There are huge risks and downsides. Such a move would directly erode community goodwill, and consequently stunt the development of LoL as an eSport.
Really how? Its basically like the NFL making up a 3rd place game and airing it PPV the Saturday before the Super Bowl.
The NFL is an established sport and one where historically it was impossible for a fan to be able to see every game they might desire on normal television. If you were a Tampa Bay Buccaneers fan in New England you'd be likely to miss half or more of all their games under normal circumstances. Enter PPV and/or special NFL channels and now you don't have to miss your game.
LoL is different because it is not an established sport/eSport. We also live in a very different era where streams effectively mean that as long as your internet holds and there are no technical difficulties the only thing preventing you from seeing the game you want to watch are the tournament organizers and/or Riot. Until now we've had complete access to the streams of players and tournaments. Suddenly throwing down a pay wall will create a backlash from players and viewers who will see it as arbitrary and a greedy money grab.
Which I've still never understood as an argument. Ok, then don't watch. The only thing this does is further the idea that the internet has created a group of consumers who are entitled to everything for free. Justifications for pirating alone point to that idea. People decide whether something is morally justifiable to pirate if they can't afford it... really? So price is just a meaningless idea now? I was unaware we entered a utopian future where currency had been abolished and people simply get what they want because they want it.
I'm rambling a bit, but I simply see it as identical to the fighting game community; there is no real downside to another tournament. If MLG doesn't deliver, then you go back to the way things were and the whole thing doesn't matter. If its a success, then you continue to go to them and everybody is happy. If a company tries to milk its consumers, then either the consumers wisen up and stop paying or their is a greater demand than people realize and they continue to pay; in which case its working as intended.
Nobody is arguing you should pirate it if you can't get it for free... but backlash and loss of community good will are just as much a part of free markets as voting with your wallet. I think it is perfectly legitimate to criticize pay models that you dislike.
I like watching a couple games of SC2 and LoL here and there but I would never consider paying the 10-20 bucks for 1 weekend event when I only have time or interest in a few of the games. If PPV becomes the standard model I think it will only hurt exposure of the game.
On March 22 2012 05:35 Juicyfruit wrote: Meh, according to that article Regi sleeps like 2 hours a day and has been doing that. I don't buy that he sleeps THAT little, but him being sleep deprived does explain a few things.
2 hours of sleep a night is beyond sleep deprived, it's downright unhealthy. For reference, anything less than 7-8 hours affects cognitive ability, and it stacks as you continue to fall short. The less sleep you get the faster your mental acuity drops. If you're only getting 6 hours of sleep a night, after two weeks your ability to think is at the same level as someone who has been awake for 24 hours straight.
and some who hasnt slept for 24 hours is retarded. sometime i cant fall asleep and i will stay up all night and by like 6 pm the next day i might as well have downed half a handle of vodka i feel so dumb.
also does any one else think it is funny that clg shares beds.
That's sort of the point of the comparison. Think about how tired, unproductive, and ineffectual you are after you haven't slept for 24 hours. Next, realize you'll be like that all the time if you only get 6 hours of sleep every night.
I'm speaking from experience, but sleep deprivation quickly reaches a point not unlike the Dunning-Kruger effect whereby you're so tired you no longer can properly assess how tired you actually are.
6 hours is honestly a fair amount, currently at my school the average amount of sleep for students is between 2-6 hours. it doesn't really affect our academic performance too much
Subjective anecdote versus rigorous study. Why, exactly, should I take your word over that of the heads of the Sleep and Chronobiology Laboratory at the Hospital at University of Pennsylvania and the Sleep and Performance Research Center at Washington State University? Why is your loosely explained situation more accurate than published papers and studies?
its quite possible to function on less hours of sleep if you break up the time you sleep into a couple of times each day. look up biphasic or polyphasic sleep
this shit doesnt work. i have friends whove tried it, even for a long time but it fucks you up. one ended up sick for a really long time. living off average 2-6 hours of sleep is not possible.
I sleep an average of 5 hours per night (i wake up a lot and can't fall asleep for ~half an hour everytime it happens). I measured it a couple of times, so I do know, and no I don't exaggerate. I try to sleep 'enough', but it doesn't work. No related actual health problems and it's like that since puberty (~8 years). I tried sleeping pills from the doctor once, to get the fabled 8 hours you'd apparantly need, but I was a complete wreck the next day (slept through tho) Are there psychological/mental issues? Probably. Maybe. I don't know how I'd be if I got more sleep, so no idea.
Point being, it is possible to sleep rather few hours, personal experience. Studies sugget that most people don't take kindly to it. And that it increases the risks of depression, etc. But I don't think any serious medical study would EVER proclaim that "A leads to B ALWAYS NO EXCEPTION". People are different.
Going back to the MR reds and blues issue I was talking about earlier, here's Froggen's first rune page. Dunno how often he actually uses it, though - I'll need to catch him streaming.
All in all, I saw a lot of MR blues but mostly penetration reds - which is not to say MR reds weren't present, they just weren't common. Penetration reds, scaling regen yellows, flat AP quints and MR blues seem to be the norm, even on American mids (scarra).
I still like the idea of MR reds though, because I'm not too attached to 9 penetration.
There are huge risks and downsides. Such a move would directly erode community goodwill, and consequently stunt the development of LoL as an eSport.
Really how? Its basically like the NFL making up a 3rd place game and airing it PPV the Saturday before the Super Bowl.
The NFL is an established sport and one where historically it was impossible for a fan to be able to see every game they might desire on normal television. If you were a Tampa Bay Buccaneers fan in New England you'd be likely to miss half or more of all their games under normal circumstances. Enter PPV and/or special NFL channels and now you don't have to miss your game.
LoL is different because it is not an established sport/eSport. We also live in a very different era where streams effectively mean that as long as your internet holds and there are no technical difficulties the only thing preventing you from seeing the game you want to watch are the tournament organizers and/or Riot. Until now we've had complete access to the streams of players and tournaments. Suddenly throwing down a pay wall will create a backlash from players and viewers who will see it as arbitrary and a greedy money grab.
Which I've still never understood as an argument. Ok, then don't watch. The only thing this does is further the idea that the internet has created a group of consumers who are entitled to everything for free. Justifications for pirating alone point to that idea. People decide whether something is morally justifiable to pirate if they can't afford it... really? So price is just a meaningless idea now? I was unaware we entered a utopian future where currency had been abolished and people simply get what they want because they want it.
I'm rambling a bit, but I simply see it as identical to the fighting game community; there is no real downside to another tournament. If MLG doesn't deliver, then you go back to the way things were and the whole thing doesn't matter. If its a success, then you continue to go to them and everybody is happy. If a company tries to milk its consumers, then either the consumers wisen up and stop paying or their is a greater demand than people realize and they continue to pay; in which case its working as intended.
Nobody is arguing you should pirate it if you can't get it for free... but backlash and loss of community good will are just as much a part of free markets just as much as voting with your wallet. I think it is perfectly legitimate to criticize pay models that you dislike.
I like watching a couple games of SC2 and LoL here and there but I would never consider paying the 10-20 bucks for 1 weekend event when I only have time or interest in a few of the games. If PPV becomes the standard model I think it will only hurt exposure of the game.
I wasn't accusing anybody of pirating. However, the idea of not being able to watch/afford/support a PPV tournament is the same mindset that a lot of people adapt.
The only real complaint if it becomes the norm, not the exception. Now, if every organization used a PPV format there would be backlash and a lack of exposure might start to hurt their business models. As it is now, there are still countless tournaments (large and small) for free in virtually every competitive pc/console game in existence and if a community somehow lashes out at tournaments who might use some PPV for tournaments; all it does is reflect extremely poorly on the community since they'll probably just turn into EA consumers that continue to purchase the product while complaining nonstop about it.
There are huge risks and downsides. Such a move would directly erode community goodwill, and consequently stunt the development of LoL as an eSport.
Really how? Its basically like the NFL making up a 3rd place game and airing it PPV the Saturday before the Super Bowl.
The NFL is an established sport and one where historically it was impossible for a fan to be able to see every game they might desire on normal television. If you were a Tampa Bay Buccaneers fan in New England you'd be likely to miss half or more of all their games under normal circumstances. Enter PPV and/or special NFL channels and now you don't have to miss your game.
LoL is different because it is not an established sport/eSport. We also live in a very different era where streams effectively mean that as long as your internet holds and there are no technical difficulties the only thing preventing you from seeing the game you want to watch are the tournament organizers and/or Riot. Until now we've had complete access to the streams of players and tournaments. Suddenly throwing down a pay wall will create a backlash from players and viewers who will see it as arbitrary and a greedy money grab.
Which I've still never understood as an argument. Ok, then don't watch. The only thing this does is further the idea that the internet has created a group of consumers who are entitled to everything for free. Justifications for pirating alone point to that idea. People decide whether something is morally justifiable to pirate if they can't afford it... really? So price is just a meaningless idea now? I was unaware we entered a utopian future where currency had been abolished and people simply get what they want because they want it.
I'm rambling a bit, but I simply see it as identical to the fighting game community; there is no real downside to another tournament. If MLG doesn't deliver, then you go back to the way things were and the whole thing doesn't matter. If its a success, then you continue to go to them and everybody is happy. If a company tries to milk its consumers, then either the consumers wisen up and stop paying or their is a greater demand than people realize and they continue to pay; in which case its working as intended.
The difference for lol is that Riot build lol on the principle of never having to pay a cent to get the full playing experience. To this point, the full viewing experience has been the same way.
It would be akin to riot all of a sudden saying that you need to pay for certain runes. It just doesnt fit with what they are.
There are huge risks and downsides. Such a move would directly erode community goodwill, and consequently stunt the development of LoL as an eSport.
Really how? Its basically like the NFL making up a 3rd place game and airing it PPV the Saturday before the Super Bowl.
The NFL is an established sport and one where historically it was impossible for a fan to be able to see every game they might desire on normal television. If you were a Tampa Bay Buccaneers fan in New England you'd be likely to miss half or more of all their games under normal circumstances. Enter PPV and/or special NFL channels and now you don't have to miss your game.
LoL is different because it is not an established sport/eSport. We also live in a very different era where streams effectively mean that as long as your internet holds and there are no technical difficulties the only thing preventing you from seeing the game you want to watch are the tournament organizers and/or Riot. Until now we've had complete access to the streams of players and tournaments. Suddenly throwing down a pay wall will create a backlash from players and viewers who will see it as arbitrary and a greedy money grab.
Which I've still never understood as an argument. Ok, then don't watch. The only thing this does is further the idea that the internet has created a group of consumers who are entitled to everything for free. Justifications for pirating alone point to that idea. People decide whether something is morally justifiable to pirate if they can't afford it... really? So price is just a meaningless idea now? I was unaware we entered a utopian future where currency had been abolished and people simply get what they want because they want it.
I'm rambling a bit, but I simply see it as identical to the fighting game community; there is no real downside to another tournament. If MLG doesn't deliver, then you go back to the way things were and the whole thing doesn't matter. If its a success, then you continue to go to them and everybody is happy. If a company tries to milk its consumers, then either the consumers wisen up and stop paying or their is a greater demand than people realize and they continue to pay; in which case its working as intended.
I'm not saying they should never use PPV or a paywall, I just think that right now it's too soon. There's a downside to Riot having to spend time and effort dealing with players/viewers who, rightly or wrongly, feel like a paywall is arbitrary. LoL is also in a position where it has a looming competitor, while SC2's primarily competition is its predecessor (with no others worth speaking of on the horizon).
Again, my basic point is that there are risks and downsides to a PPV tournament. I'm not trying to say they outweigh the bonuses, or that they don't. I'm simply contesting the assertion that there's no reason why Riot shouldn't simply jump at the opportunity.
On March 22 2012 05:35 Juicyfruit wrote: Meh, according to that article Regi sleeps like 2 hours a day and has been doing that. I don't buy that he sleeps THAT little, but him being sleep deprived does explain a few things.
2 hours of sleep a night is beyond sleep deprived, it's downright unhealthy. For reference, anything less than 7-8 hours affects cognitive ability, and it stacks as you continue to fall short. The less sleep you get the faster your mental acuity drops. If you're only getting 6 hours of sleep a night, after two weeks your ability to think is at the same level as someone who has been awake for 24 hours straight.
and some who hasnt slept for 24 hours is retarded. sometime i cant fall asleep and i will stay up all night and by like 6 pm the next day i might as well have downed half a handle of vodka i feel so dumb.
also does any one else think it is funny that clg shares beds.
That's sort of the point of the comparison. Think about how tired, unproductive, and ineffectual you are after you haven't slept for 24 hours. Next, realize you'll be like that all the time if you only get 6 hours of sleep every night.
I'm speaking from experience, but sleep deprivation quickly reaches a point not unlike the Dunning-Kruger effect whereby you're so tired you no longer can properly assess how tired you actually are.
6 hours is honestly a fair amount, currently at my school the average amount of sleep for students is between 2-6 hours. it doesn't really affect our academic performance too much
Subjective anecdote versus rigorous study. Why, exactly, should I take your word over that of the heads of the Sleep and Chronobiology Laboratory at the Hospital at University of Pennsylvania and the Sleep and Performance Research Center at Washington State University? Why is your loosely explained situation more accurate than published papers and studies?
its quite possible to function on less hours of sleep if you break up the time you sleep into a couple of times each day. look up biphasic or polyphasic sleep
this shit doesnt work. i have friends whove tried it, even for a long time but it fucks you up. one ended up sick for a really long time. living off average 2-6 hours of sleep is not possible.
I sleep an average of 5 hours per night (i wake up a lot and can't fall asleep for ~half an hour everytime it happens). I measured it a couple of times, so I do know, and no I don't exaggerate. I try to sleep 'enough', but it doesn't work. No related actual health problems and it's like that since puberty (~8 years). I tried sleeping pills from the doctor once, to get the fabled 8 hours you'd apparantly need, but I was a complete wreck the next day (slept through tho) Are there psychological/mental issues? Probably. Maybe. I don't know how I'd be if I got more sleep, so no idea.
Point being, it is possible to sleep rather few hours, personal experience. Studies sugget that most people don't take kindly to it. And that it increases the risks of depression, etc. But I don't think any serious medical study would EVER proclaim that "A leads to B ALWAYS NO EXCEPTION". People are different.
A small percentage of people seem to require substantially less sleep than the majority (~95%). Most people who routinely sleep less than 7 hours are sleep deprived, not part of that small percentage. That small percentage is fully functional with less sleep (everyone requires a certain amount, though it varies individually), though little is known as to why exactly or what the biological trade-offs are. If you're part of that small percentage, the general guideline of 7-8 hours does not apply to you. But the vast majority of people who sleep less are just sleep-deprived.
It really didn't sound like Reginald didn't need more than two hours of sleep, so I don't think that's the case here -- the manager even explicitly says that he occasionally gets a full night of sleep, but that he's usually just too busy (not that he doesn't need more sleep).
Edit: Apparently I'm behind the times; Wikipedia says "Sleep duration is affected by the gene DEC2. Some people have a mutation of this gene; they sleep two hours less than normal." So yeah, still far, far from only requiring two hours.
On March 22 2012 05:35 Juicyfruit wrote: Meh, according to that article Regi sleeps like 2 hours a day and has been doing that. I don't buy that he sleeps THAT little, but him being sleep deprived does explain a few things.
2 hours of sleep a night is beyond sleep deprived, it's downright unhealthy. For reference, anything less than 7-8 hours affects cognitive ability, and it stacks as you continue to fall short. The less sleep you get the faster your mental acuity drops. If you're only getting 6 hours of sleep a night, after two weeks your ability to think is at the same level as someone who has been awake for 24 hours straight.
and some who hasnt slept for 24 hours is retarded. sometime i cant fall asleep and i will stay up all night and by like 6 pm the next day i might as well have downed half a handle of vodka i feel so dumb.
also does any one else think it is funny that clg shares beds.
That's sort of the point of the comparison. Think about how tired, unproductive, and ineffectual you are after you haven't slept for 24 hours. Next, realize you'll be like that all the time if you only get 6 hours of sleep every night.
I'm speaking from experience, but sleep deprivation quickly reaches a point not unlike the Dunning-Kruger effect whereby you're so tired you no longer can properly assess how tired you actually are.
6 hours is honestly a fair amount, currently at my school the average amount of sleep for students is between 2-6 hours. it doesn't really affect our academic performance too much
Subjective anecdote versus rigorous study. Why, exactly, should I take your word over that of the heads of the Sleep and Chronobiology Laboratory at the Hospital at University of Pennsylvania and the Sleep and Performance Research Center at Washington State University? Why is your loosely explained situation more accurate than published papers and studies?
its quite possible to function on less hours of sleep if you break up the time you sleep into a couple of times each day. look up biphasic or polyphasic sleep
this shit doesnt work. i have friends whove tried it, even for a long time but it fucks you up. one ended up sick for a really long time. living off average 2-6 hours of sleep is not possible.
I sleep an average of 5 hours per night (i wake up a lot and can't fall asleep for ~half an hour everytime it happens). I measured it a couple of times, so I do know, and no I don't exaggerate. I try to sleep 'enough', but it doesn't work. No related actual health problems and it's like that since puberty (~8 years). I tried sleeping pills from the doctor once, to get the fabled 8 hours you'd apparantly need, but I was a complete wreck the next day (slept through tho) Are there psychological/mental issues? Probably. Maybe. I don't know how I'd be if I got more sleep, so no idea.
Point being, it is possible to sleep rather few hours, personal experience. Studies sugget that most people don't take kindly to it. And that it increases the risks of depression, etc. But I don't think any serious medical study would EVER proclaim that "A leads to B ALWAYS NO EXCEPTION". People are different.
sure there are rare cases like yours. but saying your schools students average 2-6 hours of sleep a day is straight up bs, which was my point there.
On March 22 2012 05:35 Juicyfruit wrote: Meh, according to that article Regi sleeps like 2 hours a day and has been doing that. I don't buy that he sleeps THAT little, but him being sleep deprived does explain a few things.
2 hours of sleep a night is beyond sleep deprived, it's downright unhealthy. For reference, anything less than 7-8 hours affects cognitive ability, and it stacks as you continue to fall short. The less sleep you get the faster your mental acuity drops. If you're only getting 6 hours of sleep a night, after two weeks your ability to think is at the same level as someone who has been awake for 24 hours straight.
and some who hasnt slept for 24 hours is retarded. sometime i cant fall asleep and i will stay up all night and by like 6 pm the next day i might as well have downed half a handle of vodka i feel so dumb.
also does any one else think it is funny that clg shares beds.
That's sort of the point of the comparison. Think about how tired, unproductive, and ineffectual you are after you haven't slept for 24 hours. Next, realize you'll be like that all the time if you only get 6 hours of sleep every night.
I'm speaking from experience, but sleep deprivation quickly reaches a point not unlike the Dunning-Kruger effect whereby you're so tired you no longer can properly assess how tired you actually are.
6 hours is honestly a fair amount, currently at my school the average amount of sleep for students is between 2-6 hours. it doesn't really affect our academic performance too much
Subjective anecdote versus rigorous study. Why, exactly, should I take your word over that of the heads of the Sleep and Chronobiology Laboratory at the Hospital at University of Pennsylvania and the Sleep and Performance Research Center at Washington State University? Why is your loosely explained situation more accurate than published papers and studies?
its quite possible to function on less hours of sleep if you break up the time you sleep into a couple of times each day. look up biphasic or polyphasic sleep
this shit doesnt work. i have friends whove tried it, even for a long time but it fucks you up. one ended up sick for a really long time. living off average 2-6 hours of sleep is not possible.
I sleep an average of 5 hours per night (i wake up a lot and can't fall asleep for ~half an hour everytime it happens). I measured it a couple of times, so I do know, and no I don't exaggerate. I try to sleep 'enough', but it doesn't work. No related actual health problems and it's like that since puberty (~8 years). I tried sleeping pills from the doctor once, to get the fabled 8 hours you'd apparantly need, but I was a complete wreck the next day (slept through tho) Are there psychological/mental issues? Probably. Maybe. I don't know how I'd be if I got more sleep, so no idea.
Point being, it is possible to sleep rather few hours, personal experience. Studies sugget that most people don't take kindly to it. And that it increases the risks of depression, etc. But I don't think any serious medical study would EVER proclaim that "A leads to B ALWAYS NO EXCEPTION". People are different.
I actually only average 4.5 hours of sleep a night. It's livable in the same sense that minimum wage is livable.
That said, I'd be naive if I were to assume I'm some special exception to the rule and that I wouldn't be a happier, stronger, smarter person if I got the proper amount of sleep every night.
Can we get off sleep please? Make a thread in the General discussion about it if you want to.
On topic: What do you do VS Kog'maw when he is immensely fed? As a tank, you would get thornmail and Frozen heart, but playing as a squishy, what items or strategies would you recommend?
On March 22 2012 08:25 Lorken wrote: Can we get off sleep please? Make a thread in the General discussion about it if you want to.
On topic: What do you do VS Kog'maw when he is immensely fed? As a tank, you would get thornmail and Frozen heart, but playing as a squishy, what items or strategies would you recommend?
itemwise frozen heart + a negatron would probably help more than the thornmail, the best thing to do is exhaust kog if you can
On March 22 2012 08:25 Lorken wrote: Can we get off sleep please? Make a thread in the General discussion about it if you want to.
On topic: What do you do VS Kog'maw when he is immensely fed? As a tank, you would get thornmail and Frozen heart, but playing as a squishy, what items or strategies would you recommend?
itemwise frozen heart + a negatron would probably help more than the thornmail, the best thing to do is exhaust kog if you can
Last game, nobody could even get to him, Nunu would put his mega slow on you and you would die before he's in range. Guess some games just can't be won.
EPT
