|
On August 10 2017 02:37 wuhan_clan wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2017 02:29 caramel- wrote:On August 10 2017 02:19 dtz wrote:On August 10 2017 02:15 Procake wrote:
I don't like this whole "refer to the organisation throughout the years as if they had the same players" they're doing. I get they want to make it more like "real sports" when they do that but it just sounds stupid, like the intros were they referred to IG as TI2 champs when it was none of the same players. Indeed. Very weird since Valve's official stance is that they don't recognize organizations. They recognize the 5 combination of players. They should refer to the players as the TI Champion. he opening ceremony can afford to introduce players one by one too. But every other sports use it, even if all the players retired. Like real madrid with la decima, or liverpool with 18 titles. The organization still deserved some glory with the titles that they won, so its not weird at all for me if they referred iG as champion of TI2. Just like everyone talk OG as champion of 4 majors. Would you like to just say them as 2 times major champ since its the titles that their current roster achieved? Or like at last epicenter, where 'Liquid as defending champion' even when the roster was different. The players won the titles, but the organization that collected the 5 players, give them place to train, give them salary, etc etc deserved it as much as the players do. iG, EG, Alliance, Na'Vi, Newbee. They will always deserved to be called as TI winners no matter who their current roster is, since when a player plays under a team banner, his achievements are also the team/org achievement. The biggest difference between esports teams and real sports teams is that in real sports, teams are rooted in a major city. By default, they have a fundamental identity that goes beyond just the players on the team. You aren't just supporting the players, you are supporting the city and organization that has an extensive history. The problem in Dota is that the teams aren't tethered to anything at all. It's actually extremely rare for the players to stick with a team beyond a couple years for the organization to even develop an identity. Sometimes, the organization doesn't even exist more than a couple years. With players and teams blowing up and reforming every year and with nothing else to root down a team, it's only natural that fans follow players rather than teams.
Of course its only natural that fans follow players, that also true for a lot of fans of real sports.
But my point is, of course player deserved to be called TI winner, of course they deserved all of their achievements. But, that doesn't change fact that they won that TI/achievement under spesific team/org.
Even if the org not everlasting, even if the org disappeared, the history would always already wrote them as a winner. They still already won some titles, they already won TI. There is the fact that iG already won TI2. Fact that Alliance already won TI3. Etc etc. When someone talk about that org, they fully deserved to be called TI champion even if their roster already changed completely.
The players achievement was important, like S4 as TI winner and 2 majors with different team. As if you like, Seedorf that won CL 4 times (i think? Dont really remember) Under 4 different teams. But the fact is, he won it under Alliance, and OG banner. He was under contract of the org, so all his achievements also written in history as Alliance's achievement. Even if the org disappear, the history will always write them as champion of TI3. So in my point of view, there is nothing weird to call them as such.
|
Artifact is just a side job, not even valve actually cares about it. Get over it
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Did Jerax really need that last hit on the creep
|
|
|
im actually suprised we're doing so well
|
|
|
|
|
Notail easily coulda reapered the SK there..
|
ive seen this game last year
|
|
|
an all too familiar story.
|
|
|
OG missing all their spells.
|
Seems silly to completely ignore the organizations.
I mean, it's fair to say that the iG that won a TI is not the team that's currently in the tournament.
But organizations that are run decently have a certain level of prestige and history, one's that the teams themselves stride to uphold when rebuilding around players.
And teams like Mouz will always have certain stigma around their pickups.
|
On August 10 2017 02:50 Ufnal wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2017 02:36 VGhost wrote:On August 10 2017 02:29 caramel- wrote:On August 10 2017 02:19 dtz wrote:On August 10 2017 02:15 Procake wrote:
I don't like this whole "refer to the organisation throughout the years as if they had the same players" they're doing. I get they want to make it more like "real sports" when they do that but it just sounds stupid, like the intros were they referred to IG as TI2 champs when it was none of the same players. Indeed. Very weird since Valve's official stance is that they don't recognize organizations. They recognize the 5 combination of players. They should refer to the players as the TI Champion. he opening ceremony can afford to introduce players one by one too. But every other sports use it, even if all the players retired. Like real madrid with la decima, or liverpool with 18 titles. The organization still deserved some glory with the titles that they won, so its not weird at all for me if they referred iG as champion of TI2. Just like everyone talk OG as champion of 4 majors. Would you like to just say them as 2 times major champ since its the titles that their current roster achieved? Or like at last epicenter, where 'Liquid as defending champion' even when the roster was different. The players won the titles, but the organization that collected the 5 players, give them place to train, give them salary, etc etc deserved it as much as the players do. iG, EG, Alliance, Na'Vi, Newbee. They will always deserved to be called as TI winners no matter who their current roster is, since when a player plays under a team banner, his achievements are also the team/org achievement. I think the issue is continuity. It kind of makes sense to talk about OG winning because the team's built around the same founding duo. Other teams (DC is the most blatant example) have been completely rebuilt. It's definitely an issue Valve need to figure out how to address going forward. Easiest would of course be to say "we only recognize organizations", but that would severely curtail the flexibility of the scene. I'd prefer to specifically recognize player accomplishments, but e.g. the Chinese scene might resent the downplay of the team brands. I'd actually like some middle ground, such as associating the big titles with *both* players and organizations. New team for a succesful org will then have a narrative of living up to the legacy, while old winners in new teams would be hyped to establish the new brand. (does that make sense?)
Exactly. The big titles are both the player's and org's. No one could take those achievement from them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
