fans/viewers be content with replay castings? -Understanding why.
Will they allow streamers to cast their own matches? -Modified rules.
Are the players better off because of it? -Positives/Negitives
Can spoilers be limited because of this? -This will be tough.
There is a certain attraction for "Live" broadcasts. I will admit, barring spoilers/bracket updates ahead of the cast, I will still tune in to live casts of replays after the match.
Tough topic, needs to be discussed. Maybe with more feedback and TL Polls? I say Players need to play at 100%, Casters want the best for the fans/viewers, and the fans will always demand the best out of everything. So with this "love triangle" ~Big T quote, hopefully a solution for all will be found.
|
On September 06 2010 18:19 Therickz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 18:02 chaudepisse wrote:
Tournament organiser should listen to players, i cant wait for idra, morrow and huk to find many players and announce a systematic boycott of every tournament involving livecast without a huge delay or replay casting.
You can argue as much as you want about players not beeing that important, i m sure one less good player dont matter, but once gaming sites start to announce that many great players refuse to play in your tournament because you cant run them properly, you ll give up all your business to other tournament that will listen to players and will have a much more interesting playing field than yours. So like, every tournie then? If they boycott tournies, what will that profit them? nothing, maybe abit drama in the start but it wud be shrugged off in like 1 week, and maybe we get to see new players shine, the boycotting players lose money by not playing, yeah, seems like a viable choice ._.'
If you think tournament and casters wouldnt adapt to the player request when they got no other choice if they want popular players in their field, you are overestimating their motivation on live casting over casting replays.
I m pretty sure day[9] hd and huskie would be more than happy to do as the player want and have some really popular tournament.
If the only problem is to get replay from the players everytime they finish a game, that doesnt sound that hard to fix. Giving players some sanction if they dont give the replay at the end on the game to a tournament official seems to be an easy fix.
|
On September 06 2010 19:28 heyoka wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 19:02 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 06 2010 18:59 heyoka wrote:On September 06 2010 18:37 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:As a tournament admin for 3 years on PGTour and iCCup even when there are rules to require replay uploads enforcing them for every game in a large scale tournament is largely impossible. Players can upload dummy replays, especially with blizzard changing the replay formatting every patch so the file can go back to view the proper patch. This causes an issue where automatic parsing of replays isnt always possible and sorting through every replay to make sure the ones provided are in fact the correct games is not possible. And trust me over many years on iCCup a lot of players just uploaded fake replays instead of putting in the effort they did not care because the prize was not enough. Once you catch on to the fact that it is a fake replay it is most likely too late as they are playing in further round(s) of the tournament in a large scale event. Even wrangling replays from top players can be tough see IEM group stages still missing Huk vs Machine replays http://www.esl-world.net/masters/season5/america/sc2/championship/match/19676021/ in a major event with several thousand dollars on the line. Ironically involving the OP who claims we should just cast from replays. So basically in the small tournaments players might not care enough to provide replays and take the DQ, big tournaments are either playing too many games to keep track of this or are too high profile and big scale so that disqualifying someone for merely not providing replays causes massive controversy and rage. Can you imagine if ESL disqualified Huk for not uploading those replays in a timely manner? Machine won but did not advance so whose responsibility is it? Stop and think about how much backlash there would be about that. Ultimately dealing with replays causes so much more time and effort from everyone involved and causes so much trouble on all ends of the equation that what is the plus side? The third part of the OP about stress? Yeah worse with replays for every player involved. Most of the top players know eachother they practice with eachother and are pretty confident that they are not cheating even in online play. Most of the time if someone is it becomes rather obvious as I've been in situations where it was in question if someone was cheating off my stream so we backed off the casting to test it and the player made it very obvious by the way they react to the change of casting. It's not the perfect solution but ultimately it's what the sponsors and viewers want to see and they're the ones providing the $$ for you to play over. Why is having a ref in the match not a solution here? He can deal with replays as well as be there to enforce any possible rulings (ie making sure players are on time). TSL 1&2: ref lags players tell him to leave Plus the fact that in big tournaments ie the one that Huk keeps citing from this morning having a ref in every game is not possible. In SC2 the ref can be put into a situation where the players pause the game and refuse to resume until you leave because of lag. Happened in IEM cologne again top players demanding that the stream leave the game when without the stream the prize pool doesn't exist. I'm confused, this is 1 person to gather replays instead of 2 casters 1 admin 1 streamer, how is this a worse situation?
I don't understand what you're asking, you asked why we cna't have one referee in each game to save the replay right? I answered that or so I thought, in a tournament the number of referees is a limiting factor. Plus players try to kick out referees in the past anyway in major events so then they don't get the save the replay anyway and it's still on the players to save the replay and send it in which is notoriously difficult.
|
On September 06 2010 19:45 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:I don't understand what you're asking, you asked why we cna't have one referee in each game to save the replay right? I answered that or so I thought, in a tournament the number of referees is a limiting factor. Plus players try to kick out referees in the past anyway in major events so then they don't get the save the replay anyway and it's still on the players to save the replay and send it in which is notoriously difficult.
If a referee is causing lag they shouldn't be a referee. Pretty simple solution, get a new one for the next game.
I don't see why it's so hard to get casters to sign up prior to an event via email with the tournament organizers and be sent replays as they come out from a pool of 4-5 ref's that follow mostly big names and some others. And again as many have said if casting is soooo important then there needs to be a lot more effort put into the organization of it and making sure it all works for players, streamers and viewers.
|
I cant believe some really strict rules about sending replay wouldnt fix that, like both player need to send their replay after every game, if noone of them did they are both dq, if only one did the other get a warning, after 3 warning you get a dq and cant play next tournament.
I ve been a judge for 100s of card tournament and making players follow the rules was never an issue.
If players want some proffessionalism from casters and TO they have to show some aswell.
|
There's a huge problem with casting from replays right after the games are played that people appear to be missing.
Let's say Game 1 lasts for 10 minutes. The caster receives the replay and starts casting immediately. Ten minutes later they check their email but apparently Game 2 is still going on, so there is an indefinite pause until the game is over.
Alternatively, you could send the replays after all games have finished but with a bo5 or bo7 this could mean waiting for a looooong time. SC2 is still a new game so most games tend to finish for about 10-15 minutes. However, (hopefully) this will change, so even 3 30 minute-long games plus bio breaks = 2 hours.
These delays will add-up during the course of the tournament. Finals are often played very late in the evening - imagine pushing the whole tournament for at least two additional hours? Making a reasonable schedule would become an even bigger nightmare then it already is. The only way to cope with it would be to cast pretty much the whole tournament the next day.
|
Its sad to see players having to make threads to state the obvious. Its even more sad to for some people to think the tournament organizers, or even casters, would have more sway in these situations. Its their money, true, but tournaments rely on star players to bring in the viewers. They know it, we know it, its not a secret in the slightest.
The players should definitely make a stand. Being forced to play in difficult situations is preposterous. Enough of the shitty noob casters and ridiculous rules. This is why most other sports have player associations, so the players can band together and do what's right for them.
|
Imo , Live casting is a must : money comes not from players , but from viewers (no viewers -> no sponsors -> no turnament) and i can give 100% that viewer count will drop if games arent casted live .
Now imagine , would you watch a basketball , football (socker for US ppl) and any other sport if it wasnt live ? Some would , but A LOT less.
I understand that lag and cheating is a problem , but stoping live casting isnt a solution.
In every sport player is a product witch makes money , and if its not making money to a sponsor - he isnt needed anymore.
But again , turnaments with big money usually are LAN , in witch case neither lag , neither live stream isnt a problem .
As for small turnaments i guess players , casters and sponsors need to work on solution together , not just boycoting each other .
|
The way most of these organizations run their tournament isn't the right way to do it and would not be the way we do things on TL. Allowing every joe nobody to join games claiming he streams is a really horrible setting for your players. Forcing the players not to be able to deny random streamers is not good.
That said if these tournaments are finding you guys sponsors and giving you exposure, then when you join their tournament, you agree to their rules. If this is the way they see best fit to run their tournament in order to gain the right exposure for it then creating their own rules is entirely in their right. Players joining a tournament suddenly disregarding rules they agreed to by joining in the first place is not good either.
The players are right in their complaints that this is not an ideal way to run a tournament. Their point would be supported by not joining them. Then things may change eventually. Initiatives such as this topic can help a lot. Disregarding rules after joining a tournament is not the right way.
|
I was thinking about this yesterday, and even tho ive only played in afew casted tournies so far, I really truely believe that all online tournies SHOULD be casted by replays after the fact.
Its just too much of an issue, esp with cheating, as ive seen it happen afew times (mainly on SC1, but im sure it happens on SC2 too) and the lag is unbearable already in BNet 2.
Casters who wont leave the game when they are lagging when the players say so, thats the most idiotic thing I've ever seen (I remember watching some of Huks games where it happens, how retarded).. They should be banlisted from casting/obsing any games in the future, kinda like a DotA-Banlist type thing IMO. Thats really lame.
So yea, Cast live LAN tourneys, and cast from replays for all the online tourneys, thats what I think.
|
Players should be respected way more!
Casts from replays is NO PROBLEM at all. And it only means that people will see the match 20minutes later as usual. Also the caster can rewind for a few seconds in case he misses some important drop or fight or w/e (which happens way too often with the streams I watched so far, no matter who the caster is).
|
On September 06 2010 20:32 xtfftc wrote:
There's a huge problem with casting from replays right after the games are played that people appear to be missing.
Let's say Game 1 lasts for 10 minutes. The caster receives the replay and starts casting immediately. Ten minutes later they check their email but apparently Game 2 is still going on, so there is an indefinite pause until the game is over.
Alternatively, you could send the replays after all games have finished but with a bo5 or bo7 this could mean waiting for a looooong time. SC2 is still a new game so most games tend to finish for about 10-15 minutes. However, (hopefully) this will change, so even 3 30 minute-long games plus bio breaks = 2 hours.
These delays will add-up during the course of the tournament. Finals are often played very late in the evening - imagine pushing the whole tournament for at least two additional hours? Making a reasonable schedule would become an even bigger nightmare then it already is. The only way to cope with it would be to cast pretty much the whole tournament the next day.
That's no different than the situation now. With casters left to their own devices, they often have a ton of trouble finding a game. They look at the brackets trying to find players they have on their friends lists, message some people, then find out that half the players don't want casters and the other half already started their games. Then the audience gets 30 minutes worth of the streamer's Quick Match screen.
If everyone is required to upload replays, then there are in all likelihood, more matches than streams going on. If there are 32 1st round matches, and only a handful of casts, there should be plenty of replays to choose from to kill time in case games run long.
With regard to the difficulty streamers have had getting replays from players:
1) Don't begin any round until the previous round is complete. There will be delays from matches that run long, but there should also be plenty of replays available from shorter series to cast in the mean time.
2) Winner is required to upload his replays before he may begin his next round.
|
HDH and King of the Hill beta should not be mentioned as an argument promoting how successful replay based tournaments can be, as they were done in the beta and were also the two biggest tournaments done so far. The hype up until release was obviously feeding their popularity and people were starved for high quality games, thus people couldn't care less about it being casted from "old" replays.
As far as current online tournaments go, big "psuedo LAN" tournaments excluded, there are a couple of things that just isn't optimal at the moment.
1. Cheating - this is bound to happen if a game is being streamed live. It's 100% guaranteed it has already happened and that it will continue to happen as long as games are being cast live with just a few seconds delay. This is a huge issue so this should really be a big priority at Blizzard if they really do want SC2 to be a serious esport game.
2. Lag - keeping lag to a minimum should be in everyone's interest. I remember back in the beta when there were 10+ spectators and several streamers in a single game and I remember thinking how selfish those people were. And to top it off some people didn't even leave when they lagged the game going "I'll leave if it happens again". How arrogant isn't that?
I have to say that most of the casts I've seen these days have been with just a couple of spectators, but really, there should be a maximum of just 3 people spectating. 1 ref and 1 streamer with a co-caster. That is if it's being cast live at all.
3. Organisation / stress for the player - In an optimal world there shouldn't be any organisation required by the player in the senes of having to host the game, invite the players, streamers and so on. This should obviously be handled by the organisors of the event, however, when you have 64+ players, that's a huge task so it's understandable that things are as they are right now, and as long as players are aware of this, then it shouldn't be an issue as they know what they get themselves into.
Who's the most important? Casters or players?
I don't think it's fair to state that one is more important than the other. Obviously there is a synergy going on here and both need eachother to have a product to offer. If casters couldn't cast high profile games, well, then those games wouldn't be high profile and those high profile players would certainly not be as high profile except maybe for a very hardcore group of followers. But who wants SC2 to be only for a "small" number of hardcore followers when there are threads all over the place wanting everyone to do their thing to make SC2 and esports "huge" outside of Korea.
Is it feasible to cast games as soon as they're done?
Yes, it is.
Is it difficult to do it?
Yes, it is.
Would it solve some of the issues with lag and the possibility of cheating?
Without a doubt.
Will it introduce another problem, namely spoiling thus ruining a lot of the hype, viewer experience and ultimately the legitimacy of the tournament?
Yes.
Viewers wouldn't be able to tell the difference from a live match to a casted replay if they follow a planned schedule. The only problem with casting a recent replay is obviously spoilers. Spoilers will happen, and that would be a disaster for any large and or serious tournament. It doesn't matter what the consequences for spoiling are, it will still happen.
What SC2 needs is, like others have said already, a "live" cast with a 5 min delay or so. This should've been implemented by Blizzard ages ago. That would be the solution to everything, but alas it's not currently something that is possible right now, so we're stuck with trying to improve what is already being done.
|
On September 06 2010 18:26 Macavity wrote:
Why do we need casters at all? Everyone watching knows what the Starcraft 2 units are.
And everyone watching Formula 1 knows that there's cars and they drive fast.
No one would watch 2 hours of cars going around the track with no commentary.
|
On September 06 2010 09:55 jamesr12 wrote:
live casting is good for lan style events
bad for online tourneys
There's no such thing anymore, it's still all bnet traffic 
|
As for casting from replays, doing this for open 512 man tournaments is a ridiculous suggestion. It's a lot more trouble planning wise to pull it off with tournament and casting and different dates. Open tournaments don't have this luxury as they often don't have the money or crew to make this ever worth it.
Bigger tournaments with the current state of bnet have very little choice but to use replays.
|
I agree that some of this tournaments should be run a little different and the current set of rules in some of these tournaments is far from optimal. Letting every streamer run rampart and join any game they want is stupid. The players should not be forced to accept anyone joining their games who can register a livestream/ustream account.
BUT
The moment you sign up for such a tournament you, as a player, agree to follow their rules, even if you think that they are total bullshit. You have no right to complain about any of those rules, while you're playing this tournament. Throwing a huge tantrum during the tournament should get you banned.
If you want to play for the price money you have to stick to the rules. If you don't like the rules don't join.
In the future this may change, because there will hopefully be more tournaments for pro's and semipro's to choose from.
If a player can't join every tournament there is on a given date he will choose the tournaments who provide the highest price money WITH the best playing conditions. So in the long run tournaments with bad playing conditions will cease to exist, if the fail to provide huge price pools as a compensation for bad playing conditions.
|
Hyrule19086 Posts
That's why I like Wolf's rules: there are only certain caster (teams) who can join OWC games, and until semi-finals, only 1 caster (team) per game. Seems to work pretty well, and it also allows almost all of the tournament to get casted.
|
HuK -
Don't really disagree with any of your points. But, in case nobody's said it in the previous 13 pages of this thread, the real payoff is that it generates real-time interest in an event. eSports is trying to make money. You, Idra, Morrow, all the best players, would really like for professional SC2 to be a legitimate career. Being able to follow it real-time along with thousands of other people helps bring eSports closer tot hat goal.
Not sure if it outweighs all the negatives, but that's the big positive.
-Cross
|
On September 06 2010 21:22 shrinkmaster wrote:
In the future this may change, because there will hopefully be more tournaments for pro's and semipro's to choose from.
If a player can't join every tournament there is on a given date he will choose the tournaments who provide the highest price money WITH the best playing conditions. So in the long run tournaments with bad playing conditions will cease to exist, if the fail to provide huge price pools as a compensation for bad playing conditions.
Actually that would be pretty bad....
Right now most of the "pros" like Huk and Morrow (sorry had to use you guys cause i saw you did it in the past) play more than 1 tournament now. Like at the same time Zotac, Go4Sc2 and Wolf Cup. And you hear from casters that for example "we have to wait for Morrow game cause now he plays his game in X tournament"...
Tourney admins are turning blind eye for it falls under "cause the delay in play" and "doesnt respond to game invite in 15 minutes".
So all the sides are in fault.
|
On September 06 2010 21:16 abrasion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 09:55 jamesr12 wrote:
live casting is good for lan style events
bad for online tourneys There's no such thing anymore, it's still all bnet traffic
LAN style events - the players are physically in the same location, playing in front of administrators and an audience.
Online events - the players are in their own homes, not supervised.
|
+1 for no opportunities to cheat
|
bnet doesnt make replay sharing very easy. one of its many, many shortcomings
Imagine if a player could publish their replays, and choose if its for everyone or friends only etc. Would make it much easier to cast tourneys off replays.
What they absolutely need to do is limit the obs to the bare necessities. It's absurd seeing games full of players, half of them casters half random obs. You only need one caster
|
|
|
8748 Posts
Online events shouldn't have live casting. The standard should be casting replays. It makes the cast much smoother, making it a better product for the viewers (don't have to wait on players between games, don't have to search and ask players between matches, can choose good games to cast rather than just hoping to pick a good game). It also prevents many potential problems for the players (cheating, lag). TSL and TSL2 did an excellent job covering huge tournaments by casting replays.
|
Yeah man casters bring in the big dough, lots and lots of greens so lets allow any douchebag with a youtube channel with 100 subscribers to crash in a top players game and lag that shit till its unplayable.
Get your heads out of your asses, what is the difference if it brings money right now? Do you think this kind of practice is viable for the future, its complelty unprofessional and only harms the game.
Hey Huk what i recommend you to do is talk to the other high level players and try to come to an agremeent with them, so that if you are in a game and its unplayable due to lag, just pause that shit and tell the obs to GTFO, if they dont just keep it pause. There are plenty of things you can do as sign of protest in game, like 2 hours of no agression etc.. as long as you and the other player are on the same page.
From the admin point of view the solutions are obvious.
Have only 1-2 official observers ingame streaming, others may re-stream if they want.
The cheating issue can easly be minimized with a 5 min delay, with 1-2 official observers is pretty easy to coordinate.
Another option is to just cast replays and have 1 referee ingame to share the replays asap.
Its also possible for the event results to be hidden until X time after the game to let the replays be casted first.
There is absolutly nothing you can say to justify 14 obs in one game lagging that shit up, its the same as during a futeball/basket/hokey whatever game 14 commenters go stand in the middle of the field and say thats is OK
|
Part of the problem is everyone wants in on the most popular players like HuK if HuK is playing everyone wants in on that game.
I wouldnt mind casted replays maybe move the start time for casts say 15 to 30 minutes delay after matches started so you may have 1 or 2 rounds complete already alsot giving time to set up deal with player issues. Players not showing up or needing to be replaced. Maybe a caster is having technical difficulties have time to set up overlays on streams I think that would be good.
Now ppl don't know who is casted on who's channel cause there are no schedules of that and its like a crap shoot maybe bigT gets nightend or morrow while gosugamers gets HuK or ICCUP gets idrA. Caster put up a translucent overlay of who is playing and everyone knows were to go or watches who they want. Or maybe Casters could work with players beforehand to determine who gets what replays.
|
On September 06 2010 21:34 Crosswind wrote:
HuK -
Don't really disagree with any of your points. But, in case nobody's said it in the previous 13 pages of this thread, the real payoff is that it generates real-time interest in an event. eSports is trying to make money. You, Idra, Morrow, all the best players, would really like for professional SC2 to be a legitimate career. Being able to follow it real-time along with thousands of other people helps bring eSports closer tot hat goal.
Not sure if it outweighs all the negatives, but that's the big positive.
-Cross
nothing at all can outweigh the potential for cheating alone
how can you really try to develop a professional competition where anyone could be cheating at any time and theres absolutely no way to check it?
|
faulty protective headphones +200 to cheating in live.
Btw .
Big lol @ Idra.
The problem Huk and Morrow have is mainly with weekly tournaments.
Havent seen you in any of them ;P
|
On September 06 2010 22:13 Frankon wrote:
faulty protective headphones +200 to cheating in live.
Btw .
Big lol @ Idra.
The problem Huk and Morrow have is mainly with weekly tournaments.
Havent seen you in any of them ;P
Keyword is faulty as they are not suposed to let you hear.
Good to know that you are so well informed on how Idra didnt had similiar problems in the past....
|
i know he had problem with BigT
|
I blame Livestream for being called Livestream, I mean when it has live in the name that's just what you expect and as a plebian I can't be tasked with thinking beyond that!
|
On September 06 2010 22:26 Frankon wrote:
i know he had problem with BigT
So your complaint is.... he doesn't compete in the small weekly tournaments that this effects as much so he can't have an opinion? I guess 90% of the posters in this thread should shutup then since only the players and casters can talk about these options.
Wait, given sc2's current climate probably 25% of the posters are casters.
|
It seems that StarCraft is the only gaming community that is insistent on casters going over finished, ended games (replays). I think this is mainly due to Korean eSports and casting over their live Korean broadcasts for VOD's, and general old-school attitude around here. The TSL #1 and 2 worked well because the organizers and head community members around here did a good job of making sure none of the information was leaked (and in the end some of it was).
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact.
The real problem, in the example of the MorroW match, is the sheer number of broadcasters. 14 is ridiculous, and it's ESL's job to make sure only authorized people are in the games. This counts for both the lag and cheating aspects. If a broadcaster was found to be giving results to a player during a live match (which is pretty hard to do anyway), then there's a much larger issue at hand. I've personally never heard of this happening in any of the major eSports (SC, Quake, CS, Street Fighter, Wc3, CoD, etc).
|
I've got a question for the pros.
Let's say a solution is devised to delay live casting - with, say, 15 minutes - which would make watching/listening/having a friend inform you what's going on on the stream not worth it.
Let's also say that tournament organisers impose strict rules for casters, i.e. one caster per game; leaving immediately in case of lag; etc.
Would you be happy to be casted live in this case?
Because let's make one thing clear - casters' main reason to defend live casting is having a larger audience. It would be more convenient for them to just wait for the replays to be sent and then upload some VODs, so there's no reason not to trust them about the viewer count.
P.S.
On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE.
True. I have watched hundreds, maybe even thousands of football games (90+ min each) since I was a kid and I have never ever seen one that was not live. Just think about all of us who would stay up until late or get up before down to watch something live...
|
As a viewer I really prefer it being live.
I know it causes problems, but I would much rather have the focus be on minimizing those problems. Then going over to replay casts.
|
On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
It seems that StarCraft is the only gaming community that is insistent on casters going over finished, ended games (replays). I think this is mainly due to Korean eSports and casting over their live Korean broadcasts for VOD's, and general old-school attitude around here. The TSL #1 and 2 worked well because the organizers and head community members around here did a good job of making sure none of the information was leaked (and in the end some of it was).
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact.
The real problem, in the example of the MorroW match, is the sheer number of broadcasters. 14 is ridiculous, and it's ESL's job to make sure only authorized people are in the games. This counts for both the lag and cheating aspects. If a broadcaster was found to be giving results to a player during a live match (which is pretty hard to do anyway), then there's a much larger issue at hand. I've personally never heard of this happening in any of the major eSports (SC, Quake, CS, Street Fighter, Wc3, CoD, etc).
If I told you that the UFC wasn't exactly live would you freak out?
You are comparing sporting events played LIVE in the protected environment ( btw football coaches cover their mouth when they speak so that no one can see what strategy they are discussing) to the online events where the outcome depends on the information that each player can gather. You have to be smarter that this, your analogy is weak. Compare football games to LAN games - sure, we all want live coverage there. Be serious.
|
The amount of people talking about replay vs live and act like people are suggesting casters collect replays and then a day later cast them is mind boggling. Being 1 set behind the tournament casting games is not some huge, ridiculous idea. People mention a delay of x number of minutes or something... well then it's not live? No?
The essence of "live" comes from commentators and viewers simply not knowing the outcome. This is easy to accommodate with replays if it is done properly. If there can't be a way for people to delay their streams then there simply has to be a change.
|
if we did do VODs of replays in tournaments its not a bad idea, but again, some issues:
positives:
-1080p quality is possible
-quality (sorry, i'm a gfx designer, and video editor, and quality is important to me)
-people from other countries don't have to see "crap too many viewers from my country"
negatives:
-1080p capturing and encoding takes FOREVER. seriously...a 30-45 minutes replay, or even a 10-15 minute replay can take 30-45 minutes to process, encode, add another 30-45 minutes for uploading
possible solution:
-have a player host the game, commentators DO NOT host, and just spec or ref
|
On September 06 2010 10:21 Frunkis wrote:
As a viewer I'd prefer they do replays instead of live games. Sitting around waiting for them to catch a game and bug players is really annoying. It seems like there would be a hell of a lot less downtime if they just did replays.
yeah this x1000, I can't watch any of the live online tournaments because at least 50% of the feed is the casters trying to set up the games, and often they end up missing high profile matchups because they start while casters are casting games of no names.
I really liked how HDH did their games, a big ol' stream of back to back games every week. It's not exactly hard to avoid spoilers and the benefits to players are huge.
|
On September 06 2010 22:41 News wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
It seems that StarCraft is the only gaming community that is insistent on casters going over finished, ended games (replays). I think this is mainly due to Korean eSports and casting over their live Korean broadcasts for VOD's, and general old-school attitude around here. The TSL #1 and 2 worked well because the organizers and head community members around here did a good job of making sure none of the information was leaked (and in the end some of it was).
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact.
The real problem, in the example of the MorroW match, is the sheer number of broadcasters. 14 is ridiculous, and it's ESL's job to make sure only authorized people are in the games. This counts for both the lag and cheating aspects. If a broadcaster was found to be giving results to a player during a live match (which is pretty hard to do anyway), then there's a much larger issue at hand. I've personally never heard of this happening in any of the major eSports (SC, Quake, CS, Street Fighter, Wc3, CoD, etc). If I told you that the UFC wasn't exactly live would you freak out? You are comparing sporting events played LIVE in the protected environment ( btw football coaches cover their mouth when they speak so that no one can see what strategy they are discussing) to the online events where the outcome depends on the information that each player can gather. You have to be smarter that this, your analogy is weak. Compare football games to LAN games - sure, we all want live coverage there. Be serious.
UFC is always LIVE unless the event is held internationally. That is why http://modules.ufc.com/live/ exists in the first place. Coaches covering their mouths so that opposing players and teams cannot see what they're doing, either by themselves or from the TV feed, has nothing to do with the event being played live or not. That's gamesmanship. And I don't mean Patriots-Spygate style. All major LAN eSports events - including the Korean StarCraft leagues - are played live as they should be. Online events are inherently different, but we have the technology (and internet connection) nowadays to make it a near non-existent problem. My analogy is perfectly sound.
|
On September 06 2010 22:51 Slasher wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 22:41 News wrote:On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
It seems that StarCraft is the only gaming community that is insistent on casters going over finished, ended games (replays). I think this is mainly due to Korean eSports and casting over their live Korean broadcasts for VOD's, and general old-school attitude around here. The TSL #1 and 2 worked well because the organizers and head community members around here did a good job of making sure none of the information was leaked (and in the end some of it was).
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact.
The real problem, in the example of the MorroW match, is the sheer number of broadcasters. 14 is ridiculous, and it's ESL's job to make sure only authorized people are in the games. This counts for both the lag and cheating aspects. If a broadcaster was found to be giving results to a player during a live match (which is pretty hard to do anyway), then there's a much larger issue at hand. I've personally never heard of this happening in any of the major eSports (SC, Quake, CS, Street Fighter, Wc3, CoD, etc). If I told you that the UFC wasn't exactly live would you freak out? You are comparing sporting events played LIVE in the protected environment ( btw football coaches cover their mouth when they speak so that no one can see what strategy they are discussing) to the online events where the outcome depends on the information that each player can gather. You have to be smarter that this, your analogy is weak. Compare football games to LAN games - sure, we all want live coverage there. Be serious. UFC is always LIVE unless the event is held internationally. That is why http://modules.ufc.com/live/ exists in the first place. Coaches covering their mouths so that opposing players and teams cannot see what they're doing, either by themselves or from the TV feed, has nothing to do with the event being played live or not. That's gamesmanship. And I don't mean Patriots-Spygate style. All major LAN eSports events - including the Korean StarCraft leagues - are played live as they should be. Online events are inherently different, but we have the technology (and internet connection) nowadays to make it a near non-existent problem. My analogy is perfectly sound.
Korean events are played in a LAN environment, players sit in isolated cabins, comparison with football has everything to do with it since you don't want your information to get out. How do you not get the analogy? Whole debate is about the online events being different than LAN events, wtf how are you going to make it "nonexistent problem" unless you stand behind my back while I'm playing and watching the cast on the 2nd computer?
I know for a fact something about the last UFC that you don't know since I'm friends with one of the participants.
|
On September 06 2010 22:51 Slasher wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 22:41 News wrote:On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
It seems that StarCraft is the only gaming community that is insistent on casters going over finished, ended games (replays). I think this is mainly due to Korean eSports and casting over their live Korean broadcasts for VOD's, and general old-school attitude around here. The TSL #1 and 2 worked well because the organizers and head community members around here did a good job of making sure none of the information was leaked (and in the end some of it was).
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact.
The real problem, in the example of the MorroW match, is the sheer number of broadcasters. 14 is ridiculous, and it's ESL's job to make sure only authorized people are in the games. This counts for both the lag and cheating aspects. If a broadcaster was found to be giving results to a player during a live match (which is pretty hard to do anyway), then there's a much larger issue at hand. I've personally never heard of this happening in any of the major eSports (SC, Quake, CS, Street Fighter, Wc3, CoD, etc). If I told you that the UFC wasn't exactly live would you freak out? You are comparing sporting events played LIVE in the protected environment ( btw football coaches cover their mouth when they speak so that no one can see what strategy they are discussing) to the online events where the outcome depends on the information that each player can gather. You have to be smarter that this, your analogy is weak. Compare football games to LAN games - sure, we all want live coverage there. Be serious. UFC is always LIVE unless the event is held internationally. That is why http://modules.ufc.com/live/ exists in the first place. Coaches covering their mouths so that opposing players and teams cannot see what they're doing, either by themselves or from the TV feed, has nothing to do with the event being played live or not. That's gamesmanship. And I don't mean Patriots-Spygate style. All major LAN eSports events - including the Korean StarCraft leagues - are played live as they should be. Online events are inherently different, but we have the technology (and internet connection) nowadays to make it a near non-existent problem. My analogy is perfectly sound.
I'd say your analogy falls apart when you examine the other problems inherent, specifically cheating. This is an RTS where information is at a premium. Sports? Not so much, beyond finding out perhaps a star player will be out of the game.
|
On September 06 2010 22:50 Wargizmo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:21 Frunkis wrote:
As a viewer I'd prefer they do replays instead of live games. Sitting around waiting for them to catch a game and bug players is really annoying. It seems like there would be a hell of a lot less downtime if they just did replays. yeah this x1000, I can't watch any of the live online tournaments because at least 50% of the feed is the casters trying to set up the games, and often they end up missing high profile matchups because they start while casters are casting games of no names. I really liked how HDH did their games, a big ol' stream of back to back games every week. It's not exactly hard to avoid spoilers and the benefits to players are huge.
I remember there being an accidental leak during TSL, and weren't the HDH finals played live? It is my -duty- as an independent journalist to report on and cover a tournament in full, including immediately when a match has ended. I am not waiting for the matches to broadcasted days later when it has already concluded.
|
On September 06 2010 22:57 Slasher wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 22:50 Wargizmo wrote:On September 06 2010 10:21 Frunkis wrote:
As a viewer I'd prefer they do replays instead of live games. Sitting around waiting for them to catch a game and bug players is really annoying. It seems like there would be a hell of a lot less downtime if they just did replays. yeah this x1000, I can't watch any of the live online tournaments because at least 50% of the feed is the casters trying to set up the games, and often they end up missing high profile matchups because they start while casters are casting games of no names. I really liked how HDH did their games, a big ol' stream of back to back games every week. It's not exactly hard to avoid spoilers and the benefits to players are huge. I remember there being an accidental leak during TSL, and weren't the HDH finals played live? It is my -duty- as an independent journalist to report on and cover a tournament in full, including immediately when a match has ended. I am not waiting for the matches to broadcasted days later when it has already concluded.
Stop being silly, everyone talks about 10-15 minute delay, casting games right after they finished. You are not being reasonable right now.
|
Noone is talking about vod there. Players want delayed livestream, and the easiest way atm is to livestream a replay instead of the actual match, if people could stream a game with a decent delay like 15+ min noone would complain.
|
On September 06 2010 22:57 Slasher wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 22:50 Wargizmo wrote:On September 06 2010 10:21 Frunkis wrote:
As a viewer I'd prefer they do replays instead of live games. Sitting around waiting for them to catch a game and bug players is really annoying. It seems like there would be a hell of a lot less downtime if they just did replays. yeah this x1000, I can't watch any of the live online tournaments because at least 50% of the feed is the casters trying to set up the games, and often they end up missing high profile matchups because they start while casters are casting games of no names. I really liked how HDH did their games, a big ol' stream of back to back games every week. It's not exactly hard to avoid spoilers and the benefits to players are huge. I remember there being an accidental leak during TSL, and weren't the HDH finals played live? It is my -duty- as an independent journalist to report on and cover a tournament in full, including immediately when a match has ended. I am not waiting for the matches to broadcasted days later when it has already concluded.
Hahahahah. So, you're saying that if games were cast on, say 1 hour behind the tournament schedule in order to facilitate replays and slightly less spotty downtime, that you'd dig through their match results and spoil them for everybody?
|
This problem screams for a technical solution. Someone needs to write an app to address these issues. My suggestion is a website that would be used to host replays automatically from invited tournament participants. Each participant would be given a unique code just for them for that tournament. Each player would also have a plug-in, applet, etc. that would automatically upload the replay file from their PC to the website. In this way the replay would be available just seconds after the conclusion of the match. The replays would be available initially to the invited casters and available publicly 24 hours (or however long) after the match. In this way, dozens of casters could have access right after the match. The only compromise is that the viewers are delayed until after the first match completes. In big tournaments I would think this would only be a problem at the very onset, but while long matches would be delayed, other matches that end quickly would be available 10-15 minutes after the start of the tournament. The web design could be such that it displays the bracket and replays available as they post.
I think this kind of solution would work well for online tournaments, allowing the players the security of knowing that their play is not being compromised and I’m sure that this will become an even bigger deal as the prize pools increase.
So some enterprising web designer/coder...get to work!! You might even be able to make a couple of bucks from it!
|
Am i the only one who doesnt understand how games will be spoiled if they are casted by replay?
I mean yea if you check different forums and sites every 5mins then there's a chance that it might happen, but who does that? And why do that?
f5f5f5f5f5f5f5f5f5f5f Oh God NO!! they spoiled it for me
Could someone explain?
|
Actually casting from replays (delayed 5-10mins if possible?) would help solve the issue of down time (caster waiting/searching of a game). Along with solving many other concerns with lag etc..
The caster would have a larger choice of interesting games (player notes included perhaps?) and Casters know how to draw POLLS to see exactly what viewers want.
Lastly, please keep the thread on topic, respectful, and contributive to solutions.
|
there's been so many times when someone was going a hidden tech and the other player magically just 'knew' something was up and reacted I can't even count them, I've always been 100% sure they were watching the stream because conversely I've NEVER seen a player react to something the caster didn't announce...
|
HuK, as the OP isn't clear, I think you should clarify:
Are you proposing the compromise is to cast replays of each GAME immediately after it finishes or of each SERIES? You mention that casting from replays should only introduce a 5-10 minutes delay which implies it would be the GAME but you don't address the issue with that.. in a best of 5 or best of 7, the length of the game can vary widely. And in fact is a spoiler in and of itself: Have you noticed how casters have to cover the replay timer bar? If individual games are being cast 5-10 minutes after they finish, after the first game there is an automatic spoiler (not to mention variable annoying downtime between games).
If you were referring to the SERIES though, then the main issue would be the possible large delay (a bo7 can easily take an hour+) between game and cast for people to post spoilers etc.
|
I think we all agree that good coverage is essential for the success of SC2 events including regular online cups. And not providing a "live experience" is in fact bad for people who want to follow these events – VODs, replays, etc. can't make up for it. Thus, I find that, in general, players should be tolerant regarding casters and, no matter how annoyed he might have been, MorroW's "escape" from TaKe was wrong and should have been punished.
However, in online tournaments, lag and cheating are quite important issues. And a pretty good alternative was already mentioned. It's about "live experience", this does not necessarily mean that matches have to be casted without delay. Replay casting can definitely work well if all players commit themselves to quickly providing replays after each game and not spoiling their results anywhere before the casters finished their job. This sounds like a better solution than a live stream, but it has to be executed properly and all involved parties have to work together (the "live experience" is already broken if a coverage website gets to know about the result before the casters streamed it). For now, just don't fight against the casters – it's not helping anyone.
|
On September 06 2010 22:55 News wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 22:51 Slasher wrote:On September 06 2010 22:41 News wrote:On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
It seems that StarCraft is the only gaming community that is insistent on casters going over finished, ended games (replays). I think this is mainly due to Korean eSports and casting over their live Korean broadcasts for VOD's, and general old-school attitude around here. The TSL #1 and 2 worked well because the organizers and head community members around here did a good job of making sure none of the information was leaked (and in the end some of it was).
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact.
The real problem, in the example of the MorroW match, is the sheer number of broadcasters. 14 is ridiculous, and it's ESL's job to make sure only authorized people are in the games. This counts for both the lag and cheating aspects. If a broadcaster was found to be giving results to a player during a live match (which is pretty hard to do anyway), then there's a much larger issue at hand. I've personally never heard of this happening in any of the major eSports (SC, Quake, CS, Street Fighter, Wc3, CoD, etc). If I told you that the UFC wasn't exactly live would you freak out? You are comparing sporting events played LIVE in the protected environment ( btw football coaches cover their mouth when they speak so that no one can see what strategy they are discussing) to the online events where the outcome depends on the information that each player can gather. You have to be smarter that this, your analogy is weak. Compare football games to LAN games - sure, we all want live coverage there. Be serious. UFC is always LIVE unless the event is held internationally. That is why http://modules.ufc.com/live/ exists in the first place. Coaches covering their mouths so that opposing players and teams cannot see what they're doing, either by themselves or from the TV feed, has nothing to do with the event being played live or not. That's gamesmanship. And I don't mean Patriots-Spygate style. All major LAN eSports events - including the Korean StarCraft leagues - are played live as they should be. Online events are inherently different, but we have the technology (and internet connection) nowadays to make it a near non-existent problem. My analogy is perfectly sound. Korean events are played in a LAN environment, comparison with football has everything to do with it since you don't want your information to get out. How do you not get the analogy? Whole debate is about the online events being different than LAN events, wtf how are you going to make it "nonexistent problem" unless you stand behind my back while I'm playing and watching the cast on the 2nd computer? I know for a fact something about the last UFC that you don't know since I'm friends with one of the participants.
I am fine with a 10-15 second delay on matches to prevent this issue, which is still held as a live event. RTS games are the hardest to control in this area compared to a FPS or a Fighting game, but I don't think this should be a deterrent for live matches.
As for UFC, I don't watch enough of it to know, but UFC 119 is in Indianapolis on Sept 25. I will make sure to watch, find someone who's going, and get them to text me as soon as Mir vs CroCoop has finished.
|
Oh one more thing, if the proposal is to have the caster switch to another game while waiting for (for example) a long game 2 of a series to finish, I'm against that as well as it completely deflates the drama of the series... As there's so many players involved in these tournies a lot of times it would ruin the viewer experience in some way to watch a bunch of game 1's then all of a sudden a game 2...
Plus that sounds like a logistics nightmare for the casting staff..
|
i watched your series vs morrow replays and i think in like 2 games it lagged because of other players during a major battle which was very lame, though watching live is SO MUCH BETTER even though you get the same thing out of replays, live just give you a thrill of excitement that your one of the first guys to see this match and see how it goes down, knowing that your watching a replay that can be paused or FF or rewind is really not the same, as apposed to live where anything goes.
on the same token i do believe that the top players need to be given the top conditions, and allow who they want in the tournament besides the main admin/and or/caster, to reduce lag to a minimum and still bring a great show to us the viewers. and people need to fucking learn like in BW if you get the honer of obsing in a game with a pro like Huk or morrow or idra or really anyone else in the world and you lag, you better gtfo without anyone saying your name because its the right thing to do.
|
Even delaying the stream by a few minutes won't eliminate cheating. There are things the caster can say such as one player "only has one gas up" or something that might still be the case a few minutes later and can give the other player an advantage.
|
On September 06 2010 23:07 BladeRunner wrote:
HuK, as the OP isn't clear, I think you should clarify:
Are you proposing the compromise is to cast replays of each GAME immediately after it finishes or of each SERIES? You mention that casting from replays should only introduce a 5-10 minutes delay which implies it would be the GAME but you don't address the issue with that.. in a best of 5 or best of 7, the length of the game can vary widely. And in fact is a spoiler in and of itself: Have you noticed how casters have to cover the replay timer bar? If individual games are being cast 5-10 minutes after they finish, after the first game there is an automatic spoiler (not to mention variable annoying downtime between games).
If you were referring to the SERIES though, then the main issue would be the possible large delay (a bo7 can easily take an hour+) between game and cast for people to post spoilers etc.
This is something the tournament would have to decide beforehand. Your stating a problem with many obvious solutions.
1: Delay casting the initial replay even longer operating under the assumption that one of the matches wont turn into a ridiculously epic 45 minute game.
2: Accept that if you finish a game and you have no replay, that your viewers MIGHT know that the next game is much longer.
3: As you stated, delay an entire series (note: If you're behind a series the entire tournament then the delay isn't as long since you're not simply waiting for the series to be finished, it was already underway when you were doing the previous one)
etc
|
On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
It seems that StarCraft is the only gaming community that is insistent on casters going over finished, ended games (replays). I think this is mainly due to Korean eSports and casting over their live Korean broadcasts for VOD's, and general old-school attitude around here. The TSL #1 and 2 worked well because the organizers and head community members around here did a good job of making sure none of the information was leaked (and in the end some of it was).
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact.
The real problem, in the example of the MorroW match, is the sheer number of broadcasters. 14 is ridiculous, and it's ESL's job to make sure only authorized people are in the games. This counts for both the lag and cheating aspects. If a broadcaster was found to be giving results to a player during a live match (which is pretty hard to do anyway), then there's a much larger issue at hand. I've personally never heard of this happening in any of the major eSports (SC, Quake, CS, Street Fighter, Wc3, CoD, etc).
it isnt hard to avoid spoilers at all, even if its been reported everywhere else, as long as the casters dont talk about it during the games. it just means you dont visit any esports sites as long as the tournament is going on. this is not a situation like hdh where things are played days or weeks later, broadcasts would just be delayed until the match is over, and thered be other games casted in the meantime. the only downside is you cant really participate in stream chats or anything like that, but thats a hell of a lot better than just dealing with the fact that people are cheating.
|
The tournament should be more organized, and organize the official streamers for each match/series. Limit the amount in a certain game, and limit who can stream. One streamer is generally enough for one game.
|
On September 06 2010 23:09 Slasher wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 22:55 News wrote:On September 06 2010 22:51 Slasher wrote:On September 06 2010 22:41 News wrote:On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
It seems that StarCraft is the only gaming community that is insistent on casters going over finished, ended games (replays). I think this is mainly due to Korean eSports and casting over their live Korean broadcasts for VOD's, and general old-school attitude around here. The TSL #1 and 2 worked well because the organizers and head community members around here did a good job of making sure none of the information was leaked (and in the end some of it was).
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact.
The real problem, in the example of the MorroW match, is the sheer number of broadcasters. 14 is ridiculous, and it's ESL's job to make sure only authorized people are in the games. This counts for both the lag and cheating aspects. If a broadcaster was found to be giving results to a player during a live match (which is pretty hard to do anyway), then there's a much larger issue at hand. I've personally never heard of this happening in any of the major eSports (SC, Quake, CS, Street Fighter, Wc3, CoD, etc). If I told you that the UFC wasn't exactly live would you freak out? You are comparing sporting events played LIVE in the protected environment ( btw football coaches cover their mouth when they speak so that no one can see what strategy they are discussing) to the online events where the outcome depends on the information that each player can gather. You have to be smarter that this, your analogy is weak. Compare football games to LAN games - sure, we all want live coverage there. Be serious. UFC is always LIVE unless the event is held internationally. That is why http://modules.ufc.com/live/ exists in the first place. Coaches covering their mouths so that opposing players and teams cannot see what they're doing, either by themselves or from the TV feed, has nothing to do with the event being played live or not. That's gamesmanship. And I don't mean Patriots-Spygate style. All major LAN eSports events - including the Korean StarCraft leagues - are played live as they should be. Online events are inherently different, but we have the technology (and internet connection) nowadays to make it a near non-existent problem. My analogy is perfectly sound. Korean events are played in a LAN environment, comparison with football has everything to do with it since you don't want your information to get out. How do you not get the analogy? Whole debate is about the online events being different than LAN events, wtf how are you going to make it "nonexistent problem" unless you stand behind my back while I'm playing and watching the cast on the 2nd computer? I know for a fact something about the last UFC that you don't know since I'm friends with one of the participants. I am fine with a 10-15 second delay on matches to prevent this issue, which is still held as a live event. RTS games are the hardest to control in this area compared to a FPS or a Fighting game, but I don't think this should be a deterrent for live matches. As for UFC, I don't watch enough of it to know, but UFC 119 is in Indianapolis on Sept 25. I will make sure to watch, find someone who's going, and get them to text me as soon as Mir vs CroCoop has finished.
Hahaha, 10-15 seconds. So you want a completely useless buffer? This shit is blowing my mind. A realistic amount of time has to pass in order for somebody to gain minimal to no information from a stream. 5 minutes is a good starting time, but even that many would argue isn't enough.
|
On September 06 2010 15:08 Fodder03 wrote:
Even easier, have 1 tounry rep in each game and have HIM save the replay to give out to the casters after. No lag for players, guaranteed replays, and the fans get to see the games. E z p z
Dont say there is too many games going on, im sure u could find enough volunteers in the community to obs and save replays.
The point is that the players should be #1 priority. If a player is lagging, like huk was, playing from Canada on eu, every bit of lag is amplified. Casters need to show some respect for the people giving them something to cast.
So what's the difference in lag between having an admin watch the game and 1 or 2 casters? None..
|
On September 06 2010 23:12 IdrA wrote:
it just means you dont visit any esports sites as long as the tournament is going on.
That is not an option. As soon as the results are public, the "live experience" is gone. Contrary to Slasher, I don't insist on "100% live" but the people on the stream have to be sure that it's the first place where they are going to see the result. This is why I assume that if you want replay casting to work, everyone has to work together closely. And we all know how complicated things can get.
|
On September 06 2010 23:17 D.Devil wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 23:12 IdrA wrote:
it just means you dont visit any esports sites as long as the tournament is going on. That is not an option. As soon as the results are public, the "live experience" is gone. Contrary to Slasher, I don't insist on "100% live" but the people on the stream have to be sure that it's the first place where they are going to see the result. This is why I assume that if you want replay casting to work, everyone has to work together closely. And we all know how complicated things can get.
It's closer to the middle ground. The results will be somewhere, but don't sit on the live report thread on TL or the bracket on the official web site spamming f5. Just have to avoid where it would likely be spoiled if you're extremely concerned about being spoiled in the first place. And this shouldn't be a huge issue since most of this revolves around the smaller tournaments.
|
99% of the casters don't have the tools or knowledge to artificially delay their casts. It's actually quite tricky.
I think we should cast replays after the game is done from Quarterfinals and up, maybe depending on prize money.
|
On September 06 2010 23:16 Martijn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 15:08 Fodder03 wrote:
Even easier, have 1 tounry rep in each game and have HIM save the replay to give out to the casters after. No lag for players, guaranteed replays, and the fans get to see the games. E z p z
Dont say there is too many games going on, im sure u could find enough volunteers in the community to obs and save replays.
The point is that the players should be #1 priority. If a player is lagging, like huk was, playing from Canada on eu, every bit of lag is amplified. Casters need to show some respect for the people giving them something to cast. So what's the difference in lag between having an admin watch the game and 1 or 2 casters? None..
There is likely to be lag. But yeah if there are just two streamers in it then it would not make a difference compare to say the #14 everyone's been using.
|
On September 06 2010 16:35 sikatrix wrote:
offtopic
ps; martijn, are you the same one from CAL?
Yeah I was operations staff for CAL but lets leave that in the past.
|
HuK kinda lost me now. At first I thought he were trying to figure out a solution for the whole lag + stream + mass obs, but now it just seems like we're trying to get rid of all that which I do not agree with. If streaming is possible then it should be done. Like everyone has been saying 1 tournament + 2 casters and that is it. Casting replays should be the last resort when the admin/streamers lagging the game becomes inevitable.
Like in HuK's case at the GosuCup he felt the streamers were lagging and affect his play. The Gosu admin did a good job and allowed the games to go on and cast the replays afterward. Sure it might have seemed like an excuse for losing but then he came back to win it after being down 0:3 with no casters. In MorroW's case was simply an act of frustration because the admins were not being reasonable. "14 streamers or DQ so STFU" which should not happen. If they had simply done 1admin+Take then there would not have been lag, MorroW would not have gotten frustrated and did what thought was better for him and the other player.
We should not try to get rid of streaming because it's a great thing to have for spectators and the scene. We should however try to fix the problems that streaming brings.
|
On September 06 2010 23:22 I_Love_Bacon wrote:
It's closer to the middle ground. The results will be somewhere, but don't sit on the live report thread on TL or the bracket on the official web site spamming f5. Just have to avoid where it would likely be spoiled if you're extremely concerned about being spoiled in the first place. And this shouldn't be a huge issue since most of this revolves around the smaller tournaments.
It's not about the fear of seeing a spoiler. Like I've written before, the "live experience" is relevant to how much enjoyment a not-so-small group of spectators gets out of following an event. It's just the knowledge that they could get to know the result somewhere else already that has a negative influence on spectator numbers.
I'm suggesting that instead of arguing if we want to provide a "live experience" or not, we could try to see if it's compatible with replay casting. If you guys really have such a big problem with a live stream, this seems to be the most reasonable option for me.
|
On September 06 2010 23:12 IdrA wrote:
it isnt hard to avoid spoilers at all, even if its been reported everywhere else, as long as the casters dont talk about it during the games. it just means you dont visit any esports sites as long as the tournament is going on.
Well it´s still kinda hard to not get spoiled if a tourney goes on a week or 2. You click on a hype thread and one of the comments is: 3-2 IdrA i saw it in his match history. Bam Spoilered and there was not really much you can do if you want to check maps, time and get some prehype. Which is kinda important for many.
|
you value the "live experience" more than the assurance noone is watching his opponent play while playing him?
|
Fiddler's Green42661 Posts
I agree with Huk here. As much as I love watching livestreams, Watching a replay of a series doesn't spoil anything as long as all of the replays are sent in a timely fashion and the scheduling of the tournament isn't screwy. And honestly, as spectators we have to try our best to let the players be as comfortable as they can when playing these matches so that we can see good games. A good compromise would be to let the players ban any spectators or streamers if they are feeling lag or to just stream live only when it gets to the higher rounds of a tournament like ro8 or semi-finals.
|
Should be something like this:
If there is a tournament, the casters sign up to this tournament and they're the delegated casters for casting the replays (note: I said replays). When the match is concluded by the players, they have to upload the replay on this site where the casters can obtain access to it (and only the allowed casters), and then they can begin their cast of the match. Players are then under obligation to not release details of the match and not publicly upload the replay until, say, 5 days after the match.
I don't understand people that only want to watch it LIVE, would you rather players play at their best or having to struggle with the lag conditions and frustration it elicits too? It would be hard to keep a straight head when playing under so much pressure, and if you have lag problems, it just adds to the frustration.
|
On September 06 2010 18:02 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 18:00 Silver~Guy wrote:
Hello as a player I'd like to weigh in on this issue.
The lag issue is a problem and should not be ignored, if you want the best competitions you have ever seen, every second counts.
Cheating is a possible problem since game-sense and cheating are hard to distinguish.
Stress? Well, I don't know if that will be going away but we can at least mitigate it...
Ideally I think the future of streams should look like this:
[people in the game]
players
admin who video captures (who does not cast)
Admin (otherwise called 1st streamer) lags video by 2 minutes to a hub with a password.
Caster (otherwise called 2nd streamer) picks up the stream and recasts with audio to general public.
Spectators watch 2nd stream.
benefits:
-keeps game almost-live
-limits lag
-minimize the effectiveness of cheating
drawbacks:
-more coordination for admin/streamers/casters
The drawback will be dealt with by formalizing the process by which the admin and casters interact (which will naturally happen after an initial testing period).
Care to provide the hundreds possibly thousands of dollars on server support for this setup?
I don't see why it would cost thousands of dollars if the casters are still streaming on UStream/Livestream. You just need a competent observer with a decent connection, 100/100 Mbps is quite common in Sweden and can easily stream 1Mbps video to 10 casters. I feel the guy's suggestion is quite good and got ignored unfairly just because you decided to post this.
|
I just remembered something. A lot of people have mentioned HDH as an example for a tournament casted from replays. However, there was a poll back then when HDH asked the viewers whether they would prefer a delayed live recording or casting from replays. The results were overwhelmingly in favour of the live recording, even though they were both going to be casted on the same day. Can anyone confirm whether this is the way it happened or do I remember it wrong?
|
Until blizz implements a way to watch replays online with more then one person watching, replay casting is horrible. At least if there are more then one caster. One of them always de-sync and then you hear them talk about stuff that happened 20s ago or stuff that hasn't happened yet. Honestly i just turn off the cast when that happens.
The real solution would be to have some kind of software buffer so that livestreams of online events have a few minutes of delay. I am surprised no1 has come up with something like this yet, because this really doesn't sound very hard to do.
|
The point for the tournament admins, and especially sponsors is, that they NEED to have their games covered, since this is how the money gets in - which is the players pricemoney in the end. There's no way someone will fund a tournament which isn't being watched. And a live coverage is always going to recieve more attention than replay/VoD coverage.
Edit: Since you say the KOTB or HDH did reviece more attention, this is most likely due to casterpopularity and pro-player denstity, not because they did it with replays.
|
^ Casting replays is the same thing. The player will be seen in action either way. The sponsors will be mentioned. Streamers usually have the banner up with the sponsor logo which at the end of the day is important throughout the tournament. When the VODs come out, it's the exact same thing. Some people don't even know that they are watching a VOD of a casted replay.
|
|
|
8748 Posts
On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact.
That's fine because all the big LAN events can broadcast live.
The issue here is broadcasting online events.Slightly delaying the stream (by ~90 mins) would make these events so so much better. The only problem here is people looking at players' matchlists and spoiling results. But they wouldn't be spoiled on the stream. So anyone who isn't F5'ing forums for an hour straight before a stream would be safe. Yeah, they have in the back of their head "this isn't perfectly live" but how is that worse than "these players could be cheating and the game is lagging"
On September 06 2010 23:59 funk100 wrote:
we need a survey
It'd be totally counterproductive. Why use a survey on a discussion forum? Most people responding would be uninformed. People don't know what's best for themselves.
|
From a former caster perspective:
I can say that I understand both sides. When I was just starting playing sc2, djWHEAT decided to stream our games. Insanely high pressure, considering I hadn't played an RTS in 3 years. (Bastard.) So there was probably 700-1000 people watching my horrible noobish play. Haha. But I've also been the caster for a lot of these tournaments. One way to get around this stuff from an organization standpoint is to have the organizers setup the casters and obs for the games. I agree that they should be limited. Players kinda have to accept the fact that they are going to be casted. It's part of the whole thing. It's not the same thing to cast the replays. People want to watch the stuff right away. The KotB tournament and HDH tournaments were different, because they were beta. People didn't have a lot of options to play or obs a lot of those matches.
I dunno if you've ever tried to listen to a cast when playing, but it's insanely hard to concentrate on both. You might be able to pick up some kind of crazy strat out of the periphery of your hearing if you're not scouting or if you're way better, and don't have to pay attention to your play as much.
When money is on the line, the players have an obvious right to be tense. Sorry, but the casters aren't going anywhere. Admins just have to be a bit more organized. Things were a lot easier in BW and War3 to keep everything organized. Hopefully, blizz will help somehow. (Doubtful)
|
Live casting is much more exciting but obviously some kind of delay should be worked in. It is also much more difficult to generate hype without spoilers when things are not offline.
Finally: If vods are to be used, casters are going to have to start posting dummy vods to conceal a 2-0 or something to that effect. How many games from Day9 Kotb or HDH1 were spoiled by only 2 vods being posted from a bo3?
|
On September 07 2010 00:02 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact. That's fine because all the big LAN events can broadcast live. The issue here is broadcasting online events.Slightly delaying the stream (by ~90 mins) would make these events so so much better. The only problem here is people looking at players' matchlists and spoiling results. But they wouldn't be spoiled on the stream. So anyone who isn't F5'ing forums for an hour straight before a stream would be safe. Yeah, they have in the back of their head "this isn't perfectly live" but how is that worse than "these players could be cheating and the game is lagging"
The problem is the bigger and bigger e-sports becomes the more and more this will become standard. It also takes a lot of the fun out of things like live discussion chats.
Also it already happens, I knew you lost to IdrA 0-2 or 3 (cannot remember if it was bo3 or 5) in HDH because some asshole put it on the Ustream channel comments. All I had to do was load the Ustream channel and it was spoiled. I seriously paid about 2% attention to the rest of the match because of this.
And to everyone suggesting that the casters just add a delay, it's not feasible unless the company has tens of thousands of dollars to work on this. I had a very long talk with the highest level of tech support Ustream has about this. They were able to show me several devices that added a lag, but all of them were about $900 for 30 or less seconds (which would not help anything). and we could not find a one that was over 30 seconds. Remember these networks (especially Livestream) pride themselves on having as little of a delay as possible, this is a unexpected development for them and they are unprepared.
|
What I'm most frustrated with is that all these problems could have been easily avoided if Blizzard just did some research and took a lesson from other games. Especially since they focused on making sc2 a competitive game and all.
This might be slightly offtopic but I still want to talk about these points as it creates problems for players/organizers when creating ESPORTS for Blizzards own game. They ought to support and give us the tools to do so properly!
Lag
Why is observers even affecting the latency of the players at all? Code it properly and let the observers lag by themselves.
Cheating
This is another problem easily prevented by having an additional option when creating the game. Let the host chose a Delay Time for observers. Caching 5-10mins worth of replay data on the observers end is nothing. It's practically live, and many channels do this for rl sports anyway.
Crashes/Disconnects
Why Blizzard, why didn't you code a reconnect feature for custom games? At least a save game option? WHY?!
|
Live casting is pointless. There's nothing gained from it that wouldn't be gained from just immediately casting replays in a tournament. Either way there would be nonstop action, but the players would be more satisfied and everything would run more smoothly (there wouldn't be gaps in the early stages because casters would always have replays ready to cast.
And technically, casting a replay immediate is just as live as professional sports on TV which are broadcast with a significant delay.
|
While I agree with the fact the games should be casted via replays. The viewers do not want replays and without the viewers the players won't have any funding. Yes, it does suck for the players but players could always RealID official casters who cover tournaments and not have to deal with inviting players. Perhaps they could just sit in lobby for 2 minutes before the game to let casters in. To prevent full lobbies; just have a select few casters who have a good reputation(no lag) allowed to cover the semi/finals game. While I'm on that subject any stream with 2+ casters is a bit overkill. I'm sorry but if you need a camera man because neither of your computers can handle it; you may be causing lag.
Yes cheating, does suck however someone could always use maphack in a tournament and as long as they are smart about it; it wouldn't be obvious. Also as the game progresses; map hacks anti detection will improve and eventually it will be smart enough to not upload the data of you looking at your opponents base. While streams are a path of cheating, it is not the only/best method so its not a valid reason to disappoint viewers.
|
All these people going "replays just aren't the same" are kind of missing the point. It's understandable that it's a little harder to get excited about it when you know it's delayed but it's a matter of choosing the lesser of two evils. You can have the "live experience" or you can have a situation that's optimal for the players. If it's a choice between those two things I don't know how you can value anything above giving the players the opportunity to play as near lag free as possible with minimal fear of losing to a cheater.
|
On September 07 2010 00:09 Ghad wrote:
Finally: If vods are to be used, casters are going to have to start posting dummy vods to conceal a 2-0 or something to that effect. How many games from Day9 Kotb or HDH1 were spoiled by only 2 vods being posted from a bo3?
By the time VODs are posted the results would have already been known because the matches/replays were streamed. If you did not happen to see them, then that is your problem not the organizers.
|
United States22883 Posts
On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
It seems that StarCraft is the only gaming community that is insistent on casters going over finished, ended games (replays). I think this is mainly due to Korean eSports and casting over their live Korean broadcasts for VOD's, and general old-school attitude around here. No, it's because of continual drama surrounding the live casting system. How can you not understand this? We've been talking about potential problems since beta and they've all come true.
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. Truly live sports is only two decades old, so no, they don't HAVE TO BE LIVE. You're stuck in the ESPN model just as Gotfrag always was, simply because it's the ESPN model. How much it adds to the experience is relative to each watcher and ultimately, the 15 minute delay is more than offset by the cost to the integrity of the game. Big CS tournies, which doesn't even need more than a 3 minute delay, always ran HLTV delays of 10-20 minutes. I can't find the details now, but I'm almost positive that CAL finals were delayed and even CPL finals were delayed, I believe.
If a broadcaster was found to be giving results to a player during a live match (which is pretty hard to do anyway), then there's a much larger issue at hand. I've personally never heard of this happening in any of the major eSports (SC, Quake, CS, Street Fighter, Wc3, CoD, etc). It already has happened with BigT tipping off HuK on his opponent's strat the previous game. Whether the admin or obs or casters lag the game depends entirely on the people. You'll still have a situation where an admin or the official caster ends up lagging and will be bitchy about wanting to stay in. I know because it's happened before.
The rest of those games rest on entirely different elements. And BW DID have similar problems, with Korean fans at live events tipping off players on what their opponent was doing.
I've been following ESPORTS just as long as you have. BW/SC2 was just my final stop after CS/Q3/WoW/SF3S. To me, this sounds like casters whining about losing privilege.
|
I don't know how much delay there is on the stream, but if its less than 10 seconds I'm pretty shocked they actually stream important matches. It would be incredibly easy to pull up a laptop and see what's going on or just have a friend tell you "oh hey he just expoed". However, I watch streams more than I play so I'm a big fan of the streams.... and it's really not the same watching it on a replay even if its being casted. Who wants to watch ESPN Classic (even if you don't know who wins) when you could watch a live game?
|
Having a big delay on a stream is pointless. It's better to just let the players play it out, they give you the replay and play the next game while you cast the replay. It's the same thing without all the issues. Small delays are ineffective. 2 minute old info is still useful info depending on the situation.
|
I have to admit though, watching streams that are not live (aka casting replays) are pretty lame compared to live games, it's just the feeling that the outcome is already settled which makes it pretty boring to watch.
|
On September 07 2010 00:14 Ipp wrote:
without the viewers the players won't have any funding.
That's absolutely not true. Do you want to know how LucifroN and many other players became what they are today? By having their name put up in multiple news title on websites such as myMYM, GosuGamers, readmore, fragster and etc when they win online tournaments. Not live streaming. Till this day you probably wonder why most talented players have no sponsors even though they constantly appear winning on livestreams because they do not get mentioned in the media enough for esports orgs to care.
|
8748 Posts
On September 07 2010 00:10 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 00:02 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact. That's fine because all the big LAN events can broadcast live. The issue here is broadcasting online events.Slightly delaying the stream (by ~90 mins) would make these events so so much better. The only problem here is people looking at players' matchlists and spoiling results. But they wouldn't be spoiled on the stream. So anyone who isn't F5'ing forums for an hour straight before a stream would be safe. Yeah, they have in the back of their head "this isn't perfectly live" but how is that worse than "these players could be cheating and the game is lagging" The problem is the bigger and bigger e-sports becomes the more and more this will become standard. It also takes a lot of the fun out of things like live discussion chats. Also it already happens, I knew you lost to IdrA 0-2 or 3 (cannot remember if it was bo3 or 5) in HDH because some asshole put it on the Ustream channel comments. All I had to do was load the Ustream channel and it was spoiled. I seriously paid about 2% attention to the rest of the match because of this.
The bigger esports becomes, the more tournaments will be able to have LANs and this won't be an issue.
And I'm not sure what's wrong with it becoming standard. If I think it's the best way to do it then obviously I'd want it to become standard.
As for the spoilers, that's something Blizzard would have to fix. If they make a custom game setting that makes the game totally private, not leaving any public trace of its existence on bnet, then we won't have these match history spoilers. But while we wait for Blizzard to fix the problems with match history, we need to run tournaments properly. I really can't understand why so many people want to watch a tournament that is poorly run. Step 1 is to run the tournament properly. Step 2 is to broadcast the tournament as best as possible.
If you want to chat live about the event, then do it properly by meeting up with friends to watch it together or, if all your SC2 buddies live too far away, then meet up on vent/skype/irc. The group of people who want to chat live with strangers don't really matter in the big picture.
|
In this post I will agree with everything the original poster says, while adding nothing of value other than some trite oversimplifications of situations I don't really understand. This will then add some much needed padding to another team liquid thread in order to increase my post count so then when someone points out how pointless my post is, I can refer to my post count as a means of asserting that I am in fact a worthwhile poster and not at all a waste of space.
|
8748 Posts
On September 07 2010 00:23 Snowfield wrote:
I have to admit though, watching streams that are not live (aka casting replays) are pretty lame compared to live games, it's just the feeling that the outcome is already settled which makes it pretty boring to watch.
This is a really misguided perspective on time. The outcome is settled before the games are even played. What spectators need is to be in the first group of people to publicly experience the games.
|
8748 Posts
On September 07 2010 00:26 leakingpear wrote:
In this post I will agree with everything the original poster says, while adding nothing of value other than some trite oversimplifications of situations I don't really understand. This will then add some much needed padding to another team liquid thread in order to increase my post count so then when someone points out how pointless my post is, I can refer to my post count as a means of asserting that I am in fact a worthwhile poster and not at all a waste of space.
Classic British humor :D
|
On September 07 2010 00:26 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 00:10 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:02 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact. That's fine because all the big LAN events can broadcast live. The issue here is broadcasting online events.Slightly delaying the stream (by ~90 mins) would make these events so so much better. The only problem here is people looking at players' matchlists and spoiling results. But they wouldn't be spoiled on the stream. So anyone who isn't F5'ing forums for an hour straight before a stream would be safe. Yeah, they have in the back of their head "this isn't perfectly live" but how is that worse than "these players could be cheating and the game is lagging" The problem is the bigger and bigger e-sports becomes the more and more this will become standard. It also takes a lot of the fun out of things like live discussion chats. Also it already happens, I knew you lost to IdrA 0-2 or 3 (cannot remember if it was bo3 or 5) in HDH because some asshole put it on the Ustream channel comments. All I had to do was load the Ustream channel and it was spoiled. I seriously paid about 2% attention to the rest of the match because of this. The bigger esports becomes, the more tournaments will be able to have LANs and this won't be an issue. And I'm not sure what's wrong with it becoming standard. If I think it's the best way to do it then obviously I'd want it to become standard. As for the spoilers, that's something Blizzard would have to fix. If they make a custom game setting that makes the game totally private, not leaving any public trace of its existence on bnet, then we won't have these match history spoilers. But while we wait for Blizzard to fix the problems with match history, we need to run tournaments properly. I really can't understand why so many people want to watch a tournament that is poorly run. Step 1 is to run the tournament properly. Step 2 is to broadcast the tournament as best as possible. If you want to chat live about the event, then do it properly by meeting up with friends to watch it together or, if all your SC2 buddies live too far away, then meet up on vent/skype/irc. The group of people who want to chat live with strangers don't really matter in the big picture.
True on the LAN thing, but we are no where near that yet.
Because most people don't give a shit if it's not live. During the ITL Grand Prix we lost about 100-300 viewers every time we started a replay and had to do the countdown. There would be about 30 messages saying "this isn't live?" or "not live, no thanks". People like live.
It's pretty obvious Blizzard has no intention of fixing this problem, and as shown in the past we cannot count on them to fix battle.net for tournament play.
Not all people are fortunate enough to have friends who live close that watch SC. I know I don't. Do I not deserve to discuss events while live?
|
On September 07 2010 00:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 00:23 Snowfield wrote:
I have to admit though, watching streams that are not live (aka casting replays) are pretty lame compared to live games, it's just the feeling that the outcome is already settled which makes it pretty boring to watch. This is a really misguided perspective on time. The outcome is settled before the games are even played. What spectators need is to be in the first group of people to publicly experience the games.
I realize this, but still i just have the feeling that in a live game anything can happen, but in a replay, it's already done.
I'm sure many more feel like that.
|
Good post HuK.
Personally I think all of the casters do a great job making the replay feel realtime which really makes the only con of replays nearly non-existant. For ensuring fairness and smooth gameplay it's a small price to pay.
|
Obviously replay casting would be much better. It makes no difference at all with all the benefits. Even if it's not live, it really doesn't matter. Anyone who wouldn't watch a replay but would watch live... well, doesn't deserve to see it anyway.
On September 07 2010 00:33 Snowfield wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 00:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 07 2010 00:23 Snowfield wrote:
I have to admit though, watching streams that are not live (aka casting replays) are pretty lame compared to live games, it's just the feeling that the outcome is already settled which makes it pretty boring to watch. This is a really misguided perspective on time. The outcome is settled before the games are even played. What spectators need is to be in the first group of people to publicly experience the games. I realize this, but still i just have the feeling that in a live game anything can happen, but in a replay, it's already done. I'm sure many more feel like that.
Sure it's already done but what does it matter if you haven't seen it? When you're reading a book, you don't think that the story is stupid because the book is already written, right?
|
About HDH1
Might i remind you guys that first full round matches werent streamed at all. They were all avaliable on youtube with serious spoilers about who wins.HD and Husky didnt listen to put all the games ine one set under one name. By popular demand (namely us TL users) Husky and HD were "forced" to stream the games before putting them on youtube. And mind i remind you guys that HD was always setting up his stream for a hour before the cast of games since he didnt now how to do it?
Oh and HDH by player and technical aspect (due to the fact that they planned to do all games in 1080p for youtube) were totall failure. Due to the matches taking place for over a month of time. There was like 2-3 major balance changing patches. That totally screwed the results.
Still i enjoyed it. But hopefully there wont be other event like that hopefully (i mean that much screwed)
|
People can find out the results of matches that arent live by going through the said players profile and looking at the match history and then spoiling it for everyone.
|
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
|
On September 07 2010 00:47 Carl_Sagan wrote:
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
Cause it was Day9. He could put on a $2k tournament between between bronze players on the Starcraft II release day and he could have got 15k ppl.
|
8748 Posts
On September 07 2010 00:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 00:47 Carl_Sagan wrote:
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
Cause it was Day9. He could put on a $2k tournament between between bronze players on the Starcraft II release day and he could have got 15k ppl.
So how about raising the standards on everything rather than lowering the standards on everything? Bad casters need to cast live, else they aren't able to generate any interest, which causes the tournaments to be bad (cheating, lag). But if streams would work on building audiences themselves rather than relying purely on "I'm lucky enough to be a spectator in this game" then the tournaments could be run properly and spectators would get a satisfying show anyway.
|
On September 07 2010 00:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 00:47 Carl_Sagan wrote:
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
Cause it was Day9. He could put on a $2k tournament between between bronze players on the Starcraft II release day and he could have got 15k ppl.
Strangely enough your joke hits on a legitimate point though. If casters improve, the quality of the games (which can be tied to live/replays) can decline and still be entertaining; thus them watching the stream regardless of the actual games. The casters who aren't up to snuff NEED live games and recognized players because they aren't good enough to attract viewers.
As an example, I was watching Raelcun's stream earlier despite them casting a poor game (and in some cases, no stream) while other matches were happening on other streams. Why? Because Raelcun + Josh were 10x more pleasing to my ears and brain.
|
On September 06 2010 15:43 G2Wolf wrote: Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 15:08 Fodder03 wrote:
Even easier, have 1 tounry rep in each game and have HIM save the replay to give out to the casters after. No lag for players, guaranteed replays, and the fans get to see the games. E z p z
Dont say there is too many games going on, im sure u could find enough volunteers in the community to obs and save replays. Yea, sure. I highly doubt you can find 250ish volunteers to trust to obs and save the replay and send it in without a fair bit of failure and possibly cheating involved.
You mean u arent willing to put in the effort to find refs?
250 volunteers? ur hosting 500 man tournys?
U might also have to spread ur games out if u only find a certain ammount of refs.
These are the sacrifices that will have to be made to keep everyone in the community happy especially the players.
You CANNOT continue having 15 people in every game if it is causing the players to experience lag.
|
As a viewer I mostly care about getting to see the highest quality games I can and that they are played in the fairest way possible. Thus, making it harder to cheat by delaying a broadcast is good.
If a broadcast is delayed or casted off of replays I will hope casters and players do their best to conceal the result before I get to see it, but if I somehow find out about a result it's not the end of the world either. The important thing is that the right guy won.
If I know spoilers are out there I'll try to avoid them by not looking in threads or by avoiding stream chat. Mods should moderate if people are spoiling in supposedly spoiler free environments anyway. As Huk said, just close stream chat it if nothing else helps.
As lag can be reduced by having less casters there should be less casters, and it's as easy as that. To the spoiled "waah it's not as exciting if it's replays" argument I can just say that I don't enjoy watching the constant hunt for players and games live casts brings either. Does "We're still waiting for player xxx to finish his game. -insert music you'd ram forks into your ears rather than listen to here-" sound familiar to anyone? TheGunRun's singing can only carry a cast for so long, and besides, I thought HDH was awesome, all off of replays. How many viewers did those replay casts get? Tens of thousands?
Probably not adding anything new here but whatever.
|
I've personally never heard of this happening in any of the major eSports (SC, Quake, CS, Street Fighter, Wc3, CoD, etc).
I saw it happen 3 times in one day last weekend, though it wasn't the broadcasters. I can't remember now who it was but there was a ZvT on Scrap Station where someone PMed the Zerg player and told him the Terran had expanded. The Zerg player offered to regame but the Terran said he didn't care so they continued. The Zerg player lost pretty badly after that and a lot of people in the chat had the impression that it was at least partly because he was so thrown off by the PM he'd received because he gg'd rather abruptly in the following game. Then later at the Arizona LAN in one of Psyonic's matches, both players received PMs almost simultaneously from stream viewers. Pretty sure they re-gamed there. The third one was a custom match Trump played against Combat-Ex. Granted that was just a friendly custom between two players and I think the PMer was just joking but the same principle applies. Someone will always feel the need to be a jackass and the players shouldn't have to suffer for it.
It would be nice if you could depend on peoples' integrity but, sadly, you can't, especially on the interwebs.
|
I pretty much agree with OP, for those reasons and because the sc2 community is so global it can be hell for players across the world to even find a time to play thats convenient for both. Take for instance Artosis waking up at 2am to play for IEM USA, we all saw the effect it had on his gameplay.
For that reason over at reddit the team league is definitely going to be done from replays, I know most people here dont care about that tournament but it was a no-brainer for us really.
|
i never watched HDH1 or KotB, for the sole reason that it wasnt live. When i tuned into the HDH stream on like one of the first days, or maybe it was the showmatch vs Day9 and Tasteless, cant remember, maybe it was both, and i saw the streamer open the folder with the replays i was going,
no sorry i aint watching this shit if its a replay.
I do not know why i was like that, i guess the experience from it being live, fresh and no one has never seen the game before, ever, just adds to the epicness i guess
|
On September 07 2010 00:10 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 00:02 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 06 2010 22:31 Slasher wrote:
As a member of the media, and someone who has watched all major sports since i was 5, and followed eSports for the past decade, it HAS TO BE LIVE. Competitive and sporting events only work when they are played live. When a match is over, it is over, and it is reported on that instant. The scores, highlights, pictures, videos, celebrations are all posted on the front page of any respectable media organization covering the event. There is no waiting and there never will be after the fact. That's fine because all the big LAN events can broadcast live. The issue here is broadcasting online events.Slightly delaying the stream (by ~90 mins) would make these events so so much better. The only problem here is people looking at players' matchlists and spoiling results. But they wouldn't be spoiled on the stream. So anyone who isn't F5'ing forums for an hour straight before a stream would be safe. Yeah, they have in the back of their head "this isn't perfectly live" but how is that worse than "these players could be cheating and the game is lagging" The problem is the bigger and bigger e-sports becomes the more and more this will become standard. It also takes a lot of the fun out of things like live discussion chats. Also it already happens, I knew you lost to IdrA 0-2 or 3 (cannot remember if it was bo3 or 5) in HDH because some asshole put it on the Ustream channel comments. All I had to do was load the Ustream channel and it was spoiled. I seriously paid about 2% attention to the rest of the match because of this. And to everyone suggesting that the casters just add a delay, it's not feasible unless the company has tens of thousands of dollars to work on this. I had a very long talk with the highest level of tech support Ustream has about this. They were able to show me several devices that added a lag, but all of them were about $900 for 30 or less seconds (which would not help anything). and we could not find a one that was over 30 seconds. Remember these networks (especially Livestream) pride themselves on having as little of a delay as possible, this is a unexpected development for them and they are unprepared.
i have a hard time believing only hardware solution is viable. a software solution is doable for sure we just need a good software engineer ;p unless you're telling me a sotware solution would cost 900$ :o
|
On September 07 2010 00:55 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 00:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:47 Carl_Sagan wrote:
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
Cause it was Day9. He could put on a $2k tournament between between bronze players on the Starcraft II release day and he could have got 15k ppl. So how about raising the standards on everything rather than lowering the standards on everything? Bad casters need to cast live, else they aren't able to generate any interest, which causes the tournaments to be bad (cheating, lag). But if streams would work on building audiences themselves rather than relying purely on "I'm lucky enough to be a spectator in this game" then the tournaments could be run properly and spectators would get a satisfying show anyway.
I do agree there is a influx of bad casters that are doing anything they can to sneak in a ESL game or w/e. I said it in the ESL thread, this free for all casting shit really needs to come to an end. 1 streamer per match. Why should there be 15 streams one event is beyond me. We keep just our caster and co caster in and have never had lag problems. But don't let people like BigT speak for all the casters. Not all of us are unethical as hell.
Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in.
The spoiler issue may be one of the biggest, I've had a very established and well know gamer that plays on a very reputable NA Pro Gaming Team spoil the results of the only tournament we have ran off replays (cause of potential cheating issues) over and over and because he was a mod on that website ended up having to contact the website owner to get the spoilers edited out. The spoiler he did spoiled a whole half of a bracket and more importantly spoiled a whole half bracket for the caster. Think that might explain why I had a 35% lower view rate than any other part of the tournament??
|
On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in.
Biggest problem with replay casting is the inevitable de-sync. Only way to avoid it would be to only have one caster cast the game (no more co caster, kind of annoying...). or have blizzard implement a way to watch replays online.
|
On September 07 2010 01:06 Nizaris wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in.
Biggest problem with replay casting is the inevitable de-sync. Only way to avoid it would be to only have one caster cast the game (no more co caster, kind of annoying...). or have blizzard implement a way to watch replays online.
Not having a co caster is just a bad idea.
|
On September 07 2010 01:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 01:06 Nizaris wrote:On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in.
Biggest problem with replay casting is the inevitable de-sync. Only way to avoid it would be to only have one caster cast the game (no more co caster, kind of annoying...). or have blizzard implement a way to watch replays online. Not having a co caster is just a bad idea.
Lagging players out causing unplayable conditions is an even worse idea.
|
On September 06 2010 09:40 HuK wrote:
Compromises/solutions:
-Consequences for people who post/spoil results in forum area as usual. (good job tl) Also maybe close chat in streams so people don't flood/spoil results if becomes that big of a problem.
-Players should be forced to send replays immediately to a specified email or upload so games are received first by designated streamers. (not doing so should results and punishment so to's and casters don't have to chase around players).
-1 Admin should attend the game and afterward send in replays to designated email address or upload
I think the 1 Admin policy would be excellent. Find someone who is reliable enough:
1) not to spoil results,
2) and will be punctual on submitting replays.
Even still, institute a 3-strike policy on lag, so if he can't have a reliable connection, there is a waiting list of reliable Admins to take his place.
|
On September 07 2010 01:09 Fodder03 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 01:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 01:06 Nizaris wrote:On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in.
Biggest problem with replay casting is the inevitable de-sync. Only way to avoid it would be to only have one caster cast the game (no more co caster, kind of annoying...). or have blizzard implement a way to watch replays online. Not having a co caster is just a bad idea. Lagging players out causing unplayable conditions is an even worse idea.
I think your mistaking having multiple streamers with a co caster, or just making a general assumption. I know none of our co casters have ever caused lag issues.
|
On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 00:55 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 07 2010 00:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:47 Carl_Sagan wrote:
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
Cause it was Day9. He could put on a $2k tournament between between bronze players on the Starcraft II release day and he could have got 15k ppl. So how about raising the standards on everything rather than lowering the standards on everything? Bad casters need to cast live, else they aren't able to generate any interest, which causes the tournaments to be bad (cheating, lag). But if streams would work on building audiences themselves rather than relying purely on "I'm lucky enough to be a spectator in this game" then the tournaments could be run properly and spectators would get a satisfying show anyway. I do agree there is a influx of bad casters that are doing anything they can to sneak in a ESL game or w/e. I said it in the ESL thread, this free for all casting shit really needs to come to an end. 1 streamer per match. Why should there be 15 streams one event is beyond me. We keep just our caster and co caster in and have never had lag problems. But don't let people like BigT speak for all the casters. Not all of us are unethical as hell. Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in. The spoiler issue may be one of the biggest, I've had a very established and well know gamer that plays on a very reputable NA Pro Gaming Team spoil the results of the only tournament we have ran off replays (cause of potential cheating issues) over and over and because he was a mod on that website ended up having to contact the website owner to get the spoilers edited out. The spoiler he did spoiled a whole half of a bracket and more importantly spoiled a whole half bracket for the caster. Think that might explain why I had a 35% lower view rate than any other part of the tournament??
The only reason I can think of for having more than one stream in a game would be if you had an official stream and a local stream. Say ICCUP is the official stream, casting a MorroW match and there's a Swedish stream that also wants to cast it. I don't think it's unreasonable to let the Swedes stream their countryman. Even in that case though, there's no reason you couldn't put ICCUP in a different match in that situation (unless it's a final obviously), especially if you organized the streamers correctly from the start.
I disagree you can't DQ half the tournament, or at least that it shouldn't come to that if admins are willing to demonstrate that they're willing to hand out DQs to players who fail to comply. Players will continue to drag their feet as long as there are no consequences. I think, once players saw one or two people DQd for not promptly providing replays, they'd get over their reluctance.
|
On September 06 2010 16:31 Therickz wrote:
People who say, Players should be allowed to say that caster or obs cant be in the game.
I'd say it should be completely up to the casters and the admins of the tournie, as its their money they put into it, if they want coverage of it, they should be able to cover the a match.
Its just bullshit to say that its up to the player, if they dont wanna get casted, cus it lags? dont play then, no one force you to play in it.
Go make a tournie yourself with your own money as prizes, and then suddenly, you are not allowed to watch the game, cus the player dont want to. its unfair to the host, and he wants coverage, he should be allowed that.
im just gonna quote what i said earlier in the thread cus i see people still not getting it
|
United States22883 Posts
On September 07 2010 00:56 I_Love_Bacon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 00:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:47 Carl_Sagan wrote:
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
Cause it was Day9. He could put on a $2k tournament between between bronze players on the Starcraft II release day and he could have got 15k ppl. As an example, I was watching Raelcun's stream earlier despite them casting a poor game (and in some cases, no stream) while other matches were happening on other streams. Why? Because Raelcun + Josh were 10x more pleasing to my ears and brain.
Me too. I have no idea why I was watching Trump vs. Vibe instead of some of the other stuff going on, but I also skipped some Morrow/HuK matches because the casting was so poor. It's interesting that we have the discussion on exclusive casters because from my position as an avid fan, there's probably 3 daily casters total who deserve that privilege and two of them are on the same team. The rest of the casters detract from the game.
|
On September 07 2010 01:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 01:09 Fodder03 wrote:On September 07 2010 01:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 01:06 Nizaris wrote:On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in.
Biggest problem with replay casting is the inevitable de-sync. Only way to avoid it would be to only have one caster cast the game (no more co caster, kind of annoying...). or have blizzard implement a way to watch replays online. Not having a co caster is just a bad idea. Lagging players out causing unplayable conditions is an even worse idea. I think your mistaking having multiple streamers with a co caster, or just making a general assumption. I know none of our co casters have ever caused lag issues.
I have watched your stream before and seen players pause games and ask casters/obs to leave. To which ur casters responded with some bullshit self entitled attitude and of course didnt leave. It has happened and will continue to happen.
It is NOT an assumption i have witnessed it multiple time on multiple streams during multiple events.
Morrow just got banned from a tourny for 3 weeks due to this exact issue. Players >> Casters/obs.
Personally i dont care how many viewers u get to live events. If it means that u have to negatively effect the players with lag, or cheating than you NEED to find an alternative and stop being greedy. This is about the game, not about you or some 15 year old nerds who want to watch.
|
On September 07 2010 00:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 00:47 Carl_Sagan wrote:
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
Cause it was Day9. He could put on a $2k tournament between between bronze players on the Starcraft II release day and he could have got 15k ppl.
Yet all videos from the likes of PsyStarcraft, Crota & other you tubers that are just replays with commentary pull in tens of thousands and sometimes hundreds of thousands of viewers per video, while most livestreamers are lucky to get 1k even when doing tournaments. There's a vocal minority of people who want live or nothing else, most of whom reside in the TL forums, the majority of the people who watch SC are happy to watch replays with commentary, and actually prefer the convenience of VOD over having to order their lives around tournament schedules.
When diggity was putting the Gosucoaching cup vods up on youtube he was getting 20k+ views per video which is way more than the number of people who were watching it live. For some reason tournament organisers seem to think that live is where most of the viewers are going to tune in, which is why they are making exactly $0 from Starcraft while people like HD and Husky are actually earning a living from their youtube accounts doing it via replays.
|
On September 07 2010 01:13 Therickz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 16:31 Therickz wrote:
People who say, Players should be allowed to say that caster or obs cant be in the game.
I'd say it should be completely up to the casters and the admins of the tournie, as its their money they put into it, if they want coverage of it, they should be able to cover the a match.
Its just bullshit to say that its up to the player, if they dont wanna get casted, cus it lags? dont play then, no one force you to play in it.
Go make a tournie yourself with your own money as prizes, and then suddenly, you are not allowed to watch the game, cus the player dont want to. its unfair to the host, and he wants coverage, he should be allowed that. im just gonna quote what i said earlier in the thread cus i see people still not getting it
It's on the caster to be responsible enough to have a good internet connection. You can say "it's just bullshit" but it doesn't change the fact that a caster with bad lag is going to negatively affect the game for both players. If the organizers can't find a caster without bad lag, that's their own damn fault. That is their problem, their responsibility. If their caster's lag is so bad that both players want a caster ousted, why in the world are you blaming the player?
The caster needs to take care of his own shit (his internet connection) before QQing that he was ousted from the game. It's a matter of responsbility.
|
On September 07 2010 01:12 piegasm wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:55 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 07 2010 00:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:47 Carl_Sagan wrote:
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
Cause it was Day9. He could put on a $2k tournament between between bronze players on the Starcraft II release day and he could have got 15k ppl. So how about raising the standards on everything rather than lowering the standards on everything? Bad casters need to cast live, else they aren't able to generate any interest, which causes the tournaments to be bad (cheating, lag). But if streams would work on building audiences themselves rather than relying purely on "I'm lucky enough to be a spectator in this game" then the tournaments could be run properly and spectators would get a satisfying show anyway. I do agree there is a influx of bad casters that are doing anything they can to sneak in a ESL game or w/e. I said it in the ESL thread, this free for all casting shit really needs to come to an end. 1 streamer per match. Why should there be 15 streams one event is beyond me. We keep just our caster and co caster in and have never had lag problems. But don't let people like BigT speak for all the casters. Not all of us are unethical as hell. Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in. The spoiler issue may be one of the biggest, I've had a very established and well know gamer that plays on a very reputable NA Pro Gaming Team spoil the results of the only tournament we have ran off replays (cause of potential cheating issues) over and over and because he was a mod on that website ended up having to contact the website owner to get the spoilers edited out. The spoiler he did spoiled a whole half of a bracket and more importantly spoiled a whole half bracket for the caster. Think that might explain why I had a 35% lower view rate than any other part of the tournament?? The only reason I can think of for having more than one stream in a game would be if you had an official stream and a local stream. Say ICCUP is the official stream, casting a MorroW match and there's a Swedish stream that also wants to cast it. I don't think it's unreasonable to let the Swedes stream their countryman. Even in that case though, there's no reason you couldn't put ICCUP in a different match in that situation, especially if you organized the streamers correctly from the start. I disagree you can't DQ half the tournament, or at least that it shouldn't come to that if admins are willing to demonstrate that they're willing to hand out DQs to players who fail to comply. Players will continue to drag their feet as long as there are no consequences. I think, once players saw one or two people DQd for not promptly providing replays, they'd get over their reluctance.
The problem is as soon as you say "ah sure you're not an official caster, but it's local for you so it's cool" sets a bad trend. What happens if you have 10 local casters in that area, why can't they join? How do you differentiate between one unofficial caster and another. Sort of the "if you give a mouse a cookie" theory. Also how is it fair to an "official caster" to get kicked out by an unofficial one. Tournaments (here's looking at you WolfCup and ESL EU) need to stop having caster free for alls. I cannot think of one time live casting has been an issue when you only have one set of streamers. Yes more exposure is good, but it seems to be a common theme of all these problems popping up when there is more than one casting service in a game.
Players are really bad at sending replays, period. This has to change on the players end before anything like this could happen. I sent out a big message at the start of the ITL Grand Prix saying you would be dq'd if you don't send replays, and I should not have to ask you. I had to ask (again sans KawaiiRice) every single player for their replays every single game, most multiple times. I mean Raelcun pulled up where HuK and Machine STILL have not sent in replays for a $12,000 tournament. WTF????
|
I think HuK has been more than reasonable seeing it from both sides of the coin - and i think people need to realise that both parties should be heard.
Nearly every gamer has been in a situation with obs/specs/casters what ever lagging - and it's not a joy to witness, never mind play with - so i can completely and utterly sympathize with the players pov. I also understand the other side of the coin - but ultimately i think some casters have stepped over the boundary of reasonable and that's when the problems occur - when a player asks someone to leave, and they stay despite ruining the game, not only for the spectators - but all the viewers as well just for the sake of staying in the game to keep their viewer count it's pretty absurd.
While i can't think of a solution, and although i really do enjoy watching events live - i believe having less casters/streamers the better when it comes to online play, just to avoid lag issues/delaying tournaments and obviously to avoid cheating.
|
On September 07 2010 01:14 Fodder03 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 01:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 01:09 Fodder03 wrote:On September 07 2010 01:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 01:06 Nizaris wrote:On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in.
Biggest problem with replay casting is the inevitable de-sync. Only way to avoid it would be to only have one caster cast the game (no more co caster, kind of annoying...). or have blizzard implement a way to watch replays online. Not having a co caster is just a bad idea. Lagging players out causing unplayable conditions is an even worse idea. I think your mistaking having multiple streamers with a co caster, or just making a general assumption. I know none of our co casters have ever caused lag issues. I have watched your stream before and seen players pause games and ask casters/obs to leave. To which ur casters responded with some bullshit self entitled attitude and of course didnt leave. It has happened and will continue to happen. It is NOT an assumption i have witnessed it multiple time on multiple streams during multiple events. Morrow just got banned from a tourny for 3 weeks due to this exact issue. Players >> Casters/obs. Personally i dont care how many viewers u get to live events. If it means that u have to negatively effect the players with lag, or cheating than you NEED to find an alternative and stop being greedy. This is about the game, not about you or some 15 year old nerds who want to watch.
No you are mistaken. This has not happened. ALL our VOD's are up on our Ustream. Prove it cause your not telling the truth here.
This is a game but without the 15 year old nerds we can be like the other games where we just play for free. Without the "15 year old nerds" HuK would not be on a pro team, Silver would still be unsigned, and there would not be over $1 million in prizes for this game.
It is about the fans, they are what makes this a legit E-sport.
|
On September 07 2010 01:18 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 01:12 piegasm wrote:On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:55 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 07 2010 00:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:47 Carl_Sagan wrote:
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
Cause it was Day9. He could put on a $2k tournament between between bronze players on the Starcraft II release day and he could have got 15k ppl. So how about raising the standards on everything rather than lowering the standards on everything? Bad casters need to cast live, else they aren't able to generate any interest, which causes the tournaments to be bad (cheating, lag). But if streams would work on building audiences themselves rather than relying purely on "I'm lucky enough to be a spectator in this game" then the tournaments could be run properly and spectators would get a satisfying show anyway. I do agree there is a influx of bad casters that are doing anything they can to sneak in a ESL game or w/e. I said it in the ESL thread, this free for all casting shit really needs to come to an end. 1 streamer per match. Why should there be 15 streams one event is beyond me. We keep just our caster and co caster in and have never had lag problems. But don't let people like BigT speak for all the casters. Not all of us are unethical as hell. Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in. The spoiler issue may be one of the biggest, I've had a very established and well know gamer that plays on a very reputable NA Pro Gaming Team spoil the results of the only tournament we have ran off replays (cause of potential cheating issues) over and over and because he was a mod on that website ended up having to contact the website owner to get the spoilers edited out. The spoiler he did spoiled a whole half of a bracket and more importantly spoiled a whole half bracket for the caster. Think that might explain why I had a 35% lower view rate than any other part of the tournament?? The only reason I can think of for having more than one stream in a game would be if you had an official stream and a local stream. Say ICCUP is the official stream, casting a MorroW match and there's a Swedish stream that also wants to cast it. I don't think it's unreasonable to let the Swedes stream their countryman. Even in that case though, there's no reason you couldn't put ICCUP in a different match in that situation, especially if you organized the streamers correctly from the start. I disagree you can't DQ half the tournament, or at least that it shouldn't come to that if admins are willing to demonstrate that they're willing to hand out DQs to players who fail to comply. Players will continue to drag their feet as long as there are no consequences. I think, once players saw one or two people DQd for not promptly providing replays, they'd get over their reluctance. The problem is as soon as you say "ah sure you're not an official caster, but it's local for you so it's cool" sets a bad trend. What happens if you have 10 local casters in that area, why can't they join? How do you differentiate between one unofficial caster and another. Sort of the "if you give a mouse a cookie" theory. Also how is it fair to an "official caster" to get kicked out by an unofficial one. Tournaments (here's looking at you WolfCup and ESL EU) need to stop having caster free for alls. I cannot think of one time live casting has been an issue when you only have one set of streamers. Yes more exposure is good, but it seems to be a common theme of all these problems popping up when there is more than one casting service in a game. Players are really bad at sending replays, period. This has to change on the players end before anything like this could happen. I sent out a big message at the start of the ITL Grand Prix saying you would be dq'd if you don't send replays, and I should not have to ask you. I had to ask (again sans KawaiiRice) every single player for their replays every single game, most multiple times. I mean Raelcun pulled up where HuK and Machine STILL have not sent in replays for a $12,000 tournament. WTF????
So if asking for reps isnt working find an alternative.
Simple, have a ref in the game (which are in 90% of tourny games) have the REF save the replay.
Players dont get hassled, u get ur replays. E z p z
|
On September 07 2010 01:24 Fodder03 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 01:18 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 01:12 piegasm wrote:On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:55 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 07 2010 00:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:47 Carl_Sagan wrote:
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
Cause it was Day9. He could put on a $2k tournament between between bronze players on the Starcraft II release day and he could have got 15k ppl. So how about raising the standards on everything rather than lowering the standards on everything? Bad casters need to cast live, else they aren't able to generate any interest, which causes the tournaments to be bad (cheating, lag). But if streams would work on building audiences themselves rather than relying purely on "I'm lucky enough to be a spectator in this game" then the tournaments could be run properly and spectators would get a satisfying show anyway. I do agree there is a influx of bad casters that are doing anything they can to sneak in a ESL game or w/e. I said it in the ESL thread, this free for all casting shit really needs to come to an end. 1 streamer per match. Why should there be 15 streams one event is beyond me. We keep just our caster and co caster in and have never had lag problems. But don't let people like BigT speak for all the casters. Not all of us are unethical as hell. Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in. The spoiler issue may be one of the biggest, I've had a very established and well know gamer that plays on a very reputable NA Pro Gaming Team spoil the results of the only tournament we have ran off replays (cause of potential cheating issues) over and over and because he was a mod on that website ended up having to contact the website owner to get the spoilers edited out. The spoiler he did spoiled a whole half of a bracket and more importantly spoiled a whole half bracket for the caster. Think that might explain why I had a 35% lower view rate than any other part of the tournament?? The only reason I can think of for having more than one stream in a game would be if you had an official stream and a local stream. Say ICCUP is the official stream, casting a MorroW match and there's a Swedish stream that also wants to cast it. I don't think it's unreasonable to let the Swedes stream their countryman. Even in that case though, there's no reason you couldn't put ICCUP in a different match in that situation, especially if you organized the streamers correctly from the start. I disagree you can't DQ half the tournament, or at least that it shouldn't come to that if admins are willing to demonstrate that they're willing to hand out DQs to players who fail to comply. Players will continue to drag their feet as long as there are no consequences. I think, once players saw one or two people DQd for not promptly providing replays, they'd get over their reluctance. The problem is as soon as you say "ah sure you're not an official caster, but it's local for you so it's cool" sets a bad trend. What happens if you have 10 local casters in that area, why can't they join? How do you differentiate between one unofficial caster and another. Sort of the "if you give a mouse a cookie" theory. Also how is it fair to an "official caster" to get kicked out by an unofficial one. Tournaments (here's looking at you WolfCup and ESL EU) need to stop having caster free for alls. I cannot think of one time live casting has been an issue when you only have one set of streamers. Yes more exposure is good, but it seems to be a common theme of all these problems popping up when there is more than one casting service in a game. Players are really bad at sending replays, period. This has to change on the players end before anything like this could happen. I sent out a big message at the start of the ITL Grand Prix saying you would be dq'd if you don't send replays, and I should not have to ask you. I had to ask (again sans KawaiiRice) every single player for their replays every single game, most multiple times. I mean Raelcun pulled up where HuK and Machine STILL have not sent in replays for a $12,000 tournament. WTF???? So if asking for reps isnt working find an alternative. Simple, have a ref in the game (which are in 90% of tourny games) have the REF save the replay. Players dont get hassled, u get ur replays. E z p z
You seem to think people are chomping at the bit to be refs. No one likes being a wingman and most organizations do simply not have the man power to do so. I guarantee without pay 100% of volunteers would quit within a week of that shitty job unless it was paid. You guys seem to think we are making hundreds of thousands of $ off this. We're not because we are providing you with free entertainment instead of making everything PPV.
|
Personally I couldn't give a hoot about casters. They are just casters. I just want to see the game and if it's a replay that was given to a streamer 5-10 minutes after the actual match, then that is more than good enough for me. It should always be about the players first and foremost.
|
On September 07 2010 01:16 Wargizmo wrote:
For some reason tournament organisers seem to think that live is where most of the viewers are going to tune in, which is why they are making exactly $0 from Starcraft while people like HD and Husky are actually earning a living from their youtube accounts doing it via replays.
Damm cant write it well in english...
Basically the people doing lives are better than the ones doing the youtube vods. MLG have shown that HD and Husky for a time being should stick to youtube since they dont have yet the skill to entertain people during a pauses between games.
Sorry if i ofended some youtube posters, but making vods out of replays for youtube is like hatching a egg in perfect controlled conditions. But live casting needs a bit of other skills. If you can keep a large number of people online on a channel without them getting bored of it then you are a welcomed person by the tournament organisers.
|
On September 07 2010 01:18 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 01:12 piegasm wrote:On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:55 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 07 2010 00:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:47 Carl_Sagan wrote:
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
Cause it was Day9. He could put on a $2k tournament between between bronze players on the Starcraft II release day and he could have got 15k ppl. So how about raising the standards on everything rather than lowering the standards on everything? Bad casters need to cast live, else they aren't able to generate any interest, which causes the tournaments to be bad (cheating, lag). But if streams would work on building audiences themselves rather than relying purely on "I'm lucky enough to be a spectator in this game" then the tournaments could be run properly and spectators would get a satisfying show anyway. I do agree there is a influx of bad casters that are doing anything they can to sneak in a ESL game or w/e. I said it in the ESL thread, this free for all casting shit really needs to come to an end. 1 streamer per match. Why should there be 15 streams one event is beyond me. We keep just our caster and co caster in and have never had lag problems. But don't let people like BigT speak for all the casters. Not all of us are unethical as hell. Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in. The spoiler issue may be one of the biggest, I've had a very established and well know gamer that plays on a very reputable NA Pro Gaming Team spoil the results of the only tournament we have ran off replays (cause of potential cheating issues) over and over and because he was a mod on that website ended up having to contact the website owner to get the spoilers edited out. The spoiler he did spoiled a whole half of a bracket and more importantly spoiled a whole half bracket for the caster. Think that might explain why I had a 35% lower view rate than any other part of the tournament?? The only reason I can think of for having more than one stream in a game would be if you had an official stream and a local stream. Say ICCUP is the official stream, casting a MorroW match and there's a Swedish stream that also wants to cast it. I don't think it's unreasonable to let the Swedes stream their countryman. Even in that case though, there's no reason you couldn't put ICCUP in a different match in that situation, especially if you organized the streamers correctly from the start. I disagree you can't DQ half the tournament, or at least that it shouldn't come to that if admins are willing to demonstrate that they're willing to hand out DQs to players who fail to comply. Players will continue to drag their feet as long as there are no consequences. I think, once players saw one or two people DQd for not promptly providing replays, they'd get over their reluctance. The problem is as soon as you say "ah sure you're not an official caster, but it's local for you so it's cool" sets a bad trend. What happens if you have 10 local casters in that area, why can't they join? How do you differentiate between one unofficial caster and another. Sort of the "if you give a mouse a cookie" theory. Also how is it fair to an "official caster" to get kicked out by an unofficial one. Tournaments (here's looking at you WolfCup and ESL EU) need to stop having caster free for alls. I cannot think of one time live casting has been an issue when you only have one set of streamers. Yes more exposure is good, but it seems to be a common theme of all these problems popping up when there is more than one casting service in a game. Players are really bad at sending replays, period. This has to change on the players end before anything like this could happen. I sent out a big message at the start of the ITL Grand Prix saying you would be dq'd if you don't send replays, and I should not have to ask you. I had to ask (again sans KawaiiRice) every single player for their replays every single game, most multiple times. I mean Raelcun pulled up where HuK and Machine STILL have not sent in replays for a $12,000 tournament. WTF????
I wasn't implying the local caster wouldn't be an official caster, I should have clarified. I suggested in an earlier post that the ability to stream a tournament should be subject to application and approval by the tournament admins. My scenario was meant to be 2 approved streams wanting the same match. I would never suggest kicking an official cast in favor of "herp I'm Swedish I should get to cast MorroW".
Again with the DQs...you threatened disqualification, but instead of DQing anyone, you asked again (and again and again) which is exactly what you said you wouldn't do. If you're going to threaten, follow through. People are opportunistic; if you let them take advantage, they will.
|
Great post HuK. I think it's incredibly selfish of streamers to feel entitled to observe a game simply because they're a known streamer with a lot of viewers. People running tournaments should enforce a strict 2 casters/1 streamer/1 admin rule, and all of these people should have stable internet connections that don't cause lag for the players. Tournament admins should post the official casters'/streamer/admin's names on the tournament site so that players are aware of who is supposed to be observing. On top of this, add a 5 minute delay to the stream.(It's not impossible, there are ways to add a delay to live streams)
This would mostly solve all of the issues you've brought up. Having only 2 official casters/1 official streamer/1 admin with good internet connections would mean very little, if any lag as well as reduce the stress caused by players having to pick which streamers they'll allow and which ones they won't. The 5 minute delay would make cheating from the stream not worth it since anything seen would have happened 5 minutes ago and thus very difficult to use to your advantage.
In short, I completely support the players. I feel it's idiotic to favor having a ridiculous number of streamers even though they lag the game and completely affect the outcome of games by ruining micro-intensive battles.
|
For me, personally, casted replays feels a bit like sex with a condom. It's...just not the real thing and sort of meh. It's a tough question though, I think it's up to Blizzard to come up with a solution to this. Some sort of in game function to hook up to a stream with a build in (adjustable) delay would of course be the perfect solution.
Or all streamers/casters agree before a tournament that they will all set a 5 minute delay on the stream and players should be allowed to set a limit on the number of people in the game. Having 10+ people in a game that don't need to be there (non REF / main caster) is just terrible.
|
On September 07 2010 01:21 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 01:14 Fodder03 wrote:On September 07 2010 01:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 01:09 Fodder03 wrote:On September 07 2010 01:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 01:06 Nizaris wrote:On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in.
Biggest problem with replay casting is the inevitable de-sync. Only way to avoid it would be to only have one caster cast the game (no more co caster, kind of annoying...). or have blizzard implement a way to watch replays online. Not having a co caster is just a bad idea. Lagging players out causing unplayable conditions is an even worse idea. I think your mistaking having multiple streamers with a co caster, or just making a general assumption. I know none of our co casters have ever caused lag issues. I have watched your stream before and seen players pause games and ask casters/obs to leave. To which ur casters responded with some bullshit self entitled attitude and of course didnt leave. It has happened and will continue to happen. It is NOT an assumption i have witnessed it multiple time on multiple streams during multiple events. Morrow just got banned from a tourny for 3 weeks due to this exact issue. Players >> Casters/obs. Personally i dont care how many viewers u get to live events. If it means that u have to negatively effect the players with lag, or cheating than you NEED to find an alternative and stop being greedy. This is about the game, not about you or some 15 year old nerds who want to watch. No you are mistaken. This has not happened. ALL our VOD's are up on our Ustream. Prove it cause your not telling the truth here. This is a game but without the 15 year old nerds we can be like the other games where we just play for free. Without the "15 year old nerds" HuK would not be on a pro team, Silver would still be unsigned, and there would not be over $1 million in prizes for this game. It is about the fans, they are what makes this a legit E-sport.
Im still 90% sure it was during a Iccup cast that i witnessed it. I will not argue it tho as i dont have the time/desire to search through vods.
I dont mind fans, im 100% supportive of that as i am one myself. However i have zero issue watching games cast from replays the way it should be done. The "15 year old nerds" i refer to are all the ones crying in this thread that they have to see the game live of they wont watch it. Its a selfish attitude to have.
This absolutely cannot be allowed to happen, or players wont play in your tournys anymore. If players keep getting shitty conditions to play under ie. lag/cheating/having to pause and demand that obs and streamers leave, sometimes having to ask 4 or 5 times while they ignore the players request.
Why as a player should HuK have to ask some no name streamer who doesnt even have 100 viewers to leave? why should HuK have to ask that same streamer 15 times to leave? If conditions are that bad then an alternative must be found. The fairest of which is casting reps AFTER from replays. 1 ref per game to save reps. All problems solved.
|
There's nothing wrong with staggering a semi-live game series by a single game. Lets say HuK and IdrA do a bo3, and Day[9] is casting.
They play the first set, the game is 15 minutes long with Idra taking the win. In the game are HuK, IdrA, and a tournament administrator (TA).
Once the game finishes, the tournament administrator sends the replay file to Day[9] who then proceeds to cast it to the stream. The *only* three people who currently know the outcome of the game at this point are IdrA, HuK, and the TA. Day[9] uses some sort of replay time remover/overlay so that doesn't become an issue.
While Day[9] is streaming the first game, HuK and IdrA go on to set 2. HuK wins with a proxy two gate and the game lasts a mere 4 minutes. This means that the replay is gathered 10 minutes or so before the stream of the first game finishes. No problem. The next game can either be delayed 10-15 minutes or played right now, it doesn't matter.
The next game is a huuuuuge drawn out macro game. It doesn't end until 55 minutes in, a true back and forth nail biter. The stream is long done watching the first two games. Day[9] gives a plug to the sponsors, maybe does a post-game retroview on the first two games or talks about the players, or simply goes offline for a bit "while the next game is being set up". When the replay file is actually sent, it has the same feeling as the final game being played after a ridiculously long show/commericialfest in one of the OSLs/MSLs...
You can achieve almost all the benefits of live casting without the huge negatives of cheating, distraction, lag or distractions.
|
I'd like if the tournaments would just have 1-3 official casters. That way they could cover 3 games, one game each, and we'd only have to put up with 1-2 spectators (depending if they have a co cast or not).
The situation now is whenever you reach pretty far into a tournament, you have a flood of 10+ streamers begging you to add them and invite you into their game. 1 stream in english should be sufficient enough for everyone.
|
On September 07 2010 01:26 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 01:24 Fodder03 wrote:On September 07 2010 01:18 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 01:12 piegasm wrote:On September 07 2010 01:02 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:55 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 07 2010 00:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 00:47 Carl_Sagan wrote:
Bah, anyone who says there is a difference between watching a game live, and watching a replay livecast 10 minutes later with a banner blocking the replay tab, tell me why 15k people watched Day9's king of the beta finals. I could care less, and much prefer that option if players have problems with spectators.
Cause it was Day9. He could put on a $2k tournament between between bronze players on the Starcraft II release day and he could have got 15k ppl. So how about raising the standards on everything rather than lowering the standards on everything? Bad casters need to cast live, else they aren't able to generate any interest, which causes the tournaments to be bad (cheating, lag). But if streams would work on building audiences themselves rather than relying purely on "I'm lucky enough to be a spectator in this game" then the tournaments could be run properly and spectators would get a satisfying show anyway. I do agree there is a influx of bad casters that are doing anything they can to sneak in a ESL game or w/e. I said it in the ESL thread, this free for all casting shit really needs to come to an end. 1 streamer per match. Why should there be 15 streams one event is beyond me. We keep just our caster and co caster in and have never had lag problems. But don't let people like BigT speak for all the casters. Not all of us are unethical as hell. Replays are a better system but there is the problem of the decreased viewership and players never sending in replays. You can't go and DQ half of a tournament for not sending in replays, and players are very, very bad about sending replays in. The spoiler issue may be one of the biggest, I've had a very established and well know gamer that plays on a very reputable NA Pro Gaming Team spoil the results of the only tournament we have ran off replays (cause of potential cheating issues) over and over and because he was a mod on that website ended up having to contact the website owner to get the spoilers edited out. The spoiler he did spoiled a whole half of a bracket and more importantly spoiled a whole half bracket for the caster. Think that might explain why I had a 35% lower view rate than any other part of the tournament?? The only reason I can think of for having more than one stream in a game would be if you had an official stream and a local stream. Say ICCUP is the official stream, casting a MorroW match and there's a Swedish stream that also wants to cast it. I don't think it's unreasonable to let the Swedes stream their countryman. Even in that case though, there's no reason you couldn't put ICCUP in a different match in that situation, especially if you organized the streamers correctly from the start. I disagree you can't DQ half the tournament, or at least that it shouldn't come to that if admins are willing to demonstrate that they're willing to hand out DQs to players who fail to comply. Players will continue to drag their feet as long as there are no consequences. I think, once players saw one or two people DQd for not promptly providing replays, they'd get over their reluctance. The problem is as soon as you say "ah sure you're not an official caster, but it's local for you so it's cool" sets a bad trend. What happens if you have 10 local casters in that area, why can't they join? How do you differentiate between one unofficial caster and another. Sort of the "if you give a mouse a cookie" theory. Also how is it fair to an "official caster" to get kicked out by an unofficial one. Tournaments (here's looking at you WolfCup and ESL EU) need to stop having caster free for alls. I cannot think of one time live casting has been an issue when you only have one set of streamers. Yes more exposure is good, but it seems to be a common theme of all these problems popping up when there is more than one casting service in a game. Players are really bad at sending replays, period. This has to change on the players end before anything like this could happen. I sent out a big message at the start of the ITL Grand Prix saying you would be dq'd if you don't send replays, and I should not have to ask you. I had to ask (again sans KawaiiRice) every single player for their replays every single game, most multiple times. I mean Raelcun pulled up where HuK and Machine STILL have not sent in replays for a $12,000 tournament. WTF???? So if asking for reps isnt working find an alternative. Simple, have a ref in the game (which are in 90% of tourny games) have the REF save the replay. Players dont get hassled, u get ur replays. E z p z You seem to think people are chomping at the bit to be refs. No one likes being a wingman and most organizations do simply not have the man power to do so. I guarantee without pay 100% of volunteers would quit within a week of that shitty job unless it was paid. You guys seem to think we are making hundreds of thousands of $ off this. We're not because we are providing you with free entertainment instead of making everything PPV.
Then if u cant find the refs then find another alternative, im telling you the players are getting pissed. If u have nothing to cast u make $0, if tourny organizers piss off the players they will have nothing to cast.
Other tourny organizers will pop up that are willing to put in the time and effort to make the entire event enjoyable for everyone involved, especially the players. You will lose the players to better run tournys.
You say without fans HuK wouldnt be pro and silver would remain unsigned. Realize that if it werent for these players you would also not be making any money. So respect them and find an alternative.
|
If there's anything other than pride on the line, no live casting. Additionally players should be required to take screenshots to make sure they don't map hack. Some bad precedents have been set that need to be corrected.
|
Before I begin, congratulations on your excellent win at MLG. (Late I know) Those were some VERY exciting games to watch.
Next, I'd like to say that I both agree and disagree with you. (The world is never simple, eh?)
Agree: I am quite a bit worse than you, but even I think that the effects of lag on gameplay are... terrible. Trying to pull of a well-timed force field/psi storm combo with lag is impossible.
Disagree: I don't intend this to sound harsh, so please don't take it that way. And before I begin, I would like once again to state my respect for you as a player.
Money makes the world go round. The reason you are able to play in tournaments and make money is because of ad revenue. (People watching the stream for MLG will recall seeing an upteen million commercials for Hot Pockets) With this in mind, the best way to assure ad revenue is not from replays, where people can download them and get off the site, it is through live streams. From this point, I'd say, that streams are a necessary evil.
The alternative, and I think what you are point at, is to play the games, and then send in the streams to another player, who would then "stream the games"
There are problems with this as well. I don't know if you have ever taped a hockey game, and then watched it later? Even if you don't know the results, it still doesn't seem quite as exciting, does it?
At any rate, I can't think of a perfect solution to this problem. The best solution I can come up with, is limit the number of streamers.
|
On September 07 2010 01:28 piegasm wrote:
I wasn't implying the local caster wouldn't be an official caster, I should have clarified. I suggested in an earlier post that the ability to stream a tournament should be subject to application and approval by the tournament admins. My scenario was meant to be 2 approved streams wanting the same match. I would never suggest kicking an official cast in favor of "herp I'm Swedish I should get to cast MorroW".
Again with the DQs...you threatened disqualification, but instead of DQing anyone, you asked again (and again and again) which is exactly what you said you wouldn't do. If you're going to threaten, follow through. People are opportunistic; if you let them take advantage, they will.
I've been saying for awhile now this is how things need to be ran. DEATH TO CASTER FREE FOR ALLS!!!
I'm sure my sponsors would have been real pleased when I dq'd everyone in the ITL Grand Prix besides Kawaii and he won with only 2 games being played. That would have gone over real well. It's not a problem with one or two key players, it's a problem with almost every single player.
On September 07 2010 01:34 Fodder03 wrote:
Im still 90% sure it was during a Iccup cast that i witnessed it. I will not argue it tho as i dont have the time/desire to search through vods.
I dont mind fans, im 100% supportive of that as i am one myself. However i have zero issue watching games cast from replays the way it should be done. The "15 year old nerds" i refer to are all the ones crying in this thread that they have to see the game live of they wont watch it. Its a selfish attitude to have.
This absolutely cannot be allowed to happen, or players wont play in your tournys anymore. If players keep getting shitty conditions to play under ie. lag/cheating/having to pause and demand that obs and streamers leave, sometimes having to ask 4 or 5 times while they ignore the players request.
Why as a player should HuK have to ask some no name streamer who doesnt even have 100 viewers to leave? why should HuK have to ask that same streamer 15 times to leave? If conditions are that bad then an alternative must be found. The fairest of which is casting reps AFTER from replays. 1 ref per game to save reps. All problems solved.
It was not, I assure you of that. The last time I remember our casters lagging anyone was several moths ago when Raelcun's second video card died and he left before he was even asked.
People are selfish, this is not unique to SC. Unfortunately the selfish people outweigh the no selfish ones. This is the way of life.
It's not a problem with our tournaments or any events we cover, but the streamers that have these problems need to fix their shit, no doubt. Certain organizations such as ESL EU need to hold their casters to a certain standard, but do not. This is for sure a problem.
He should not have to ask 15 times. But if he is asking ESL TV to leave and ESL event, he should not really have that right. It's more about the couple assclown casters that are dying to make that big break to top 100 viewers. This is again a problem with organizers letting anyone stream. This is why we have been working with ESL NA so much lately. They seem to get the concept to only have one or two casters per event, and ones that have a track record of being good casters (I know they use BigT, but let's ignore that, everyone makes mistakes I guess), who do not cause these problems. How many problems did the IEM Grouptages have like this? 0, becuase they had two reputable casting services covering their event, and no one else.
|
I totally agree with you. In the qualifier where you played msv, the toss he played afterward did some suspicious things that i didn't think much of. But looking at the replay it would be very easy to make a case that he had the stream going in the background. At the time the chat on the stream was blowing up with people saying he maphacked, but I really don't think he was MHing so much as just being fed info by the stream.
The players builds, wether or not they wall their choke, the tech pattern they go, wether or not they FE, the scouting information they recieved, the strength of each others army, food count, etc are all things that the casters talk about and if you roll it all up it's a good advantage.
|
Anyone who watched the TSL knows that replays are JUST as exciting as live matches.
It's watching it at the same time as everyone else that's exciting. Chatting on IRC, posting in live threads etc...
What's happening at the moment is probably easier organisation wise but it wouldn't take much to change that.
You just need 2 live chat channels:
1st channel has a referee and all the players. Referee sorts out the bracket and who plays who.
2nd channel has the referee and all the casters.
Set your casting time 30mins later than the match start time. Players send their replays to the ref immediately as they finish each game in the first channel.
Then the ref posts the link, spoiler-free, in the caster channel. They can then choose whether to cast it or wait for a better one.
|
It really comes down to what the tourney organizers want to do, right? If they want to allow multiple casters into games and deal with lag and the hassle that comes with that so be it. If they think that a ‘cleaner’ game with only the players and a ref (or not), casting from the replay immediately after the match, then they will do that. To say that no one will watch unless it’s live is a joke. HD and Husky have a combined 120,000,000 upload views. Holy Crap!! Yeah, right...no one will watch SC2 tourney games unless it’s live.
|
On September 07 2010 01:38 meRz wrote:
I'd like if the tournaments would just have 1-3 official casters. That way they could cover 3 games, one game each, and we'd only have to put up with 1-2 spectators (depending if they have a co cast or not).
The situation now is whenever you reach pretty far into a tournament, you have a flood of 10+ streamers begging you to add them and invite you into their game. 1 stream in english should be sufficient enough for everyone.
I just wanted to write something and read this post, which sums it up pretty well imo
|
Just a note:
Everything done "live" in the US is actually a delayed cast so that way they have time to fix up things, like take out swear words. Just because it's live doesn't mean it's not delayed. Delaying it is totally fine.
|
Most big tourneys these days are LANs. MLG, GSL, IEM, etc.
The HDH2 is the only major tourney I can think of now that will be online, and last time HD + H casted the replays, not the games live.
Obviously all the small cups are livestreamed and such, but that's not as huge.
|
There is always something to do with cheat, for example, if u add 2 min delay for the stream, ok, spects can't help the cheater but the caster or somebody in the game can always pm ou talk in teamspeak and helps him. So, since there is a obs, cheating is possible.
Ok, a lot of less cheating but not 100%.. :/
|
On September 06 2010 18:00 Silver~Guy wrote:
Hello as a player I'd like to weigh in on this issue.
The lag issue is a problem and should not be ignored, if you want the best competitions you have ever seen, every second counts.
Cheating is a possible problem since game-sense and cheating are hard to distinguish.
Stress? Well, I don't know if that will be going away but we can at least mitigate it...
Ideally I think the future of streams should look like this:
[people in the game]
players
admin who video captures (who does not cast)
Admin (otherwise called 1st streamer) lags video by 2 minutes to a hub with a password.
Caster (otherwise called 2nd streamer) picks up the stream and recasts with audio to general public.
Spectators watch 2nd stream.
benefits:
-keeps game almost-live
-limits lag
-minimize the effectiveness of cheating
drawbacks:
-more coordination for admin/streamers/casters
The drawback will be dealt with by formalizing the process by which the admin and casters interact (which will naturally happen after an initial testing period).
About $250 a month per stream (more depending on bandwidth/hours online), plus an initial $400 investment. If you want to donate your winnings, we'll get right on that. Otherwise it's the casters/tournaments that would have to pay for this and you best believe we'd have no interest in sharing it with others and run our bill up higher.
If casters would pay the bill, we'd have to start charging tournaments for coverage. If tournaments would pay the bill, it'd severely hurt the price-pool. Either every stream or every tournament would have to buy one of these hubs. And those costs are assuming that people would code the software for free.
If the community wants to step up and start covering those costs, great, but realistically we'd be much better off with something like waaaghtv.
Not to mention that you'd still have someone in the game potentially lagging, so in essence there's 0 difference between just having 1 or 2 casters in the game when it comes to that aspect.
|
i just realised it was huk who started this thread, if hes lists stress, there is stress
|
On September 07 2010 02:22 Martijn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 18:00 Silver~Guy wrote:
Hello as a player I'd like to weigh in on this issue.
The lag issue is a problem and should not be ignored, if you want the best competitions you have ever seen, every second counts.
Cheating is a possible problem since game-sense and cheating are hard to distinguish.
Stress? Well, I don't know if that will be going away but we can at least mitigate it...
Ideally I think the future of streams should look like this:
[people in the game]
players
admin who video captures (who does not cast)
Admin (otherwise called 1st streamer) lags video by 2 minutes to a hub with a password.
Caster (otherwise called 2nd streamer) picks up the stream and recasts with audio to general public.
Spectators watch 2nd stream.
benefits:
-keeps game almost-live
-limits lag
-minimize the effectiveness of cheating
drawbacks:
-more coordination for admin/streamers/casters
The drawback will be dealt with by formalizing the process by which the admin and casters interact (which will naturally happen after an initial testing period).
About $250 a month per stream (more depending on bandwidth/hours online), plus an initial $400 investment. If you want to donate your winnings, we'll get right on that. Otherwise it's the casters/tournaments that would have to pay for this and you best believe we'd have no interest in sharing it with others and run our bill up higher. If casters would pay the bill, we'd have to start charging tournaments for coverage. If tournaments would pay the bill, it'd severely hurt the price-pool. Either every stream or every tournament would have to buy one of these hubs. And those costs are assuming that people would code the software for free. If the community wants to step up and start covering those costs, great, but realistically we'd be much better off with something like waaaghtv. Not to mention that you'd still have someone in the game potentially lagging, so in essence there's 0 difference between just having 1 or 2 casters in the game when it comes to that aspect.
What cost is this that you're estimating? If casters just use an observer's video feed instead of their own SC2 as the source, they're not paying anything extra. I don't think it costs $250 a month to stream a video to 10-15 streamers, it can be done on someone's home connection.
|
I'm sure my sponsors would have been real pleased when I dq'd everyone in the ITL Grand Prix besides Kawaii and he won with only 2 games being played. That would have gone over real well. It's not a problem with one or two key players, it's a problem with almost every single player.
Why are you threatening to DQ people if it's not actually an option? That just damages the tournament's credibility.
If matches are going to be cast via replay, the tournament should have a rule that states the winner of each series must upload their replays before they can begin the next round. Have admins host the matches and check that replays have been received before starting the game. Even in a tournament with a several hundred person draw it can still be manageable if you limit the casting to the round of 16 or round of 8.
|
On September 07 2010 02:34 piegasm wrote:Show nested quote +I'm sure my sponsors would have been real pleased when I dq'd everyone in the ITL Grand Prix besides Kawaii and he won with only 2 games being played. That would have gone over real well. It's not a problem with one or two key players, it's a problem with almost every single player. Why are you threatening to DQ people if it's not actually an option? That just damages the tournament's credibility. If matches are going to be cast via replay, the tournament should have a rule that states the winner of each series must upload their replays before they can begin the next round. Have admins host the matches and check that replays have been received before starting the game. Even in a tournament with a several hundred person draw it can still be manageable if you limit the casting to the round of 16 or round of 8.
TL penalized Tarson 1/2 of his Prizepool in the TSL when he leaked the results of his match shortly before they were going to be shown on a polish forum. Rather than threaten a DQ (which obviously punishes the fans as well) add a clause that a refusal to send in replays results in a 10% deduction in winnings per match or something.
Nobody is trying to pile on you Diamond. We all (or at least most) understand the difficulties of setting up and organizing a tournament from scratch with little staff or infrastructure to gain help. The faultiness of Livecasts and Bnet2.0 add even more problems. However, as a community figuring out what is wrong, what works, what doesn't work, what should work, etc... is all beneficial once it is fleshed out and acted upon in a manner conducive to improving the quality of tournaments.
The casters in general need to not look at these discussions and separate themselves from their jobs and look at the criticisms in an unbiased light. It's easy to look at criticism as an insult or slight against you, but I hope all of the casters take something from these discussions and use them.
|
On September 07 2010 01:51 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
I've been saying for awhile now this is how things need to be ran. DEATH TO CASTER FREE FOR ALLS!!!
I'm sure my sponsors would have been real pleased when I dq'd everyone in the ITL Grand Prix besides Kawaii and he won with only 2 games being played. That would have gone over real well. It's not a problem with one or two key players, it's a problem with almost every single player.
This kinda seems obvious. I am not even sure why this has not been done yet. I have watched a number of live tournaments and I have not see players complaining in tournaments with only a few certified casters.
Also there should be some sorta standards implemented for casting, a base set of rules that all online tournaments will have to follow
- like all streams should be delayed by 5-10 mins
- no more than 3 observers allowed who will be ref,caster and co caster etc.
Also dqs should not be responsibility of tournament organizers, since they have responsibility to sponsors and conflict of interest arise. Rather I think there should be some sort of ethics committee which oversees the tournaments and makes these decisions. Every sports has one and if SC2 is to become an esport it should have one. This committee can lay ground rules for players,casters and tournaments and outcomes if these are not followed.
|
hmm... so making money from esports is not as easy as it seem...
Streaming is a rather costly hobby to have it seem.
On the cheating issue though - what is there to stop someone from using maphack (vs watching the stream in another monitor?) in a live tournament? Good maphackers can make it not obvious that a maphack is being used: ie: not using it to check out enemy composition but just using the minimap to see expos and army movements.
Seem like it is up to blizzard to step up the anti-cheat efforts.
|
On September 07 2010 02:47 I_Love_Bacon wrote:
TL penalized Tarson 1/2 of his Prizepool in the TSL when he leaked the results of his match shortly before they were going to be shown on a polish forum. Rather than threaten a DQ (which obviously punishes the fans as well) add a clause that a refusal to send in replays results in a 10% deduction in winnings per match or something.
Nobody is trying to pile on you Diamond. We all (or at least most) understand the difficulties of setting up and organizing a tournament from scratch with little staff or infrastructure to gain help. The faultiness of Livecasts and Bnet2.0 add even more problems. However, as a community figuring out what is wrong, what works, what doesn't work, what should work, etc... is all beneficial once it is fleshed out and acted upon in a manner conducive to improving the quality of tournaments.
The casters in general need to not look at these discussions and separate themselves from their jobs and look at the criticisms in an unbiased light. It's easy to look at criticism as an insult or slight against you, but I hope all of the casters take something from these discussions and use them.
The move to penalize Tarson was a good one. But what happens when you cannot do something like that? Like when iNcontroL spoiled the ITL GP, he was entitled to no prize. Now mind you of course you will never see iNcontroL in another iCCup event, but that does not stop him from playing in ESL or MLG or even the Wolf Cup.
I know you're not trying to pile on and I LOVE discussing things like for sure as it's an issue I've had with live casting when we started. The problem I am having is people just jumping in and saying "add a 5 min delay, ez pz!". It's not easy or cheap or we would have done so from the very start. It's VERY expensive, and companies like Ustream have no way of manually adding a delay.
On September 07 2010 02:49 WickedBit wrote:
This kinda seems obvious. I am not even sure why this has not been done yet. I have watched a number of live tournaments and I have not see players complaining in tournaments with only a few certified casters.
Also there should be some sorta standards implemented for casting, a base set of rules that all online tournaments will have to follow
- like all streams should be delayed by 5-10 mins
- no more than 3 observers allowed who will be ref,caster and co caster etc.
Also dqs should not be responsibility of tournament organizers, since they have responsibility to sponsors and conflict of interest arise. Rather I think there should be some sort of ethics committee which oversees the tournaments and makes these decisions. Every sports has one and if SC2 is to become an esport it should have one. This committee can lay ground rules for players,casters and tournaments and outcomes if these are not followed.
I agree. I will keep saying it so people will hear it. NO MORE CASTER FFA's. PICK ONE TO TWO STREAMING GROUPS. That's all. 95% of this issue would be solved.
Again the delay is very expensive, so cost is a factor. We are not making a lot of $ here.
I agree we need a organization like this, but it does not exist. Even is one pops up it will be a long times before they are able to take over. This does not help the problem right now.
|
On September 06 2010 23:54 Nizaris wrote:
Until blizz implements a way to watch replays online with more then one person watching, replay casting is horrible. At least if there are more then one caster. One of them always de-sync and then you hear them talk about stuff that happened 20s ago or stuff that hasn't happened yet. Honestly i just turn off the cast when that happens.
Anyone who was watching the GosuCup finals would have easily taken note of this fact.
|
On September 07 2010 03:04 DreamScaR wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 23:54 Nizaris wrote:
Until blizz implements a way to watch replays online with more then one person watching, replay casting is horrible. At least if there are more then one caster. One of them always de-sync and then you hear them talk about stuff that happened 20s ago or stuff that hasn't happened yet. Honestly i just turn off the cast when that happens. Anyone who was watching the GosuCup finals would have easily taken note of this fact.
Yep plus the whole "ok are you loaded on 0 seconds? yea? Ok good. Ok let's go in 3-2-1-GOGOGOGOGOG" is soooooooooooooooooooooo unprofessional. Esports can't be taken too seriously when we have to do stupid shit like that.
|
On September 07 2010 01:14 Fodder03 wrote:
This is about the game, not about you or some 15 year old nerds who want to watch.
If all you care about is playing the game, then play on the ladder.
If SC2 is a sport, it needs an audience.
|
I hope people read Martijn's post... A lot of this is effort based, and a lot of these people don't get paid. O_o They actually put in their own money to do this stuff for the community. I would love to see some numbers on how much the really big tournaments make in profit. Because, these weekly tournaments with smaller prize pools can't afford shit. I mean, people should really just take them for what they are...smaller tournaments to practice for larger tournaments.
In the larger tournaments...everyone should be getting paid for their work. But like Diamond and Martijn said - it's not really done by the smaller tournaments. Lots and lots of work for free, basically.
|
i'm wondering how many games were lost due to ppl cheating off streams...
like idra said... there's absolutely no way you can prove cheating due to actions ingame.
Even the slightest piece of information about a build order can be game changing...
most streams got a delay of like 10 to 30 seconds.
i'll tell you what happens if somebody sits in skype and tells you what the other playing is doing "in the future"
baneling bust...
banshees...
roach rush...
colossus...
4 gate...
hidden stargate...
proxy gates...
dts
hidden expo
etc.
these things need TIME and because your friend in skype tells you these things the instant it is been built (well you`ll get it some time later, but it doesnt matter, since these buildings take time to build and most of the time you see what a player is up to, if you can watch his whole build order on stream), you will be prepared for these things... terrans will get bunkers, etc. and most ppl will get prepared in advance for these things anyway, but if you just KNOW what's coming... 1 more "right" unit can decide the game.
"there`s a probe going out probably building a pylon over there"
(even with 30sec-1 minute delay.. i'`d imagine such info game changing and how do you want to convict somebody randomly scouting in the right direction ? - while most players will scout those things anyway, these informations are critical and you can easy fall behind if you miss on scouting something while somebody with help from skype will know exactly what`s going on)
but i'm stunned, that ppl handle this so easily... i mean... getting more information than others (superb scouting), even if it`s about tiny pieces... it`s what makes the difference between and idrA and other players... like day9 says "it`s about those little things"
|
You guys forget that the people watching the games are more important than the players, the people watching the games and streams are the only reason why you guys can make money with playing a video game
|
On September 07 2010 03:13 xylos wrote:
You guys forget that the people watching the games are more important than the players, the people watching the games and streams are the only reason why you guys can make money with playing a video game
Yeah and the players are the only reasons streamers/sponsors can make money off the game, what's your point
|
On September 07 2010 03:13 xylos wrote:
You guys forget that the people watching the games are more important than the players, the people watching the games and streams are the only reason why you guys can make money with playing a video game
Word. As long as the $ is there people will play and fans will watch. Remember when ITL 1 started two of my biggest draws were CauthonLuck and LzGaMeR. Adding people like HuK had no effect on my ratings.
This is about the game and the fans, and because we have both the players are not the biggest thing. There will ALWAYS be new good players, as demonstrated by Silver and Masq most notable lately.
On September 07 2010 03:17 Skeyser wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:13 xylos wrote:
You guys forget that the people watching the games are more important than the players, the people watching the games and streams are the only reason why you guys can make money with playing a video game Yeah and the players are the only reasons streamers/sponsors can make money off the game, what's your point
That if we lose the fans than these players will all be playing for $100 a week like at the end of BW. People like HuK would not be making $, nor would any of the other players. We would just all be laddering for fun back like BW before SCII.
|
yea they should regulated this stuff,
you did good
THE INCREDIBLE HUK
And yeh I remember during KOTH tournaments they have here on TL, a lot of people can just hop on to vent, and discuss with their buddy what the opponent is doing on live stream.
Sure live streams are awesome, but it shouldn`t affect a player performance, and allow cheaters.
|
I'll state this fact one more time as a caster who has been apart of a lot of the issues that have been brought up. 95% of the time during a tournament, if I lag.. I'l leave instantly, even if it's not me lagging. If it's the finals of an event that where I work for is putting it on and there's lag, I'll wait on the admins decision to say "Ok, you're doing the replay of this" because I'm not going to have all the viewers just randomly not know anything.
If there was a free way (Haha, at the moment probably thousands of dollars) to be in games as they happen, cast them but they don't get sent to the masses for 30 minutes I would love that fact.
Lets go back to the point of the nVIDIA GosuCup, the finals ended up playing out very smoothly pre-game 3 and post-game 3. With me not being the streamer I was running at a higher FPS rate which means I'll unsync with someone else watching it at the same time, at the one point almost 10-15 seconds. This, is from a replay (keep that in mind). The chat went bat crazy because 15 seconds before the battle they saw happened, was already commentated on and over with. 15 minute game, being done by replay.
Players uploading replays
If there was some way to make it so that, they sent it to the streamer right away. I would be in my glory, but the odds of the player sending it without some SEVERE penalty is almost zero. Yes, people will bitch about it, but it will become a chore and they'll just say fuck it/
|
On September 06 2010 10:45 GenoZStriker wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 10:44 tertle wrote:
Pretty much we just need waaaghtv for sc2
Only 1 observer but everyone get's to watch live... This. This is what we need. Sadly there is no LAN for SC2 but it would rid most of the problems players like HuK, MorroW and Idra are pointing out.
Here lies the problem, unfortunally.
|
On September 07 2010 02:22 Martijn wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On September 06 2010 18:00 Silver~Guy wrote:
Hello as a player I'd like to weigh in on this issue.
The lag issue is a problem and should not be ignored, if you want the best competitions you have ever seen, every second counts.
Cheating is a possible problem since game-sense and cheating are hard to distinguish.
Stress? Well, I don't know if that will be going away but we can at least mitigate it...
Ideally I think the future of streams should look like this:
[people in the game]
players
admin who video captures (who does not cast)
Admin (otherwise called 1st streamer) lags video by 2 minutes to a hub with a password.
Caster (otherwise called 2nd streamer) picks up the stream and recasts with audio to general public.
Spectators watch 2nd stream.
benefits:
-keeps game almost-live
-limits lag
-minimize the effectiveness of cheating
drawbacks:
-more coordination for admin/streamers/casters
The drawback will be dealt with by formalizing the process by which the admin and casters interact (which will naturally happen after an initial testing period).
About $250 a month per stream (more depending on bandwidth/hours online), plus an initial $400 investment. If you want to donate your winnings, we'll get right on that. Otherwise it's the casters/tournaments that would have to pay for this and you best believe we'd have no interest in sharing it with others and run our bill up higher. If casters would pay the bill, we'd have to start charging tournaments for coverage. If tournaments would pay the bill, it'd severely hurt the price-pool. Either every stream or every tournament would have to buy one of these hubs. And those costs are assuming that people would code the software for free. If the community wants to step up and start covering those costs, great, but realistically we'd be much better off with something like waaaghtv. Not to mention that you'd still have someone in the game potentially lagging, so in essence there's 0 difference between just having 1 or 2 casters in the game when it comes to that aspect.
so basically the problem is not the money but the software...
The main problem would be a buffering of 5minutes of HD feed (being 5 minutes as a minimal). It couldnt be done in memory so throw in a 5TB++ of HDD as a buffer. The file size shouldnt be a problem. Only problem is that you cant get more than 10 minutes of delay... Well maybe using multiple temp files. Hmm i wonder how the hell ustream gets 2h vods....
Oh well. We need some programmer to write a program that:
a) receive raw data from the streamer
b) buffers the data on the HDD
c) streams it to other streamer...
Big problem would be that the material would be encoded 2 times so the quality would be lowered...
Oh well maybe someone would figure it out
|
On September 07 2010 02:22 Martijn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 18:00 Silver~Guy wrote:
Hello as a player I'd like to weigh in on this issue.
The lag issue is a problem and should not be ignored, if you want the best competitions you have ever seen, every second counts.
Cheating is a possible problem since game-sense and cheating are hard to distinguish.
Stress? Well, I don't know if that will be going away but we can at least mitigate it...
Ideally I think the future of streams should look like this:
[people in the game]
players
admin who video captures (who does not cast)
Admin (otherwise called 1st streamer) lags video by 2 minutes to a hub with a password.
Caster (otherwise called 2nd streamer) picks up the stream and recasts with audio to general public.
Spectators watch 2nd stream.
benefits:
-keeps game almost-live
-limits lag
-minimize the effectiveness of cheating
drawbacks:
-more coordination for admin/streamers/casters
The drawback will be dealt with by formalizing the process by which the admin and casters interact (which will naturally happen after an initial testing period).
About $250 a month per stream (more depending on bandwidth/hours online), plus an initial $400 investment. If you want to donate your winnings, we'll get right on that. Otherwise it's the casters/tournaments that would have to pay for this and you best believe we'd have no interest in sharing it with others and run our bill up higher. If casters would pay the bill, we'd have to start charging tournaments for coverage. If tournaments would pay the bill, it'd severely hurt the price-pool. Either every stream or every tournament would have to buy one of these hubs. And those costs are assuming that people would code the software for free. If the community wants to step up and start covering those costs, great, but realistically we'd be much better off with something like waaaghtv. Not to mention that you'd still have someone in the game potentially lagging, so in essence there's 0 difference between just having 1 or 2 casters in the game when it comes to that aspect.
Yes I'd like to know where these magic numbers of $250 and $400 are appearing.
Honestly I'm beginning to think that casting replays live might be the best way to things. I mean live is good, but if the players are not in a comfortable situation what can you do really?
As unfortunate as it is for the casters to not be able to cast it live, I do think that it's pretty selfish to ask players to play in unfavorable settings.
Yes I'm well aware that the money is put in to draw the big names, and gather the large amounts of people, but the casters need to respect the players perspective; do you not want a game that is being played to the fullest?
And for those saying that the fans will dwindle because it's not Live, again the example of HDH and KotB, two of the most popular tournaments were not casted live.
|
On September 07 2010 03:29 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 02:22 Martijn wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On September 06 2010 18:00 Silver~Guy wrote:
Hello as a player I'd like to weigh in on this issue.
The lag issue is a problem and should not be ignored, if you want the best competitions you have ever seen, every second counts.
Cheating is a possible problem since game-sense and cheating are hard to distinguish.
Stress? Well, I don't know if that will be going away but we can at least mitigate it...
Ideally I think the future of streams should look like this:
[people in the game]
players
admin who video captures (who does not cast)
Admin (otherwise called 1st streamer) lags video by 2 minutes to a hub with a password.
Caster (otherwise called 2nd streamer) picks up the stream and recasts with audio to general public.
Spectators watch 2nd stream.
benefits:
-keeps game almost-live
-limits lag
-minimize the effectiveness of cheating
drawbacks:
-more coordination for admin/streamers/casters
The drawback will be dealt with by formalizing the process by which the admin and casters interact (which will naturally happen after an initial testing period).
About $250 a month per stream (more depending on bandwidth/hours online), plus an initial $400 investment. If you want to donate your winnings, we'll get right on that. Otherwise it's the casters/tournaments that would have to pay for this and you best believe we'd have no interest in sharing it with others and run our bill up higher. If casters would pay the bill, we'd have to start charging tournaments for coverage. If tournaments would pay the bill, it'd severely hurt the price-pool. Either every stream or every tournament would have to buy one of these hubs. And those costs are assuming that people would code the software for free. If the community wants to step up and start covering those costs, great, but realistically we'd be much better off with something like waaaghtv. Not to mention that you'd still have someone in the game potentially lagging, so in essence there's 0 difference between just having 1 or 2 casters in the game when it comes to that aspect. so basically the problem is not the money but the software... The main problem would be a buffering of 5minutes of HD feed (being 5 minutes as a minimal). It couldnt be done in memory so throw in a 5TB++ of HDD as a buffer. The file size shouldnt be a problem. Only problem is that you cant get more than 10 minutes of delay... Well maybe using multiple temp files. Hmm i wonder how the hell ustream gets 2h vods.... Oh well. We need some programmer to write a program that: a) receive raw data from the streamer b) buffers the data on the HDD c) streams it to other streamer... Big problem would be that the material would be encoded 2 times so the quality would be lowered... Oh well maybe someone would figure it out
You'd just encode the video before storing it and you won't need more than 100MB of buffer.
|
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible.
|
On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible.
Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $.
|
On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $.
Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays.
|
8748 Posts
On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $.
Capture screen but don't stream it directly -- save it to a file on local disk. Second computer networked with first opens the file 30 mins later and streams it.
I just tested this with my PC and a laptop. It was as easy as I thought. vhscrcap + fmle saves an flv file to a folder that I'm sharing for streaming on my network. Laptop opens the file and has its own vhscrcap + fmle setup and streams VLC playing the file. You set the length of the delay by calculating the time between recording the file on the first PC and opening the file on the second PC.
|
On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays.
And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen).
|
sorry if it was said before, but you also have to keep in mind, that everybody can look up the results of the games (nearly) the instant they are finished on battle.net (if you know the ID) so keeping chat spoiler free would not be possible.
Having no chat would not be horrible, but to be honest it's sometimes quite funny to read it during the casts.
|
On September 07 2010 03:56 grigorin wrote:
sorry if it was said before, but you also have to keep in mind, that everybody can look up the results of the games (nearly) the instant they are finished on battle.net (if you know the ID) so keeping chat spoiler free would not be possible.
Having no chat would not be horrible, but to be honest it's sometimes quite funny to read it during the casts.
Yep I could not agree more. As mentioned before I had IdrA vs. NoNy spoiled for me during HDH cause of a comment left in the stream comments of someone who check NoNy's profile.
Also the ITL GP was spoiled by a player, and the day that had been spoiled had a 35% less viewership.
|
On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen).
....... in which case you have to cast the replays.
This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues.
EDIT: The point of running a tournament at the core of it is really to see which player is the best, it's the test of skill. Attracting viewers and shit like that is only an accessory of the tournament, if players refuse to play games because of these issues what then?
It's a biased case but the player's do have a foot and a leg advantage holding open the door on the issue.
|
I wouldn't mind if casters casted replays instead of live games. I do agree that having a ton of people in the game all with the potential to lag the game is absurd. Only the 2 players and an admin/referee/etc. should be present and then after the game is over the replay is sent to the casters asap.
|
On September 06 2010 20:32 xtfftc wrote:
There's a huge problem with casting from replays right after the games are played that people appear to be missing.
Let's say Game 1 lasts for 10 minutes. The caster receives the replay and starts casting immediately. Ten minutes later they check their email but apparently Game 2 is still going on, so there is an indefinite pause until the game is over.
Alternatively, you could send the replays after all games have finished but with a bo5 or bo7 this could mean waiting for a looooong time. SC2 is still a new game so most games tend to finish for about 10-15 minutes. However, (hopefully) this will change, so even 3 30 minute-long games plus bio breaks = 2 hours.
These delays will add-up during the course of the tournament. Finals are often played very late in the evening - imagine pushing the whole tournament for at least two additional hours? Making a reasonable schedule would become an even bigger nightmare then it already is. The only way to cope with it would be to cast pretty much the whole tournament the next day.
Excellent point.
Tell me, how many viewers will come back after watching 2 hours of "filler" and 2 hours of "actual gameplay" VS a live stream of 2 hours of solid gamplay?
Tell the result to the sponsors, and expect to see any prize money halved or worse, not supplied.
It's reasonable logic to say if Manchester United asked the spectator crowd to leave because "The noise affects my gameplay", "The crowd is biased towards the other team" etc they would NOT get the same cash. Same applies if they recorded the match and then put it on TV 2 hours later - less viewers compared to live.
Fact is - it just is NOT that exciting when its a replay. Try not to show this forums strong bias towards the players and think of the tournament as a whole. Viewers, Players, Sponsors, Casters. Without one of these 4 there would be no tournaments, or just very poor ones. Another solution needs to be found, and some posts have got close to a good answer.
Somehow having a 3 minute delay (however with a constant stream casted "live" by the caster") would be the ideal solution, maybe give or take a minute or two.
Somebody get on that - find a cheap solution that sponsor money can cover and everyone will have to be happy.
|
On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues.
Ugh let me repeat myself again.
98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney.
Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this.
|
On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this.
I completely understand the chance of spoilers, the problems of people not submitting replays, I've run a couple tourneys myself.
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
I get it, HuK didn't post replays, he's a lazy fuck or w.e. But if you try to reach a compromise, show respect to the player side, I'm sure you'll get it back. I personally have not had that big of a problem with people sending me replays in free tournaments, the occasional 1 or 2 sets where I had to ask someone but I really didn't think it was a problem.
|
On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong.
Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT.
Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers.
Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors.
|
On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
I completely understand the chance of spoilers, the problems of people not submitting replays, I've run a couple tourneys myself.
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
I get it, HuK didn't post replays, he's a lazy fuck or w.e. But if you try to reach a compromise, show respect to the player side, I'm sure you'll get it back. I personally have not had that big of a problem with people sending me replays in free tournaments, the occasional 1 or 2 sets where I had to ask someone but I really didn't think it was a problem.
Well without the viewers than these tournaments will not be for $. That's why companies sponsor them. For people to see their company name. I can be the very best Diablo II PvP player in the universe but if no one is watching me prove that than I will be doing it all for free, there would be no prize $. There is a mutual relationship, and unfortunately one where viewers > players.
Well in free tournaments you are mainly dealing with lower level players who are DYING to make their name. But with established pros they rarely do it, and even Day9 has commented on this before. Imagine running down 256 people for replays or 512......
|
On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this.
excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that
|
On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors.
Exactly.
SC2 wouldn't be nearly as valuable for sponsors if not for it's value as a spectator event.
1st and Ideally you want asses in seats, watching live, in the same room.
2nd you want live cast events.
3rd you have replays... maybe even fourth. I would rather listen to a live game than watch a replay to be honest.
|
On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that
I don't know what is going on with ESL so I will withdraw that point.
But I did have to ask you every single round for replays. You did send them but only after asking.
|
On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors.
So why did people run tournaments before corporate sponsorship? Before mass media so people could watch it?
I'm sorry but I think you're the one who has it wrong. A player will participate in a tournament because
he wants to prove himself. That's what a tournament is, competition. Entertainment is merely a by-product of it. Please try to understand, I mean what's a tournament with a $1 million dollar sponsorship but no players?
On September 07 2010 04:16 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
I completely understand the chance of spoilers, the problems of people not submitting replays, I've run a couple tourneys myself.
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
I get it, HuK didn't post replays, he's a lazy fuck or w.e. But if you try to reach a compromise, show respect to the player side, I'm sure you'll get it back. I personally have not had that big of a problem with people sending me replays in free tournaments, the occasional 1 or 2 sets where I had to ask someone but I really didn't think it was a problem. Well without the viewers than these tournaments will not be for $. That's why companies sponsor them. For people to see their company name. I can be the very best Diablo II PvP player in the universe but if no one is watching me prove that than I will be doing it all for free, there would be no prize $. There is a mutual relationship, and unfortunately one where viewers > players. Well in free tournaments you are mainly dealing with lower level players who are DYING to make their name. But with established pros they rarely do it, and even Day9 has commented on this before. Imagine running down 256 people for replays or 512......
I seriously doubt you'd want to cast 256 games live anyways.
I get that without viewership or sponsor, no money, but I'm still trying to press the matter that it is still ultimately the players who will decide wether or not they want to participate, money or no money. Obviously money attracts the better players, but again players are expressing the fact that they do not want to play in an environment with lag.
I mean with more money on the line doesn't it mean that the players should be catered so they can play at the fullest? So that lag isn't a problem, so that it's an even and fair match?
But really all we can do is speculate about what this issue will blow up to, I honestly think that it will come to casting replays if Blizzard doesn't do something.
On September 07 2010 04:23 Opinion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors. Exactly. SC2 wouldn't be nearly as valuable for sponsors if not for it's value as a spectator event. 1st and Ideally you want asses in seats, watching live, in the same room. 2nd you want live cast events. 3rd you have replays... maybe even fourth. I would rather listen to a live game than watch a replay to be honest.
I seriously doubt you'd rather listen to a live game then watch it a pre-recorded game, I can say that with confidence.
Again money is something to DRAW in the players, players aren't meant to drawn in the money.
|
On September 07 2010 03:49 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Capture screen but don't stream it directly -- save it to a file on local disk. Second computer networked with first opens the file 30 mins later and streams it. I just tested this with my PC and a laptop. It was as easy as I thought. vhscrcap + fmle saves an flv file to a folder that I'm sharing for streaming on my network. Laptop opens the file and has its own vhscrcap + fmle setup and streams VLC playing the file. You set the length of the delay by calculating the time between recording the file on the first PC and opening the file on the second PC.
nice - the only thing I can imagine is, that the streamer will not have as much fun as before and there would be no way the caster can influence what is shown on screen (not so much of a problem, if you consider in SC:BW it was the only way to get english casts of pro games - but the streamer has to be really good to catch all the action)
|
HuK, my respect to you has raised a little, yet again. I'm starting to like you soon!
But to the topic: I find it annoying to watch live events if it is full of casters. There is 99% of times someone who has connection problems. Yeah, imagine couple of seconds wasting game time, not a big deal, but gotta feel horrible from the players perspective. Sometimes it just continues until rest of the streamers lets the lagging streamer know. streamers casting for their community
+10 streamers is absolutely ridiculous. Yeah, there is Russian, Spanish, Germany and whatnot streamers casting for their community, its nice, but somewhere there needs to be a line. Especially when people has to take most of the casters in the game.
|
On September 07 2010 04:33 Grettin wrote:
HuK, my respect to you has raised a little, yet again. I'm starting to like you soon!
But to the topic: I find it annoying to watch live events if it is full of casters. There is 99% of times someone who has connection problems. Yeah, imagine couple of seconds wasting game time, not
+10 streamers is absolutely ridiculous. Yeah, there is Russian, Spanish, Germany and whatnot a big deal, but gotta feel horrible from the players perspective. Sometimes it just continues until rest of the streamers lets the lagging streamer know.streamers casting for their community, its nice, but somewhere there needs to be a line. Especially when people has to take most of the casters in the game.
I could not agree more. Caster FFA's are dumb and need to stop asap.
|
8748 Posts
On September 07 2010 04:26 grigorin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 03:49 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Capture screen but don't stream it directly -- save it to a file on local disk. Second computer networked with first opens the file 30 mins later and streams it. I just tested this with my PC and a laptop. It was as easy as I thought. vhscrcap + fmle saves an flv file to a folder that I'm sharing for streaming on my network. Laptop opens the file and has its own vhscrcap + fmle setup and streams VLC playing the file. You set the length of the delay by calculating the time between recording the file on the first PC and opening the file on the second PC. nice - the only thing I can imagine is, that the streamer will not have as much fun as before and there would be no way the caster can influence what is shown on screen (not so much of a problem, if you consider in SC:BW it was the only way to get english casts of pro games - but the streamer has to be really good to catch all the action)
the caster can be on the first computer that is capturing the video and audio. it's really no different to him. after one or two games he needs to take a short break to start the stream on his second computer and that's it
|
Lol did someone just suggest that lag is "part of the game" like the crowd is for soccer? That analogy might be the most hilarious one I've heard in this thread. I can't believe I'm actually hearing this. Wow.
|
On September 07 2010 04:34 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:33 Grettin wrote:
HuK, my respect to you has raised a little, yet again. I'm starting to like you soon!
But to the topic: I find it annoying to watch live events if it is full of casters. There is 99% of times someone who has connection problems. Yeah, imagine couple of seconds wasting game time, not
+10 streamers is absolutely ridiculous. Yeah, there is Russian, Spanish, Germany and whatnot a big deal, but gotta feel horrible from the players perspective. Sometimes it just continues until rest of the streamers lets the lagging streamer know.streamers casting for their community, its nice, but somewhere there needs to be a line. Especially when people has to take most of the casters in the game. I could not agree more. Caster FFA's are dumb and need to stop asap.
God those lines jumped all around when i posted it. Fixed now, i hope..
And yeah, gotta add one more thing.
Yeah, the community streamers are okay as long as admins and stuff listen the players if they are having a serious problem with a huge amount of casters.
E: Eh, guess its TL who messes up those lines.
|
On September 07 2010 04:24 RoarMan wrote:
So why did people run tournaments before corporate sponsorship? Before mass media so people could watch it?
I'm sorry but I think you're the one who has it wrong. A player will participate in a tournament because
he wants to prove himself. That's what a tournament is, competition. Entertainment is merely a by-product of it. Please try to understand, I mean what's a tournament with a $1 million dollar sponsorship but no players?
There would be no tourney if there wouldnt be viewers. Competition is only a by-product of it.
Eg.
Wolf wanted to cast some games. As a totally new in sc2 scene he decided to create a tournament which he can cast. First wolf cup had 0 price pool. But people like it. So next cup had a price from donation's of cup watchers. So tell me that viewers aren't important.
Also take Husky and HD. HDH1 had a few changes in price money. It was all relevant to the amount of viewers it generated. So more sponsors jump on the bandwagon and even increase there donation to the tournament.
So basically:
More viewers -> better exposure of the sponsor -> bigger price from the sponsor -> players get more money.
So
Viewers >>>> players.
This is eSport.
if players>viewers
its normal ladder game ;P
|
On September 06 2010 22:11 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 21:34 Crosswind wrote:
HuK -
Don't really disagree with any of your points. But, in case nobody's said it in the previous 13 pages of this thread, the real payoff is that it generates real-time interest in an event. eSports is trying to make money. You, Idra, Morrow, all the best players, would really like for professional SC2 to be a legitimate career. Being able to follow it real-time along with thousands of other people helps bring eSports closer tot hat goal.
Not sure if it outweighs all the negatives, but that's the big positive.
-Cross nothing at all can outweigh the potential for cheating alone how can you really try to develop a professional competition where anyone could be cheating at any time and theres absolutely no way to check it?
AGREED!!
|
On September 07 2010 04:24 RoarMan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors. So why did people run tournaments before corporate sponsorship? Before mass media so people could watch it? I'm sorry but I think you're the one who has it wrong. A player will participate in a tournament because he wants to prove himself. That's what a tournament is, competition. Entertainment is merely a by-product of it. Please try to understand, I mean what's a tournament with a $1 million dollar sponsorship but no players? Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:16 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
I completely understand the chance of spoilers, the problems of people not submitting replays, I've run a couple tourneys myself.
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
I get it, HuK didn't post replays, he's a lazy fuck or w.e. But if you try to reach a compromise, show respect to the player side, I'm sure you'll get it back. I personally have not had that big of a problem with people sending me replays in free tournaments, the occasional 1 or 2 sets where I had to ask someone but I really didn't think it was a problem. Well without the viewers than these tournaments will not be for $. That's why companies sponsor them. For people to see their company name. I can be the very best Diablo II PvP player in the universe but if no one is watching me prove that than I will be doing it all for free, there would be no prize $. There is a mutual relationship, and unfortunately one where viewers > players. Well in free tournaments you are mainly dealing with lower level players who are DYING to make their name. But with established pros they rarely do it, and even Day9 has commented on this before. Imagine running down 256 people for replays or 512...... I seriously doubt you'd want to cast 256 games live anyways. I get that without viewership or sponsor, no money, but I'm still trying to press the matter that it is still ultimately the players who will decide wether or not they want to participate, money or no money. Obviously money attracts the better players, but again players are expressing the fact that they do not want to play in an environment with lag. I mean with more money on the line doesn't it mean that the players should be catered so they can play at the fullest? So that lag isn't a problem, so that it's an even and fair match? But really all we can do is speculate about what this issue will blow up to, I honestly think that it will come to casting replays if Blizzard doesn't do something. Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:23 Opinion wrote:On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors. Exactly. SC2 wouldn't be nearly as valuable for sponsors if not for it's value as a spectator event. 1st and Ideally you want asses in seats, watching live, in the same room. 2nd you want live cast events. 3rd you have replays... maybe even fourth. I would rather listen to a live game than watch a replay to be honest. I seriously doubt you'd rather listen to a live game then watch it a pre-recorded game, I can say that with confidence. Again money is something to DRAW in the players, players aren't meant to drawn in the money.
You don't have to believe me, i do it often.
Watching live casted games i watch the games.
When casters are playing replays i often find myself tabbing over and reading the forums or lurking reddit while listening to the play by play.
I don't know why exactly but replays just don't keep me as entertained.
Unless I'm watching a replay which is hyped up and i know is going to be a great game before hand, then it's fun but still less fun then seeing it live.
TLDR: I'd rather watch a sporting event live in person, and if not in person live on TV. If it's already over I'm content with just the highlights and the outcome. If it was a spectacular game and i missed it, sure, i'll watch it being cast but only if all alternatives are exhausted.
|
On September 07 2010 04:24 RoarMan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors. So why did people run tournaments before corporate sponsorship? Before mass media so people could watch it? I'm sorry but I think you're the one who has it wrong. A player will participate in a tournament because he wants to prove himself. That's what a tournament is, competition. Entertainment is merely a by-product of it. Please try to understand, I mean what's a tournament with a $1 million dollar sponsorship but no players? Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:16 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
I completely understand the chance of spoilers, the problems of people not submitting replays, I've run a couple tourneys myself.
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
I get it, HuK didn't post replays, he's a lazy fuck or w.e. But if you try to reach a compromise, show respect to the player side, I'm sure you'll get it back. I personally have not had that big of a problem with people sending me replays in free tournaments, the occasional 1 or 2 sets where I had to ask someone but I really didn't think it was a problem. Well without the viewers than these tournaments will not be for $. That's why companies sponsor them. For people to see their company name. I can be the very best Diablo II PvP player in the universe but if no one is watching me prove that than I will be doing it all for free, there would be no prize $. There is a mutual relationship, and unfortunately one where viewers > players. Well in free tournaments you are mainly dealing with lower level players who are DYING to make their name. But with established pros they rarely do it, and even Day9 has commented on this before. Imagine running down 256 people for replays or 512...... I seriously doubt you'd want to cast 256 games live anyways. I get that without viewership or sponsor, no money, but I'm still trying to press the matter that it is still ultimately the players who will decide wether or not they want to participate, money or no money. Obviously money attracts the better players, but again players are expressing the fact that they do not want to play in an environment with lag. I mean with more money on the line doesn't it mean that the players should be catered so they can play at the fullest? So that lag isn't a problem, so that it's an even and fair match? But really all we can do is speculate about what this issue will blow up to, I honestly think that it will come to casting replays if Blizzard doesn't do something. Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:23 Opinion wrote:On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors. Exactly. SC2 wouldn't be nearly as valuable for sponsors if not for it's value as a spectator event. 1st and Ideally you want asses in seats, watching live, in the same room. 2nd you want live cast events. 3rd you have replays... maybe even fourth. I would rather listen to a live game than watch a replay to be honest. I seriously doubt you'd rather listen to a live game then watch it a pre-recorded game, I can say that with confidence. Again money is something to DRAW in the players, players aren't meant to drawn in the money.
And what were those prize pools before corporate sponsorship? I guarantee they weren't anywhere near the size they are now, or the potential size they can be with increased popularity. I was playing counter-strike when the first CPL took place way back in 2000 (or whatever year it was). After that event, the sponsors started flooding in and the prize pool for tournaments went up to the point that all these organizations like EG popped up. Why? Because the sponsors saw that people wanted to watch CS matches.
Viewers are what drive this "e-sport". Not the players. For every player that chooses not to participate in a tournament, there will be another 50 waiting to take his place. And in the end, the only thing it's going to cost that player is potential sponsors as his name won't be out there.
And where do you get this concept of people wanting to watch a replay than a live cast? In SC and professional sports, my interest level drops tremendously if I don't watch something live. There have been countless times where I've DVR'd an NFL game or something and then never watched it because I just didn't care after the fact.
I understand both sides of the argument and I think the best possible solution is for there to be 1 or 2 approved casters casting matches. Or you can even assign 5-6 casters to follow certain high profile players through the tourney and then when, say the elite 8, hits, the 1 or 2 approved casters take over.
|
On September 07 2010 04:36 mav451 wrote:
Lol did someone just suggest that lag is "part of the game" like the crowd is for soccer? That analogy might be the most hilarious one I've heard in this thread. I can't believe I'm actually hearing this. Wow.
haha, yeah that's just wrong. Though a better one would be:
'lag is part of the game like the vuvuzelas are for soccer.'
|
On September 07 2010 04:42 RxN wrote:
And what were those prize pools before corporate sponsorship? I guarantee they weren't anywhere near the size they are now, or the potential size they can be with increased popularity. I was playing counter-strike when the first CPL took place way back in 2000 (or whatever year it was). After that event, the sponsors started flooding in and the prize pool for tournaments went up to the point that all these organizations like EG popped up. Why? Because the sponsors saw that people wanted to watch CS matches.
Viewers are what drive this "e-sport". Not the players. For every player that chooses not to participate in a tournament, there will be another 50 waiting to take his place. And in the end, the only thing it's going to cost that player is potential sponsors as his name won't be out there.
And where do you get this concept of people wanting to watch a replay than a live cast? In SC and professional sports, my interest level drops tremendously if I don't watch something live. There have been countless times where I've DVR'd an NFL game or something and then never watched it because I just didn't care after the fact.
I understand both sides of the argument and I think the best possible solution is for there to be 1 or 2 approved casters casting matches. Or you can even assign 5-6 casters to follow certain high profile players through the tourney and then when, say the elite 8, hits, the 1 or 2 approved casters take over.
Very well said. Especially the bolded part.
|
On September 07 2010 04:42 RxN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:24 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors. So why did people run tournaments before corporate sponsorship? Before mass media so people could watch it? I'm sorry but I think you're the one who has it wrong. A player will participate in a tournament because he wants to prove himself. That's what a tournament is, competition. Entertainment is merely a by-product of it. Please try to understand, I mean what's a tournament with a $1 million dollar sponsorship but no players? On September 07 2010 04:16 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
I completely understand the chance of spoilers, the problems of people not submitting replays, I've run a couple tourneys myself.
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
I get it, HuK didn't post replays, he's a lazy fuck or w.e. But if you try to reach a compromise, show respect to the player side, I'm sure you'll get it back. I personally have not had that big of a problem with people sending me replays in free tournaments, the occasional 1 or 2 sets where I had to ask someone but I really didn't think it was a problem. Well without the viewers than these tournaments will not be for $. That's why companies sponsor them. For people to see their company name. I can be the very best Diablo II PvP player in the universe but if no one is watching me prove that than I will be doing it all for free, there would be no prize $. There is a mutual relationship, and unfortunately one where viewers > players. Well in free tournaments you are mainly dealing with lower level players who are DYING to make their name. But with established pros they rarely do it, and even Day9 has commented on this before. Imagine running down 256 people for replays or 512...... I seriously doubt you'd want to cast 256 games live anyways. I get that without viewership or sponsor, no money, but I'm still trying to press the matter that it is still ultimately the players who will decide wether or not they want to participate, money or no money. Obviously money attracts the better players, but again players are expressing the fact that they do not want to play in an environment with lag. I mean with more money on the line doesn't it mean that the players should be catered so they can play at the fullest? So that lag isn't a problem, so that it's an even and fair match? But really all we can do is speculate about what this issue will blow up to, I honestly think that it will come to casting replays if Blizzard doesn't do something. On September 07 2010 04:23 Opinion wrote:On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors. Exactly. SC2 wouldn't be nearly as valuable for sponsors if not for it's value as a spectator event. 1st and Ideally you want asses in seats, watching live, in the same room. 2nd you want live cast events. 3rd you have replays... maybe even fourth. I would rather listen to a live game than watch a replay to be honest. I seriously doubt you'd rather listen to a live game then watch it a pre-recorded game, I can say that with confidence. Again money is something to DRAW in the players, players aren't meant to drawn in the money. And what were those prize pools before corporate sponsorship? I guarantee they weren't anywhere near the size they are now, or the potential size they can be with increased popularity. I was playing counter-strike when the first CPL took place way back in 2000 (or whatever year it was). After that event, the sponsors started flooding in and the prize pool for tournaments went up to the point that all these organizations like EG popped up. Why? Because the sponsors saw that people wanted to watch CS matches. Viewers are what drive this "e-sport". Not the players. For every player that chooses not to participate in a tournament, there will be another 50 waiting to take his place. And in the end, the only thing it's going to cost that player is potential sponsors as his name won't be out there. And where do you get this concept of people wanting to watch a replay than a live cast? In SC and professional sports, my interest level drops tremendously if I don't watch something live. There have been countless times where I've DVR'd an NFL game or something and then never watched it because I just didn't care after the fact. I understand both sides of the argument and I think the best possible solution is for there to be 1 or 2 approved casters casting matches. Or you can even assign 5-6 casters to follow certain high profile players through the tourney and then when, say the elite 8, hits, the 1 or 2 approved casters take over.
I really believe this is a truly selfish way to look at it.
What are you guys saying then? The players are monkeys dancing around for coins?
Viewership is important, it's valuable yes. Money is important, yes.
But aren't the players something to be placed above that? The game itself? I mean c'mon, what's a a million viewers with a million dollar price pool if all we get is lack luster games because the players are in an uncomfortable environment?
|
On September 07 2010 04:47 RoarMan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:42 RxN wrote:On September 07 2010 04:24 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors. So why did people run tournaments before corporate sponsorship? Before mass media so people could watch it? I'm sorry but I think you're the one who has it wrong. A player will participate in a tournament because he wants to prove himself. That's what a tournament is, competition. Entertainment is merely a by-product of it. Please try to understand, I mean what's a tournament with a $1 million dollar sponsorship but no players? On September 07 2010 04:16 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
I completely understand the chance of spoilers, the problems of people not submitting replays, I've run a couple tourneys myself.
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
I get it, HuK didn't post replays, he's a lazy fuck or w.e. But if you try to reach a compromise, show respect to the player side, I'm sure you'll get it back. I personally have not had that big of a problem with people sending me replays in free tournaments, the occasional 1 or 2 sets where I had to ask someone but I really didn't think it was a problem. Well without the viewers than these tournaments will not be for $. That's why companies sponsor them. For people to see their company name. I can be the very best Diablo II PvP player in the universe but if no one is watching me prove that than I will be doing it all for free, there would be no prize $. There is a mutual relationship, and unfortunately one where viewers > players. Well in free tournaments you are mainly dealing with lower level players who are DYING to make their name. But with established pros they rarely do it, and even Day9 has commented on this before. Imagine running down 256 people for replays or 512...... I seriously doubt you'd want to cast 256 games live anyways. I get that without viewership or sponsor, no money, but I'm still trying to press the matter that it is still ultimately the players who will decide wether or not they want to participate, money or no money. Obviously money attracts the better players, but again players are expressing the fact that they do not want to play in an environment with lag. I mean with more money on the line doesn't it mean that the players should be catered so they can play at the fullest? So that lag isn't a problem, so that it's an even and fair match? But really all we can do is speculate about what this issue will blow up to, I honestly think that it will come to casting replays if Blizzard doesn't do something. On September 07 2010 04:23 Opinion wrote:On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors. Exactly. SC2 wouldn't be nearly as valuable for sponsors if not for it's value as a spectator event. 1st and Ideally you want asses in seats, watching live, in the same room. 2nd you want live cast events. 3rd you have replays... maybe even fourth. I would rather listen to a live game than watch a replay to be honest. I seriously doubt you'd rather listen to a live game then watch it a pre-recorded game, I can say that with confidence. Again money is something to DRAW in the players, players aren't meant to drawn in the money. And what were those prize pools before corporate sponsorship? I guarantee they weren't anywhere near the size they are now, or the potential size they can be with increased popularity. I was playing counter-strike when the first CPL took place way back in 2000 (or whatever year it was). After that event, the sponsors started flooding in and the prize pool for tournaments went up to the point that all these organizations like EG popped up. Why? Because the sponsors saw that people wanted to watch CS matches. Viewers are what drive this "e-sport". Not the players. For every player that chooses not to participate in a tournament, there will be another 50 waiting to take his place. And in the end, the only thing it's going to cost that player is potential sponsors as his name won't be out there. And where do you get this concept of people wanting to watch a replay than a live cast? In SC and professional sports, my interest level drops tremendously if I don't watch something live. There have been countless times where I've DVR'd an NFL game or something and then never watched it because I just didn't care after the fact. I understand both sides of the argument and I think the best possible solution is for there to be 1 or 2 approved casters casting matches. Or you can even assign 5-6 casters to follow certain high profile players through the tourney and then when, say the elite 8, hits, the 1 or 2 approved casters take over. I really believe this is a truly selfish way to look at it. What are you guys saying then? The players are monkeys dancing around for coins? Viewership is important, it's valuable yes. Money is important, yes. But aren't the players something to be placed above that? The game itself? I mean c'mon, what's a a million viewers with a million dollar price pool if all we get is lack luster games because the players are in an uncomfortable environment?
Selfish? Please. Get off your high horse. Selfish is expecting sponsors to throw money at you for playing a game in a situation that they get no benefit from, i.e. nobody watching the game you're playing.
Players can be placed above it....in tournaments where there are no sponsors or money on the line.
|
On September 07 2010 04:24 RoarMan wrote:
So why did people run tournaments before corporate sponsorship? Before mass media so people could watch it?
I'm sorry but I think you're the one who has it wrong. A player will participate in a tournament because
he wants to prove himself. That's what a tournament is, competition. Entertainment is merely a by-product of it. Please try to understand, I mean what's a tournament with a $1 million dollar sponsorship but no players?
Please, just stop exaggerating this much.
Yes, people are competitive. Gamers are competitive. People in all walks of life have the urge to prove themselves somehow, thus a lot of us will take that chance when offered if we feel we have something to contribute with. But, your argument ends right there.
If those competitive people have that same chance while competing for a large cash price, obviously they would go for that instead of something which offered nothing but a pat on the back and some efame for a very small select group of people.
Entertainment is what makes those big cash prices possible and it promotes players to become better and better since their results now actually matters in their daily life instead of just being a name on the internet.
It's just a pointless discussion and it's not what should be discussed in this thread. This thread is about making it better for both the players and streamers. Not a discussion about who makes what possible. It's a synergy. They feed and nurture each other. The end.
|
I never really understood the hype with livecasting online tournaments
there's just so much last minute shit that can happen that delays the games and forces the casters to fill in the gaps (kinda like what happened @ MLG Raleigh)
I mean just look at Go4SC2, thank god DeMuslim and Take were drunk and the stream was hilarious otherwise a lot of people would've just lost interest.
Just have both players + 1 admin in the game and have that admin send the replays to the casters
cast it when the series is over or if you REALLY want to have it as close to live as possible just cast the first finished game while the 2nd is being played and have the admin just keep sending games between games.
Prevents lag and cheating. Case closed.
In the end, wtf do you care if it's live or was played 30 minutes ago?
and to whoever said that for each player that quits there'll be 50 to replace him:
You're watching the games for the level of competition. At one point they'd be casting low diamond players. nobody's gonna watch that.
players make the tournament what it is. sponsors come to good players because they see an opportunity to use them to display their brand. they help tournaments because of they see the opportunity in having their brand repeated mindlessly to all viewers.
if you have a bad tournament with bad players, do you really expect to have as many viewers?
|
I was irritated when this first came up on Gosu the other day as I was one of the viewers and the whole thing was handled less then well, what with no one really knowing how to handle it, definitely a break down in communications, and while I'd like to continue to see live games casted I understand the lag problem and will concede to it as long as events such as ESL and GSL etc continue to be casted live, I think casting replays is acceptable for online tournaments.
|
On September 07 2010 04:44 Ghazwan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:36 mav451 wrote:
Lol did someone just suggest that lag is "part of the game" like the crowd is for soccer? That analogy might be the most hilarious one I've heard in this thread. I can't believe I'm actually hearing this. Wow. haha, yeah that's just wrong. Though a better one would be: 'lag is part of the game like the vuvuzelas are for soccer.'
Haha this is spot-on.
|
On September 07 2010 04:34 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:26 grigorin wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Capture screen but don't stream it directly -- save it to a file on local disk. Second computer networked with first opens the file 30 mins later and streams it. I just tested this with my PC and a laptop. It was as easy as I thought. vhscrcap + fmle saves an flv file to a folder that I'm sharing for streaming on my network. Laptop opens the file and has its own vhscrcap + fmle setup and streams VLC playing the file. You set the length of the delay by calculating the time between recording the file on the first PC and opening the file on the second PC. nice - the only thing I can imagine is, that the streamer will not have as much fun as before and there would be no way the caster can influence what is shown on screen (not so much of a problem, if you consider in SC:BW it was the only way to get english casts of pro games - but the streamer has to be really good to catch all the action) the caster can be on the first computer that is capturing the video and audio. it's really no different to him. after one or two games he needs to take a short break to start the stream on his second computer and that's it
but does it work with more than one caster? Otherwise it would "only" eliminate the cheating issue.
|
On September 07 2010 04:47 RoarMan wrote:
What are you guys saying then? The players are monkeys dancing around for coins?
Well if they are pro players than yes. They must provide the best amount of coverage to their sponsors.
If i remember correctly on the first day of IEM Morrow was wearing a normal shirt.
But from day two he started to wear a mous sport.
It takes no Sherlock to get that after the life feed he got message from his sponsor.
"Put on the dam shirt"
And so he did.
I leave HuK's hoodie without comment.
Wannabe pro's.
Of the players posting here (from the big 3) only Idra has a mindset of a pro. (Thats why his main concern was about cheating)
|
8748 Posts
Top players are the product. Viewers are the customers. When you have all the top players saying "this tournament sucked cuz it lagged and people were cheating" and they decide to play in other tournaments, you can replace them with the players right below them but viewer numbers will drop and sponsors will flee. The tournaments that run things properly for the players will succeed. The only way the shitty tournaments survive is because the players have nothing else to do at that time.
|
to all the Viewers > Players will have better games to watch if there is no chance of cheating and less lag.
so long as its not spoiled by the griefers a casted replay a few minutes after the game should have no real difference for an online event vs a replay.
On September 07 2010 04:54 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
Top players are the product. Viewers are the customers. When you have all the top players saying "this tournament sucked cuz it lagged and people were cheating" and they decide to play in other tournaments, you can replace them with the players right below them but viewer numbers will drop and sponsors will flee. The tournaments that run things properly for the players will succeed. The only way the shitty tournaments survive is because the players have nothing else to do at that time.
A great point, I'd much rather watch players like yourself, Idra or any of the other big names then lesser players, even if that means watching replays a few minutes after a match.
|
On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this.
Diamond, yesterday there was lag no matter what happened. The odd time even our Ref left the game, and within seconds of the game being over he had the replay and it was being passed onto the caster. If players are able to do what HuK did with the replays, casters have no right to bitch.
|
One caster per game must be enough, they can all tune into the same stream, and that one caster should have his shit in order, you can't compete on a pro level with lag, it's disgraceful imo.
|
Tyler didn't see Dimaga post here so your post is invalid.... j/k
Still Idra>>Dimaga>>Morrow>> Huk when it comes to entertaining top players.
|
On September 07 2010 04:52 grigorin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:34 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 07 2010 04:26 grigorin wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Capture screen but don't stream it directly -- save it to a file on local disk. Second computer networked with first opens the file 30 mins later and streams it. I just tested this with my PC and a laptop. It was as easy as I thought. vhscrcap + fmle saves an flv file to a folder that I'm sharing for streaming on my network. Laptop opens the file and has its own vhscrcap + fmle setup and streams VLC playing the file. You set the length of the delay by calculating the time between recording the file on the first PC and opening the file on the second PC. nice - the only thing I can imagine is, that the streamer will not have as much fun as before and there would be no way the caster can influence what is shown on screen (not so much of a problem, if you consider in SC:BW it was the only way to get english casts of pro games - but the streamer has to be really good to catch all the action) the caster can be on the first computer that is capturing the video and audio. it's really no different to him. after one or two games he needs to take a short break to start the stream on his second computer and that's it but does it work with more than one caster? Otherwise it would "only" eliminate the cheating issue.
Of course. All this merely does is delay the stream you want to stream by having another computer buffer it before sending it out. I assumed it was doable but I was unsure of how streaming into the video file would work since I'm not familar w/ various codecs in playing a file that is still being constructed, so to speak. But if tee-ler was able to do it, then it shouldn't be that bad.
|
For whatever it's worth, I don't see the problem with just casting replays and leaving out the live stuff for non-LAN play. Just make sure that there's not one privileged caster that does get the opportunity to do it live, and make the replay available to the appropriate people quickly and at the same time. If the players are suffering and games are being influenced and delayed by casters, something's got to change.
|
On September 06 2010 19:28 heyoka wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 19:02 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 06 2010 18:59 heyoka wrote:On September 06 2010 18:37 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:As a tournament admin for 3 years on PGTour and iCCup even when there are rules to require replay uploads enforcing them for every game in a large scale tournament is largely impossible. Players can upload dummy replays, especially with blizzard changing the replay formatting every patch so the file can go back to view the proper patch. This causes an issue where automatic parsing of replays isnt always possible and sorting through every replay to make sure the ones provided are in fact the correct games is not possible. And trust me over many years on iCCup a lot of players just uploaded fake replays instead of putting in the effort they did not care because the prize was not enough. Once you catch on to the fact that it is a fake replay it is most likely too late as they are playing in further round(s) of the tournament in a large scale event. Even wrangling replays from top players can be tough see IEM group stages still missing Huk vs Machine replays http://www.esl-world.net/masters/season5/america/sc2/championship/match/19676021/ in a major event with several thousand dollars on the line. Ironically involving the OP who claims we should just cast from replays. So basically in the small tournaments players might not care enough to provide replays and take the DQ, big tournaments are either playing too many games to keep track of this or are too high profile and big scale so that disqualifying someone for merely not providing replays causes massive controversy and rage. Can you imagine if ESL disqualified Huk for not uploading those replays in a timely manner? Machine won but did not advance so whose responsibility is it? Stop and think about how much backlash there would be about that. Ultimately dealing with replays causes so much more time and effort from everyone involved and causes so much trouble on all ends of the equation that what is the plus side? The third part of the OP about stress? Yeah worse with replays for every player involved. Most of the top players know eachother they practice with eachother and are pretty confident that they are not cheating even in online play. Most of the time if someone is it becomes rather obvious as I've been in situations where it was in question if someone was cheating off my stream so we backed off the casting to test it and the player made it very obvious by the way they react to the change of casting. It's not the perfect solution but ultimately it's what the sponsors and viewers want to see and they're the ones providing the $$ for you to play over. Why is having a ref in the match not a solution here? He can deal with replays as well as be there to enforce any possible rulings (ie making sure players are on time). TSL 1&2: ref lags players tell him to leave Plus the fact that in big tournaments ie the one that Huk keeps citing from this morning having a ref in every game is not possible. In SC2 the ref can be put into a situation where the players pause the game and refuse to resume until you leave because of lag. Happened in IEM cologne again top players demanding that the stream leave the game when without the stream the prize pool doesn't exist. I'm confused, this is 1 person to gather replays instead of 2 casters 1 admin 1 streamer, how is this a worse situation?
A proper coverageteam has 2 casters which has one or both streaming. Are quite willing to communicate and negotiate with admins and are flexible. They also have proper internet and if they do cause a lag popup, leave.
Generally, takes two casters to cover a tournament and not fuck yourself up in the process. That's all glhf needs for example unless the admins request guest commentators which of course takes extra slots.
|
On September 07 2010 04:48 Frosten wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:24 RoarMan wrote:
So why did people run tournaments before corporate sponsorship? Before mass media so people could watch it?
I'm sorry but I think you're the one who has it wrong. A player will participate in a tournament because
he wants to prove himself. That's what a tournament is, competition. Entertainment is merely a by-product of it. Please try to understand, I mean what's a tournament with a $1 million dollar sponsorship but no players? Please, just stop exaggerating this much. Yes, people are competitive. Gamers are competitive. People in all walks of life have the urge to prove themselves somehow, thus a lot of us will take that chance when offered if we feel we have something to contribute with. But, your argument ends right there. If those competitive people have that same chance while competing for a large cash price, obviously they would go for that instead of something which offered nothing but a pat on the back and some efame for a very small select group of people. Entertainment is what makes those big cash prices possible and it promotes players to become better and better since their results now actually matters in their daily life instead of just being a name on the internet. It's just a pointless discussion and it's not what should be discussed in this thread. This thread is about making it better for both the players and streamers. Not a discussion about who makes what possible. It's a synergy. They feed and nurture each other. The end.
How am I exaggerating?
I don't feel I am getting through to you, so I'll basically quote Tyler because I feel contributes to what I'm trying to get at
On September 07 2010 04:54 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
Top players are the product. Viewers are the customers. When you have all the top players saying "this tournament sucked cuz it lagged and people were cheating" and they decide to play in other tournaments, you can replace them with the players right below them but viewer numbers will drop and sponsors will flee. The tournaments that run things properly for the players will succeed. The only way the shitty tournaments survive is because the players have nothing else to do at that time.
Also
On September 07 2010 04:48 RxN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:47 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 04:42 RxN wrote:On September 07 2010 04:24 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors. So why did people run tournaments before corporate sponsorship? Before mass media so people could watch it? I'm sorry but I think you're the one who has it wrong. A player will participate in a tournament because he wants to prove himself. That's what a tournament is, competition. Entertainment is merely a by-product of it. Please try to understand, I mean what's a tournament with a $1 million dollar sponsorship but no players? On September 07 2010 04:16 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
I completely understand the chance of spoilers, the problems of people not submitting replays, I've run a couple tourneys myself.
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
I get it, HuK didn't post replays, he's a lazy fuck or w.e. But if you try to reach a compromise, show respect to the player side, I'm sure you'll get it back. I personally have not had that big of a problem with people sending me replays in free tournaments, the occasional 1 or 2 sets where I had to ask someone but I really didn't think it was a problem. Well without the viewers than these tournaments will not be for $. That's why companies sponsor them. For people to see their company name. I can be the very best Diablo II PvP player in the universe but if no one is watching me prove that than I will be doing it all for free, there would be no prize $. There is a mutual relationship, and unfortunately one where viewers > players. Well in free tournaments you are mainly dealing with lower level players who are DYING to make their name. But with established pros they rarely do it, and even Day9 has commented on this before. Imagine running down 256 people for replays or 512...... I seriously doubt you'd want to cast 256 games live anyways. I get that without viewership or sponsor, no money, but I'm still trying to press the matter that it is still ultimately the players who will decide wether or not they want to participate, money or no money. Obviously money attracts the better players, but again players are expressing the fact that they do not want to play in an environment with lag. I mean with more money on the line doesn't it mean that the players should be catered so they can play at the fullest? So that lag isn't a problem, so that it's an even and fair match? But really all we can do is speculate about what this issue will blow up to, I honestly think that it will come to casting replays if Blizzard doesn't do something. On September 07 2010 04:23 Opinion wrote:On September 07 2010 04:15 Frankon wrote:On September 07 2010 04:12 RoarMan wrote:
The point I'm trying hard to iterate is this: The players ultimately will get to decide. They are the ones playing the game. A tournament is for players, people may want to watch it yes, but the players are the ones who are actually engaging it and are the core reason to run a tournament in the first place.
You get it so wrong. Tournament is for viewers. Its a ENTERTAINMENT. Players try to earn money but more importantly entertain the viewers. Core reason to run a sponsored tournament is to get a low cost advertisement for the sponsors. Exactly. SC2 wouldn't be nearly as valuable for sponsors if not for it's value as a spectator event. 1st and Ideally you want asses in seats, watching live, in the same room. 2nd you want live cast events. 3rd you have replays... maybe even fourth. I would rather listen to a live game than watch a replay to be honest. I seriously doubt you'd rather listen to a live game then watch it a pre-recorded game, I can say that with confidence. Again money is something to DRAW in the players, players aren't meant to drawn in the money. And what were those prize pools before corporate sponsorship? I guarantee they weren't anywhere near the size they are now, or the potential size they can be with increased popularity. I was playing counter-strike when the first CPL took place way back in 2000 (or whatever year it was). After that event, the sponsors started flooding in and the prize pool for tournaments went up to the point that all these organizations like EG popped up. Why? Because the sponsors saw that people wanted to watch CS matches. Viewers are what drive this "e-sport". Not the players. For every player that chooses not to participate in a tournament, there will be another 50 waiting to take his place. And in the end, the only thing it's going to cost that player is potential sponsors as his name won't be out there. And where do you get this concept of people wanting to watch a replay than a live cast? In SC and professional sports, my interest level drops tremendously if I don't watch something live. There have been countless times where I've DVR'd an NFL game or something and then never watched it because I just didn't care after the fact. I understand both sides of the argument and I think the best possible solution is for there to be 1 or 2 approved casters casting matches. Or you can even assign 5-6 casters to follow certain high profile players through the tourney and then when, say the elite 8, hits, the 1 or 2 approved casters take over. I really believe this is a truly selfish way to look at it. What are you guys saying then? The players are monkeys dancing around for coins? Viewership is important, it's valuable yes. Money is important, yes. But aren't the players something to be placed above that? The game itself? I mean c'mon, what's a a million viewers with a million dollar price pool if all we get is lack luster games because the players are in an uncomfortable environment? Selfish? Please. Get off your high horse. Selfish is expecting sponsors to throw money at you for playing a game in a situation that they get no benefit from, i.e. nobody watching the game you're playing. Players can be placed above it....in tournaments where there are no sponsors or money on the line.
I'm sorry if I seem like a tool, but I strongly believe in catering to the players needs because they are doing this for a fucking living. They dedicate their lives and time to this game, and all the viewers can do is cry because we don't get to watch the games live? That doesn't sound selfish?
I fully understand that sponsors are expecting some sort of a return from their investments, but I don't think that any alternative to live games will kill viewership completely.
|
Ugh this thread is the biggest repeat ever.
Person 1: "Hey just use replays"
Person 2: "Dude there is a problem with spoilers and players not sending in replays, plus you will get less viewers with replays than live"
Person 1: "Oh just add a delay"
Person 2: "That's alot of $ and really not feasible."
Person 1: "Oh, well than idk"
Person 3: "Just use replays..."
Until something new comes up in this thread I am withdrawing. There is issues on both sides and there is no right answer. Blizzard could make a fix for this but will not because it's blizzard and having 2 sweet ass computers just to run a stream is also not feasible.
|
On September 07 2010 05:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Ugh this thread is the biggest repeat ever.
Person 1: "Hey just use replays"
Person 2: "Dude there is a problem with spoilers and players not sending in replays, plus you will get less viewers with replays than live"
Person 1: "Oh just add a delay"
Person 2: "That's alot of $ and really not feasible."
Person 1: "Oh, well than idk"
Person 3: "Just use replays..."
Until something new comes up in this thread I am withdrawing. There is issues on both sides and there is no right answer. Blizzard could make a fix for this but will not because it's blizzard and having 2 sweet ass computers just to run a stream is also not feasible.
Yes honestly this is something only Blizzard can solve.
|
Sadly the lack of good coverage from esports site also comes into play. Because like I said in one of my previous post, before there was live stream, players got their recognition and sponsorship simply by having their names mentioned in news post on multiple esports news site or having an article written about their upset and what not. Replays and casted VOD also did the trick. But because Starcraft 2 isn't well developed yet, there are no leagues (solo/team) or a lot of majors, so esports site can't do much. Online cups is mostly what the scene has which is why streaming seems like the most important thing because that's the only way you can follow it because news site won't bother with it because they are too much.
|
the whole LAN "fix" wont fix things when people are in different countries
kinda need a direct connection
the only "fix" i can see for cross country tournaments is one obs in the game and everyone obs from him and casts the game from his perspective out of the game
seems reasonable to me atleast
you both have a live cast and it will be delayed slightly due to the obs streaming to everyone
|
On September 07 2010 05:15 RoarMan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Ugh this thread is the biggest repeat ever.
Person 1: "Hey just use replays"
Person 2: "Dude there is a problem with spoilers and players not sending in replays, plus you will get less viewers with replays than live"
Person 1: "Oh just add a delay"
Person 2: "That's alot of $ and really not feasible."
Person 1: "Oh, well than idk"
Person 3: "Just use replays..."
Until something new comes up in this thread I am withdrawing. There is issues on both sides and there is no right answer. Blizzard could make a fix for this but will not because it's blizzard and having 2 sweet ass computers just to run a stream is also not feasible. Yes honestly this is something only Blizzard can solve.
Then, we may have to wait for HotS :p
|
8748 Posts
On September 07 2010 05:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Ugh this thread is the biggest repeat ever.
Person 1: "Hey just use replays"
Person 2: "Dude there is a problem with spoilers and players not sending in replays, plus you will get less viewers with replays than live"
Person 1: "Oh just add a delay"
Person 2: "That's alot of $ and really not feasible."
Person 1: "Oh, well than idk"
Person 3: "Just use replays..."
Until something new comes up in this thread I am withdrawing. There is issues on both sides and there is no right answer. Blizzard could make a fix for this but will not because it's blizzard and having 2 sweet ass computers just to run a stream is also not feasible.
I don't see how the delay is that difficult for any decent streamer. Many people who aren't interested in streaming at all already have two capable PC's at home for other reasons.
|
On September 07 2010 05:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Ugh this thread is the biggest repeat ever.
Probably because alot of it is a matter of opinions.
Personally I believe that for tournaments there should be a delay in the cast (say, 2 minutes), while offline tournaments can be shown without delay. I have been admin for the WC3L for awhile and I can guarantee you that people have already abused livestreams in SC2 money tournaments. There is absolutely no way to find out about it, unless the player is pants-on-head retarded and does a no scout proxy on a 4 player map or whatever. Certain players I have adminned in the past, that have now transitioned into SC2, will do anything they can get away with to win.
The lag is annoying but I don't think it can really be helped, until there is a way to get a stream into a game without observers being able to affect player lag.
The stress is Bnets fault for forcing so much effort into communication and such. Private chat channels help tons with organising games for streamers and such.
In the end everyone suffers from these things, the players directly but the viewers indirectly. Players simply deliver far better games when they're in a comfortable situation and can just play their game without worries.
|
Start casting the replays IMO, or just at the most allow a streamer/admin if needed, the casters can cast off the streamers stream, no reason for 14++ people(whatever ist he limit now) to be in one game making it unplayable.
|
Vatican City State2594 Posts
Of course players should kick casters. Who needs some idiots talking over the players if the players deem it necessary to kick the caster (lag or whatever reason)? Fuck casters' crying.
|
@Diamond: what is new: nony suggested a solution to introduce a delay which doesn't require a lot of $.
Btw, I think not many people noticed, but idra made a post some pages ago, which explained why having a delay might not solve the cheating issue completely (his example was having a hidden expo for the whole game iirc), so that argument should not be forgotten.
|
I'm sorry, but can someone explain to me why there would be less viewers if they were casted replays then if it were live - assuming no spoilers, shortly after the games have been played, with equivalent casting.
If it were the industry standard ( that is, casters could only cast from replays), i don't see why people wouldn't watch the games.
I mean, last time i checked, HDH and KOTB were kind of successful.
|
There isn't really any debate to be had. Tyler and IdrA laid it out perfectly.
People are just going to have to deal with replays.
In terms of sympathizing between someone who installed capture software and someone who wants to be a pro-SC2 player, It's pretty easy for me to make up my mind.
|
Someone please rename this thread.
|
On September 07 2010 05:21 arb wrote:
Start casting the replays IMO, or just at the most allow a streamer/admin if needed, the casters can cast off the streamers stream, no reason for 14++ people(whatever ist he limit now) to be in one game making it unplayable.
I think SC2 is already passed casting replays. Right now starting over isn't goinf solve this but moving forward and finding solutions to our problems. Lag, minimize the number of streamers per game. Cheating, find a way to delay the stream. Stress, proper organizing. If all hope fails then do it classic style.
|
Players needs > Any other persons petty wants in comparison.
|
On September 07 2010 05:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Ugh this thread is the biggest repeat ever.
Person 1: "Hey just use replays"
Person 2: "Dude there is a problem with spoilers and players not sending in replays, plus you will get less viewers with replays than live"
Person 1: "Oh just add a delay"
Person 2: "That's alot of $ and really not feasible."
Person 1: "Oh, well than idk"
Person 3: "Just use replays..."
Until something new comes up in this thread I am withdrawing. There is issues on both sides and there is no right answer. Blizzard could make a fix for this but will not because it's blizzard and having 2 sweet ass computers just to run a stream is also not feasible.
Actually, it's more like 2 good people with decent computers and good connections if you don't expect somebody to have 2 good computers. And realistically, the person sending out the stream to ustream/livestream doesn't even need that good of a computer because it'd be capturing a video, not even sc2 itself which isn't taxing unless you have a really bad computer.
edit to addon:
X: needs the best computer since he's capturing the video in the highest quality from sc2 itself as well as recording. He also would need the best connection since the original file it'd be streaming to Y would be less compressed.
Y: Needs only a good enough computer/connection to upload and capture in quality that is to the caster's requirement (1000kbs for example). Since he's merely capturing a .avi (or whatever) to stream the taxation on videocard/mobo is a lot less since sc2 isn't even running.
|
Ok, Blizzard will have to add an option for tourney players to not have win/loss results show on record in order to prevent Id checker spoilers.
Two designated admins, should be allowed in game to make sure all is good. (I don't know if all parties involved are equally monitored for shenanigans) PM's etc..
The fans will have to understand why some tourneys would be on delay or livecasted of the replay.
If it is a replay, the players will have to hold the results to themselves or face a penalty. (this should be discussed upon organizers) Replays should be sent in a timely fashion.
In order for anything thing to work, Blizzard will have to be contacted and convinced to add a tournament feature where records on said games will be held confidential.
Please everyone stay on topic,
Help with informative solutions to make this a more professional and fair experience for everyone.
|
I'm curious how people feel about this, so I tried to make a as non-bias as possible poll.
Poll: Where do you stand on Replays vs Live?I prefer replays because cheating and laggy games are big risks (36) 54% I prefer live games because cheating and laggy games are not big risks (31) 46% 67 total votes Your vote: Where do you stand on Replays vs Live? (Vote): I prefer live games because cheating and laggy games are not big risks
(Vote): I prefer replays because cheating and laggy games are big risks
If this gets enough attention, I think it would be a good idea to edit this into your OP, HuK.
|
On September 07 2010 05:31 Mohdoo wrote:
*poll*
Not a great poll tbh. I think you need to rename it.
I agree with the players that the cheating and lag are big risks. I still prefer live streams.
The way it's written is confusing.
|
Players have the right to boot anyone from the game imo unless they are affiliated with the event/league. There is nothing wrong with casting replays and it will get viewers as proven successful in the past. I guess I just don't have any sympathy for casters unless their name is Day9 haha. The only people I respect in this matter are the players and the persons computer/connection that streams the game.
|
On September 07 2010 05:32 keV. wrote:Not a great poll tbh. I think you need to rename it. I agree with the players that the cheating and lag are big risks. I still prefer live streams. The way it's written is confusing.
What is it about a game being live that makes you decide someone cheating in the tournament is worth it?
|
I agree with huk
it should be mandatory for online tournaments to send the replay directly after every match/map to the tournament admins so they can send it to the casters or tournament admins should give out a "offical replay mailing list before the tournament".
if players do this after every match it won't delay the stream so much.
|
Personally, I would be very interested to see why so many people are so anti-replay and pro-live.
I mean, I haven't really seen any real argument for live --> replay, I've only seen comments along the lines of ''it has to be live'' or ''there's something special about watching it live'', can someone actually make a real argument for live ---> replay, that's not simply an arbitrary preference?
|
On September 07 2010 05:37 Me1234 wrote:
I agree with huk
it should be mandatory for online tournaments to send the replay directly after every match/map to the tournament admins so they can send it to the casters or tournament admins should give out a "offical replay mailing list before the tournament".
if players do this after every match it won't delay the stream so much.
All that would need to happen would be for penalty points to be awarded to players who don't send replays. If players are punished for not sending in replays in a timely manner, there will be no problems.
|
On September 07 2010 05:24 Comeh wrote:
I'm sorry, but can someone explain to me why there would be less viewers if they were casted replays then if it were live - assuming no spoilers, shortly after the games have been played, with equivalent casting.
If it were the industry standard ( that is, casters could only cast from replays), i don't see why people wouldn't watch the games.
I mean, last time i checked, HDH and KOTB were kind of successful.
This is what I thought too, I don't think it would effect it at all but a definite problem is spoilers, because you could just check the players custom games and check the out come.
|
On September 07 2010 05:36 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:32 keV. wrote:On September 07 2010 05:31 Mohdoo wrote:
*poll* Not a great poll tbh. I think you need to rename it. I agree with the players that the cheating and lag are big risks. I still prefer live streams. The way it's written is confusing. What is it about a game being live that makes you decide someone cheating in the tournament is worth it?
Uhh. I don't know that anyone is cheating? Live is more fun to watch and there is no chance of being spoiled. I'm pretty sure that the majority of viewers prefer live streams, even if they agree that they present a considerable risk.
I'm surprised that you need explanation. Don't take my comment personal.
see this:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 07 2010 05:43 Arkless wrote:
I never thought these words would come from my mouth( or fingers )
But I agree with Idra 100%. No amount of sponsors,recognition,prize money will be continued to be given if this game turns into 1 big stream cheat fest. Players>casters always when it comes to tourneys.
Obviously yes, I prefer the live streams, but I dont want to watch a livestream if it gives a BM player the advantage over the non BM player who doesnt have it running in the background.
I cant begin to tell u how many tourney games i've lost that were casted. Where my opponent has the perfect build order, set up his static D in the exact right spot at the exact right time etc, and then when i watch the replay he has not scouted me once, not even at the start. I mean hell, I was watching Ryan vs Suggy in zotac yesterday and Ryan was responding to questions on bnet chat, from questions gunrunner was saying on the stream. If thats not bm/cheating I dont know what is!
huk makes the perfect point. The two biggest tourneys so far were KOTB and HDH, which wer eboth purely off of replays. It's not important to sponsors if a replay is casted 2 minutes after the game is done. What is important that this game isn't known for BM ppl who have the stream in the background, because if it does become that you can kiss every sponsor goodbye.
|
Well belive it or not the 900 euro that is on offer comes from advertisements and this money will only be given by advertisers if there is interest in the event, the stream helps to do this.
|
I never thought these words would come from my mouth( or fingers )
But I agree with Idra 100%. No amount of sponsors,recognition,prize money will be continued to be given if this game turns into 1 big stream cheat fest. Players>casters always when it comes to tourneys.
Obviously yes, I prefer the live streams, but I dont want to watch a livestream if it gives a BM player the advantage over the non BM player who doesnt have it running in the background.
I cant begin to tell u how many tourney games i've lost that were casted. Where my opponent has the perfect build order, set up his static D in the exact right spot at the exact right time etc, and then when i watch the replay he has not scouted me once, not even at the start. I mean hell, I was watching Ryan vs Suggy in zotac yesterday and Ryan was responding to questions on bnet chat, from questions gunrunner was saying on the stream. If thats not bm/cheating I dont know what is!
huk makes the perfect point. The two biggest tourneys so far were KOTB and HDH, which wer eboth purely off of replays. It's not important to sponsors if a replay is casted 2 minutes after the game is done. What is important that this game isn't known for BM ppl who have the stream in the background, because if it does become that you can kiss every sponsor goodbye.
|
I really think the players should allow casters if they don't have a very good reason not to. It's just good for SC2 as a competitive platform to have lots of casters and it's very enjoyable to watch for us decent players who want to see cool tricks from the players we like to watch and look up to in the context of the game - such as yourself Huk! Not to suck up, but I get pretty excited when I see you play because as a protoss player, it's just a good opportunity to learn and see some exciting action, and I hope you recognize that people appreciate the cool games you and other pros have going on and actually take an active interest in them.
So to sum up: Please let your games get casted if you don't have a very good reason not to. It's good for you as a player to get exposure, and it's cool for us as viewers to see strong players in action
|
^ they should also have te option to not allow it as well which is what the streamers in thread don't want. To give players the right to prevent them from casting their matches even if problems arise. Yeah but the stream can be either live or replays. The numbers are what counts right?
|
someone should implement a poll...
I btw agree with HuK
edit: okay sorry =) there is the poll already
|
On September 07 2010 05:44 GenoZStriker wrote:
Yeah but the stream can be either live or replays. The numbers are what counts right?
Yes and streams run off replays draw less numbers than ones casted live.
|
On September 07 2010 05:41 keV. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:36 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:32 keV. wrote:On September 07 2010 05:31 Mohdoo wrote:
*poll* Not a great poll tbh. I think you need to rename it. I agree with the players that the cheating and lag are big risks. I still prefer live streams. The way it's written is confusing. What is it about a game being live that makes you decide someone cheating in the tournament is worth it? Uhh. I don't know that anyone is cheating? Live is more fun to watch and there is no chance of being spoiled. I'm pretty sure that the majority of viewers prefer live streams, even if they agree that they present a considerable risk. I'm surprised that you need explanation. Don't take my comment personal.
Because you don't know anyone is cheating, you assume no one is? What method would you suggest to verify someone is cheating? There is no way at all to prove someone cheated using a live stream. All someone needs to do is set their laptop with a livestream running next to their monitor and watch that the whole time. Is it that the top level players in tournaments saying that they think some people cheat is not good enough reason?
It just seems that you are only comfortable with live games because you are under the assumption that no one will cheat. If people are cheating, it destroys the integrity of the tournament.
On September 07 2010 05:43 Jenslyn87 wrote:So to sum up: Please let your games get casted if you don't have a very good reason not to. It's good for you as a player to get exposure, and it's cool for us as viewers to see strong players in action
Define what you believe to be a good reason. Is the possibility of the opponent cheating good enough reason. In a lot of big tournaments, a lot of people haven't even heard of each other, in the beginning rounds at least. What reason do they have to trust them? With it being SO INCREDIBLY EASY to cheat, is that not a good reason?
|
Can't streams temporarily IP ban people?
That way, players can be IP banned from streams when they play their games--they can be unbanned when they finish.
|
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only.
The simple solution would be for each competition to have one single official streaming channel with 1 or 2 casters. This way, there wouldn't be lag problems caused by games with a large number of spectators and the competition between streamers would significantly increase. Also, the dedicated streamers would invest into better equipment and better internet connections.
|
On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only.
Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays?
|
On September 07 2010 05:47 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:41 keV. wrote:On September 07 2010 05:36 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:32 keV. wrote:On September 07 2010 05:31 Mohdoo wrote:
*poll* Not a great poll tbh. I think you need to rename it. I agree with the players that the cheating and lag are big risks. I still prefer live streams. The way it's written is confusing. What is it about a game being live that makes you decide someone cheating in the tournament is worth it? Uhh. I don't know that anyone is cheating? Live is more fun to watch and there is no chance of being spoiled. I'm pretty sure that the majority of viewers prefer live streams, even if they agree that they present a considerable risk. I'm surprised that you need explanation. Don't take my comment personal. Because you don't know anyone is cheating, you assume no one is? What method would you suggest to verify someone is cheating? There is no way at all to prove someone cheated using a live stream. All someone needs to do is set their laptop with a livestream running next to their monitor and watch that the whole time. Is it that the top level players in tournaments saying that they think some people cheat is not good enough reason? It just seems that you are only comfortable with live games because you are under the assumption that no one will cheat. If people are cheating, it destroys the integrity of the tournament.
Look man, the only thing I said was that your poll could be worded better. That clearly flew over your head.
You're arguing with me over the OP, instead of what I actually said. Let me try and clarify.
I prefer to watch events live, like most viewers. That DOES NOT mean, that I don't acknowledge the risk of potential cheating. I believe what needs to happen is a switch to replays, but I don't "prefer" said change.
The only point I was making, is that someones personal preference, often doesn't reflect what they actually believe. You wanted an accurate poll. I'm saying that your poor word choice could skew the results.
|
On September 07 2010 05:46 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:44 GenoZStriker wrote:
Yeah but the stream can be either live or replays. The numbers are what counts right? Yes and streams run off replays draw less numbers than ones casted live.
That depends on the coverage, hype, players, tournament and time. In iCCups case I don't suggest it. But other tournaments can get away with it.
|
On September 07 2010 05:43 Arkless wrote:I mean hell, I was watching Ryan vs Suggy in zotac yesterday and Ryan was responding to questions on bnet chat, from questions gunrunner was saying on the stream. If thats not bm/cheating I dont know what is!
I recall that part of the stream. Somebody was typing in game, appearing to respond to question from the casters on the stream, and the caster was like, 'Wait... you're not replying to me now, aren't you?" It was a bit unclear what was going on there.
Edit:
Also, that poll doesn't make sense. Avoiding cheating doesn't require replays... What about a 2 min tape delay?
Personally, an ideal solution seems to be: 2-3 min stream delay (people WANT live over replays) + a system where obs cannot slow down the game.
|
On September 07 2010 05:53 keV. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:47 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:41 keV. wrote:On September 07 2010 05:36 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:32 keV. wrote:On September 07 2010 05:31 Mohdoo wrote:
*poll* Not a great poll tbh. I think you need to rename it. I agree with the players that the cheating and lag are big risks. I still prefer live streams. The way it's written is confusing. What is it about a game being live that makes you decide someone cheating in the tournament is worth it? Uhh. I don't know that anyone is cheating? Live is more fun to watch and there is no chance of being spoiled. I'm pretty sure that the majority of viewers prefer live streams, even if they agree that they present a considerable risk. I'm surprised that you need explanation. Don't take my comment personal. Because you don't know anyone is cheating, you assume no one is? What method would you suggest to verify someone is cheating? There is no way at all to prove someone cheated using a live stream. All someone needs to do is set their laptop with a livestream running next to their monitor and watch that the whole time. Is it that the top level players in tournaments saying that they think some people cheat is not good enough reason? It just seems that you are only comfortable with live games because you are under the assumption that no one will cheat. If people are cheating, it destroys the integrity of the tournament. Look man, the only thing I said was that your poll could be worded better. That clearly flew over your head. You're arguing with me over the OP, instead of what I actually said. Let me try and clarify. I prefer to watch events live, like most viewers. That DOES NOT mean, that I don't acknowledge the risk of potential cheating. I believe what needs to happen is a switch to replays, but I don't "prefer" said change. The only point I was making, is that someones personal preference, often doesn't reflect what they actually believe. You wanted an accurate poll. I'm saying that your poor word choice could skew the results.
My apologies then. If I am able to edit it, I will. I understand your perspective better, thank you!
edit: Can't, I don't think. Though I'd imagine most people will vote based on what it comes down to, not an ideal situation.
|
On September 07 2010 04:24 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that I don't know what is going on with ESL so I will withdraw that point. But I did have to ask you every single round for replays. You did send them but only after asking.
as soon as i finished the games i sent in the replays, just because i said " im done"
and u said "send me the replays"
doesn't mean you had to go out of your way to get the replays
|
On September 07 2010 05:47 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:41 keV. wrote:On September 07 2010 05:36 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:32 keV. wrote:On September 07 2010 05:31 Mohdoo wrote:
*poll* Not a great poll tbh. I think you need to rename it. I agree with the players that the cheating and lag are big risks. I still prefer live streams. The way it's written is confusing. What is it about a game being live that makes you decide someone cheating in the tournament is worth it? Uhh. I don't know that anyone is cheating? Live is more fun to watch and there is no chance of being spoiled. I'm pretty sure that the majority of viewers prefer live streams, even if they agree that they present a considerable risk. I'm surprised that you need explanation. Don't take my comment personal. Because you don't know anyone is cheating, you assume no one is? What method would you suggest to verify someone is cheating? There is no way at all to prove someone cheated using a live stream. All someone needs to do is set their laptop with a livestream running next to their monitor and watch that the whole time. Is it that the top level players in tournaments saying that they think some people cheat is not good enough reason? It just seems that you are only comfortable with live games because you are under the assumption that no one will cheat. If people are cheating, it destroys the integrity of the tournament. Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:43 Jenslyn87 wrote:So to sum up: Please let your games get casted if you don't have a very good reason not to. It's good for you as a player to get exposure, and it's cool for us as viewers to see strong players in action Define what you believe to be a good reason. Is the possibility of the opponent cheating good enough reason. In a lot of big tournaments, a lot of people haven't even heard of each other, in the beginning rounds at least. What reason do they have to trust them? With it being SO INCREDIBLY EASY to cheat, is that not a good reason?
Good point man and it's a real shame... I couldn't be the one to say if these strong players would cheat or not. Maybe I am naive to think they won't because they try to be the best they can be for LAN tournaments. But then again I do have to recognize Huk's point about cash prizing causing players to possibly cheat to win...
This is a tough call :/
|
On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays?
Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments.
But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else.
What people should understand is that tournaments are for the entertainment of the people watching, and that should be given priority when taking decisions regarding the type of coverage.
|
One of the biggest flame bait, dramA llama and repeating threads i have seen in a looong time, i feel terrible to have posted in it.
imo close this bs, it aint going nowhere.
"i agree with huk"
"fuk all casters"
"cast replays herp derp"
"No? add delay den"
![[image loading]](http://yourargumentisinvalid.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/the_cat_is_pushing_a_watermelon_out_of_a_lake.thumbnail.jpg)
|
Imagine if there was a 1024 player tournament.
That's exactly 1024 replays that are released if EVERY game is a best of 1 (and includes a game for third place).
If you think getting 1024 replays available for download and casting is easier than casting the games live, I think you should re-evaluate what is considered "difficult" and what is considered "easy". It gets even worse in a tournament where you want to follow specific players: some players are popular, and as such their replays will be wanted "more". Have fun, as a player, giving out the replay to multiple sources instead of having it casted live.
People quoting the success of HDH and Day9's KotB shouldn't forget the trouble these two tournaments had acquiring the replays: Day9 gave a pretty startling, vivid image of horror and depravity when it came to securing the replays from players. I could only imagine Hell would be unleashed if lots of people were relied upon.
Oh, and there's nothing stopping people cheating via replays.
|
On September 07 2010 05:57 dizzy101 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:43 Arkless wrote:I mean hell, I was watching Ryan vs Suggy in zotac yesterday and Ryan was responding to questions on bnet chat, from questions gunrunner was saying on the stream. If thats not bm/cheating I dont know what is! I recall that part of the stream. Somebody was typing in game, appearing to respond to question from the casters on the stream, and the caster was like, 'Wait... you're not replying to me now, aren't you?" It was a bit unclear what was going on there.
I don't remember the exact topic of the conversation, but I know it spanned more than just one question. It was multiple answers to multiple questions. Over I would say about a 3-4 minute span before they just went back to casting the game.
Here is my problem with even a 3 min delay when it comes to livestreams/cheating. For example, if a terran is doing a 1/1/1. And the caster says blah blah destiny cloudfist blah blah. You can bet two minutes later he is still doing his destiny cloudfist build. And macro around that. Thats just one out of a gajillion examples I could give you.
As far as livestream IP bans are concerned. Their is about 1 million ways around that, IP masks, multiple computers, a laptop on ur neighbours wireless etc.......
The fact is, if you jump into a stream 9x out of 10 they have the image that will cover the time bar/camera bar regardless if its a livestream or replay. Unless you saw them join the replay, I doubt you would honestly notice the difference.
Cheating, and keeping this game's integrity intact are of most importance, not everyone and their mother who wants to stream.
|
On September 07 2010 06:06 Ancient.eu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays? Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments. But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else.
even though you see the exact same game being played?
i doubt you'd even notice. the appeal of watching something live doesnt come from omg this is happening right now, it comes from everyone is watching this along with me and we are seeing the game unfold at the same time, which is why replay events are successful.
|
On September 07 2010 06:09 Cranberries wrote:
Imagine if there was a 1024 player tournament.
That's exactly 1024 replays that are released if EVERY game is a best of 1 (and includes a game for third place).
If you think getting 1024 replays available for download and casting is easier than casting the games live, I think you should re-evaluate what is considered "difficult" and what is considered "easy". It gets even worse in a tournament where you want to follow specific players: some players are popular, and as such their replays will be wanted "more". Have fun, as a player, giving out the replay to multiple sources instead of having it casted live.
The way i see it, if its a huge tournament, its organizers problem to solve out the replays if he wants to host such large tournament.
|
On September 07 2010 06:05 Jenslyn87 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:47 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:41 keV. wrote:On September 07 2010 05:36 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:32 keV. wrote:On September 07 2010 05:31 Mohdoo wrote:
*poll* Not a great poll tbh. I think you need to rename it. I agree with the players that the cheating and lag are big risks. I still prefer live streams. The way it's written is confusing. What is it about a game being live that makes you decide someone cheating in the tournament is worth it? Uhh. I don't know that anyone is cheating? Live is more fun to watch and there is no chance of being spoiled. I'm pretty sure that the majority of viewers prefer live streams, even if they agree that they present a considerable risk. I'm surprised that you need explanation. Don't take my comment personal. Because you don't know anyone is cheating, you assume no one is? What method would you suggest to verify someone is cheating? There is no way at all to prove someone cheated using a live stream. All someone needs to do is set their laptop with a livestream running next to their monitor and watch that the whole time. Is it that the top level players in tournaments saying that they think some people cheat is not good enough reason? It just seems that you are only comfortable with live games because you are under the assumption that no one will cheat. If people are cheating, it destroys the integrity of the tournament. On September 07 2010 05:43 Jenslyn87 wrote:So to sum up: Please let your games get casted if you don't have a very good reason not to. It's good for you as a player to get exposure, and it's cool for us as viewers to see strong players in action Define what you believe to be a good reason. Is the possibility of the opponent cheating good enough reason. In a lot of big tournaments, a lot of people haven't even heard of each other, in the beginning rounds at least. What reason do they have to trust them? With it being SO INCREDIBLY EASY to cheat, is that not a good reason? Good point man and it's a real shame... I couldn't be the one to say if these strong players would cheat or not. Maybe I am naive to think they won't because they try to be the best they can be for LAN tournaments. But then again I do have to recognize Huk's point about cash prizing causing players to possibly cheat to win... This is a tough call :/
I will assume that you are less active and knowledgeable on past happenings in high level competitions in games such as Brood War and WC3, but it has happened. There have even been times where very high level players were caught map hacking. Its extremely unfortunate, and you'd think they would all have higher standards...And a lot of them do...But not all of them.
Don't get me wrong, I wish it wasn't like that. But it is. There have been more than enough times where cheating has happened to know that it is a genuine issue. I feel like a lot of people who aren't worried about streamed games are just people who don't have as long of a history with the "semi-pro" scene to know that it is a very real issue. I'm not saying everyone cheats. But in a 200 person tournament, isn't even 1 person cheating enough to just switch to replays?
On September 07 2010 06:09 Cranberries wrote:Imagine if there was a 1024 player tournament. That's exactly 1024 replays that are released if EVERY game is a best of 1 (and includes a game for third place). If you think getting 1024 replays available for download and casting is easier than casting the games live, I think you should re-evaluate what is considered "difficult" and what is considered "easy". It gets even worse in a tournament where you want to follow specific players: some players are popular, and as such their replays will be wanted "more". Have fun, as a player, giving out the replay to multiple sources instead of having it casted live. People quoting the success of HDH and Day9's KotB shouldn't forget the trouble these two tournaments had acquiring the replays: Day9 gave a pretty startling, vivid image of horror and depravity when it came to securing the replays from players. I could only imagine Hell would be unleashed if lots of people were relied upon. Oh, and there's nothing stopping people cheating via replays.
You make it sound like all of those games would be casted anyway. In tournaments like that, not nearly close to the majority of the games are even casted. Its always just the highlights or the best players' games. The exact same amount of games can be casted, whether it is through replays or live. Penalize players for not giving replays. Problem solved.
Every replay is automatically saved. It will never be impossible for a player to send a replay in. They can e-mail it as well as tons of other things. Harsh punishments for not submitting replays is extremely reasonable in a game that automatically saves the last 10 games or whatever.
|
On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays?
Comparing these tournaments to little $50-100 weekly events is silly and you know it. I'm sure if NBC only broadcasted a "replay" of the Super Bowl rather than the live event it'd still get more viewers than the local High School state championship game casted live. That doesn't prove that replays = win.
|
On September 07 2010 06:09 Cranberries wrote:Imagine if there was a 1024 player tournament. That's exactly 1024 replays that are released if EVERY game is a best of 1 (and includes a game for third place). If you think getting 1024 replays available for download and casting is easier than casting the games live, I think you should re-evaluate what is considered "difficult" and what is considered "easy". It gets even worse in a tournament where you want to follow specific players: some players are popular, and as such their replays will be wanted "more". Have fun, as a player, giving out the replay to multiple sources instead of having it casted live. People quoting the success of HDH and Day9's KotB shouldn't forget the trouble these two tournaments had acquiring the replays: Day9 gave a pretty startling, vivid image of horror and depravity when it came to securing the replays from players. I could only imagine Hell would be unleashed if lots of people were relied upon. Oh, and there's nothing stopping people cheating via replays.
A 1024 player tournament is not going to see all those games casted live anyway. The least you will get is one game per round. Because it ends faster due to it beig BO1
|
Livecasting should be forbidden only because its a legal way to CHEAT and thus making the games bad and short. If i was playing then i would had the stream in the background listening to the casters. There is no way to stop this and im sure that 99% of the pro players are doing this.
Anything else falls in comparison. Either cast the replays and dont release the replays for the public or find a way to do a 5min delay in livecast.
|
The fact remains that cheating is extremely viable and can be used in ALL tourneys! When money comes to play, any person can pick up their laptop and cheese their way to victory. It's not honorable but how are you going to get caught?
Did you guys not read about the huge match making scandal in Korea? Cheating? Pros? CHEATIN'!? MY PROS? Live games or replays, what is the difference? It's not like Day9 spoke any differently when he's watching a live event or it's a replay. You don't need to. Whatever FALSE feelings some of you guys feel about "live events" while you're sitting at your computer chair can be fabricated by just using replays. Go to real events and you'll actually be watching "live".
The beauty of this game is that we CAN use replays. Just man up, comparing "live" airing and "live" events is just ridiculous. Sitting in your computer chair naked and watching the cast versus being at a tournament sullies what an actual live event is.
I think a great solution would be if there was ONE OFFICIAL site for all online tournament replays that is sponsored by xxx. The players would receive unique id's confirming who they are etc and they could quickly and easily upload replays. The casters also receive unique id's and are given the passwords to download these replays. Later on, the passwords could be lifted and anyone could access the replays :D!
I know, you people are unforgivably impatient and it'll be like 15-30 minutes before you see the match but cry moar. The cons (Cheating and Lag) are a much bigger issue than "omg my feelings?!" from some people. The player comes first. Cry as much as you want but when players stop playing because of lag or cheating, we will not be watching any "live" tournies or replays.
|
On September 07 2010 06:10 Tropics wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 06:06 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays? Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments. But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else. even though you see the exact same game being played? i doubt you'd even notice. the appeal of watching something live doesnt come from omg this is happening right now, it comes from everyone is watching this along with me and we are seeing the game unfold at the same time, which is why replay events are successful.
The appeal of a live stream is that the events that you seeing are happening in real time, not from realizing that many other people are watching the same thing. If there was a very good game on a stream, would you enjoy it more if there were 1500 people watching than you would enjoy it if there were 1000 watching ? You would probably enjoy it the same, as you would enjoy the events and not the knowledge that more people are seeing the same thing.
I am not sure how you form your opinions, but just look around the events around you. How many live entertainment events are in the world as opposed to recorded ones. The biggest and most important events in the world, the ones that attract the most viewers, are live, and this is not accidental.
The appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one.
And these tournaments exist for the entertainment of the viewers and this is what should be given priority when taking a decision regarding the coverage.
|
On September 07 2010 06:21 Ancient.eu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 06:10 Tropics wrote:On September 07 2010 06:06 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays? Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments. But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else. even though you see the exact same game being played? i doubt you'd even notice. the appeal of watching something live doesnt come from omg this is happening right now, it comes from everyone is watching this along with me and we are seeing the game unfold at the same time, which is why replay events are successful. The appeal of a live stream is that the events that you seeing are happening in real time, not from realizing that many other people are watching the same thing. If there was a very good game on a stream, would you enjoy it more if there were 1500 people watching than you would enjoy it if there were 1000 watching ? You would probably enjoy it the same, as you would enjoy the events and not the knowledge that more people are seeing the same thing. I am not sure how you form your opinions, but just look around the events around you. How many live entertainment events are in the world as opposed to recorded ones. The biggest and most important events in the world, the ones that attract the most viewers, are live, and this is not accidental. The appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. And these tournaments exist for the entertainment of the viewers and this is what should be given priority when taking a decision regarding the coverage.
Is there actually a difference between watching the game live and watching a replay of a game played 10 minutes ago that NOBODY knows the results of?
I think that streamers should at least delay the stream by 2-3 minutes if they are in the game streaming it live, but I don't know if that is actually possible.. T_T
|
On September 07 2010 06:21 Ancient.eu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 06:10 Tropics wrote:On September 07 2010 06:06 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays? Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments. But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else. even though you see the exact same game being played? i doubt you'd even notice. the appeal of watching something live doesnt come from omg this is happening right now, it comes from everyone is watching this along with me and we are seeing the game unfold at the same time, which is why replay events are successful. The appeal of a live stream is that the events that you seeing are happening in real time, not from realizing that many other people are watching the same thing. If there was a very good game on a stream, would you enjoy it more if there were 1500 people watching than you would enjoy it if there were 1000 watching ? You would probably enjoy it the same, as you would enjoy the events and not the knowledge that more people are seeing the same thing. I am not sure how you form your opinions, but just look around the events around you. How many live entertainment events are in the world as opposed to recorded ones. The biggest and most important events in the world, the ones that attract the most viewers, are live, and this is not accidental. The appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. And these tournaments exist for the entertainment of the viewers and this is what should be given priority when taking a decision regarding the coverage.
I'm sorry but Live Viewing is not that much different from recorded viewing when it comes to an emotional aspect, I understand that you think it is, but it just is not that different. If you don't know the result and it's just being replayed for you live with casters commenting on the action, you wouldn't even know the difference if it was real-time or a pre-recorded thing.
And the emotion you feel, while false and shallow, is something towards the players, not the fact that it is happening at that moment. If you watch livestreams of certain players, that's different because it's a person's actual stream where they, themselves normally comment, that's why you are more drawn to personal 'live' streams because you feel a greater 'connection' to the players on the stream. However when it's a casted stream the difference in whether it's live or not makes very little difference, IF the casters do their job well, you feel a connection to the players through the casters or to the casters themselves.
HuK, I'm with you all the way, every caster that annoys you and bugs you to stream your games is just another connection, and another person for your opponent to listen to, or to cause lag in a game that is your LIVING.
HuK wouldn't ask to come to a person's job who is complaining about the lack of 'live' streaming. And even if he did, if he was being disruptive, or helping competition, or anything of the like, he would be IMMEDIATELY be asked to leave and never return. If you want to keep casters live, then make it a ZERO tolerance policy for casters and video guys, if you lag, are accused or caught of cheating or anything even remotely like that, they are IMMEDIATELY BANNED from ever participating in a SC2 Tourney or casting any more PROFESSIONAL games.
|
There is a 0% chance that cheating hasn't occurred due to live streaming. Progamers risked thousands in future earnings as well as jail time to cheat. They were living many times above the median income in Korea. They had to go to greater, riskier lengths to establish contacts and get paid.
And some of you are saying that someone who makes virtually no money, who has rent due in a few weeks and has been eating rice and noodles for months, who only needs to set up a wireless computer next to his own, or receive telephone info from a friend with virtually no chance of getting caught -- you're saying that person is less likely to cheat? No.
Yes people can also cheat by hacking, but that is easier to prove and harder to set up. If my option is to watch a replay, or watch a live game where there is a distinct possibility of cheating, give me the replay please.
|
On September 07 2010 06:25 drewbie.root wrote:
I think that streamers should at least delay the stream by 2-3 minutes if they are in the game streaming it live, but I don't know if that is actually possible.. T_T
This is very possible, it was often done in the WC3L for the purpose of anti-cheating.
|
On September 07 2010 06:25 drewbie.root wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 06:21 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 06:10 Tropics wrote:On September 07 2010 06:06 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays? Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments. But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else. even though you see the exact same game being played? i doubt you'd even notice. the appeal of watching something live doesnt come from omg this is happening right now, it comes from everyone is watching this along with me and we are seeing the game unfold at the same time, which is why replay events are successful. The appeal of a live stream is that the events that you seeing are happening in real time, not from realizing that many other people are watching the same thing. If there was a very good game on a stream, would you enjoy it more if there were 1500 people watching than you would enjoy it if there were 1000 watching ? You would probably enjoy it the same, as you would enjoy the events and not the knowledge that more people are seeing the same thing. I am not sure how you form your opinions, but just look around the events around you. How many live entertainment events are in the world as opposed to recorded ones. The biggest and most important events in the world, the ones that attract the most viewers, are live, and this is not accidental. The appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. And these tournaments exist for the entertainment of the viewers and this is what should be given priority when taking a decision regarding the coverage. Is there actually a difference between watching the game live and watching a replay of a game played 10 minutes ago that NOBODY knows the results of? I think that streamers should at least delay the stream by 2-3 minutes if they are in the game streaming it live, but I don't know if that is actually possible.. T_T
I have stated several times before what I consider the differences to be, you can see them in what you quoted.
Would you prefer the final of a football/hokey cup to be recorded on the afternoon and streamed on the TV later in the night ? Would you enjoy it the same ?
Like I have mentioned, the appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. Switching to casting replays will cause significant drops in the number of viewers. As a player, you should not prefer that, as it would in turn cause less tournaments to be organized and less money investments into the game.
|
On September 07 2010 06:34 Ancient.eu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 06:25 drewbie.root wrote:On September 07 2010 06:21 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 06:10 Tropics wrote:On September 07 2010 06:06 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays? Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments. But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else. even though you see the exact same game being played? i doubt you'd even notice. the appeal of watching something live doesnt come from omg this is happening right now, it comes from everyone is watching this along with me and we are seeing the game unfold at the same time, which is why replay events are successful. The appeal of a live stream is that the events that you seeing are happening in real time, not from realizing that many other people are watching the same thing. If there was a very good game on a stream, would you enjoy it more if there were 1500 people watching than you would enjoy it if there were 1000 watching ? You would probably enjoy it the same, as you would enjoy the events and not the knowledge that more people are seeing the same thing. I am not sure how you form your opinions, but just look around the events around you. How many live entertainment events are in the world as opposed to recorded ones. The biggest and most important events in the world, the ones that attract the most viewers, are live, and this is not accidental. The appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. And these tournaments exist for the entertainment of the viewers and this is what should be given priority when taking a decision regarding the coverage. Is there actually a difference between watching the game live and watching a replay of a game played 10 minutes ago that NOBODY knows the results of? I think that streamers should at least delay the stream by 2-3 minutes if they are in the game streaming it live, but I don't know if that is actually possible.. T_T I have stated several times before what I consider the differences to be, you can see them in what you quoted. Would you prefer the final of a football/hokey cup to be recorded on the afternoon and streamed on the TV later in the night ? Would you enjoy it the same ? Like I have mentioned, the appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. Switching to casting replays will cause significant drops in the number of viewers. As a player, you should not prefer that, as it would in turn cause less tournaments to be organized and less money investments into the game.
You cannot compare a sporting event to an esport event, I hate that they use that word as is. Because if you're watching a live sporting event, the casters or reporters arent causing the game to SLOW DOWN and causing missed opportunities because of their presence.
Also you can't know exactly what an opponent is doing based on watching a live sporting event, but you can if you even JUST LISTEN to the live stream of casted games.
You cannot compare things that are not similar at all and have none of the same properties.
|
On September 07 2010 06:36 Killerbot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 06:34 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 06:25 drewbie.root wrote:On September 07 2010 06:21 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 06:10 Tropics wrote:On September 07 2010 06:06 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays? Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments. But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else. even though you see the exact same game being played? i doubt you'd even notice. the appeal of watching something live doesnt come from omg this is happening right now, it comes from everyone is watching this along with me and we are seeing the game unfold at the same time, which is why replay events are successful. The appeal of a live stream is that the events that you seeing are happening in real time, not from realizing that many other people are watching the same thing. If there was a very good game on a stream, would you enjoy it more if there were 1500 people watching than you would enjoy it if there were 1000 watching ? You would probably enjoy it the same, as you would enjoy the events and not the knowledge that more people are seeing the same thing. I am not sure how you form your opinions, but just look around the events around you. How many live entertainment events are in the world as opposed to recorded ones. The biggest and most important events in the world, the ones that attract the most viewers, are live, and this is not accidental. The appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. And these tournaments exist for the entertainment of the viewers and this is what should be given priority when taking a decision regarding the coverage. Is there actually a difference between watching the game live and watching a replay of a game played 10 minutes ago that NOBODY knows the results of? I think that streamers should at least delay the stream by 2-3 minutes if they are in the game streaming it live, but I don't know if that is actually possible.. T_T I have stated several times before what I consider the differences to be, you can see them in what you quoted. Would you prefer the final of a football/hokey cup to be recorded on the afternoon and streamed on the TV later in the night ? Would you enjoy it the same ? Like I have mentioned, the appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. Switching to casting replays will cause significant drops in the number of viewers. As a player, you should not prefer that, as it would in turn cause less tournaments to be organized and less money investments into the game. You cannot compare a sporting event to an esport event, I hate that they use that word as is. Because if you're watching a live sporting event, the casters or reporters arent causing the game to SLOW DOWN and causing missed opportunities because of their presence. Also you can't know exactly what an opponent is doing based on watching a live sporting event, but you can if you even JUST LISTEN to the live stream of casted games. You cannot compare things that are not similar at all and have none of the same properties.
From the viewer's point of view, it's the same type of thing, it's entertainment. As a viewer, I am interested in enjoying the event, not in the mechanics of it.
Dealing with the mechanics is the responsibility of the organizers. But, as the events are organized for the entertainment of the people, without the viewers, the events would not exist, it is normal that the entertainment of the viewers to be given priority.
|
put a delay at the streams, i think it could fix everything
|
On September 07 2010 06:44 debasers wrote:
put a delay at the streams, i think it could fix everything
Yes, a delay of a few minutes, if it could be done, would be the better solution.
|
On September 07 2010 06:25 drewbie.root wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 06:21 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 06:10 Tropics wrote:On September 07 2010 06:06 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays? Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments. But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else. even though you see the exact same game being played? i doubt you'd even notice. the appeal of watching something live doesnt come from omg this is happening right now, it comes from everyone is watching this along with me and we are seeing the game unfold at the same time, which is why replay events are successful. The appeal of a live stream is that the events that you seeing are happening in real time, not from realizing that many other people are watching the same thing. If there was a very good game on a stream, would you enjoy it more if there were 1500 people watching than you would enjoy it if there were 1000 watching ? You would probably enjoy it the same, as you would enjoy the events and not the knowledge that more people are seeing the same thing. I am not sure how you form your opinions, but just look around the events around you. How many live entertainment events are in the world as opposed to recorded ones. The biggest and most important events in the world, the ones that attract the most viewers, are live, and this is not accidental. The appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. And these tournaments exist for the entertainment of the viewers and this is what should be given priority when taking a decision regarding the coverage. Is there actually a difference between watching the game live and watching a replay of a game played 10 minutes ago that NOBODY knows the results of? I think that streamers should at least delay the stream by 2-3 minutes if they are in the game streaming it live, but I don't know if that is actually possible.. T_T
I agree with Ancient.eu. It's a huge difference in watching a live game compared to a recorded game (even if it's 10minutes delayed). You know the game is over. You can't cheer or hope for a player do do something because it already happened!
Simply no hype/excitement at all in watching recorded games ...
No offense, but you probably don't understand this, since you're a player and you're more interested in analyzing the game, strategies etc. rather than cheering for a player. It's a job for you but it's entertainment for the majority.
Also the results can be spoiled so easily with the match history stats on bnet. I'm glad Blizzard did it this way. If we want eSports to grow then people must understand this: spectators are the priority over players! This means live games > recorded games.
As for the players cheating by watching the stream ... those who get in the final rounds of a tournament and get their matches streamed, will not risk their sc2 career for anything less than 5000$ so stop being paranoid please.
Pro players really need to understand that spectators are more important than them, if we want SC2 and tournament prizes to grow.
|
Whats the big difference of casting a game a few minutes after it is over and casting it right away? nothing with the exception of feeling important because you are in that game while they are playing. Bo3+ could easily be streamed just like it was live if players just had to send in the replay right after the game. We are talking about starcraft here and not football, it's not like in football the coaches are watching the live stream of the game and saying hey LOOK AT HIS PLAY BOOK!.
Lag is obvious, I don't know how some of you players can stand having 10+ obs in a match, even slight delays affect gameplay. Someone lags out? ok lag might settle down then, but you still had that 1 extra minute to think about whats going on in the game, or that 1 minute that throws you completly off your game.
Cheating is huge, and this is the one thing I don't like the most about live streams/obs. People have been cheating in sc since 98 to become well known/pro. It is sad that the integrity of players are low, but its just fact. I wouldn't call anyone out without 100% evidence and this is where the livestream/obs cheating is so benefical. Who can really know if your buddy(or streamer) is telling you important details. I've played a tourney game against someone i won't name, he had a buddy who wanted to obs and i figured he was a respectable person. After watching the replay it was pretty clear his buddy was talking to him, but wheres the proof? so I had to just let it slide and ignore it, but I won't be allowing random obs in any games if I decide to play sc2 at a higher level. I would think the sponsers of these tourney's would not want live stream either inless a 5 minute delay could be put on that stream. Smaller tourney's the prize pool might not seem big enough to be really picky about streaming, but these smaller tourney's give players a name where then they can have a shot at the big bucks and just quit cheating then.
You can't really say well if hes cheating he won't be able to compete with the pros because there are many pros who cheated got good then went to korea. I find allowing this to happen in a more fashionable way is just bad for e-sports in general.
|
On September 07 2010 06:43 Ancient.eu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 06:36 Killerbot wrote:On September 07 2010 06:34 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 06:25 drewbie.root wrote:On September 07 2010 06:21 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 06:10 Tropics wrote:On September 07 2010 06:06 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays? Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments. But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else. even though you see the exact same game being played? i doubt you'd even notice. the appeal of watching something live doesnt come from omg this is happening right now, it comes from everyone is watching this along with me and we are seeing the game unfold at the same time, which is why replay events are successful. The appeal of a live stream is that the events that you seeing are happening in real time, not from realizing that many other people are watching the same thing. If there was a very good game on a stream, would you enjoy it more if there were 1500 people watching than you would enjoy it if there were 1000 watching ? You would probably enjoy it the same, as you would enjoy the events and not the knowledge that more people are seeing the same thing. I am not sure how you form your opinions, but just look around the events around you. How many live entertainment events are in the world as opposed to recorded ones. The biggest and most important events in the world, the ones that attract the most viewers, are live, and this is not accidental. The appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. And these tournaments exist for the entertainment of the viewers and this is what should be given priority when taking a decision regarding the coverage. Is there actually a difference between watching the game live and watching a replay of a game played 10 minutes ago that NOBODY knows the results of? I think that streamers should at least delay the stream by 2-3 minutes if they are in the game streaming it live, but I don't know if that is actually possible.. T_T I have stated several times before what I consider the differences to be, you can see them in what you quoted. Would you prefer the final of a football/hokey cup to be recorded on the afternoon and streamed on the TV later in the night ? Would you enjoy it the same ? Like I have mentioned, the appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. Switching to casting replays will cause significant drops in the number of viewers. As a player, you should not prefer that, as it would in turn cause less tournaments to be organized and less money investments into the game. You cannot compare a sporting event to an esport event, I hate that they use that word as is. Because if you're watching a live sporting event, the casters or reporters arent causing the game to SLOW DOWN and causing missed opportunities because of their presence. Also you can't know exactly what an opponent is doing based on watching a live sporting event, but you can if you even JUST LISTEN to the live stream of casted games. You cannot compare things that are not similar at all and have none of the same properties. From the viewer's point of view, it's the same type of thing, it's entertainment. As a viewer, I am interested in enjoying the event, not in the mechanics of it. Dealing with the mechanics is the responsibility of the organizers. But, as the events are organized for the entertainment of the people, without the viewers, the events would not exist, it is normal that the entertainment of the viewers to be given priority.
Yes, they are for entertainment, and yes the mechanics are the responsibility of the organizer, however you are dealing with completely separate and far different events. One is easily casted live with no problem, but actually now most 'live' events have between a 5 and 10 second delay to allow possible bleeping or blurring of anything offensive.
And I'm sorry but I feel a minority of people would be that upset so as to never watch SC2 again if it went to a 15-20 minute delay between playing and casting. Most people would be unaware of the time difference unless told about it or have the ending ruined for them.
And you say that entertainment is better live, but every single show you watch, outside of a select few are completely taped, recorded, and later re-run. You're telling me you never watch re-runs of shows, since it wasn't live? Or you never look up the highlights or scores of sports games you miss simply because you couldn't see it live, to use your still weak analogy? If that were true Sportscenter would fail, no one would watch any TV re-runs, Hulu wouldn't exist. Oh and day9 wouldn't have 6k+ viewers a night.
This is a JOB for most players, they get paid handsomely, and even more if they win. To use another sports analogy to continue your analogy, if you went to a golf tournament and heckled a golfer, you would be beaten and dragged out of the tournament. If you ran onto the course or dropped balls to help a player, you would be beaten and dragged out of the tournament. But if you cause lag, which upsets a player just as much as heckling at golf, or you know your 'friend' is listening to your cast while he is playing in a game YOU are casting, and asked to cast, it's okay.
A delay would be perfect, but thats what a replay and then cast is, its a 15-20 minutes delay between the action and the cast of the action.
|
If nobody knows the results, then it is exactly the same as watching it live, you won't enjoy it less wtf thats crazy. Did anyone follow TSL2 in Broodwar? The games were played about 2 hours before the cast and then the replays were casted, nobody except the players knew the results, and nobody can say that it was less enjoyable than watching it live.
|
On September 07 2010 06:50 ReDDoG-TrEe wrote:
Whats the big difference of casting a game a few minutes after it is over and casting it right away? nothing with the exception of feeling important because you are in that game while they are playing. Bo3+ could easily be streamed just like it was live if players just had to send in the replay right after the game. We are talking about starcraft here and not football, it's not like in football the coaches are watching the live stream of the game and saying hey LOOK AT HIS PLAY BOOK!.
Lag is obvious, I don't know how some of you players can stand having 10+ obs in a match, even slight delays affect gameplay. Someone lags out? ok lag might settle down then, but you still had that 1 extra minute to think about whats going on in the game, or that 1 minute that throws you completly off your game.
Cheating is huge, and this is the one thing I don't like the most about live streams/obs. People have been cheating in sc since 98 to become well known/pro. It is sad that the integrity of players are low, but its just fact. I wouldn't call anyone out without 100% evidence and this is where the livestream/obs cheating is so benefical. Who can really know if your buddy(or streamer) is telling you important details. I've played a tourney game against someone i won't name, he had a buddy who wanted to obs and i figured he was a respectable person. After watching the replay it was pretty clear his buddy was talking to him, but wheres the proof? so I had to just let it slide and ignore it, but I won't be allowing random obs in any games if I decide to play sc2 at a higher level. I would think the sponsers of these tourney's would not want live stream either inless a 5 minute delay could be put on that stream. Smaller tourney's the prize pool might not seem big enough to be really picky about streaming, but these smaller tourney's give players a name where then they can have a shot at the big bucks and just quit cheating then.
You can't really say well if hes cheating he won't be able to compete with the pros because there are many pros who cheated got good then went to korea. I find allowing this to happen in a more fashionable way is just bad for e-sports in general.
I'm still unclear what you and other posters are proposing this would play out like if they want to cast a replay as soon as the game finishes...
"tourney cast starts"
filler for X minutes while game 1 finishes
game 1 casting for x minutes, game 2 starts but takes x+5 minutes to finish
game 1 cast finishes
5 minutes filler (keep in mind this 5 minutes is variable from 0 to 30min+ so hard to plan what to put in there)
game 2 cast starts, entire audience knows that the game takes x+5 minutes to finish (spoiler much?)
See the problem here? If you want to cast with replays it's going to have to be after the entire series is over, or complete random ordering - that is, game 1 of X v Y then game 1 of Z v M then game 2 of X v Y etc (which sounds dumb to me), or it's going to be after the entire series, which isn't entirely bad but it could pose major delay issues for tournaments already strapped for time.
|
On September 07 2010 06:46 cyclone25 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 06:25 drewbie.root wrote:On September 07 2010 06:21 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 06:10 Tropics wrote:On September 07 2010 06:06 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays? Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments. But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else. even though you see the exact same game being played? i doubt you'd even notice. the appeal of watching something live doesnt come from omg this is happening right now, it comes from everyone is watching this along with me and we are seeing the game unfold at the same time, which is why replay events are successful. The appeal of a live stream is that the events that you seeing are happening in real time, not from realizing that many other people are watching the same thing. If there was a very good game on a stream, would you enjoy it more if there were 1500 people watching than you would enjoy it if there were 1000 watching ? You would probably enjoy it the same, as you would enjoy the events and not the knowledge that more people are seeing the same thing. I am not sure how you form your opinions, but just look around the events around you. How many live entertainment events are in the world as opposed to recorded ones. The biggest and most important events in the world, the ones that attract the most viewers, are live, and this is not accidental. The appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. And these tournaments exist for the entertainment of the viewers and this is what should be given priority when taking a decision regarding the coverage. Is there actually a difference between watching the game live and watching a replay of a game played 10 minutes ago that NOBODY knows the results of? I think that streamers should at least delay the stream by 2-3 minutes if they are in the game streaming it live, but I don't know if that is actually possible.. T_T I agree with Ancient.eu. It's a huge difference in watching a live game compared to a recorded game (even if it's 10minutes delayed). You know the game is over. You can't cheer or hope for a player do do something because it already happened! Simply no hype/excitement at all in watching recorded games ... No offense, but you probably don't understand this, since you're a player and you're more interested in analyzing the game, strategies etc. rather than cheering for a player. It's a job for you but it's entertainment for the majority. Also the results can be spoiled so easily with the match history stats on bnet. I'm glad Blizzard did it this way. If we want eSports to grow then people must understand this: spectators are the priority over players! This means live games > recorded games. As for the players cheating by watching the stream ... those who get in the final rounds of a tournament and get their matches streamed, will not risk their sc2 career for anything less than 5000$ so stop being paranoid please. Pro players really need to understand that spectators are more important than them, if we want SC2 and tournament prizes to grow.
First, yes if you look up the result and know it then obviously you won't be as interested. But if you avoid the result and no one ruins it by limiting chat or some such thing you would be just as enthralled, and in truth would probably be none the wiser as to whether the game was live or recorded.
And you seriously overestimate peoples ability to gauge the consequences of their actions, not to mention I assure you people have listened to streams on ladder games, let alone a tournament game where money is on the line.
Spectators are very important, but the truth is the advertisers care more about people AT a specific event rather than watching it. And guess what, if an event is in your area, you can leave you house, brave that sun, and go watch it LIVE, but if it's not in your area, accept that it will be delayed 15-20 minutes, avoid learning a result, which is fairly easy, and watch the replay with excellent casting like HDH, Husky, Artosis, Tasteless, or Day9. And even then I honestly think that main casters are not HuK's main point, as they can be trusted and believed in. It's the 20 casters on TL that have to cast ESL or Gosucoaching and if they don't they whine about not being allowed to cast a game because they are lagging it. So you get full lobbies with 2 player, 1 admin, 2 pro casters, 1 video guy, and 9 amateur casters who are trying to get their stream featured or watched on TL just so they have someone to listen to their opinions.
|
How bout a poll in the op? - Replays with commentary is fine vs. GTFO it has to be live all the way or I don't feel a thing.
Personally, all that matters to me is that the commentator hasn't seen the game beforehand. I enjoy vods/replays with live commentary just as much as any live stream I've ever seen. In fact, being nervous about lag happening/stream dying/cheating going on makes live streams less enjoyable.
Edit: and obviously Blizzard have to implement some sort of private mode for replays of significant tournament matches, but I honestly don't see why they wouldn't.
|
Its seem pretty clear to me the way they need to go with streams and Huks right. Ideally you cast off replays after each game is played and how the streamers get those replays is up to the tournament admins to figure out.
You could either have 3-4 refs following the top players, sending in the replays or ask the players to do it themselves. And lets be realistic here, if you were to tell a top player that he has a choice of either sending in a replay or that he must have multiple casters in his game, I think he could find a way to comprise and get those replays in.
Cheating is going to become and issue and as it stands there's no way to prevent it. Certainly the players realize this and its time the admins and streamers accept it as well. You may not like the idea of casting off streams but its something I'm sure you'll get use to as well as the viewers.
|
On September 07 2010 06:59 BladeRunner wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 06:50 ReDDoG-TrEe wrote:
Whats the big difference of casting a game a few minutes after it is over and casting it right away? nothing with the exception of feeling important because you are in that game while they are playing. Bo3+ could easily be streamed just like it was live if players just had to send in the replay right after the game. We are talking about starcraft here and not football, it's not like in football the coaches are watching the live stream of the game and saying hey LOOK AT HIS PLAY BOOK!.
Lag is obvious, I don't know how some of you players can stand having 10+ obs in a match, even slight delays affect gameplay. Someone lags out? ok lag might settle down then, but you still had that 1 extra minute to think about whats going on in the game, or that 1 minute that throws you completly off your game.
Cheating is huge, and this is the one thing I don't like the most about live streams/obs. People have been cheating in sc since 98 to become well known/pro. It is sad that the integrity of players are low, but its just fact. I wouldn't call anyone out without 100% evidence and this is where the livestream/obs cheating is so benefical. Who can really know if your buddy(or streamer) is telling you important details. I've played a tourney game against someone i won't name, he had a buddy who wanted to obs and i figured he was a respectable person. After watching the replay it was pretty clear his buddy was talking to him, but wheres the proof? so I had to just let it slide and ignore it, but I won't be allowing random obs in any games if I decide to play sc2 at a higher level. I would think the sponsers of these tourney's would not want live stream either inless a 5 minute delay could be put on that stream. Smaller tourney's the prize pool might not seem big enough to be really picky about streaming, but these smaller tourney's give players a name where then they can have a shot at the big bucks and just quit cheating then.
You can't really say well if hes cheating he won't be able to compete with the pros because there are many pros who cheated got good then went to korea. I find allowing this to happen in a more fashionable way is just bad for e-sports in general.
I'm still unclear what you and other posters are proposing this would play out like if they want to cast a replay as soon as the game finishes... "tourney cast starts" filler for X minutes while game 1 finishes game 1 casting for x minutes, game 2 starts but takes x+5 minutes to finish game 1 cast finishes 5 minutes filler (keep in mind this 5 minutes is variable from 0 to 30min+ so hard to plan what to put in there) game 2 cast starts, entire audience knows that the game takes x+5 minutes to finish (spoiler much?) See the problem here? If you want to cast with replays it's going to have to be after the entire series is over, or complete random ordering - that is, game 1 of X v Y then game 1 of Z v M then game 2 of X v Y etc (which sounds dumb to me), or it's going to be after the entire series, which isn't entirely bad but it could pose major delay issues for tournaments already strapped for time.
They fill fairly easily at big tournaments, the good casters, become good at it, just like good radio announcers or tv announcers, bad casters need action to talk about because they have nothing interesting to talk about.
Second you're assuming that people sit there with a stopwatch and time how long the game lasts and then add in the filler and then compute them and figure out how long the second game lasted, and then count down that time to know when the end is coming, but that doesn't spoil shit. You can always pretty much tell when a game is coming to a head when you are watching it, so I don't know why knowing the exact time of the game would ruin anything besides your mind trying to keep track of all those timings.
|
On September 07 2010 06:44 debasers wrote:
put a delay at the streams, i think it could fix everything
On September 06 2010 18:06 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2010 17:38 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:
I ignored the cheating part because my stream is consistantly a good several minutes behind anyway. I've had people try to cheat off my stream in ladder games only to realize oh fuck it's behind and I'm not getting any useful information. I had one guy even tell me this straight up, cheating is easily solved by delaying the stream. games can be changed by an expo remaining hidden for the entire game, well over 5 minutes after its built. thats not a valid argument. its less dangerous than a normal live stream, its still bad.
|
I am not saying that method would be best at all, what I am saying is that livestreaming brings problems. If you could delay streams 5 minutes that would be good enough, but for some reason these sites don't offer that.
|
8748 Posts
On September 07 2010 06:46 cyclone25 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 06:25 drewbie.root wrote:On September 07 2010 06:21 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 06:10 Tropics wrote:On September 07 2010 06:06 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays? Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments. But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else. even though you see the exact same game being played? i doubt you'd even notice. the appeal of watching something live doesnt come from omg this is happening right now, it comes from everyone is watching this along with me and we are seeing the game unfold at the same time, which is why replay events are successful. The appeal of a live stream is that the events that you seeing are happening in real time, not from realizing that many other people are watching the same thing. If there was a very good game on a stream, would you enjoy it more if there were 1500 people watching than you would enjoy it if there were 1000 watching ? You would probably enjoy it the same, as you would enjoy the events and not the knowledge that more people are seeing the same thing. I am not sure how you form your opinions, but just look around the events around you. How many live entertainment events are in the world as opposed to recorded ones. The biggest and most important events in the world, the ones that attract the most viewers, are live, and this is not accidental. The appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. And these tournaments exist for the entertainment of the viewers and this is what should be given priority when taking a decision regarding the coverage. Is there actually a difference between watching the game live and watching a replay of a game played 10 minutes ago that NOBODY knows the results of? I think that streamers should at least delay the stream by 2-3 minutes if they are in the game streaming it live, but I don't know if that is actually possible.. T_T I agree with Ancient.eu. It's a huge difference in watching a live game compared to a recorded game (even if it's 10minutes delayed). You know the game is over. You can't cheer or hope for a player do do something because it already happened! Simply no hype/excitement at all in watching recorded games ... No offense, but you probably don't understand this, since you're a player and you're more interested in analyzing the game, strategies etc. rather than cheering for a player. It's a job for you but it's entertainment for the majority. Also the results can be spoiled so easily with the match history stats on bnet. I'm glad Blizzard did it this way. If we want eSports to grow then people must understand this: spectators are the priority over players! This means live games > recorded games. As for the players cheating by watching the stream ... those who get in the final rounds of a tournament and get their matches streamed, will not risk their sc2 career for anything less than 5000$ so stop being paranoid please. Pro players really need to understand that spectators are more important than them, if we want SC2 and tournament prizes to grow.
The facts are absolutely against you as big events have already successfully generated tons of hype and excitement when casting replays of games that were played days earlier. TSL, HDH, KotB.
There are some sacrifices that players need to make in order to put on a better show. They have to do interviews and they have to adhere to schedules and they have to agree to some ridiculous rules and play maps they don't want to play. There's a ton of shit that players are already doing. But not everything should be sacrificed for the good of the show. And hopefully spectators have enough respect for the integrity of the competition that they wouldn't even want players to sacrifice a stable playing experience or anti-cheating measures since a competition that sacrifices those things is not a great competition to watch. The players entertain primarily by playing the game better than anyone else. Tournament admins should do nothing to compromise that. Spectators should be outraged when a tournament isn't doing everything it can (within reason) to get the best performances out of its players.
And lolol drewbie can't understand about the excitement of watching something live but you know the exact dollar amount that a player would risk cheating. Yeahhhh you offer some great perspective!
|
What the hell is this argument about "livestream feeling", this is absolutely nothing compared to lag / cheating. You're trying to tell me, you'd prefer a cheated live game than a fair replay? Every caster should switch completely to replays, it has tons and tons of advantages and if everyone is comfortable with this system, than it won't be that much of a hassle with the replays anymore (or just give them penalty point if they mess it up).
|
even a 10 minute old game is not as cool as watching a live game, it's the atmosphere, even for nerds on their computers
|
Its just something some people have so ingrained in their head, that they must watch it live or they can't watch it all. Just like everything in life though they'll get use to it, that is watching streamed replays.
|
Okay, I'm still hoping for a pro to answer whether they'll be happy if:
A.) We develop a tool which allows a cast to be delayed by an x amount of minutes.
B.) Allow only a proven caster and co-caster to observe the game live. Just like you won't get unknown players invite to a pro tournament, it's only natural that big tournaments rely on pro casters.
These conditions would lead to
A.) Pretty much making sure that people can't use the stream to cheat.
B.) Pretty much making sure that there will be no lag (no one is immune to that 100%).
|
On September 07 2010 05:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Ugh this thread is the biggest repeat ever.
Person 1: "Hey just use replays"
Person 2: "Dude there is a problem with spoilers and players not sending in replays, plus you will get less viewers with replays than live"
Person 1: "Oh just add a delay"
Person 2: "That's alot of $ and really not feasible."
Person 1: "Oh, well than idk"
Person 3: "Just use replays..."
Until something new comes up in this thread I am withdrawing. There is issues on both sides and there is no right answer. Blizzard could make a fix for this but will not because it's blizzard and having 2 sweet ass computers just to run a stream is also not feasible.
This thread has passed the spam horizon - the people who read the thread are still stuck reading the posts so the only people posting are ones that haven't read it.
|
On September 07 2010 07:13 Sernen wrote:
Its just something some people have so ingrained in their head, that they must watch it live or they can't watch it all. Just like everything in life though they'll get use to it, that is watching streamed replays.
In England if you asked someone this question:
"Would you rather watch Manchester United v Chelsea live or would you watch the highlights on Match of the Day tomorrow?" I'm pretty sure a clear majority would watch the match live. It's part of the glamour: if it's happening live you're part of it.
I'm a Manchester United supporter (ish, I support Cardiff now that I live in Cardiff) but I watched the 1999 Champion's League final between Manchester United and Bayern Munich where Manchester United score two goals in the dying minutes of the game. I can say, forever, that I was part of the amazing moment. It's similar to when a new television series airs: you watch the first viewing, you don't watch a repeat, which is also similar to watching a movie. I will put my hand up and say I am going to be seeing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 1) on the 19th November. It's a special feeling.
Again, it comes down to "LIVE IS LIVE AT THAT TIME." I want to stab people who think Glastonbury festival, Reading and Leads festival, Radio 1's Ibiza festival, Radio 1's Big Weekend etc etc are "easily replaceable with BBC television." Being among a crowd of tens of thousands is momentous, it's awesome.
|
On September 07 2010 07:09 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 06:46 cyclone25 wrote:On September 07 2010 06:25 drewbie.root wrote:On September 07 2010 06:21 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 06:10 Tropics wrote:On September 07 2010 06:06 Ancient.eu wrote:On September 07 2010 05:53 Mohdoo wrote:On September 07 2010 05:51 Ancient.eu wrote:
I strongly prefer live games. They have a unique feeling, an empathy connection between the games and the audience. As a spectator, you live the events of the games as they happen in real time and this feeling is the beauty of a live transmission.
If people just started streaming replays, I would stop watching most of the events that I am watching now. I would probably just limit my time to the big events only. Did you watch HDH Invitational? The Day9 tournament? KOTB? Those were among the most successful tournaments to date. You chose not to watch them because they were replays? Like I have mentioned, I would probably limit my time to the big events only. I have followed the HDH and the KotB tournaments but they were the 2 biggest beta tournaments. But I would not watch daily streams and weekly tournaments with replays being casted. I just don't enjoy them and would just spend my time doing something else. even though you see the exact same game being played? i doubt you'd even notice. the appeal of watching something live doesnt come from omg this is happening right now, it comes from everyone is watching this along with me and we are seeing the game unfold at the same time, which is why replay events are successful. The appeal of a live stream is that the events that you seeing are happening in real time, not from realizing that many other people are watching the same thing. If there was a very good game on a stream, would you enjoy it more if there were 1500 people watching than you would enjoy it if there were 1000 watching ? You would probably enjoy it the same, as you would enjoy the events and not the knowledge that more people are seeing the same thing. I am not sure how you form your opinions, but just look around the events around you. How many live entertainment events are in the world as opposed to recorded ones. The biggest and most important events in the world, the ones that attract the most viewers, are live, and this is not accidental. The appeal of a live event is much greater than the appeal of a recorded one. And these tournaments exist for the entertainment of the viewers and this is what should be given priority when taking a decision regarding the coverage. Is there actually a difference between watching the game live and watching a replay of a game played 10 minutes ago that NOBODY knows the results of? I think that streamers should at least delay the stream by 2-3 minutes if they are in the game streaming it live, but I don't know if that is actually possible.. T_T I agree with Ancient.eu. It's a huge difference in watching a live game compared to a recorded game (even if it's 10minutes delayed). You know the game is over. You can't cheer or hope for a player do do something because it already happened! Simply no hype/excitement at all in watching recorded games ... No offense, but you probably don't understand this, since you're a player and you're more interested in analyzing the game, strategies etc. rather than cheering for a player. It's a job for you but it's entertainment for the majority. Also the results can be spoiled so easily with the match history stats on bnet. I'm glad Blizzard did it this way. If we want eSports to grow then people must understand this: spectators are the priority over players! This means live games > recorded games. As for the players cheating by watching the stream ... those who get in the final rounds of a tournament and get their matches streamed, will not risk their sc2 career for anything less than 5000$ so stop being paranoid please. Pro players really need to understand that spectators are more important than them, if we want SC2 and tournament prizes to grow. The facts are absolutely against you as big events have already successfully generated tons of hype and excitement when casting replays of games that were played days earlier. TSL, HDH, KotB. There are some sacrifices that players need to make in order to put on a better show. They have to do interviews and they have to adhere to schedules and they have to agree to some ridiculous rules and play maps they don't want to play. There's a ton of shit that players are already doing. But not everything should be sacrificed for the good of the show. And hopefully spectators have enough respect for the integrity of the competition that they wouldn't even want players to sacrifice a stable playing experience or anti-cheating measures since a competition that sacrifices those things is not a great competition to watch. The players entertain primarily by playing the game better than anyone else. Tournament admins should do nothing to compromise that. Spectators should be outraged when a tournament isn't doing everything it can (within reason) to get the best performances out of its players. And lolol drewbie can't understand about the excitement of watching something live but you know the exact dollar amount that a player would risk cheating. Yeahhhh you offer some great perspective!
QFT. Thank you Tyler for putting it better than my words would allow. It's about the precision and expertise of the players, they are what make you watch, not that it's live, who would watch bronze players live over the best of the best recorded.
Do what you can to make the players happy, keep the casters happy (in that no ONE gets an exclusive) and if that is all well and good, people will watch, for the OPPORTUNITY to watch some of the best of the best at what they do. If you can't handle that it's not live, don't watch, I promise you that there are more than enough people out there that can understand HuK and others, including IdRAGE's opinions.
I'll take well casted, completely legit, replays over poorly casted by 15 people, some questionable live streams.
|
To be honest it's stupid we even have to have this discussion. This is supposed to be the best competitive game ever, yet Blizzard have done nothing to help with content delivery of pro games.
A HLTV equivalent with a 10 minute delay and adding no additional strain to the players connection is completely possible, and I can't imagine adding a live, good quality VOIP service in game on top of that to be too difficult.
A short term solution is needed, but long term this shit needs fixing and that's on Blizzard.
|
On September 07 2010 06:53 Killerbot wrote:
Yes, they are for entertainment, and yes the mechanics are the responsibility of the organizer, however you are dealing with completely separate and far different events. One is easily casted live with no problem, but actually now most 'live' events have between a 5 and 10 second delay to allow possible bleeping or blurring of anything offensive.
A delay with the stream would be acceptable, but there is a very big difference between casting with a delay and casting a replay.
On September 07 2010 06:53 Killerbot wrote:
And I'm sorry but I feel a minority of people would be that upset so as to never watch SC2 again if it went to a 15-20 minute delay between playing and casting. Most people would be unaware of the time difference unless told about it or have the ending ruined for them.
I have never said that people would be upset as to never watch Starcraft 2 again. Don't exaggerate your impressions, just take them as they are. What I have said is that people would enjoy recorded events less and that the number of viewers would drop, especially for the small and medium events.
On September 07 2010 06:53 Killerbot wrote:
And you say that entertainment is better live, but every single show you watch, outside of a select few are completely taped, recorded, and later re-run. You're telling me you never watch re-runs of shows, since it wasn't live? Or you never look up the highlights or scores of sports games you miss simply because you couldn't see it live, to use your still weak analogy? If that were true Sportscenter would fail, no one would watch any TV re-runs, Hulu wouldn't exist. Oh and day9 wouldn't have 6k+ viewers a night.
I did not said that entertainment is better live. Please don't presume things that I have not said. There are different types of entertainment, each having different types of audience appeal. A movie, for example, has more audience appeal as a recorded form of entertainment. A sporting event, on the other hand, has more appeal as a live event rather than as a recording.
I have never said that I do not watch re-runs of shows, I have never said that I do not look up highlights or score, where are you getting all of these from ?
You should limit your impressions to what I have actually said, not include your own ideas and say that they are mine.
On September 07 2010 06:53 Killerbot wrote:
This is a JOB for most players, they get paid handsomely, and even more if they win. To use another sports analogy to continue your analogy, if you went to a golf tournament and heckled a golfer, you would be beaten and dragged out of the tournament. If you ran onto the course or dropped balls to help a player, you would be beaten and dragged out of the tournament. But if you cause lag, which upsets a player just as much as heckling at golf, or you know your 'friend' is listening to your cast while he is playing in a game YOU are casting, and asked to cast, it's okay.
First of all, your oder of ideas in that paragraph is hard to follow. You could use some ordering into your form of expression.
I will give you an example. In tennis, it is prohibited for a player to have contact with his trainer. But, his trainer is allowed to sit in the audience and therefore they can develop a secret form of communicating, thus cheating.
What would be your solution for this ? Don't allow people to watch tennis games on stadiums because there is the possibility for a player to cheat ? Play games with empty stadiums and later stream the games ?
Do they do that ? No, they do not. They let trainers in the audience because the entertainment of the viewers is more important that the possible cheating.
|
On September 07 2010 07:16 Cranberries wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 07:13 Sernen wrote:
Its just something some people have so ingrained in their head, that they must watch it live or they can't watch it all. Just like everything in life though they'll get use to it, that is watching streamed replays. In England if you asked someone this question: "Would you rather watch Manchester United v Chelsea live or would you watch the highlights on Match of the Day tomorrow?" I'm pretty sure a clear majority would watch the match live. It's part of the glamour: if it's happening live you're part of it. I'm a Manchester United supporter (ish, I support Cardiff now that I live in Cardiff) but I watched the 1999 Champion's League final between Manchester United and Bayern Munich where Manchester United score two goals in the dying minutes of the game. I can say, forever, that I was part of the amazing moment. It's similar to when a new television series airs: you watch the first viewing, you don't watch a repeat, which is also similar to watching a movie. I will put my hand up and say I am going to be seeing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 1) on the 19th November. It's a special feeling.
Okay you're watching the game and just as they go to score the second goal in the 90th minute to win the game, a fan jumps onto the field grabs the ball and runs away. Guess what? That ONE person just ruined the entire live experience. (LAG)
Or better, you saw the game but found out 2 days later that Man U cheated in order to win that game in the final minutes, they could see exactly what all the Bayern players were going to do, before they did it, would you still think it was such an awesome victory to see live knowing that it was completely hollow and false victory. (CHEATING)
|
On September 07 2010 07:20 Killerbot wrote:
Or better, you saw the game but found out 2 days later that Man U cheated in order to win that game in the final minutes, they could see exactly what all the Bayern players were going to do, before they did it, would you still think it was such an awesome victory to see live knowing that it was completely hollow and false victory. (CHEATING)
To be fair Manchester United were incredibly lucky in their win, didn't change the fact that Britain once again proved it's superiority over something German. :3
|
huk for president
start cast replays of top8 in tours and allowing casters outside of top8 in brackets players should be able to decline casters
i bet theres been tons of underground newbs cheating with streams already, hell even top gamers cheat just look at sc1 with tsl.....
HDH and king of the beta most successful so far and they casted replays, organizers of these tours are brilliant, everyone should do this
|
Watching great players LIVE is definitely a greater sensation, you are part of a crowd, you are there perhaps seeing history being made. Being part of a crowd where there are people cheering on whomever they are a fan of, reacting to whats going on in the game is just something totally different than you sitting alone.
So what do we need? Some delay on the stream with a minute or 2. We need Blizzard to fix the lag problems. Its not hard, its just a lot of work, (I would guess 2 programers 3 weeks + 3 more weeks and fixes with additional people testing and looking for bugs). The spectators should not be affecting the lag between the 2 players at all. It is just silly. Blizzard needs to step up and make this a sport that can be as spectacular as it should be.
Its up to you and me to write to blizzard and explain what we need and im sure they will give it to us once they realize there is demands.
|
The integrity of matches have to be addressed here. 1 cheating player ruins a whole tournament in my opinion.
The huge venues have players show up at a center location and play in proboxes for more than a few reasons and it solves so many issues, plus satisfying everyone at the same time.
There are solutions for what Huk has addressed. Question is, will Blizzard see/read/contribute to this thread?
I have posted my thoughts for solutions earlier. Again please stay on topic and drop the personal attacks.
|
On September 07 2010 07:20 Killerbot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 07:16 Cranberries wrote:On September 07 2010 07:13 Sernen wrote:
Its just something some people have so ingrained in their head, that they must watch it live or they can't watch it all. Just like everything in life though they'll get use to it, that is watching streamed replays. In England if you asked someone this question: "Would you rather watch Manchester United v Chelsea live or would you watch the highlights on Match of the Day tomorrow?" I'm pretty sure a clear majority would watch the match live. It's part of the glamour: if it's happening live you're part of it. I'm a Manchester United supporter (ish, I support Cardiff now that I live in Cardiff) but I watched the 1999 Champion's League final between Manchester United and Bayern Munich where Manchester United score two goals in the dying minutes of the game. I can say, forever, that I was part of the amazing moment. It's similar to when a new television series airs: you watch the first viewing, you don't watch a repeat, which is also similar to watching a movie. I will put my hand up and say I am going to be seeing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 1) on the 19th November. It's a special feeling. Okay you're watching the game and just as they go to score the second goal in the 90th minute to win the game, a fan jumps onto the field grabs the ball and runs away. Guess what? That ONE person just ruined the entire live experience. (LAG) Or better, you saw the game but found out 2 days later that Man U cheated in order to win that game in the final minutes, they could see exactly what all the Bayern players were going to do, before they did it, would you still think it was such an awesome victory to see live knowing that it was completely hollow and false victory. (CHEATING)
This is ridiculous haha. So you suggest spectators should be forbidden on a live match?
Also lol at players cheating by knowing what their opponents will do. Did you ever saw a football game? You know how this game is played?
Sorry but your logic is terrible.
|
On September 07 2010 07:16 Cranberries wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 07:13 Sernen wrote:
Its just something some people have so ingrained in their head, that they must watch it live or they can't watch it all. Just like everything in life though they'll get use to it, that is watching streamed replays. In England if you asked someone this question: "Would you rather watch Manchester United v Chelsea live or would you watch the highlights on Match of the Day tomorrow?" I'm pretty sure a clear majority would watch the match live. It's part of the glamour: if it's happening live you're part of it.
You can't ignore the other issues involved though. If it was simply between live and delayed of course everyone would want to watch it live. But the moment you add the very real chances of cheating and lag problems, it doesn't become quite as simple.
And although it's a extremely small sample, the poll on page 25 sides with replays over live due to the above issues.
|
Blizzard wont change their stance. Blizzard doesn't have a stance on this.
HuK is suggesting communism, Blizzard isn't communist. (Albeit their war on trolling and silencing of any negative feedback continues to rage on)
|
On September 07 2010 05:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Ugh this thread is the biggest repeat ever.
1) Huk: "Hey just use replays"
2) Caster/Tour Admin: "Dude there is a problem with spoilers and players not sending in replays, plus you will get less viewers with replays than live"
3) Random TL Viewer: "Oh just add a delay"
4) Caster: "That's alot of $ and really not feasible."
5) Random TL Viewer: "Oh, well than idk"
6) Random Top Player: "Just use replays... theres no problems"
7) Random dogpile of people agreeing with the new top player posting
8)New Caster jumps in and says this is not a viable business model for 90% of tournaments
Repeat steps 3-8
Fixed that for you, basically the thread in a nutshell. Players are biased, casters/admins are biased tired of repeating myself saying that both parties need to make accommodations for each other seeing as nobody is really listening.
|
On September 07 2010 07:39 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Ugh this thread is the biggest repeat ever.
1) Huk: "Hey just use replays"
2) Caster/Tour Admin: "Dude there is a problem with spoilers and players not sending in replays, plus you will get less viewers with replays than live"
3) Random TL Viewer: "Oh just add a delay"
4) Caster: "That's alot of $ and really not feasible."
5) Random TL Viewer: "Oh, well than idk"
6) Random Top Player: "Just use replays... theres no problems"
7) Random dogpile of people agreeing with the new top player posting
8)New Caster jumps in and says this is not a viable business model for 90% of tournaments
Repeat steps 3-8
Fixed that for you, basically the thread in a nutshell. Players are biased, casters/admins are biased tired of repeating myself saying that both parties need to make accommodations for each other seeing as nobody is really listening.
I lol'd sir. Well played
|
I fully expected this to be some new tournament or something where players would go against casters, or some sort of 2v2 format. Maybe you can just have a huge tourney for casters, whoever wins gets to cast. To add insult to injury, you can spam them during the tourney and stuff.
But yeah, it is pretty ridiculous with the current situation.
|
Players > viewers 100%!!!!
Obviously best tournament format is LAN / live casted (GSL, MLG etc).
Online tournaments should all be replay casted as stated by the people that make it all happen (huk, tyler , morrow, idra, 99% of all progamers I am sure). Some1 get a poll running to see the actual numbers but I think most people would back the progamers here....
The only reason I wrote this is when I saw the retarded chat reaction to HuK requesting the game to be caster / observer free during the recent gosucup and even casters were like " Well its a live game HuK just has to deal with it". Seriously? get your heads out of your behinds!!!! Without players your cups/ tourns would not be happening!!!
|
I'll voice my opinion for live streaming being the way to go for the majority of tournaments. We should work on improving that process for the players, the casters and the fans, but keep it live (or a few minute delay). Overall I find myself agreeing with the viewpoints of posters like Ancient.eu and iCCup.Diamond, so I won't repeat all of that.
Something else to consider that I haven't seen mentioned, is that the people that post here aren't necessarily a representative sample of the people that watch SC2 tournaments.
|
On September 07 2010 07:35 cyclone25 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 07:20 Killerbot wrote:On September 07 2010 07:16 Cranberries wrote:On September 07 2010 07:13 Sernen wrote:
Its just something some people have so ingrained in their head, that they must watch it live or they can't watch it all. Just like everything in life though they'll get use to it, that is watching streamed replays. In England if you asked someone this question: "Would you rather watch Manchester United v Chelsea live or would you watch the highlights on Match of the Day tomorrow?" I'm pretty sure a clear majority would watch the match live. It's part of the glamour: if it's happening live you're part of it. I'm a Manchester United supporter (ish, I support Cardiff now that I live in Cardiff) but I watched the 1999 Champion's League final between Manchester United and Bayern Munich where Manchester United score two goals in the dying minutes of the game. I can say, forever, that I was part of the amazing moment. It's similar to when a new television series airs: you watch the first viewing, you don't watch a repeat, which is also similar to watching a movie. I will put my hand up and say I am going to be seeing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 1) on the 19th November. It's a special feeling. Okay you're watching the game and just as they go to score the second goal in the 90th minute to win the game, a fan jumps onto the field grabs the ball and runs away. Guess what? That ONE person just ruined the entire live experience. (LAG) Or better, you saw the game but found out 2 days later that Man U cheated in order to win that game in the final minutes, they could see exactly what all the Bayern players were going to do, before they did it, would you still think it was such an awesome victory to see live knowing that it was completely hollow and false victory. (CHEATING) This is ridiculous haha. So you suggest spectators should be forbidden on a live match? Also lol at players cheating by knowing what their opponents will do. Did you ever saw a football game? You know how this game is played? Sorry but your logic is terrible.
Well first I'm just showing the stupid nature of using a FOOTBALL match to compare to a video game cast. You are the one who started the analogy, I'm taking your analogy and using it's piss poor starting position to try and explain to someone as dim as you what it is similar to in a professional video game sense.
Yes I know how soccer (thats what we call it) is played, and yes I understand that my logic may seem flawed but yours is even worse for starting a comparison between watching a football game live on TV and watching a video game live on a stream versus slightly delayed/recorded on a stream.
Oh and if every 1 out of 5 spectators did that to a football game, they would remove them (cite Italian soccer body BANNING spectators following guess what? A RIOT THAT DISRUPTED THE GAME).
Take your sports analogies and forget them, they don't apply.
Just to cite about the Italian Ban
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/soccer/europe/2007-02-07-italy-violence-stadiums_x.htm
Guess what disruptive behavior, such as lagging in a esport event is similar (not saying equal or anything) to starting a freaking riot in the stands.
|
Why not compromise.
Have them play send replay. The Show that replay and stream it while casting.. Then just do the 2nd game after the first is done... Never any delay inbetween and it be pretty nice.
|
The casters are too set in their ways, funny how they say nothing is being accomplished well obviously not when you pretty much demand to cast live or else.
|
United States22883 Posts
On September 07 2010 07:48 Sernen wrote:
The casters are too set in their ways, funny how they say nothing is being accomplished
I feel the same way while watching most of their casts.
Just imagine, without live casting, it'd take 5 or more minutes to hear about some exciting 6 pool going on. That's just unacceptable!
|
Not to poke the bear but they didn't even realize it was a 6 pool until after the match anyways..
|
One must also mention that live events are generally timed so that the entire world, within reason, can watch the event live. Watching Day9's KotB at 3-4am BST wasn't my idea of "fun".
|
United States22883 Posts
You should probably get used to it if you plan on following top tier BW/SC2 seriously.
|
On September 07 2010 07:36 Cranberries wrote:
Blizzard wont change their stance. Blizzard doesn't have a stance on this.
HuK is suggesting communism, Blizzard isn't communist. (Albeit their war on trolling and silencing of any negative feedback continues to rage on)
lol wut
|
On September 07 2010 07:36 Cranberries wrote:
Blizzard wont change their stance. Blizzard doesn't have a stance on this.
HuK is suggesting communism, Blizzard isn't communist. (Albeit their war on trolling and silencing of any negative feedback continues to rage on)
Communism?
Just wow.
Dang beat me to it korea.
|
On September 07 2010 07:56 Jibba wrote:
You should probably get used to it if you plan on following top tier BW/SC2 seriously.
Well I can tune into GSL from 10am BST (which is very good, forces me to get up early too) and most US tournaments run from 19:00 to 23:00 or 01:00 BST which is timed brilliantly, except when there are good BBC programs being aired (Waterloo Road <3). No tournaments are going to start at 19:00 [random US timezone] or later, because it's too late for EU players/too early for Korean players.
|
On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that
Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdf
Let me point out in particular
4.10 Demos and Replays
All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel
Extreme Masters administration.
7.5.2 Demos
All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament.
Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played.
You were saying?
|
On September 07 2010 07:54 Cranberries wrote:One must also mention that live events are generally timed so that the entire world, within reason, can watch the event live. Watching Day9's KotB at 3-4am BST wasn't my idea of "fun".
Uh, no... GSL is being cast at 2-5AM PST / 5-8AM EST so the Americas are having to be up in the middle of the night just like you did for Day9's KotB.
|
On September 07 2010 08:04 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdfLet me point out in particular 4.10 Demos and Replays All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel Extreme Masters administration. 7.5.2 Demos All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament. Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played. You were saying?
To quote your own post Raelcun and HuK's he says that the ADMINS took care of the replays, which I think is completely acceptable, why should the player HAVE to be responsible for replays when you can just as easily have 1 admin in the game and he can post replays. Or after a match you can have an admin pop on a player's comp while the user is deciding next map.
The players have plenty of stress and things going on in their heads already to have to also be thinking about saving and uploading replays, the solution is to have 1(ONE) and only 1 admin in the game, with no casting and he immediately gives the replay to the appropriate casters or in a live LAN event to have an admin pop on the winner's comp and upload the replay while the loser picks map.
Those IEM rules obviously are ignored in live events, as I will take HuK's word over the IEM rulebook.
|
the replay route is the best way to go
the people complaining that it'll lose ~*The Magic*~ or ~*The Hype*~ because they don't get instant gratification and instead get gratification 5 minutes later are dumb and shouldn't even be paid attention to
almost every competition, game show, whatever on TV is taped - does that stop the hype? not really. not everything is afforded the luxury of being live, and when it starts jeopardizing the legitimacy of tournament results then god damn just go to replays its simple
|
On September 07 2010 08:10 Killerbot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:04 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdfLet me point out in particular 4.10 Demos and Replays All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel Extreme Masters administration. 7.5.2 Demos All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament. Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played. You were saying? To quote your own post Raelcun and HuK's he says that the ADMINS took care of the replays, which I think is completely acceptable, why should the player HAVE to be responsible for replays when you can just as easily have 1 admin in the game and he can post replays. Or after a match you can have an admin pop on a player's comp while the user is deciding next map. The players have plenty of stress and things going on in their heads already to have to also be thinking about saving and uploading replays, the solution is to have 1(ONE) and only 1 admin in the game, with no casting and he immediately gives the replay to the appropriate casters or in a live LAN event to have an admin pop on the winner's comp and upload the replay while the loser picks map. Those IEM rules obviously are ignored in live events, as I will take HuK's word over the IEM rulebook.
You would need 512 admins.
It's easier if the player does it, if he's too lazy that's probably why live streaming exists.
|
On September 07 2010 08:04 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdfLet me point out in particular 4.10 Demos and Replays All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel Extreme Masters administration. 7.5.2 Demos All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament. Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played. You were saying?
you can have one admin watching the game, so players don't need to send the replay and then casters can cast from replays. I don't thin one single person obs'ing will make it laggy
|
On September 07 2010 07:39 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 05:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Ugh this thread is the biggest repeat ever.
1) Huk: "Hey just use replays"
2) Caster/Tour Admin: "Dude there is a problem with spoilers and players not sending in replays, plus you will get less viewers with replays than live"
3) Random TL Viewer: "Oh just add a delay"
4) Caster: "That's alot of $ and really not feasible."
5) Random TL Viewer: "Oh, well than idk"
6) Random Top Player: "Just use replays... theres no problems"
7) Random dogpile of people agreeing with the new top player posting
8)New Caster jumps in and says this is not a viable business model for 90% of tournaments
Repeat steps 3-8
Fixed that for you, basically the thread in a nutshell. Players are biased, casters/admins are biased tired of repeating myself saying that both parties need to make accommodations for each other seeing as nobody is really listening.
Wrong. Players aren't biased. They just don't want lag and potential cheating to interfere with the gameplay.
As top players they are committed to showing the best games they possibly can, and lag / cheating to interfere with intricate strategy and the integrity of the e-sprots.
The bottom line is: players are the stars, ultimately they are what attracts viewers and they are right in this case.
|
ESL admins usually handle the replays even though it says that players should send them in immediately. And HuK did say "the admins took care of it" which is standard ESL thing to do. So even though he didn't know the rule, it's fin in this case.
|
On September 07 2010 07:40 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 07:39 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 05:12 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
Ugh this thread is the biggest repeat ever.
1) Huk: "Hey just use replays"
2) Caster/Tour Admin: "Dude there is a problem with spoilers and players not sending in replays, plus you will get less viewers with replays than live"
3) Random TL Viewer: "Oh just add a delay"
4) Caster: "That's alot of $ and really not feasible."
5) Random TL Viewer: "Oh, well than idk"
6) Random Top Player: "Just use replays... theres no problems"
7) Random dogpile of people agreeing with the new top player posting
8)New Caster jumps in and says this is not a viable business model for 90% of tournaments
Repeat steps 3-8
Fixed that for you, basically the thread in a nutshell. Players are biased, casters/admins are biased tired of repeating myself saying that both parties need to make accommodations for each other seeing as nobody is really listening. I lol'd sir. Well played
Out of all this unproductive circular discussion, I would love to see some entrepreneurial types come up with a tournament web service that automated all this junk.
+ Tournament coordinators can create a new tournament on the website.
+ Players can register with the website for tournaments that they are interested in participating.
+ Coordinators input times that each round should be completed and the website automatically enforces those time constraints.
+ The website requires that players upload replays of the matches to complete their rounds. The website parses the replays and validates the results, automatically updating the brackets.
+ The website also automatically makes the replays available to the casters (in general, to a pre-selected set of folk, to the public as a whole, or kept private) as they become available by the players.
Automated tournament services like this would help put this debate to rest. And it would also be a huge boon for the competitive sc2 scene as it will remove a significant portion of the barrier to entry to hosting an online tournament. I was hoping this would be a battle.net feature to-be-implemented, but in lieu of that, all the technology is available now for it to be a reality.
|
8748 Posts
On September 07 2010 08:04 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdfLet me point out in particular 4.10 Demos and Replays All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel Extreme Masters administration. 7.5.2 Demos All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament. Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played. You were saying?
This is ridiculous man. Have you been involved in events like that? There are admins/refs overseeing the players, telling them what to do. It's basically like "ok you can sit here now and get ready to play. ok you can play. ok you're done, go do this interview and take your gear off this PC". While the admins may have written a player rulebook saying players are responsible for uploading replays, no reasonable admin will tell a player to do something else and then hold the player responsible for not uploading reps.
|
8748 Posts
On September 07 2010 08:11 Cranberries wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:10 Killerbot wrote:On September 07 2010 08:04 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdfLet me point out in particular 4.10 Demos and Replays All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel Extreme Masters administration. 7.5.2 Demos All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament. Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played. You were saying? To quote your own post Raelcun and HuK's he says that the ADMINS took care of the replays, which I think is completely acceptable, why should the player HAVE to be responsible for replays when you can just as easily have 1 admin in the game and he can post replays. Or after a match you can have an admin pop on a player's comp while the user is deciding next map. The players have plenty of stress and things going on in their heads already to have to also be thinking about saving and uploading replays, the solution is to have 1(ONE) and only 1 admin in the game, with no casting and he immediately gives the replay to the appropriate casters or in a live LAN event to have an admin pop on the winner's comp and upload the replay while the loser picks map. Those IEM rules obviously are ignored in live events, as I will take HuK's word over the IEM rulebook. You would need 512 admins. It's easier if the player does it, if he's too lazy that's probably why live streaming exists.
wtf you realize we're talking about an event where all the players, admins and casters are in the same room?
|
If you want Esports to be respected u need to respect the viewers and spectactors not just the players. Obviously players get alot of respect and are always going to get the best treatment possible, but you'll never hear a hockey player in the NHL complaining about TV timeouts, if you want to make money playing, you need to have fans. suck it up
|
On September 07 2010 08:11 Cranberries wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:10 Killerbot wrote:On September 07 2010 08:04 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdfLet me point out in particular 4.10 Demos and Replays All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel Extreme Masters administration. 7.5.2 Demos All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament. Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played. You were saying? To quote your own post Raelcun and HuK's he says that the ADMINS took care of the replays, which I think is completely acceptable, why should the player HAVE to be responsible for replays when you can just as easily have 1 admin in the game and he can post replays. Or after a match you can have an admin pop on a player's comp while the user is deciding next map. The players have plenty of stress and things going on in their heads already to have to also be thinking about saving and uploading replays, the solution is to have 1(ONE) and only 1 admin in the game, with no casting and he immediately gives the replay to the appropriate casters or in a live LAN event to have an admin pop on the winner's comp and upload the replay while the loser picks map. Those IEM rules obviously are ignored in live events, as I will take HuK's word over the IEM rulebook. You would need 512 admins. It's easier if the player does it, if he's too lazy that's probably why live streaming exists.
Cranberries... Really... 512 admins... When it comes to the larger tourneys with that many matches occuring simultaneously, the replays can be uploaded by individual players. But in most big events and in big games there are normally at most 4-6 games occurring at the same time. So you need 4-6 admins, which is pretty easy to get.
Go back to accusing Blizzard of communism, you were better off rambling.
|
Also as you may have figured out the ESL site is pretty complicated to go through so the admins don't make a big deal about it as long as they get the replays for when they update the results.
|
On September 07 2010 08:14 jSIX wrote:
If you want Esports to be respected u need to respect the viewers and spectactors not just the players. Obviously players get alot of respect and are always going to get the best treatment possible, but you'll never hear a hockey player in the NHL complaining about TV timeouts, if you want to make money playing, you need to have fans. suck it up
Stop comparing esports to real sports.
There is no opportunity for cheating by having a NHL game being played live.
There is no lag caused by having people at a NHL game.
It's not the same situation, at all.
|
On September 07 2010 08:14 jSIX wrote:
If you want Esports to be respected u need to respect the viewers and spectactors not just the players. Obviously players get alot of respect and are always going to get the best treatment possible, but you'll never hear a hockey player in the NHL complaining about TV timeouts, if you want to make money playing, you need to have fans. suck it up
Yes... but a NHL game is not equal to a video game final matches. TV timeouts in hockey are fairly limited and controlled, lag cannot be controlled and in some cases is not limited.
|
On September 07 2010 08:12 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:04 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdfLet me point out in particular 4.10 Demos and Replays All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel Extreme Masters administration. 7.5.2 Demos All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament. Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played. You were saying? This is ridiculous man. Have you been involved in events like that? There are admins/refs overseeing the players, telling them what to do. It's basically like "ok you can sit here now and get ready to play. ok you can play. ok you're done, go do this interview and take your gear off this PC". While the admins may have written a player rulebook saying players are responsible for uploading replays, no reasonable admin will tell a player to do something else and then hold the player responsible for not uploading reps.
We are referring to the IEM online event with no admins telling him where to sit, the only people who were in the match with Huk and Machine were the casters there was no admin present at this event. And the replays for the match never got uploaded to the website. I'm using this as an example of even in big events with top players and big prizes securing replays is not easy.
|
Like HuK said, LAN should be casted live. Period.
For online tournaments, I seriously don't see the problem with doing it off replays. You can't, in any way compare this to a sporting event, because at the sporting event, there's SOMEONE watching it live. If you're going to compare it to a football match, for example, it'd be the equivalent of no one being in the stadium except the players/coaches, videotaping it, and then having it broadcasted on TV afterwards.
The only people that can spoil the match are the players or the admin, or if a replay gets leaked somehow. The rest of the world wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between a live game and one casted like this.
|
Raelcun the winner is suppose to upload the replay. So it's not HuK's fault but Machine. HuK uploaded replays from both his matches he won.
|
United States22883 Posts
So then crack down on players keeping replays. That's certainly a much easier fix than removing lag from the infrastructure or dissuading people from cheating.
|
On September 07 2010 08:20 Animostas wrote:
Like HuK said, LAN should be casted live. Period.
For online tournaments, I seriously don't see the problem with doing it off replays. You can't, in any way compare this to a sporting event, because at the sporting event, there's SOMEONE watching it live. If you're going to compare it to a football match, for example, it'd be the equivalent of no one being in the stadium except the players/coaches, videotaping it, and then having it broadcasted on TV afterwards.
The only people that can spoil the match are the players or the admin, or if a replay gets leaked somehow. The rest of the world wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between a live game and one casted like this.
Read the above thread, Huk the OP in a live online event the IEM group stages has still not posted the replays from one of his matches. Getting replays from every player from every match in an online even is a major headache which if anything causes more delays while trying to do it live than waiting for a bracket. He claims it's not his responsibility but there was no admin in his game just the stream and I posted the rules saying that the players are responsible and then Nony turns around and says it's ridiculous because the admins should have handled it. If the OP claiming we should cast from replays is refusing to post his then... how can this be a viable solution?
|
On September 07 2010 08:23 Jibba wrote:
So then crack down on players keeping replays. That's certainly a much easier fix than removing lag from the infrastructure or dissuading people from cheating.
yeah, exactly
if you just enforced this as a strict rule and optionally gave people a centralized place to quickly upload/email/whatever their replays this would all be solved
|
On September 07 2010 08:18 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:12 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On September 07 2010 08:04 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdfLet me point out in particular 4.10 Demos and Replays All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel Extreme Masters administration. 7.5.2 Demos All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament. Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played. You were saying? This is ridiculous man. Have you been involved in events like that? There are admins/refs overseeing the players, telling them what to do. It's basically like "ok you can sit here now and get ready to play. ok you can play. ok you're done, go do this interview and take your gear off this PC". While the admins may have written a player rulebook saying players are responsible for uploading replays, no reasonable admin will tell a player to do something else and then hold the player responsible for not uploading reps. We are referring to the IEM online event with no admins telling him where to sit, the only people who were in the match with Huk and Machine were the casters there was no admin present at this event. And the replays for the match never got uploaded to the website. I'm using this as an example of even in big events with top players and big prizes securing replays is not easy.
Start penalizing players that don't upload their replays or delay uploading them. For every match both players should be uploading the replay. Drill it through their heads that replays are required and will be analyzed or they won't get paid.
|
On September 07 2010 08:23 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:20 Animostas wrote:
Like HuK said, LAN should be casted live. Period.
For online tournaments, I seriously don't see the problem with doing it off replays. You can't, in any way compare this to a sporting event, because at the sporting event, there's SOMEONE watching it live. If you're going to compare it to a football match, for example, it'd be the equivalent of no one being in the stadium except the players/coaches, videotaping it, and then having it broadcasted on TV afterwards.
The only people that can spoil the match are the players or the admin, or if a replay gets leaked somehow. The rest of the world wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between a live game and one casted like this. Read the above thread, Huk the OP in a live online event the IEM group stages has still not posted the replays from one of his matches. Getting replays from every player from every match in an online even is a major headache which if anything causes more delays while trying to do it live than waiting for a bracket. He claims it's not his responsibility but there was no admin in his game just the stream and I posted the rules saying that the players are responsible and then Nony turns around and says it's ridiculous because the admins should have handled it. If the OP claiming we should cast from replays is refusing to post his then... how can this be a viable solution?
Okay, and if you read 2 posts above, the winner posts, so Machine posts.
Second if it's as big a concern as you seem to think it is, make it so there is a punishment for NOT uploading replays, in that maybe they get warned and then if they fail again they are banned from 2 or 3 tournaments.
If you want to control players, hit them where it hurts, their pocket books, not in the game where by causing lag, possible cheating, disturbances from spectators and casters.
|
ESL usually gives penalty points to those who do not upload replays but because it did not matter from that point on, they did not give penalty points. Also ESL nationals is something new. The European admins are more strict because they've been doing it longer and know the rules inside out.
|
It may be dumb to compare esports to real ones, but if having live audience watching football games made players trip or drop the ball more, there's no way in hell they'd continue the practice.
Casters in this thread shouldn't be arguing with things like "no we can't fix this" or "it's impossible or too costly to do it any other way" or "players are too lame to submit replays." Instead, admit there's a problem (if top players are saying there's a problem, then yeah, there's a problem) and engage in a proactive discussion about what can be done to resolve it, and then talk about what you'll do differently in the future. Bashing players in general is just not productive. Instead, you need to whip out the hurt-stick when people break rules, and build up enough credibility to ensure that casters and players are behaving appropriately.
When this thread was started, I was honestly hoping to see posts by prominent organizers/casters that looked like this:
"Hey, one/two caster(s) per game is something we can do to help fix this."
"Maybe if we actually follow through on replay-related policies, people will believe us and send in replays."
"We should start banning casters from events if they refuse to leave after lagging or if they try to edge out official or affiliated casters."
"Maybe we should try a small replay-only event and see how the system works."
"When the next big tourney hits BO16, we could have admins in games and use dropbox or some other file sharing service to get them to casters on-demand and instantly."
"For high-stakes tournaments, you could have players download an auto-replay upload service like the one posted on TL. Half an hour of setup could mean no replay hassle for the entire tourney."
And the list of ideas goes on, but apparently that's not what people are here to talk about.
|
On September 07 2010 08:23 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:20 Animostas wrote:
Like HuK said, LAN should be casted live. Period.
For online tournaments, I seriously don't see the problem with doing it off replays. You can't, in any way compare this to a sporting event, because at the sporting event, there's SOMEONE watching it live. If you're going to compare it to a football match, for example, it'd be the equivalent of no one being in the stadium except the players/coaches, videotaping it, and then having it broadcasted on TV afterwards.
The only people that can spoil the match are the players or the admin, or if a replay gets leaked somehow. The rest of the world wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between a live game and one casted like this. Read the above thread, Huk the OP in a live online event the IEM group stages has still not posted the replays from one of his matches. Getting replays from every player from every match in an online even is a major headache which if anything causes more delays while trying to do it live than waiting for a bracket. He claims it's not his responsibility but there was no admin in his game just the stream and I posted the rules saying that the players are responsible and then Nony turns around and says it's ridiculous because the admins should have handled it. If the OP claiming we should cast from replays is refusing to post his then... how can this be a viable solution?
Maybe a simple solution is to "enforce" the replay posting by simply not counting a win until the relevant replay is posted. With this rule no1 would be too "lazy" to post a replay and no caster would "suffer" by not getting their hands on the replay in time.
|
On September 07 2010 08:27 Killerbot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:23 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 08:20 Animostas wrote:
Like HuK said, LAN should be casted live. Period.
For online tournaments, I seriously don't see the problem with doing it off replays. You can't, in any way compare this to a sporting event, because at the sporting event, there's SOMEONE watching it live. If you're going to compare it to a football match, for example, it'd be the equivalent of no one being in the stadium except the players/coaches, videotaping it, and then having it broadcasted on TV afterwards.
The only people that can spoil the match are the players or the admin, or if a replay gets leaked somehow. The rest of the world wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between a live game and one casted like this. Read the above thread, Huk the OP in a live online event the IEM group stages has still not posted the replays from one of his matches. Getting replays from every player from every match in an online even is a major headache which if anything causes more delays while trying to do it live than waiting for a bracket. He claims it's not his responsibility but there was no admin in his game just the stream and I posted the rules saying that the players are responsible and then Nony turns around and says it's ridiculous because the admins should have handled it. If the OP claiming we should cast from replays is refusing to post his then... how can this be a viable solution? Okay, and if you read 2 posts above, the winner posts, so Machine posts. Second if it's as big a concern as you seem to think it is, make it so there is a punishment for NOT uploading replays, in that maybe they get warned and then if they fail again they are banned from 2 or 3 tournaments. If you want to control players, hit them where it hurts, their pocket books, not in the game where by causing lag, possible cheating, disturbances from spectators and casters.
The rules state that BOTH players save their replays because of situations like this. If the winner does not upload replays then the ideal is he gets punished and they make the loser upload. Machine has not posted the replays under this situation since there was no admin present it becomes Huk's responsibility to post the replays. He's claiming it's not his responsibility, again the person who wrote the OP saying we should use replays not uploading them makes a good example of why it's such a pain in the ass to use replays. We had to wrangle replays from replays with many threats and pain in the ITL GP and then a player who lost in the first round spoiled the results of a later round in favor of his teammate. Players do not always act mature in these situations and look at the threads about every time a player is penalized there's huge discussions on both sides with much rage. Yes replays would work if the players would behave theoretically but then in order to not lose viewers you have to pretend it's live and actively deceive your viewers which I'm not a fan of.
|
On September 07 2010 08:27 Killerbot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:23 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 08:20 Animostas wrote:
Like HuK said, LAN should be casted live. Period.
For online tournaments, I seriously don't see the problem with doing it off replays. You can't, in any way compare this to a sporting event, because at the sporting event, there's SOMEONE watching it live. If you're going to compare it to a football match, for example, it'd be the equivalent of no one being in the stadium except the players/coaches, videotaping it, and then having it broadcasted on TV afterwards.
The only people that can spoil the match are the players or the admin, or if a replay gets leaked somehow. The rest of the world wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between a live game and one casted like this. Read the above thread, Huk the OP in a live online event the IEM group stages has still not posted the replays from one of his matches. Getting replays from every player from every match in an online even is a major headache which if anything causes more delays while trying to do it live than waiting for a bracket. He claims it's not his responsibility but there was no admin in his game just the stream and I posted the rules saying that the players are responsible and then Nony turns around and says it's ridiculous because the admins should have handled it. If the OP claiming we should cast from replays is refusing to post his then... how can this be a viable solution? Okay, and if you read 2 posts above, the winner posts, so Machine posts. Second if it's as big a concern as you seem to think it is, make it so there is a punishment for NOT uploading replays, in that maybe they get warned and then if they fail again they are banned from 2 or 3 tournaments. If you want to control players, hit them where it hurts, their pocket books, not in the game where by causing lag, possible cheating, disturbances from spectators and casters.
this seems kind of harsh and we should still keep in perspective that it's just a video game but
anyone who played competitive counter strike knows that you had to record a demo before EVERY match - not because you had to submit it, but because if someone disputed your for cheating, 16 bitting, whatever, and you didn't have it, you were up shit creek. so, the vast majority of people remembered their demos. if you make it compulsory, as most people in here are saying, it won't be a problem at all.
|
On September 07 2010 08:04 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdfLet me point out in particular 4.10 Demos and Replays All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel Extreme Masters administration. 7.5.2 Demos All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament. Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played. You were saying?
glad you post when you have no idea what your talking about. at esl lan we had to do interviews/makeup/move right after games so we didn't have time to post replays on the site, the admins took care of it. just because its written in the rules doesn't mean thats whats going to happen at a live event. awesome you post about it tho considering you weren't even there
|
On September 07 2010 08:30 Losthorn wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:23 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 08:20 Animostas wrote:
Like HuK said, LAN should be casted live. Period.
For online tournaments, I seriously don't see the problem with doing it off replays. You can't, in any way compare this to a sporting event, because at the sporting event, there's SOMEONE watching it live. If you're going to compare it to a football match, for example, it'd be the equivalent of no one being in the stadium except the players/coaches, videotaping it, and then having it broadcasted on TV afterwards.
The only people that can spoil the match are the players or the admin, or if a replay gets leaked somehow. The rest of the world wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between a live game and one casted like this. Read the above thread, Huk the OP in a live online event the IEM group stages has still not posted the replays from one of his matches. Getting replays from every player from every match in an online even is a major headache which if anything causes more delays while trying to do it live than waiting for a bracket. He claims it's not his responsibility but there was no admin in his game just the stream and I posted the rules saying that the players are responsible and then Nony turns around and says it's ridiculous because the admins should have handled it. If the OP claiming we should cast from replays is refusing to post his then... how can this be a viable solution? Maybe a simple solution is to "enforce" the replay posting by simply not counting a win until the relevant replay is posted. With this rule no1 would be too "lazy" to post a replay and no caster would "suffer" by not getting their hands on the replay in time.
Exactly, also 'fake' replays can be checked in seconds by opening up the replay in Sc2gears
|
On September 07 2010 08:33 HuK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:04 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdfLet me point out in particular 4.10 Demos and Replays All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel Extreme Masters administration. 7.5.2 Demos All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament. Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played. You were saying? glad you post when you have no idea what your talking about. at esl lan we had to do interviews/makeup/move right after games so we didn't have time to post replays on the site, the admins took care of it. just because its written in the rules doesn't mean thats whats going to happen at a live event. awesome you post about it tho considering you weren't even there
I'm not talking about the LAN for the tenth time I mean IEM group stages from 2 days ago in which you played machined. It's not a live event there was no admin in game iwth you to save the replay just the stream. Glad you post when YOU have no idea what you're talking about.
|
On September 07 2010 08:31 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:27 Killerbot wrote:On September 07 2010 08:23 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 08:20 Animostas wrote:
Like HuK said, LAN should be casted live. Period.
For online tournaments, I seriously don't see the problem with doing it off replays. You can't, in any way compare this to a sporting event, because at the sporting event, there's SOMEONE watching it live. If you're going to compare it to a football match, for example, it'd be the equivalent of no one being in the stadium except the players/coaches, videotaping it, and then having it broadcasted on TV afterwards.
The only people that can spoil the match are the players or the admin, or if a replay gets leaked somehow. The rest of the world wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between a live game and one casted like this. Read the above thread, Huk the OP in a live online event the IEM group stages has still not posted the replays from one of his matches. Getting replays from every player from every match in an online even is a major headache which if anything causes more delays while trying to do it live than waiting for a bracket. He claims it's not his responsibility but there was no admin in his game just the stream and I posted the rules saying that the players are responsible and then Nony turns around and says it's ridiculous because the admins should have handled it. If the OP claiming we should cast from replays is refusing to post his then... how can this be a viable solution? Okay, and if you read 2 posts above, the winner posts, so Machine posts. Second if it's as big a concern as you seem to think it is, make it so there is a punishment for NOT uploading replays, in that maybe they get warned and then if they fail again they are banned from 2 or 3 tournaments. If you want to control players, hit them where it hurts, their pocket books, not in the game where by causing lag, possible cheating, disturbances from spectators and casters. The rules state that BOTH players save their replays because of situations like this. If the winner does not upload replays then the ideal is he gets punished and they make the loser upload. Machine has not posted the replays under this situation since there was no admin present it becomes Huk's responsibility to post the replays. He's claiming it's not his responsibility, again the person who wrote the OP saying we should use replays not uploading them makes a good example of why it's such a pain in the ass to use replays. We had to wrangle replays from replays with many threats and pain in the ITL GP and then a player who lost in the first round spoiled the results of a later round in favor of his teammate. Players do not always act mature in these situations and look at the threads about every time a player is penalized there's huge discussions on both sides with much rage. Yes replays would work if the players would behave theoretically but then in order to not lose viewers you have to pretend it's live and actively deceive your viewers which I'm not a fan of.
Okay so HuK was in the wrong not posting his replays because Machine failed to he should have. Sure I understand that part, and I can see that players are a pain sometimes, but WITHOUT the best players, you would NOT have anything to cast, so maybe instead of being a semi-diva caster complaining about the players, you work WITH them to get things figured out.
And as to actively deceiving your viewers, why not just tell them it's recorded, but since it's the FIRST time anyone is seeing the replay it can still be exciting, IF you don't go looking for a result or ruin it through casting and maybe turn off chat when casting a replay so no one else can ruin it for the viewers, but honestly if EVERYONE casted off replays, you would get nearly just as many viewers with a few becoming overly emotionally pissed off about having to watch a replay instead of a 'live' game.
I'm sorry Raelcun, I like your stream, and I would watch it whether you were casting replays, or casting live games. Day9 succeeds casting almost solely replays, not only does he survive, he is probably one of the most popular SC2 casters in the community. I enjoy analysis BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF THE GAMEPLAY.
|
On September 07 2010 08:35 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:33 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 08:04 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:40 Whalecore wrote:
/signed
Casting sites needs to implement delay-feature if it isn't already possible. Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdfLet me point out in particular 4.10 Demos and Replays All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel Extreme Masters administration. 7.5.2 Demos All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament. Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played. You were saying? glad you post when you have no idea what your talking about. at esl lan we had to do interviews/makeup/move right after games so we didn't have time to post replays on the site, the admins took care of it. just because its written in the rules doesn't mean thats whats going to happen at a live event. awesome you post about it tho considering you weren't even there I'm not talking about the LAN for the tenth time I mean IEM group stages from 2 days ago in which you played machined. It's not a live event there was no admin in game iwth you to save the replay just the stream. Glad you post when YOU have no idea what you're talking about.
the thing is we were talking about the lan event lol next time keep up or keep out
edit:
I love how you took quotes of us talking about the LAN event (see nony even talking about it as well) then converted the conversation to the iem qualifiers which NO ONE was talking about.
When I talked to the admins and they said that machine would post it and its ok not to worry about it. MAYBE if you were an admin for esl you could have some say here but your not.
|
On September 07 2010 08:37 HuK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:35 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 08:33 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 08:04 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:On September 07 2010 04:22 HuK wrote:On September 07 2010 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 04:06 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:49 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On September 07 2010 03:48 RoarMan wrote:On September 07 2010 03:45 iCCup.Diamond wrote:
[quote]
Dude have you read the thread? It's not possible without spending a lot of $. Then the only other alternative without having casters in-game is to cast replays. And again there is a host of issues but most importantly spoilers. There's no one solution here besides LAN's and Blizz doing something about it (which we know won't happen). ....... in which case you have to cast the replays. This is definitely an issue that Blizzard has to handle, it's pretty damn sad to see a split between casters and players because of these issues. Ugh let me repeat myself again. 98% of the player base including the OP is absolutely atrocious about submitting replays. HuK did nto upload replays for a tournament that is a live LAN and has over $12k in prizes. Imagine pulling replays for a couple hundred $ tourney. Also spoilers, I've had it happen, HDH had it happen. Until you can set certain custom games to private on your profile there is no way to avoid this. excuse me ? i have no idea what your talking about though. if ur talking about esl, we were never asked to post the replays; right after games we were asked to do interviews or w/e and the admins took care of it. i always send in replays including ur ITL GP (with dumby replays) and Gosucup among others. so please dont try to pull that Official IEM Rules: http://gfx.esl-europe.net/gfx/media/masters/rulebook/Intel_Extreme_Masters_SeasonIV_Rulebook.pdfLet me point out in particular 4.10 Demos and Replays All Demo's or replays must be immediately uploaded to a networked server, or to a USB stick provided by the Intel Extreme Masters administration. 7.5.2 Demos All players have to record demos from their matches. They have to those recordings until the end of the tournament. Replays have to be uploaded on the match site until 24 hours after the match has been played. You were saying? glad you post when you have no idea what your talking about. at esl lan we had to do interviews/makeup/move right after games so we didn't have time to post replays on the site, the admins took care of it. just because its written in the rules doesn't mean thats whats going to happen at a live event. awesome you post about it tho considering you weren't even there I'm not talking about the LAN for the tenth time I mean IEM group stages from 2 days ago in which you played machined. It's not a live event there was no admin in game iwth you to save the replay just the stream. Glad you post when YOU have no idea what you're talking about. the thing is we were talking about the lan event lol next time keep up or keep out edit: I love how you took quotes of us talking about the LAN event (see nony even talking about it as well) then converted the conversation to the iem qualifiers which NO ONE was talking about. When I talked to the admins and they said that machine would post it and its ok not to worry about it. MAYBE if you were an admin for esl you could have some say here but your not.
Oh no he didn't! <3 HuK Canadian Warrior
|
On September 07 2010 08:23 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2010 08:20 Animostas wrote:
Like HuK said, LAN should be casted live. Period.
For online tournaments, I seriously don't see the problem with doing it off replays. You can't, in any way compare this to a sporting event, because at the sporting event, there's SOMEONE watching it live. If you're going to compare it to a football match, for example, it'd be the equivalent of no one being in the stadium except the players/coaches, videotaping it, and then having it broadcasted on TV afterwards.
The only people that can spoil the match are the players or the admin, or if a replay gets leaked somehow. The rest of the world wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between a live game and one casted like this. Read the above thread, Huk the OP in a live online event the IEM group stages has still not posted the replays from one of his matches. Getting replays from every player from every match in an online even is a major headache which if anything causes more delays while trying to do it live than waiting for a bracket. He claims it's not his responsibility but there was no admin in his game just the stream and I posted the rules saying that the players are responsible and then Nony turns around and says it's ridiculous because the admins should have handled it. If the OP claiming we should cast from replays is refusing to post his then... how can this be a viable solution?
Why exactly do you need every replay from every game, are you going to cast them all, no. God forbid a handful of players were told beforehand to upload their games for casters to use, again, not the entire field.
But you're so against using replays, at this point you've locked out any other options that don't allow you to cast from the game live
|
Raelcun you're kinda lost here. You are quoting rules from the live events (Global Challenge and nationals) and Quake Live. It's winner uploads replay and you assume that because Machine didn't upload them that HuK should so he is equally to blame which is not true.
|
For those who are trying to compare this to a pro sports event. Think of the topic this way, fans, players, and coaches have direct access to find out what the next play will be by contacting another without any trace of it happening.
Even just watching replays hit the NE Patriots reputation pretty hard.
And this is much further of an issue being addressed here.
|
Considering that this thread is already ridiculous I'd just like to say...
On September 07 2010 07:16 Cranberries wrote:
I'm a Manchester United supporter (ish, I support Cardiff now that I live in Cardiff) but I watched the 1999 Champion's League final between Manchester United and Bayern Munich where Manchester United score two goals in the dying minutes of the game. I can say, forever, that I was part of the amazing moment.
And Solksjaer has won it!!!
|
On September 07 2010 08:43 Serendipicus wrote:
For those who are trying to compare this to a pro sports event. This of the topic this way, fans, players, and coaches have direct access to find out what the next play will be by contacting another without any trace of it happening.
Even just watching replays hit the NE Patriots reputation pretty hard.
And this is must further of an issue being addressed here.
Love it, also when was the last time a Pro Athlete posted on a message board of fans to open A DISCUSSION about rules changes and game changes because he SEES that as it is now, it appears broken.
|
@Sernen Replays can work on big events in which the prize pool is big enough that a threat of a DQ is scary enough for the players. But in the smaller events weekly tournaments that run mostly on volunteers then it really isnt. What needs to go are the sweeping generalizations "only cast live at LAN" "every tournament can use replays" there are a lot of tournaments that cannot. I am using the Huk vs Machine as an example. Huk's argument is by saying that I don't know what Diamond was talking about when I'm on skype with him right now. Really?
Casting from replays in a situation like the IEM groups can work but it has to be planned out ahead of time and explained clearly it takes another level of organization to make sure it goes smoothly plus extra staff. It was not planned out ahead of time for the IEM groups, and the big weekly tournaments like the ESL EU weekly that he was referring to in his OP are not viable to be casted from replays, the main draw for the sponsors on those tournaments are how long the stream is on. Which goes away if you take away half hte tournament by only casting the top 16 or whatever.
@GenoZStriker I was a tournament admin for 3 years, the rules state BOTH players must save replays for the express reason that sometimes replays bug out get corrupted or do not get uploaded. Right I'm the one not knowing what I"m talking about and I quoted the rules from the IEM page directly.
|
Maybe have one admin in each game who saves the replays...? It might work for events starting with 64 players, as that means only 32 admins... It seems a little excessive, though. Maybe just do that for the really high events, such as the quarterfinals and above, and have the lower ones just be cast normally? A final solution would be a single "official" stream lagging 1-2 minutes behind with only one observer and no commentary, and then let other commentators work off that, but I don't know how well that'd work.
|
Osaka27151 Posts
If you guys want to stop kicking each other in the balls and create some compromise and discussion, feel free to remake the thread with the important parts summarized. Otherwise I am just going to close this he said she said.
For the record, the TSL was casted off replays and we had one leak (Tarson, who was banned) in a preliminary round, one broadcast malfunction (our fault), and we collected every replay except for IdrA where we made a special exemption. It is possible to do if you set the rules out well enough beforehand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
