|
On July 12 2013 14:50 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 14:39 cascades wrote:
1) You understand why Riot wants EU/NA to make it further in And I don't agree with it. Let's be clear about this, the viewership in China absolutely dwarfs Western viewership AND Chinese viewers are more fickle than viewers from other countries. WE failing to make it to Worlds (very possible) will probably result in the largest possible viewership hit of any team not making it to Worlds. In fact, I would venture that a no-WE Worlds would potentially result in a larger loss of viewership than a no-NA/EU Ro8.
maybe that's part of it though?
like why pander to fans that are going to turn off the stream (or get up and leave the event... or ASK FOREIGNERS TO LEAVE THE EVENT) when their team loses?
|
United States47024 Posts
Because the fact that the tuned in at all still allows you to pad your stream stats if this is a marketing thing.
Any "marketing" argument doesn't make sense to me because the places where Riot stands to gain the most from selling LoL harder are the places they're screwing over the most.
NA is the region that benefits most from this, but is also the place where LoL is already most entrenched (e.g. has the least competition from other E-sports games or games in the same genre), has been around the longest, and where the LoL's least likely to find new players to market to.
|
On July 12 2013 14:50 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 14:39 cascades wrote:
1) You understand why Riot wants EU/NA to make it further in And I don't agree with it. Let's be clear about this, the viewership in China absolutely dwarfs Western viewership AND Chinese viewers are more fickle than viewers from other countries. WE failing to make it to Worlds (very possible) will probably result in the largest possible viewership hit of any team not making it to Worlds. In fact, I would venture that a no-WE Worlds would potentially result in a larger loss of viewership than a no-NA/EU Ro8.
I actually agree with you. I just wanted to debunk the region/continent garbage that keeps on being brought up. This is TL, and that is tripe that belongs on Reddit.
However you must also consider spending power of viewers. I wager that Riot has decided that the monetization potential of the West is justified to the risk of not having WE in Worlds. Basically, Riot is choosing to go down the Halo/CoD route.
Background info:
Halo/CoD are mediocre but well made AAA titles that are popular. This is because Americans do well on the competitive circuit, as generally only Americans take them competitively.
|
The problem is it won't make the western teams perform any better. Or should I say, if a western team performs well it still would have done so in a more equitable format. Bowing out in the quarter finals or group stages still equates to final stages of the event without the "major drawcards". In fact I'd go as far to say that regular LCS play will have far more impact than any creative formatting.
Anyway Riot's promotion of competitive LoL has never been about viewer numbers or sponsorship $$. That's chump change compared to the marketing benefits reaped by exciting games showcasing the most skillful players.
Should point out, I'm still super excited. This will still be an awesome event and we'll get to watch some incredible matches. Pumped!!
|
It won't make Western teams perform better, but it will make them look better.
2nd point- Unsubstantiated opinion. Where are the most skillful players? Sitting at home in CN/KR/TW.
|
On July 12 2013 12:39 abcb wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I was not arguing whether or not the current format made sense or that it would've been less entertaining than a 16 team format. I was simply stating that unfairness in professional sports are everywhere, and they do not de-legitimize the sports itself. I was merely comparing the fairness of baseball to fairness of letting Riot determining # of teams selected from each region.
I do have to say though, EU + NA = 6, China + Korea + Southeast asia = 7. How is this event EU/NA heavy?
If you want a format of 16 teams such as EU/NA/China/Korea/Southeast asia each gets 3 teams, then Asia region would field total of 9 teams vs. 6, at which point it may be better to just host an all-asian final instead. If the whole point of world championship is to have different regions play each other, then having 9/16 teams or 10/16 teams (if AU advances) will lessen that purpose.
From what i can recall, top seed, from US, EU, KOR, and China gets a bye, the remaining 10 teams play group stage where 2 teams from each team will advance, then it's 8 team regular format. This pretty much guarantees that in each group of 5 teams in the group stage, no 2 teams will be from the same region. The break down can be (US #2, EU#3, CN#2, KOR #2, SEA#1) and (US#3, EU#2, SEA#2, KO#3, Wildcard). Not sure why this is so complicated for viewers to follow. Finally, if we do expand the teams to 16, and allow 4 groups of 4, there is a chance that we may see all asian teams in the quarterfinals. Where the current format guarantees at least 1 NA and 1 EU team in the quarter finals.
Even in the current format, it is likely that the quarterfinals will have 1 NA team and 7 Asian teams. Unless they rig the groups so that four or more NA/EU teams go in the same group.
Also, in respond to the last paragraph in spoilers, no, EU does not get a bye.
|
On July 12 2013 15:21 cascades wrote:
It won't make Western teams perform better, but it will make them look better.
Marginally better. So marginally that it's detrimental to stack a competition with them.
Of course this is all assuming you subscribe to the "western teams are weaker" argument. If you don't subscribe to that argument then western teams don't need a comparatively stronger presence than eastern teams to feature in the later stages of the tournament.
On July 12 2013 15:21 cascades wrote:
2nd point- Unsubstantiated opinion. Where are the most skillful players? Sitting at home in CN/KR/TW.
I don't know. I'd like to have the opportunity to come to a conclusion based on as many candidates as possible attending the world finals and competing against each other. Riot disagrees.
And it's not wholly unsubstantiated. The All Stars at least hinted very strongly what most suspect about the strength of the regions.
|
Anyways. I think MOST people would love to see a 16 team bracket, but the current bracket isn't too bad.
Are people going to be disappointed with (made up results inc) a quarters of C9, OMG, MVP Oz, SGS (byes) vs. The top 2 of the following groups:
1: Alt, Vulcan, IG/WE, Frost, AHQ
2: Fanatic, Gambit, Blaze. TSM/CLG, Insert Crazy Aussie Team
|
On July 12 2013 15:36 cLutZ wrote:
Anyways. I think MOST people would love to see a 16 team bracket, but the current bracket isn't too bad.
Are people going to be disappointed with (made up results inc) a quarters of C9, OMG, MVP Oz, SGS (byes) vs. The top 2 of the following groups:
1: Alt, Vulcan, IG/WE, Frost, AHQ
2: Fanatic, Gambit, Blaze. TSM/CLG, Insert Crazy Aussie Team
Agreed. It's more of a principled stance than anything. The tournament will be awesome.
|
On July 12 2013 15:06 cascades wrote:
However you must also consider spending power of viewers. I wager that Riot has decided that the monetization potential of the West is justified to the risk of not having WE in Worlds. Basically, Riot is choosing to go down the Halo/CoD route.
Background info:
Halo/CoD are mediocre but well made AAA titles that are popular. This is because Americans do well on the competitive circuit, as generally only Americans take them competitively.
The popularity of CoD as an ESPORT has very little to do with the fact that the top players are Americans.
Also not sure why you think competitive Halo was ever about monetization.
|
On July 12 2013 15:41 Amarok wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 15:36 cLutZ wrote:
Anyways. I think MOST people would love to see a 16 team bracket, but the current bracket isn't too bad.
Are people going to be disappointed with (made up results inc) a quarters of C9, OMG, MVP Oz, SGS (byes) vs. The top 2 of the following groups:
1: Alt, Vulcan, IG/WE, Frost, AHQ
2: Fanatic, Gambit, Blaze. TSM/CLG, Insert Crazy Aussie Team Agreed. It's more of a principled stance than anything. The tournament will be awesome.
And the problem is less in the tournament, its the qualification for. The EU/NA LCS teams could potentially (for qualification purposes), using today's standings, finish like so:
EU: #1 NIP, #2, Lemondogs, #3MYM (Tied for 4th)
NA: #1. Dig (Bye)(6), 2 TSM (5), 3. Coast (4)
We can love Bjergson all we want, and I do, but the only team of those that has a leg to stand on right now of those 6 is TSM because they won Spring Split.
|
On July 12 2013 15:44 HPoirot wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 15:06 cascades wrote:
However you must also consider spending power of viewers. I wager that Riot has decided that the monetization potential of the West is justified to the risk of not having WE in Worlds. Basically, Riot is choosing to go down the Halo/CoD route.
Background info:
Halo/CoD are mediocre but well made AAA titles that are popular. This is because Americans do well on the competitive circuit, as generally only Americans take them competitively. The popularity of CoD as an ESPORT has very little to do with the fact that the top players are Americans. Also not sure why you think competitive Halo was ever about monetization.
I'll never understand CoD. For its massive popularity it seems like a low quality ESPORT. Smallest crowds at MLG's, tournaments seem non existent. Yet one of the Optic guys can post a video on youtube and it will get a million plus hits in under a week.
|
The more I think about how much Riot did a injustice to the Chinese/Korean scene, the worst I'll post. So, I'll simply say that they should have been given 3 base spots to the KR/Chinese regions. They deserve it. I sincerely do not understand why they didn't. The idea that winning a huge event like the all-stars for a play off spot that only tied them to the NA/EU spots is laughable.
I really thought it would be the below. It makes the most sense(to me. based off my vague understanding of how popular a game is in a region, and so maybe I'm doing an injustice to the SEA region, but it works!) overall:
3 NA / 3 EU / 4 KR (that +1 for winning all-stars) / 3 CN / 2 SEA / 1 International "wild card"
|
I've cooled down somewhat, and I'll attempt to break this down in a calm manner, and offer some of my own ideas to how the tournament could be designed.
Status of Season 2 World Championship
1) 12 teams with 4 seeds for 5 regions (technically 6 since SEA and TW had separate routes of qualification):
This was a problematic because obviously the numbers simply didn't fit. They ended up having to do a draw (luck playing a major part once again).
In addition, first placed seeds were under the risk of being knocked out after a single BO3, whereas Season 1 World Championship encorporated both the group stages, and double elimination, meaning that all the different teams could demonstrate their level of skill to a reasonable degree without being too influenced by the nature of the brackets.
2) Group stages being influenced by starting positions:
The Chinese tournaments were one of the first to fix the imbalance by introducing the new concept of a BO2. Professional players have been vocal about the advantage blue side gets, and there was no doubting that the round-of-robin stages were influenced by coinflips more than what was desired.
3) The need for representation from newer regions:
I'm not sure about the scenes in Brazil, Australia, and Turkey, but some people felt that a truly global competition was in order with the need for implementation of some kind of a qualification route for teams from previously unrepresented regions.
4) No booths:
This is just plain stupid. Even sound-proof booths are somewhat affected by crowd noises, and the notion that sound-proof headphones would do the job was unprofessional in my eyes. Multiple players were suspected of having the broadcasted screen within their field of vision, and in the case of Woong, the evidence was undeniable. The ease with which cheating could be done, and the manner in which the cases were dealt with left a bitter taste in many people's mouths. All cheating should be prevented pre-emptively as much as possible, and in the future, professional players should be warned of the consequences for any underhand methods of victory.
5) Nature of regames:
The series between CLG EU and World Elite was wrecked by technical difficulties, and should not happen again. Should such technical difficulties happen again, and another situation where regames are necessary ensues, there should be some kind of an agreement to how it should be handled beforehand. So many questions were unanswered here. Exactly when is a game over? Should a re-game happen no matter what the situation is? Should the picks and bans remain identical, or should they be able to start off with a clean slate since teams are able to adapt on the fly? If teams are given a clean slate, should they be given extra time to prepare for new strategies?
This is how I feel about it. If Riot is unable to judge accurately at which point a game is over (I'm suspecting this is the case), a re-game should be done every single time regardless of the circumstances. Once a re-game is decided, all teams should be given a clean slate to start-off with, and be given at least an extra day of preparation, so that they can recuperate from the mishap, and do their best to start-off from the cut-off point of the series.
6) Re-adjusting slot allocations:
Although all competitions are plagued by politics and bureaucracy, some integrity can be gained if there is an illusion that the best are rewarded for their success. Like a lot of people have mentioned, the qualification spots for the FIFA World Cup are partly influenced by the performances of the teams, as well as accounting for variety, player base, and overall marketability. Season 2 World Championship was the first of its kind where teams from all over the region were included, and a fair representation for each of the regions was obviously out of anyone's hands. However, the results of Season 2 World Championship (with six regions to base our judgements on) should have been portrayed to some degree in my opinion.
Status of Season 3 World Championship
1) 14 teams, 4 seeds for 4 regions:
The tournament was expanded to encorporate two extra spots, one for the unrepresented regions, and another to adjust for the accurate, and fair representation of the regions. The idea itself is valid, and while I personally feel that further adjustments should have been made to in their attempt to represent the regions fairly (in a number of different ways, one of which is the expansion to 16 teams with further representation from regions judged to be worthy of extra-representation, suggested by TheYango), I am not going to criticize Riot in direction. And I'll talk about representation of the newer regions later on.
However, the method in which they decided which regions get a seeding, and which regions get an extra spot was a farce. I ranted about this non-stop when the announcements for the All Stars Championship was made, so I'll cut it short by saying that there were too many inconsistencies involved with the overall design of the tournament to influence such a big part in the design of the one and only Season 3 World Championship. I'm Korean, so of course, I was more thrilled than anybody about the result, but the manner in which it was done was not fair.
Also, the fact that the seeded team could theoretically only play two games against a single opposition before getting knocked out irks me. Not only is it a shame that we might not get to see the potential of the most powerful team in the region, it brings a lot of issues of whether all the seeds truly deserve the bye into the play-off rounds. Either give a team a chance to prove themselves by making the play-off rounds into a double elimination setting, or just do away with the bye altogether and just separate the seeds into separate groups so that we are guaranteed a variety of games against multiple oppositions.
2) Group stages being influenced by starting positions:
Why is this not being fixed? The Tencent LPL fixed it. There is a fair balance when it comes to starting positions in the regular season of both LCS tournaments between all the teams. Ongament The Champions got solved the problem. There are just too many to list. Even the qualification stages for the Taiwanese teams have minimized the effect of starting positions by encorporating BO2 settings in the group stages. How an earth is it possible that the qualifcation stages for the main tournament is better designed in this particular aspect? Riot, why are you not getting with the times? BO2 has essentially solved the imbalance issues that follow round-of-robin settings. Use it, you nitwits.
3) The need for representation from newer regions:
Excellent. Giving new regions a chance to compete is a good marketing decision as well as providing new story lines, more variety, and competitive integrity by opening up those willing, instead of it being a exclusive party. It is also not an invitation, but an arduous process that will reach its end at the International Wildcard tournament at Gamescom. I like it.
4) No booths:
Just do it. Don't spend money on stupid dolls. Spend it on booths. Please.
5) Nature of regames:
Learn from your mistakes.
6) Re-adjusting slot allocations:
There were no re-adjustments, just a single extra spot that went towards accurate representation of the different regions, which was done in a god awful manner (the show was good, don't get me wrong, and I couldn't be more delighted with the result, but it was still done badly from a competitive design standpoint). One spot in good will (not even done properly) does not fix the allocations problems alone. There are talks of wildcard tournaments a-la the competition for the new regions, but for top teams that failed to qualify from the established regions, but we all know that would be too time consuming, and people don't seem to be too keen on pushing that idea.
But we do have to attempt to re-structure the tournament even a little bit, to make it correlate somewhat with the performances from past competitions, in my opinion. I've expressed my distaste in what I feel is an unfair representation of the Taiwanese scene in the past. They had a sole representative that proved the worth of the Taiwanese region, and it was obvious to those around that the Taiwanese scene has flourished ever since the success of Taipei Assassins (although ironically the team that brought all the attention has nose-dived into mediocrity themselves). Regardless of exactly how strong the Taiwanese scene is, their results must be taken into account when deciding the qualification spots, just as much, if not more so than some random all stars event.
Likewise, regions that did badly must come under scrutiny. Two teams went home without a single victory in the group stages, and that was SK Gaming and Dignitas. Of course both these teams had their reasons for performing below their usual level, but results are results. Both the third team from Europe and North America were unable to show their worth at the highest level.
Now in my personal opinion, the following would have been fairer. Twelve teams, no decisions made from the All Stars Championship, but made directly from the results of Season 2 World Championship. Perhaps the representation would have been less accurate of the status quo, but in my eyes at least, is more fair.
North America: 2 spots
Europe: 2 spots
South East Asia: 1 spot
China: 2 spots
Korea: 2 spots
Taiwan: 2 spots
Wildcard entry: 1 spot
If we are to implement TheYango's idea of an easy to plan, 16 team tournament. Then the extra four spots becomes too hard to adjust for purely by going off a tournament that was completed a year ago, so perhaps the results of cross regional competition done in season 3 such as SWL S2, IEM World Championship, MLG Invitationals, NVIDIA Game Festival, Asian Indoor Games, and maybe even the All Stars Championship could be considered.
Korea: IEM World Championship (CJ Entus Blaze), MLG Dallas Invitational (KT Rolster B), Asian Indoor Games (KT Rolster B)
China: SWL S2 (Invictus Gaming), NVIDIA Game Festival (Team WE)
Europe: IEM Katowice (Gambit Gaming)
How should it be done? I'm not so sure, and some of the regions are harder to judge due to the lack of data. But season 3 saw the rise of four international level Chinese teams, and perhaps five if you argue for the inclusion of Royal Club, while both Azubu Taipei Assassins, and Snipers did moderately in two of the cross-regional tournament they participated in. KT Rolster B had international success against respectable opponents, showing their worth at a global level. Gambit Gaming were able to come on top against some of the most respected teams in Korea and North America. Which teams would we miss the most should they fail to qualify due to the varying number of qualification spots? I don't know. But it's something Riot should go to greater lengths to come to respectable conclusion. I feel like they just added a random number of extra teams to the allocations they already had without worring too much about it.
|
Pootie too good!4331 Posts
Everyone getting so angry, but the real culprit is EU. NA gets 2 spots + 1 spot for being hosting country, DUH. EU gets 1 more spot for no good reason!
But yah... Letmelose is pretty on point here.
I think one thing Riot should be doing for the LCS is adding a point system (like OGN has) for World's Qualification. And they need to talk to CN/KR/Sea/International regions and get a schedule that is reasonably coordinated so there can be a few international tournaments. Maybe one per split?
|
Honestly I feel that far too people view people due to their heavy emotional investment in said team or person. This is reflected in almost all popular streamers and teams. People rarely watch people just because their good, they have usually started some fad or have some addictive persona.
The inclusion of a third slot for the western regions is intelligent due to the inclusion of the LCS this year as opposed to last year. People not only want to see the old crew get in (TSM, CLg etc) but would be ecstatic if an amateur team made it to Worlds. This would inspire more amateur teams, then a cascade starts. Honestly, whether Korea has 1 team or 5, we'll see Koreans in the finals, so why complain?
|
On July 12 2013 22:39 jcc wrote:
Honestly I feel that far too people view people due to their heavy emotional investment in said team or person. This is reflected in almost all popular streamers and teams. People rarely watch people just because their good, they have usually started some fad or have some addictive persona.
The inclusion of a third slot for the western regions is intelligent due to the inclusion of the LCS this year as opposed to last year. People not only want to see the old crew get in (TSM, CLg etc) but would be ecstatic if an amateur team made it to Worlds. This would inspire more amateur teams, then a cascade starts. Honestly, whether Korea has 1 team or 5, we'll see Koreans in the finals, so why complain?
I don't understand how just because there is a reasoning behind their choices, it somehow makes the decisions Riot made any fairer or more legitimate. Nobody is denying that Riot has their reasons for managing their tournaments the way they do, but the point I'm trying to make is that nothing about it is admirrable.
Like you mentioned, Korea has already has reached a critical mass where the scene can pretty much handle itself, but it may not be so for some of the other regions that are being looked over in favour of the teams from the Western hemisphere. Just because Korea has managed to be represented to a respectable degree, it does not mean everyone's has gotten covered. It's not North America, Europe, Korea, and some random teams. You may argue that it doesn't matter since an Asian team will most likely win in the end. And you may be happy to see the various advantages of being able to qualify for the Season 3 World Championship with ease, being distributed amongst your region of interest, but shouldn't you consider that what you're rooting for is basically having no qualms about unfairly denying those same benefits towards other regions regardless of whether they deserve it or not?
It does not make the competition legitimate just because a Korean team might win the whole thing in the end. There needs to be a fair representation across all regions, and hours of painstaking research and thought to ensure that everybody is doing their upmost best to include the very best teams from as many different regions as possible. Riot should make sure that the way in which it was done was fair, and understandable towards everyone involved. What is happening now is blatant favouritism over certain regions over others without a better explanation than "oh... we just stuck to the slot allocations from last year, but added in extra spots", as if the spot allocations made last year were in any shape or form perfect. It is no where near my expectations for how the only major international tournament should be run, and is quite frankly lacks authenticity in multiple aspects compared to even regional competitions. That is why I am complaining.
|
at least we're not drawing out of a bingo machine to determine which team gets screwed due to poor planning
What's most important to riot is to sell out at the staples center, and the best way to do that is to get as many western fans to buy the tickets. It doesn't matter if the teams are likely to be eliminated before the ro4 because they will have sold out long before then if they can get the right teams into the tournament. The ability to actually put on "the best event in esports history" instead of completely flopping last year and just saying it over and over is Riot's challenge this year and they definitely seem more equipped to do so.
|
On July 12 2013 14:55 TheYango wrote:
Any "marketing" argument doesn't make sense to me because the places where Riot stands to gain the most from selling LoL harder are the places they're screwing over the most.
Riot isn't even the game publisher in China, they only indirectly benefit from LoL's growth there and I bet they'd take 1 new NA player over 10 new CN players in a heartbeat.
Now we can't really reach a conclusion without knowing the details of their deal but isn't it more plausible that their marketing team, which has all the data, is more likely to know what the hell they're doing rather than people speculating on forums based on no numbers?
|
On July 12 2013 23:42 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2013 14:55 TheYango wrote:
Any "marketing" argument doesn't make sense to me because the places where Riot stands to gain the most from selling LoL harder are the places they're screwing over the most. Riot isn't even the game publisher in China, they only indirectly benefit from LoL's growth there and I bet they'd take 1 new NA player over 10 new CN players in a heartbeat. Now we can't really reach a conclusion without knowing the details of their deal but isn't it more plausible that their marketing team, which has all the data, is more likely to know what the hell they're doing rather than people speculating on forums based on no numbers?
riot is owned by tencent
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
