|
On June 18 2011 18:59 Phenny wrote:
25kish all up, 12k on Day9tv, 6k Totalbiscuit, 1.8 for ICCUP, 3k for Khaldor, 500 for SETT, 1.2 for Ragequit.
I don't get why such a casual oriented game like LoL has 80k+ viewers, not that I'm not happy that esports is growing. I think it's great!
Might be too soon to call your question, all I'd bank on is Starcraft for now, but if that's how many people usually tune in to large LoL tournies that's amazing.
Surprise surprise. The viewers of streams are casuals. Hence more casual oriented games have more viewers. SC2 should have been more streamlined and straightforward in this regard - would have attracted more of the LoL crowd. It retained too much of the brutal parts of sc1.
|
On June 18 2011 23:25 MoonBear wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2011 22:51 Batch wrote:On June 18 2011 22:32 Sae wrote:On June 18 2011 22:27 Redmark wrote:On June 18 2011 22:25 Sae wrote:On June 18 2011 22:23 Domination wrote:On June 18 2011 22:17 Sae wrote:I don't get where people got the idea that sc2 is extremely popular, its a rather small (one of the smallest) game just with a very strong high-tier competitive environment adopted from the original game. This is so wrong I don't even know where to begin to right it. What's wrong about it? For one it's definitely not one of the smallest games? Unless you're comparing it to WoW or something. LoL isn't all that far behind WoW in player numbers, but besides those two giants several games have a stronger casual player base than SC2 (yes, I was talking about casual player base as I know sc2 has a very strong tournament scene with all the money being injected to it right now.) Define "not all that far behind"... WoW had 11.4 million subscribers as of March 2011 according to Wikipedia. Total Players Ranked in LoL are 160,955 according to their homepage. SC2 had sold nearly 4.5 million units in December 2010. Probably over 5 million units by now. I can assure everyone that LoL do not have over 100k real viewers. Batch, do you actually have access to internal data on the player base of LoL? I highly doubt it. Please don't spout nonsense when you don't actually know anything. While the exact number of LoL players is currently DNA, what I can tell you is that LoL is #2 in terms of player base in the Western World just behind WoW. If you're asking me for proof, the best I can give you right now is a statement by the President of Riot Games on the official forums. As the others have stated, being listed on Ranked is only a small proportion of the player base. There are many many players that don't play ranked. There are also 4 separate server locations so just relying on the NA data will be misleading.
Obviously I do not have access to internal data. I wrote where I found the data so there should be no confusion about it. A lot of people pointed out that 90% of the users aren't even counted in those 160k ranked players. It doesn't matter if LoL had 10 times larger player base than what is listed as ranked players, they still aren't even close to the number of WoW players, and that is what I wanted to point out.
I really don't buy the "We don't want to show any numbers but we have as much players as WoW". If they had that large number of players then they wouldn't mind showing some numbers to the public, or am I missing something?
Btw, I don't have any hate against LoL at all. If they do good and actually have over 100k viewers then it's a great showing how big esports have become, but I still doubt the numbers as of now. After DH have ended we will probably get some real numbers of the stream counts.
|
On June 18 2011 22:11 BlindGamer wrote:
Once we get the next Quake-esque game, I think that will be the next explosion in e-sports.
Starcraft will grow and grow, as well as all the other titles, but if there were some kind of casually-playable game, like CoD, that could also somehow be played to the standard/competitiveness of Quake (whether it be 1v1 or 5v5 etc), there would be a built in audience of hundreds of thousands of people with the proper support/advertising of the creators
Wrong. Quake is dead. Fast hard games are dead, no one wants to play these any more. There are excellent well polished balanced quake games with modern engines - quakeworld, warsow, painkiller. no one watches these because no one playes these. the quake learning curve is way too brutal for casuals so with the availability of "tactical" shooters the hardcore fast shooters will never be popular again.
|
On June 19 2011 00:04 xarthaz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2011 22:11 BlindGamer wrote:
Once we get the next Quake-esque game, I think that will be the next explosion in e-sports.
Starcraft will grow and grow, as well as all the other titles, but if there were some kind of casually-playable game, like CoD, that could also somehow be played to the standard/competitiveness of Quake (whether it be 1v1 or 5v5 etc), there would be a built in audience of hundreds of thousands of people with the proper support/advertising of the creators Wrong. Quake is dead. Fast hard games are dead, no one wants to play these any more. There are excellent well polished balanced quake games with modern engines - quakeworld, warsow, painkiller. no one watches these because no one playes these. the quake learning curve is way too brutal for casuals so with the availability of "tactical" shooters the hardcore fast shooters will never be popular again.
All those games you listed are way worse than any of the classic competitive multiplayer shooters that still have tournaments today.
|
Some guys say if you look in lol you look the stream, so i think it's unfair to compare it.
I think Sc2 has a good future and you need skill for sc2. What you must do in LoL you must micro one unit omfg :D SC2 you controll 40 marines 8 tanks and so on.
LoL players are usually 12 years old!
User was warned for this post
|
On June 19 2011 00:18 TreXx wrote:
Some guys say if you look in lol you look the stream, so i think it's unfair to compare it.
I think Sc2 has a good future and you need skill for sc2. What you must do in LoL you must micro one unit omfg :D SC2 you controll 40 marines 8 tanks and so on.
LoL players are usually 12 years old!
Yet somehow I don't see 12 year olds on the stage.. hmmm.
Broad generalization in order to demean what you don't like ftw?
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
On June 19 2011 00:18 TreXx wrote:
Some guys say if you look in lol you look the stream, so i think it's unfair to compare it.
I think Sc2 has a good future and you need skill for sc2. What you must do in LoL you must micro one unit omfg :D SC2 you controll 40 marines 8 tanks and so on.
LoL players are usually 12 years old!
I think SC2 is stupid, I mean you have MBS and you don't even need to control your units just 1a your way to victory, no need for micro lololol, I mean in BW you actually need skill.
That made as much sense as you did.
|
On June 19 2011 00:04 xarthaz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2011 22:11 BlindGamer wrote:
Once we get the next Quake-esque game, I think that will be the next explosion in e-sports.
Starcraft will grow and grow, as well as all the other titles, but if there were some kind of casually-playable game, like CoD, that could also somehow be played to the standard/competitiveness of Quake (whether it be 1v1 or 5v5 etc), there would be a built in audience of hundreds of thousands of people with the proper support/advertising of the creators Wrong. Quake is dead. Fast hard games are dead, no one wants to play these any more. There are excellent well polished balanced quake games with modern engines - quakeworld, warsow, painkiller. no one watches these because no one playes these. the quake learning curve is way too brutal for casuals so with the availability of "tactical" shooters the hardcore fast shooters will never be popular again.
I think the modern FPS gamer can appreciate the mechanical aspect of Quake-style shooters. If a meathead can find beauty in a 360 no-scope, then surely they'll be amazed by someone getting a flick rail kill after flying out of a portal.
The problem is that not enough people want to understand the strategic aspect of Quake. If you showed a Call of Duty player a Cooller vs Rapha match, they'd be saying "this is dumb, why are they running away from each other all the time? They should be shooting each other." Halo is the closest thing console gamers will ever get to an old-school shooter, and it's popularity pales in comparison to Call of Duty because Halo more thinking than CoD.
|
Isn't it good? Who the fuck cares which e-sport it is, as long as one e-sport spear heads the charge to change western culture (in general, I know some countries have no problem with it) and get people's attention it's good for everyone.
|
United States22883 Posts
100,000 people don't spontaneously start watching a stream. If they're getting those kinds of active viewers (and not the background client viewing that people have said LoL uses), they'd be talking about it somewhere. Are there any LoL communities moving at double the rate of TL during peak?
I don't doubt that LoL's numbers are pretty damn substantial and more power to them. But big numbers like that leave a trail.
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
On June 19 2011 00:25 Count9 wrote:
Isn't it good? Who the fuck cares which e-sport it is, as long as one e-sport spear heads the charge to change western culture (in general, I know some countries have no problem with it) and get people's attention it's good for everyone.
Its a ''mines bigger then yours'' competition it seems.
|
LoL appeals to casuals and that was Riot's intention as much as they may try to pretend it wasn't. They keep releasing new champions every few weeks to cash in on casual-noobs and still haven't figured out a way to make replays or a friggin' observer mode work properly.
F2P model attracts a bunch of players. Anyone who played LoL will know that it's way easier and dumbed down to its counterparts like DotA or HoN. Game is still fun, I agree.
Riot just understood what casual players want and jumped on it. Good for them
|
On June 19 2011 00:26 Jibba wrote:
100,000 people don't spontaneously start watching a stream. If they're getting those kinds of active viewers (and not the background client viewing that people have said LoL uses), they'd be talking about it somewhere. Are there any LoL forums moving at double the rate of TL during peak?
Solomid.net is the TL equivalent for LoL, and it's not nearly as active as TL. However, the official LoL forums is MUCH more active than TL (at least 3x more active than TL atm, I'd say), which shows how huge the casual fanbase of LoL is.
|
On June 19 2011 00:26 Jibba wrote:
100,000 people don't spontaneously start watching a stream. If they're getting those kinds of active viewers (and not the background client viewing that people have said LoL uses), they'd be talking about it somewhere. Are there any LoL communities moving at double the rate of TL during peak?
I don't doubt that LoL's numbers are pretty damn substantial and more power to them. But big numbers like that leave a trail.
Not to mention the 1000+ page threads per day we had during MLG.
|
On June 19 2011 00:29 LoLAdriankat wrote:Show nested quote +On June 19 2011 00:26 Jibba wrote:
100,000 people don't spontaneously start watching a stream. If they're getting those kinds of active viewers (and not the background client viewing that people have said LoL uses), they'd be talking about it somewhere. Are there any LoL forums moving at double the rate of TL during peak? Solomid.net is the TL equivalent for LoL, and it's not nearly as active as TL. However, the official LoL forums is MUCH more active than TL (at least 3x more active than TL atm, I'd say), which shows how huge the casual fanbase of LoL is.
If you mean by popularity then kind of, if you mean by posting standard, they're polar opposites.
|
On June 18 2011 23:56 xarthaz wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2011 18:59 Phenny wrote:
25kish all up, 12k on Day9tv, 6k Totalbiscuit, 1.8 for ICCUP, 3k for Khaldor, 500 for SETT, 1.2 for Ragequit.
I don't get why such a casual oriented game like LoL has 80k+ viewers, not that I'm not happy that esports is growing. I think it's great!
Might be too soon to call your question, all I'd bank on is Starcraft for now, but if that's how many people usually tune in to large LoL tournies that's amazing. Surprise surprise. The viewers of streams are casuals. Hence more casual oriented games have more viewers. SC2 should have been more streamlined and straightforward in this regard - would have attracted more of the LoL crowd. It retained too much of the brutal parts of sc1.
go check viewers again
|
On June 18 2011 23:24 Probe1 wrote: It's the biggest League of Legends event of the whole year. They'll never have numbers remotely close to this again until next year.
Look at the facts bro. They have these insane numbers DESPITE very poor feature set for esports: no spec mode, no reps, no demos, no TV-mode. the devs fail terribly at delivering esport-oriented content, and yet the viewer count is insanely high. there can be no doubt: LoL is the ultimate esport game.
|
People keep saying the LoL client forces you to watch the stream.. How about confirming that before spouting it around? Because it doesn't. There's a static picture(not even taken from the stream, just *A* picture) in the middle of the client after you log in, but it's a LINK, not a player of any kind. And the LoL community is just www.leagueoflegends.com with US/EU switcher at the top.
|
It hasn't been mentioned once here so I'd like to hear some quick responses: What about TF2? Does it have any potential for comp play or, just, not
|
just waa @ 100K+++ viewer on LOL dont expect that, I like that because I can understand and follow this game more easily than cs (never played it competively) or WOW (played it competively but watching arena is still ZZzZ)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
