EPTGretech's Final Offer to the Broadcasting Stations - Page 4
| Forum Index > Community News and Headlines |
|
Slix36
United Kingdom145 Posts
| ||
|
Archvil3
Denmark989 Posts
Kespa, as far as I have been able to pick up, completely disregards Blizzard as the creater and owner of SC:BW. No logos, no achknowledgement and worst of all has been completely uncooperative with Blizzard in all matters, not just the recent. Blizzard want their rights as creater and owner of the game to be achknowledged. Money is not an issue here. Reallly $90000 is a drop in the water in the budgets involved and Kespas statements about how they are a non-profit organisation is merely a way win the hearts of the before mentioned people who lacks understanding of finances. It's not about money, it's all about rights and control to which it 100% belongs to Blizzard. Blizzard do not wish to kill BW, if they really wanted to they could easily have done so and there is nothing, absolutely nothing in those demands that in any way would kill BW or hurt Kespas business as long as they agree that SC:BW is Blizzards products, which it unarguably is. So for a young gamer who have yet to experience and get a prober understanding of how the world goes round, this may all seem unfair to you and Blizzard is being the big bad wolf that want to dominate the universe, but really it isnt. It's just business, how the world goes round. | ||
|
Frankon
3054 Posts
On November 14 2010 04:05 Chibalicious wrote: Kespa, as far as I have been able to pick up, completely disregards Blizzard as the creater and owner of SC:BW. No logos, no achknowledgement and worst of all has been completely uncooperative with Blizzard in all matters, not just the recent. Did you seen any stream of BW? There are Blizzard and SC:BW logos everywhere | ||
|
Hikko
United States1126 Posts
On November 14 2010 04:08 Frankon wrote: Did you seen any stream of BW? There are Blizzard and SC:BW logos everywhere Uh...no, they're never there. I'll rewatch some vods on VioleTAK, but I am pretty sure they've never been present on BW stages. | ||
|
Trozz
Canada3454 Posts
Bad news for the industry. At least its public. | ||
|
Archvil3
Denmark989 Posts
On November 14 2010 04:08 Frankon wrote: Did you seen any stream of BW? There are Blizzard and SC:BW logos everywhere I've seen a few, didnt spot the Blizzard logos, but could be that I missed them. Anyway probally the smallest part of it all which has little to no influence in this matter. I should probally have left it out of my post as people will inevetably try to find flaws in my arguments, no matter how small and pointless they are. | ||
|
red_b
United States1267 Posts
On November 14 2010 04:05 Chibalicious wrote: Reallly $90000 is a drop in the water in the budgets involved and Kespas statements about how they are a non-profit organisation is merely a way win the hearts of the before mentioned people who lacks understanding of finances. It's ironic that you suggest others dont know much of finances and yet you think 90 grand American is a drop in the bucket for an esports event. What do you think this is, the NFL? Funny, I havent seen any TV stations other than MBC and OGN succeed. What about the CGS? Oh yeah, it lasted all of 2 seasons. Blizzard is doing now what valve did a few years ago; try as hard as they can to shut down the old version of a game by denying access to it for televised events whenever they feel like it. Granted, I like their new game, but that is what they are trying to do. | ||
|
Hikko
United States1126 Posts
On November 14 2010 04:17 Chibalicious wrote: I've seen a few, didnt spot the Blizzard logos, but could be that I missed them. Anyway probally the smallest part of it all which has little to no influence in this matter. I should probally have left it out of my post as people will inevetably try to find flaws in my arguments, no matter how small and pointless they are. If there are any blizzard logos I didn't see them in any of the videos I looked at (the closing ceremony parts, which looks at the entire stage, as well as the opening themes), so your original statement stands as correct. | ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
On November 14 2010 02:32 kamikami wrote: - Everything must be approved by Blizz means that everyone in the industry is Blizz's slaves and Blizz maintains absolute control over the scene - which is shit considering this game has become a sport under the government's approval, there is no way it can be controlled by one foreign company. Can you explain why exactly you think Blizzard making all the calls about a game they made and own is in any way comparable to slavery? If the entire Korean e-sport setup and the government doesn't find "foreign companies" relevant or doesn't find protecting their rights and interests necessary in their country, then maybe they should stop using foreign products (BW included). On November 14 2010 02:32 kamikami wrote: SC2 players are too obsessed with the game that they don't take those issues seriously at all, if SC2 is not "liberated" from Blizz in the future I failed to see how it will evolve into a mature spectator sport. (even now Blizz is suing the 2 only esport television channels, so in the future they can only broadcasts SC2 through internet streams lol, not to mention they go against the government for that). We BW fans have no problem with SC2, but we have problems with Blizz and their greed (omg they make "greed is good" a cheat code for their game, how can people argue against that). I would rather say that the e-sports fans are too obsessed with e-sports that they don't take this issue seriously because they are overprotective of the bw scene. Neither SCBW nor SC2 are "liberal sports" open for anybody to exploit - and Blizzard would be completely insane to allow something like that to happen and essentially give away a potential gold mine they created and own. These games are - first and foremost - video games and property of their developer and it is their will that matters. You can't break those rules just because you want the Korean e-sports scene to stay like it is. Because if you break the rules for the sake of what you like, that means the Korean government can also decide that it's in their "national interest" to allow the music I make to be used freely (or in a Samsung TV commercial) tomorrow. And I kind of don't want that. | ||
|
Archvil3
Denmark989 Posts
On November 14 2010 04:17 red_b wrote: It's ironic that you suggest others dont know much of finances and yet you think 90 grand American is a drop in the bucket for an esports event. What do you think this is, the NFL? Funny, I havent seen any TV stations other than MBC and OGN succeed. What about the CGS? Oh yeah, it lasted all of 2 seasons. Blizzard is doing now what valve did a few years ago; try as hard as they can to shut down the old version of a game by denying access to it for televised events whenever they feel like it. Granted, I like their new game, but that is what they are trying to do. Yes it's just an e-sports but you have to ackknowledge how big SC:BW is in Korea. Compared to other e-sports like SC2 in the rest of the world, compared to counterstrike and other great e-sport, SC:BW in Korea is HUGE. What SC2 players and others often dont realise is how great BW is in Korea. With hundreds, maybe even thousands of paid employees, 2 TV-stations and the sponsors involved 90k is a drop in the water. SC:BW is a great game and an industry that foreigners often cant even comprehend. Blizzard terms wont kill or hurt any of that. | ||
]343[
United States10328 Posts
On November 14 2010 04:25 Chibalicious wrote: Yes it's just an e-sports but you have to ackknowledge how big SC:BW is in Korea. Compared to other e-sports like SC2 in the rest of the world, compared to counterstrike and other great e-sport, SC:BW in Korea is HUGE. What SC2 players and others often dont realise is how great BW is in Korea. With hundreds, maybe even thousands of paid employees, 2 TV-stations and the sponsors involved 90k is a drop in the water. SC:BW is a great game and an industry that foreigners often cant even comprehend. Blizzard terms wont kill or hurt any of that. Hmm, have you seen this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136 MBC actually doesn't make any profits from broadcasting BW... 100 million won is definitely not a small sum. I guess broadcasters should have the Blizzard logo more prominently though. | ||
|
emythrel
United Kingdom2599 Posts
Is it not perfectly possible that blizzard got into business with gretech because they share a common goal or philosophy about esports? That they did this because they tried to deal with kespa first but couldn't come to an agreement so took their IP rights elsewhere? That sounds far more likely to me As for blizz influencing the terms gretech offered... ofc they did lol... its their game. What in the hell is unreasonable about having the blizzard logo plastered everywhere while broadcasting a blizzard game? They do it in GSL, MLG constantly thank blizzard for the game.... its how you do things in a civilized world. Its like watching a football (soccer) game from the premiership and not expecting to see the FA sign anywhere, or watching the NBA and not seeing the NBA logo..... anyone who thinks it is unreasonable really needs to get over themselves. edit: and if its about money..... $90k is pittance to blizzard. they spend that much each day on toilet paper ffs ;p This is about blizz getting acknowledgment as creators and owners of the game..... how would you feel if you made a product and then someone else made money off that product and refused to even acknowledge that it was your product? | ||
|
moopie
12605 Posts
On November 14 2010 04:49 ]343[ wrote: Hmm, have you seen this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136 MBC actually doesn't make any profits from broadcasting BW... 100 million won is definitely not a small sum. I guess broadcasters should have the Blizzard logo more prominently though. That would be 100 million x3 for a year's worth of MSL ($265k) not to mention more fees for proleague on top, and this is all AFTER the actual cost and financing that goes into it now (salaries, production, etc etc). While in theory Blizzard may deserve some royalties for the game, taking the bw finely tuned economic structure that has evolved and extorting more off the top might just topple the whole thing, then again Blizzard is ok with that. | ||
|
Zona
40426 Posts
50/50 ownership is something I would never agree to if I were sitting on the other side of the table... All the player houses, the mapmakers, the commentating, the production values and structure supplied by one side...and merely the license supplied by other other side results in this other side getting 50% ownership? And I don't know what the last point involves, but depending on its implications it could be a huge drag as well. Years ago Blizzard branding was pretty prominent in broadcasts, but recently it's all faded away. The bad blood might have started earlier, when it seems Kespa tried to get a license but Blizzard wouldn't talk, long before SC2 was announced. I definitely agree with Captain Peabody's assertion that Activision Blizzard wants control...just look at the new Bnet for more evidence - the foundation of the new Bnet is that everything is controlled by Activision Blizzard's servers. However the desire for control does not necessarily mean they'll work hard to preserve what's been built. Kespa has had many missteps on the way - but if you examine governing authorities in the births of other sports - including prominent sports like baseball, football, basketball and more - you'll see that they all had problems in their infancy, too. Scandals, player mistreatment, prejudice, and more - and on a larger scale. It's too much to describe in one post, but how Blizzard handled tournaments and such in the past does not make me confident in them as stewards of a pro scene. As well, it's not necessarily in a game publisher's interest to have a long-lasting pro scene for their games, since they are constantly trying to sell new games. I've mulled over issues for quite awhile and I've come to the conclusion that the time when the game publisher's (or developer's) interests and the competitive scene's interest are aligned is when the publisher benefits from continued interest in the same game. This occurs in games such as free-to-play ad-supported games. Games structured in this manner would be ideal to create a competitive scene around (if the particular game allows it), as it's also in the publisher's interest to extend interest in, and the lifetime of the game. One thing I do wish is for everyone to not assume that a scene like BW's can be easily built...after all there have been NONE like it in the decades that electronic gaming have existed. If the contributions of players such as Ongamenet, MBCGame, or the progaming team sponsors (i.e. the sponsors Kespa represent) were so easy to duplicate, we've have dozens of competitive scenes like BW by now. But we don't have any like that at all. A possible end result of this mess is great damage to the BW scene, and no scene to rise up to replace it on the same scale. After all, it's been virtually a decade and nothing quite like it has appeared. | ||
|
Archvil3
Denmark989 Posts
On November 14 2010 04:49 ]343[ wrote: Hmm, have you seen this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136 MBC actually doesn't make any profits from broadcasting BW... 100 million won is definitely not a small sum. I guess broadcasters should have the Blizzard logo more prominently though. Yea I've seen that and Kespa has also been making similair claims, that its all non-profit and whatever fee is charged will kill off the industri etc. I'm sorry but I have no better argument to this other then I dont beleive in non-profit charity TV-stations that cant pay a 90k fee. Kespa and the TV-stations dont want to loose control for whatever reason. That is the whole case here. Whether they are actually worried that with the release of SC2, Blizzard do actually want to kill them off or maybe their business model doesnt work out with Blizzard/Gretech in the picture. It could be anything and your guess is as good as mine cause there are probally a lot of hidden intentions that arent revealed to the public. I do hope for a solution to all this though as BW have at least a couple of years left despite all the setbacks that SC2 and this legal issue have caused. Also SC2 is far away from being polished enough to take over from BW so I think it would be really bad for everyone including Blizzard and Gretech if BW died right now. | ||
|
OnFire
324 Posts
| ||
|
ffreakk
Singapore2155 Posts
On November 14 2010 05:02 Zona wrote: As others have said, 1 year is really not stable. 50/50 ownership is something I would never agree to if I were sitting on the other side of the table... All the player houses, the mapmakers, the commentating, the production values and structure supplied by one side...and merely the license supplied by other other side results in this other side getting 50% ownership? And I don't know what the last point involves, but depending on its implications it could be a huge drag as well. Years ago Blizzard branding was pretty prominent in broadcasts, but recently it's all faded away. The bad blood might have started earlier, when it seems Kespa tried to get a license but Blizzard wouldn't talk, long before SC2 was announced. I definitely agree with Captain Peabody's assertion that Activision Blizzard wants control...just look at the new Bnet for more evidence - the foundation of the new Bnet is that everything is controlled by Activision Blizzard's servers. However the desire for control does not necessarily mean they'll work hard to preserve what's been built. Kespa has had many missteps on the way - but if you examine governing authorities in the births of other sports - including prominent sports like baseball, football, basketball and more - you'll see that they all had problems in their infancy, too. Scandals, player mistreatment, prejudice, and more - and on a larger scale. It's too much to describe in one post, but how Blizzard handled tournaments and such in the past does not make me confident in them as stewards of a pro scene. As well, it's not necessarily in a game publisher's interest to have a long-lasting pro scene for their games, since they are constantly trying to sell new games. I've mulled over issues for quite awhile and I've come to the conclusion that the time when the game publisher's (or developer's) interests and the competitive scene's interest are aligned is when the publisher benefits from continued interest in the same game. This occurs in games such as free-to-play ad-supported games. Games structured in this manner would be ideal to create a competitive scene around (if the particular game allows it), as it's also in the publisher's interest to extend interest in, and the lifetime of the game. One thing I do wish is for everyone to not assume that a scene like BW's can be easily built...after all there have been NONE like it in the decades that electronic gaming have existed. If the contributions of players such as Ongamenet, MBCGame, or the progaming team sponsors (i.e. the sponsors Kespa represent) were so easy to duplicate, we've have dozens of competitive scenes like BW by now. But we don't have any like that at all. A possible end result of this mess is great damage to the BW scene, and no scene to rise up to replace it on the same scale. After all, it's been virtually a decade and nothing quite like it has appeared. Spoilered due to length, just quoting.. Just like Zona for a quality post (here or in LR threads). I agree with everything. Again, 1 year term means that they can pull these stunts every year. Whether they will do it, only time will tell, but since this is an industry involving jobs of many people (in the thousands, at least), we really cant have their future being put on the chopping board every year. These people need a peace of mind too, in knowing that their futures are secure (at least for a while). 50/50 ownership sounds unreasonable as well. Considering how much both sides has put into this (10 years worth of players' salary, housing, traveling, food, prize money, organising events, maps innovations, paying Blizz for the copies of their games vs a license). Edit: typos | ||
|
overt
United States9006 Posts
On November 14 2010 01:02 McDonalds wrote: Well, I've said it before and I'll say it again. In my opinion, the only reason Gretech was given the IP rights by Blizzard is because Blizzard wanted a court battle. They assumed that they would lose in a Korean court if the case ended up being foreigner company versus Korean company, so they turned it into Korean company versus Korean company and are hoping this will help them get the result that they want. The only problem with this logic is that it's Blizzard suiting MBCGame and OnGameNet, not Gretech. I would have agreed with you, but since Blizzard went ahead and filed lawsuits on those two already it seems like maybe that wasn't the only reason. However I do agree that Blizzard probably did want this to go to court as I think they most definitely want to get Brood War out of the way so that SC2 can "take off." Although maybe the courts will notice Gretech and sympathize with them, it would have made more sense for Gretech to be the one doing the suiting though. And I don't really blame KeSPA, OGN, or MBCGame for not accepting those terms. It's nice to know exactly what the terms were though. | ||
Selith
United States238 Posts
On November 14 2010 05:03 Chibalicious wrote: ... your guess is as good as mine cause there are probally a lot of hidden intentions that arent revealed to the public. ... It's all about the money, both KeSPA and Gretech/Blizzard stands to either gain or lose a lot of money based on how the lawsuit / negotiation goes. Either way, broadcasters lose. They end up paying anyway, either to KeSPA or Gretech/Blizzard. I would think broadcasters really don't like either parties (sour relations happened when KeSPA first tried to charge the broadcasters way back then), but prefers KeSPA, since at least, they are fully Korean, knows how to keep progaming teams rolling in Korea, and has connections to chaebols (big businesses) and government. | ||
|
iamho
United States3347 Posts
| ||
| ||
