|
Please keep this thread on topic. It's ok to discuss the professionalism of what happened, but don't turn this thread into personal attacks or it will be closed. |
On December 14 2011 04:27 karpo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2011 04:22 Subversive wrote:On December 14 2011 04:19 hmunkey wrote:On December 14 2011 04:09 travis wrote:On December 14 2011 04:07 karpo wrote:On December 14 2011 04:02 Subversive wrote:On December 14 2011 04:01 Klondikebar wrote:On December 14 2011 03:53 Subversive wrote:On December 14 2011 03:50 hmunkey wrote:
Anyway, I'm done debating here.
My point still stands though: the match was 100% pointless and should not have been included in the tournament format to begin with. Pointless matches lead to half-assed attempts to win all the time and as Tyler and Huk both said, SC2 pros do what Nani did all the time -- the only difference is they cover it up.
GOM told Nani to play a match in which he got nothing in return. This is unheard of in any professional sport. And even in the games that don't matter much, professional athletes and coaches oftentimes barely try. Nani simply forfeited and everyone is mad because he was "disrespectful," because as we all know SC2 is all about respect and not about winning (something he had no reason to even attempt). Actually it is about more than just winning. If it was only winning, you could literally measure someone's fans by their win/loss statistics. Games are about passion, personality, good manners, showmanship. All sorts of things. Naniwa is getting flak for the way he's acted. Really? Because last I checked you don't get promoted up a league for "passion and good manners." You don't climb the bracket because of "showmanship." And they certainly don't declare the winner of a tournament based on "personality." You're now comparing the ladder and being streamed to thousands of people live. Also, my point was that there is more to the game than winning. So nothing you've said invalidates that. To you there's more to the game than winning. I could care less about manners, personality, or showmanship. If the dullest most BM person on earth is the best player ever i would still enjoy his games. Don't try and convince others that your opinions are anything more than just that, opinions. well then why do the games even need to be streamed you can just look up online and see who won The ultimate goal of competitive tournaments is winning, but the side-effects of people striving to win is what creates the entertainment. The way I see it, the concept is pretty common and accepted. For example, the goal of capitalism is the acquisition of wealth. Of course this leads people to educate themselves, work hard, and innovate. All of these side effects lead to more and more great things, from technological breakthroughs to the widespread dissemination of knowledge, medicine, etc. At the base of this all is the goal of acquiring wealth though. That's what I see a tournament as. The players have one goal -- to win. Now while they strive for that, we get quite a bit of entertainment. As soon as the goal is removed however, all of this goes out the window. You could take that and say, he should have therefore tried to win his last game. That is the goal of competitive tournaments as you just pointed out. He had no money to win. So is the goal winning in tournaments or just being paid? I hope Catz does get paid as much/more than him and that CompLexity recognises fame as just as important as results. Because Naniwa certainly didn't make any extra fans with his antics. And if your attitude inside the game and outside of it can get you more money from sponsors, then you could say that Naniwa by disappointing viewers/fans didn't do himself any favours, no matter how utilitarian you want to be about it. So you want to further the commercial aspect where people are paid not for their skill but their marketability? That's sad to me. Sure Naniwa is on the wrong side of the spectrum but we're already seing crappy players get alot of attention and money just for being marketable and it's kinda sad. Throwing the game is not about money as people have said many times. It's about the match not having any meaning as none of the players can get out of their group regardless of how great they play. People have forfeited placement deciding games at MLG many times where there's actually money involved yet people like you seem to care so very much about this one time.
I didn't say I want to see people paid for marketability and not skills. I was pointing out that aside from keeping fans happy, sportsmanship, showmanship, decency to your opponents, being respectful and what people lampooned as other wispy notions of unimportance, it can actually carry a dollar handle. Seeing as the person replying to me was saying it is all about winning, with the inference being winning money, I was pointing out that bad behaviour can even have monetary consequences.
I don't see how you missed that.
|
On December 14 2011 04:29 ZAiNs wrote:Tyler summed it up the best: Show nested quote +People act like what Naniwa did is unprecedented. It's not. It's common. Naniwa just took it to the logical, non-deceptive extreme. People are acting like Naniwa did this when someone else's neck was on the line...
well then, i guess we're gonna see a lot more probe rushes then aren't we.....
|
I would like to see Naniwa barred from future GSL events, or at least one or two.
People paid good money to see these games. Part of that payment was to get to see an epid Naniwa vs Nestea game--even part of the hype thread for this day was about that match. Whether it would have change the outcome or not, people wanted to see the match and paid to see the match.
|
On December 14 2011 04:29 ZAiNs wrote:Tyler summed it up the best: Show nested quote +People act like what Naniwa did is unprecedented. It's not. It's common. Naniwa just took it to the logical, non-deceptive extreme. People are acting like Naniwa did this when someone else's neck was on the line...
Goddamn why is Tyler always so smart and handsome and right about everything?
|
On December 14 2011 04:31 iG.Forever wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2011 04:29 ZAiNs wrote:Tyler summed it up the best: People act like what Naniwa did is unprecedented. It's not. It's common. Naniwa just took it to the logical, non-deceptive extreme. People are acting like Naniwa did this when someone else's neck was on the line... well then, i guess we're gonna see a lot more probe rushes then aren't we.....
Would you rather see players do shitty strats on purpose?
|
On December 14 2011 04:30 MercilessMonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2011 04:22 Tor wrote:
Naniwa made the assumption there was nothing at stake, yet clearly the negative reaction proves otherwise. If one want fans, one caters to fans. If you think your only net benefit in playing starcraft comes from a cash win in a tournament, you're either short sighted, ignorant or just inconsiderate of the fans of the game and the community in which you are a part of. Rather than throw the game, Naniwa should've taken the opportunity to throw out a ballsy or entertaining strategy to win the hearts of the community, or even better, played his best game possible in the hopes that people can look back and actually be impressed with or proud of him. Show nested quote +I hope Naniwa can look at White-Ra and change his mentality. I don't think it's right to do that, not considering your opponent at all. I wish he'd think about how he would have felt if I had gone 3-0 and confirmed #1 in my group, and he was 0-3, and I thought that since I'm 1st place nothing matters and just GG'd out of my game against him. -MC
These two things sum it up pretty well in my opinion.
First quote. Not everyone is interested in touching the hearts of the community. Some are diehard competitive guys who care about nothing but winning. Is that bad for sports? Hell no. Is it bad for esports? Hell no.
Second quote. Why play that 3-0 vs 0-3 last game? Why not give option to forfeit or remove it altogether. Why stream a match that has no bearing on results and where the players have nothing but fanservice as a motivator?
|
On December 14 2011 04:31 iG.Forever wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2011 04:29 ZAiNs wrote:Tyler summed it up the best: People act like what Naniwa did is unprecedented. It's not. It's common. Naniwa just took it to the logical, non-deceptive extreme. People are acting like Naniwa did this when someone else's neck was on the line... well then, i guess we're gonna see a lot more probe rushes then aren't we.....
Don't make people play matches that don't count and nobody would lose on purpose.
|
On December 14 2011 04:31 Trsjnica wrote:
I would like to see Naniwa barred from future GSL events, or at least one or two.
People paid good money to see these games. Part of that payment was to get to see an epid Naniwa vs Nestea game--even part of the hype thread for this day was about that match. Whether it would have change the outcome or not, people wanted to see the match and paid to see the match.
That is just a ridiculous thing to say. He should be banned for doing nothing wrong. Yes he did wrong by the community and esports in general for not trying but there is no where which says that "games must be epic" or "no probe rushes". Complete over reaction in my opinion. Most people who have tried there hardest and prepared for weeks and gone 3-0 would get frustrated. He's only human.
|
On December 14 2011 04:31 Trsjnica wrote:
I would like to see Naniwa barred from future GSL events, or at least one or two.
People paid good money to see these games. Part of that payment was to get to see an epid Naniwa vs Nestea game--even part of the hype thread for this day was about that match. Whether it would have change the outcome or not, people wanted to see the match and paid to see the match.
I will maintain that if you expected players to try their hardest in a game that had absolutely no bearing on their tournament results, you failed as an observer. Naniwa did not fail as a player.
If you're worried about the money you paid, you should be mad at GOM for showing you games that had no bearing on their tournament.
|
Without having read all 62 pages, and not that this was in Naniwa's head, but could an argument be made that Naniwa was playing mindgames with Nestea, making the point that beating him means nothing to Naniwa ? Again, I'm not suggesting that Naniwa thought this, but if that were his reasoning, would the longer-term mindgame of that statement make this somewhat defendable ?
|
On December 14 2011 04:34 ZAiNs wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2011 04:31 iG.Forever wrote:On December 14 2011 04:29 ZAiNs wrote:Tyler summed it up the best: People act like what Naniwa did is unprecedented. It's not. It's common. Naniwa just took it to the logical, non-deceptive extreme. People are acting like Naniwa did this when someone else's neck was on the line... well then, i guess we're gonna see a lot more probe rushes then aren't we..... Would you rather see players do shitty strats on purpose?
I guess you prefer the probe rush then.
|
On December 14 2011 04:31 Trsjnica wrote:
I would like to see Naniwa barred from future GSL events, or at least one or two.
People paid good money to see these games. Part of that payment was to get to see an epid Naniwa vs Nestea game--even part of the hype thread for this day was about that match. Whether it would have change the outcome or not, people wanted to see the match and paid to see the match.
I dono, I was entertained! lol
|
While I think Naniwa could of handled the situation better, I do understand where he is coming from. And its not like this is the first time something like this has happened. I think its unfair to be this critical of him when Stephano Vs. Bratok at assembly. Wasn't even an issue.
|
geez why pro teams even play when they dont make the playoff
they should just score on their own net and be done with!
|
On December 14 2011 04:30 Subversive wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2011 04:27 karpo wrote:On December 14 2011 04:22 Subversive wrote:On December 14 2011 04:19 hmunkey wrote:On December 14 2011 04:09 travis wrote:On December 14 2011 04:07 karpo wrote:On December 14 2011 04:02 Subversive wrote:On December 14 2011 04:01 Klondikebar wrote:On December 14 2011 03:53 Subversive wrote:On December 14 2011 03:50 hmunkey wrote:
Anyway, I'm done debating here.
My point still stands though: the match was 100% pointless and should not have been included in the tournament format to begin with. Pointless matches lead to half-assed attempts to win all the time and as Tyler and Huk both said, SC2 pros do what Nani did all the time -- the only difference is they cover it up.
GOM told Nani to play a match in which he got nothing in return. This is unheard of in any professional sport. And even in the games that don't matter much, professional athletes and coaches oftentimes barely try. Nani simply forfeited and everyone is mad because he was "disrespectful," because as we all know SC2 is all about respect and not about winning (something he had no reason to even attempt). Actually it is about more than just winning. If it was only winning, you could literally measure someone's fans by their win/loss statistics. Games are about passion, personality, good manners, showmanship. All sorts of things. Naniwa is getting flak for the way he's acted. Really? Because last I checked you don't get promoted up a league for "passion and good manners." You don't climb the bracket because of "showmanship." And they certainly don't declare the winner of a tournament based on "personality." You're now comparing the ladder and being streamed to thousands of people live. Also, my point was that there is more to the game than winning. So nothing you've said invalidates that. To you there's more to the game than winning. I could care less about manners, personality, or showmanship. If the dullest most BM person on earth is the best player ever i would still enjoy his games. Don't try and convince others that your opinions are anything more than just that, opinions. well then why do the games even need to be streamed you can just look up online and see who won The ultimate goal of competitive tournaments is winning, but the side-effects of people striving to win is what creates the entertainment. The way I see it, the concept is pretty common and accepted. For example, the goal of capitalism is the acquisition of wealth. Of course this leads people to educate themselves, work hard, and innovate. All of these side effects lead to more and more great things, from technological breakthroughs to the widespread dissemination of knowledge, medicine, etc. At the base of this all is the goal of acquiring wealth though. That's what I see a tournament as. The players have one goal -- to win. Now while they strive for that, we get quite a bit of entertainment. As soon as the goal is removed however, all of this goes out the window. You could take that and say, he should have therefore tried to win his last game. That is the goal of competitive tournaments as you just pointed out. He had no money to win. So is the goal winning in tournaments or just being paid? I hope Catz does get paid as much/more than him and that CompLexity recognises fame as just as important as results. Because Naniwa certainly didn't make any extra fans with his antics. And if your attitude inside the game and outside of it can get you more money from sponsors, then you could say that Naniwa by disappointing viewers/fans didn't do himself any favours, no matter how utilitarian you want to be about it. So you want to further the commercial aspect where people are paid not for their skill but their marketability? That's sad to me. Sure Naniwa is on the wrong side of the spectrum but we're already seing crappy players get alot of attention and money just for being marketable and it's kinda sad. Throwing the game is not about money as people have said many times. It's about the match not having any meaning as none of the players can get out of their group regardless of how great they play. People have forfeited placement deciding games at MLG many times where there's actually money involved yet people like you seem to care so very much about this one time. I didn't say I want to see people paid for marketability and not skills. I was pointing out that aside from keeping fans happy, sportsmanship, showmanship, decency to your opponents, being respectful and what people lampooned as other wispy notions of unimportance, it can actually carry a dollar handle. Seeing as the person replying to me was saying it is all about winning, with the inference being winning money, I was pointing out that bad behaviour can even have monetary consequences. I don't see how you missed that.
The guy you quoted never mentioned money as a motivator, that's why i wrote what i wrote. I'm pretty sure Naniwa and many other players would live under these stressful conditions even if there was alot less money.
|
On December 14 2011 04:33 ffadicted wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2011 04:29 ZAiNs wrote:Tyler summed it up the best: People act like what Naniwa did is unprecedented. It's not. It's common. Naniwa just took it to the logical, non-deceptive extreme. People are acting like Naniwa did this when someone else's neck was on the line... Goddamn why is Tyler always so smart and handsome and right about everything?
someone else's neck was on the line ? like maybe the foreign community as a whole? Top 10 players chosen for this was basically divided into this, Koreans / The rest of the world. So what he did, shows koreans about how players from rest of the world act like.
|
OMG some of you guys make a huge deal about nothing. The game was meaningless.
|
Every team in sports league should just forfeit the meaningless game once it is decided they are out of the playoff.
playing such meaningless game is so stupid.
|
I have 0 issue with what naniwa did. The game was completely meaningless, he lost some matches (especially the leenock one which I thought he made mistakes that kill himself), you know what? Time to go home.
Should he have done it in maybe a classier way, like a cannon rush or a proxy gate? Sure, I guess. It would have looked slightly nicer for the audience, but it'd have been just a different road to the same end.
|
On December 14 2011 04:39 iG.Forever wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2011 04:33 ffadicted wrote:On December 14 2011 04:29 ZAiNs wrote:Tyler summed it up the best: People act like what Naniwa did is unprecedented. It's not. It's common. Naniwa just took it to the logical, non-deceptive extreme. People are acting like Naniwa did this when someone else's neck was on the line... Goddamn why is Tyler always so smart and handsome and right about everything? someone else's neck was on the line ? like maybe the foreign community as a whole? Top 10 players chosen for this was basically divided into this, Koreans / The rest of the world. So what he did, shows koreans about how players from rest of the world act like.
Yes I'm sure Koreans are dumb enough to think one non-Korean represents every non-Korean on Earth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
