|
On December 05 2013 05:05 Takkara wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 05:01 PrinceXizor wrote:On December 05 2013 04:59 wei2coolman wrote:On December 05 2013 04:58 nojitosunrise wrote:They updated the article Update, 11:20AM PST: onGamers has confirmed with the team representatives that LCS players are disallowed from streaming the games listed below outright, not just when adjacent to a League of Legends stream. Under Section 3 Rule 4 of the new contract handling 'Non-League Events and Streaming', it states that "... the [LCS] Team shall ensure that, during the Term of this Agreement, its Team Members do not publicly stream gameplay of the titles set forth on Exhibit B". Exhibit B states "the specific restrictions on streaming are set forth in the Sponsorship and Streaming Restricted List, as updated by the League from time to time", which is the document listed below. Welp, fuck Riot. Yeah, but this is gonna happen the same way as the team contract dispute went. riot will say it was an early version of the contract and is no longer in there. and then the blind fanboys for both sides will argue and the skeptics will eye riot more wearily and the moderates on the side of riot will be saying "well it didn't happen so no problem". and everyone will move on until the next time. Which is exactly the problem when people constantly force a zero-sum framework on everything. There was a chance for a win-win before activating the pitchfork brigade. Now, for the public to win, Riot has to "lose", which leads to the exact situation you described, where the only win condition is to pretend that this never existed.
The win win was Riot not changing contract to prevent other games from being streamed.
|
On December 05 2013 05:07 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 05:05 Takkara wrote:On December 05 2013 05:01 PrinceXizor wrote:On December 05 2013 04:59 wei2coolman wrote:On December 05 2013 04:58 nojitosunrise wrote:They updated the article Update, 11:20AM PST: onGamers has confirmed with the team representatives that LCS players are disallowed from streaming the games listed below outright, not just when adjacent to a League of Legends stream. Under Section 3 Rule 4 of the new contract handling 'Non-League Events and Streaming', it states that "... the [LCS] Team shall ensure that, during the Term of this Agreement, its Team Members do not publicly stream gameplay of the titles set forth on Exhibit B". Exhibit B states "the specific restrictions on streaming are set forth in the Sponsorship and Streaming Restricted List, as updated by the League from time to time", which is the document listed below. Welp, fuck Riot. Yeah, but this is gonna happen the same way as the team contract dispute went. riot will say it was an early version of the contract and is no longer in there. and then the blind fanboys for both sides will argue and the skeptics will eye riot more wearily and the moderates on the side of riot will be saying "well it didn't happen so no problem". and everyone will move on until the next time. Which is exactly the problem when people constantly force a zero-sum framework on everything. There was a chance for a win-win before activating the pitchfork brigade. Now, for the public to win, Riot has to "lose", which leads to the exact situation you described, where the only win condition is to pretend that this never existed. The win win was Riot not changing contract to prevent other games from being streamed.
Correct, which is possible when people come from a place that as spectators we greatly enjoy seeing other games during queues. It makes us watch streams more often and watch them for longer. There's nothing I hate worse than watching someone go AFK for a 25 min queue, eat, or browse Reddit.
When we come from a place of accusing Riot of trying to kill esports and control streamers, that doesn't leave them a lot of room to backtrack without being stuck with those scarlet letters. The community are their own worst enemy with the kneejerking.
EDIT: Old but tangentially relevant post by Day[9] (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=427639¤tpage=7#126). While not directly related to the current situation, it talks about the dangers of knee-jerk reactions and witchhunting. It creates countless false narratives that are allowed to dig in deeply because of the smokescreen of information without context. Even if the community "wins" on this point, Riot loses dearly because of the misinformation that is allowed to foment all over the Internet. In the end, we all lose a little bit, in ways we may not ever realize.
|
On December 05 2013 05:05 Takkara wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 05:01 PrinceXizor wrote:On December 05 2013 04:59 wei2coolman wrote:On December 05 2013 04:58 nojitosunrise wrote:They updated the article Update, 11:20AM PST: onGamers has confirmed with the team representatives that LCS players are disallowed from streaming the games listed below outright, not just when adjacent to a League of Legends stream. Under Section 3 Rule 4 of the new contract handling 'Non-League Events and Streaming', it states that "... the [LCS] Team shall ensure that, during the Term of this Agreement, its Team Members do not publicly stream gameplay of the titles set forth on Exhibit B". Exhibit B states "the specific restrictions on streaming are set forth in the Sponsorship and Streaming Restricted List, as updated by the League from time to time", which is the document listed below. Welp, fuck Riot. Yeah, but this is gonna happen the same way as the team contract dispute went. riot will say it was an early version of the contract and is no longer in there. and then the blind fanboys for both sides will argue and the skeptics will eye riot more wearily and the moderates on the side of riot will be saying "well it didn't happen so no problem". and everyone will move on until the next time. Which is exactly the problem when people constantly force a zero-sum framework on everything. There was a chance for a win-win before activating the pitchfork brigade. Now, for the public to win, Riot has to "lose", which leads to the exact situation you described, where the only win condition is to pretend that this never existed.
Well, when you do an action that has no benefit for anyone but yourself, its hard to create win win situations.
|
On December 05 2013 04:54 nafta wrote:
Pretty sure if dota had something similar it would be #1 on lol subreddit as well.
i doubt the majority of league players even know what company makes dota2, much less care about the details of their contracts.
|
On December 05 2013 04:59 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 04:58 nojitosunrise wrote:They updated the article Update, 11:20AM PST: onGamers has confirmed with the team representatives that LCS players are disallowed from streaming the games listed below outright, not just when adjacent to a League of Legends stream. Under Section 3 Rule 4 of the new contract handling 'Non-League Events and Streaming', it states that "... the [LCS] Team shall ensure that, during the Term of this Agreement, its Team Members do not publicly stream gameplay of the titles set forth on Exhibit B". Exhibit B states "the specific restrictions on streaming are set forth in the Sponsorship and Streaming Restricted List, as updated by the League from time to time", which is the document listed below. Welp, fuck Riot.
Yeeeeah that's a bit too much for me.
I can understand not streaming it between LoL games. Not being allowed to stream it ever is crossing a line, IMO.
|
On December 05 2013 05:14 chalice wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 04:54 nafta wrote:
Pretty sure if dota had something similar it would be #1 on lol subreddit as well. i doubt the majority of league players even know what company makes dota2, much less care about the details of their contracts.
I thought Volvo makes cars?
The big kid on the block always draws the most scrutiny. Dota 2 community wish Valve was in Riot's position (in regards to eSports).
|
Not sure on the legality of that, but that aside.
Ethically I think it's wrong unless riot is also paying them to stream. Take somebody like TOO, who probably makes a magnitude more than his LCS salary from twitch with his 10-40k viewers at all times. So TOO can no longer rush in Warcraft III or play a 2v2 in SC2 while streaming and waiting for Queue to pop.
I think it depends on the outcry on the big teams(TSM), such as threatening not to participate in LCS due to that restriction. I would understand if Riot partnered with twitch and created a featured LoL streamers category, where you would get increased ad revenue in exchange for that, always on top of twitch LoL section and whatnot. Linking it to LCS contract is really stupid IMO. If it was a separate, optional contract I think it would be fine.
|
You can still play you just can't stream said game. Or you could play the other 6 billion games out there, your call.
|
I think this whole situation is very interesting, but it's smart to let riot reply and more facts come out before everyone explodes.
I was under the impression that the reason that players were paid to play in LCS was so they could focus on playing the game instead of scrounging for money/sponsorships so they could stay afloat while trying to compete. Instead, it seems like riot is just considering the players as representatives of the company now. Welcome to the new ESPORTS!
|
Now Riot is just being stupid...
|
On December 05 2013 05:32 Nos- wrote:
You can still play you just can't stream said game. Or you could play the other 6 billion games out there, your call.
The actual practical implications of it are small. Aside from Hearthstone, very few LCS streamers actually play any of those games on stream in any significant capacity.
It's more a question of what is Riot's attitude toward other game developers and it's relationship with LCS players.
|
On December 05 2013 05:24 Amui wrote:
Not sure on the legality of that, but that aside.
Ethically I think it's wrong unless riot is also paying them to stream. Take somebody like TOO, who probably makes a magnitude more than his LCS salary from twitch with his 10-40k viewers at all times. So TOO can no longer rush in Warcraft III or play a 2v2 in SC2 while streaming and waiting for Queue to pop.
I think it depends on the outcry on the big teams(TSM), such as threatening not to participate in LCS due to that restriction. I would understand if Riot partnered with twitch and created a featured LoL streamers category, where you would get increased ad revenue in exchange for that, always on top of twitch LoL section and whatnot. Linking it to LCS contract is really stupid IMO. If it was a separate, optional contract I think it would be fine.
no one is going to threaten to not participate in the LCS because of this, playing a random unbanned game instead of WC3 while in queue is going to have virtually zero impact on theoddone's or anyone else's bank account.
|
On December 05 2013 05:32 Eiii wrote:
I think this whole situation is very interesting, but it's smart to let riot reply and more facts come out before everyone explodes.
I was under the impression that the reason that players were paid to play in LCS was so they could focus on playing the game instead of scrounging for money/sponsorships so they could stay afloat while trying to compete. Instead, it seems like riot is just considering the players as representatives of the company now. Welcome to the new ESPORTS!
It's just a weird precedent. I've accepted it, personally, but I don't particularly support or agree with it.
I'm waiting for the punishment to violating this too - Team loses a ban? Fine? Kicked from the League?
|
United Kingdom50293 Posts
|
On December 05 2013 05:17 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 05:14 chalice wrote:On December 05 2013 04:54 nafta wrote:
Pretty sure if dota had something similar it would be #1 on lol subreddit as well. i doubt the majority of league players even know what company makes dota2, much less care about the details of their contracts. I thought Volvo makes cars? The big kid on the block always draws the most scrutiny. Dota 2 community wish Valve was in Riot's position (in regards to eSports).
The dota community is incredibly grateful to have Valve in exactly the position they are in, and not to have some disgustingly awful company like riot anywhere near our game. Valve have exactly as much control over the Dota scene as Riot do over League, and Valve has opted not to be as absolutely anti-competitive as possible.
Either way, Riot as the "Big Kid" on the block, feel the need to bully others. Might be understandable as the "Big Kid" but it tells you a lot about them as a company.
If Dota 2 had a similar thing going on (which wouldn't happen because Valve distinctly dislikes fucking over their communities), it would get removed from the League subreddit as "not LoL content" because riot own that subreddit. I'm sure it would be on top of the SC2 one though much like this is.
|
|
|
United Kingdom50293 Posts
On December 05 2013 05:42 suicideyear wrote:who is kazmitch
Some support, he was on fnatic.beta before leaving with mozilla to form benched gaming which became reason gaming (aka k0u dragging around a bunch of Czechs). I don't really have an opinion on him since I don't care about any challenger besides TCM/CW/H2K
|
On December 05 2013 05:42 Sn0_Man wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 05:17 wei2coolman wrote:On December 05 2013 05:14 chalice wrote:On December 05 2013 04:54 nafta wrote:
Pretty sure if dota had something similar it would be #1 on lol subreddit as well. i doubt the majority of league players even know what company makes dota2, much less care about the details of their contracts. I thought Volvo makes cars? The big kid on the block always draws the most scrutiny. Dota 2 community wish Valve was in Riot's position (in regards to eSports). The dota community is incredibly grateful to have Valve in exactly the position they are in, and not to have some disgustingly awful company like riot anywhere near our game. Valve have exactly as much control over the Dota scene as Riot do over League, and Valve has opted not to be as absolutely anti-competitive as possible. Either way, Riot as the "Big Kid" on the block, feel the need to bully others. Might be understandable as the "Big Kid" but it tells you a lot about them as a company. If Dota 2 had a similar thing going on (which wouldn't happen because Valve distinctly dislikes fucking over their communities), it would get removed from the League subreddit as "not LoL content" because riot own that subreddit. I'm sure it would be on top of the SC2 one though much like this is.
Yeah no one ever freaked out about Valve not giving Diretide or their lack general lack of communication. Nope, perfect harmony between valve and the dota community.
|
On December 05 2013 05:42 Sn0_Man wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 05:17 wei2coolman wrote:On December 05 2013 05:14 chalice wrote:On December 05 2013 04:54 nafta wrote:
Pretty sure if dota had something similar it would be #1 on lol subreddit as well. i doubt the majority of league players even know what company makes dota2, much less care about the details of their contracts. I thought Volvo makes cars? The big kid on the block always draws the most scrutiny. Dota 2 community wish Valve was in Riot's position (in regards to eSports). The dota community is incredibly grateful to have Valve in exactly the position they are in, and not to have some disgustingly awful company like riot anywhere near our game. Valve have exactly as much control over the Dota scene as Riot do over League, and Valve has opted not to be as absolutely anti-competitive as possible. Either way, Riot as the "Big Kid" on the block, feel the need to bully others. Might be understandable as the "Big Kid" but it tells you a lot about them as a company. If Dota 2 had a similar thing going on (which wouldn't happen because Valve distinctly dislikes fucking over their communities), it would get removed from the League subreddit as "not LoL content" because riot own that subreddit. I'm sure it would be on top of the SC2 one though much like this is.
I don't think you understand what I meant >.>
I was just saying, Dota 2 community would wish Valve's Dota 2 game was as big as LoL in terms of market share (in esports, not just game size)
|
On December 05 2013 05:45 Amethyst21 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2013 05:42 Sn0_Man wrote:On December 05 2013 05:17 wei2coolman wrote:On December 05 2013 05:14 chalice wrote:On December 05 2013 04:54 nafta wrote:
Pretty sure if dota had something similar it would be #1 on lol subreddit as well. i doubt the majority of league players even know what company makes dota2, much less care about the details of their contracts. I thought Volvo makes cars? The big kid on the block always draws the most scrutiny. Dota 2 community wish Valve was in Riot's position (in regards to eSports). The dota community is incredibly grateful to have Valve in exactly the position they are in, and not to have some disgustingly awful company like riot anywhere near our game. Valve have exactly as much control over the Dota scene as Riot do over League, and Valve has opted not to be as absolutely anti-competitive as possible. Either way, Riot as the "Big Kid" on the block, feel the need to bully others. Might be understandable as the "Big Kid" but it tells you a lot about them as a company. If Dota 2 had a similar thing going on (which wouldn't happen because Valve distinctly dislikes fucking over their communities), it would get removed from the League subreddit as "not LoL content" because riot own that subreddit. I'm sure it would be on top of the SC2 one though much like this is. Yeah no one ever freaked out about Valve not giving Diretide or their lack general lack of communication. Nope, perfect harmony between valve and the dota community.
you realize the difference between valve doing exactly what the community asked for a year ago(just work on releasing more heroes instead of diretide) with poor communcation explaining that is what they were doing, and riot trying to control even more of the people involved in their game, right?
On December 05 2013 05:45 wei2coolman wrote:
I don't think you understand what I meant >.>
I was just saying, Dota 2 community would wish Valve's Dota 2 game was as big as LoL in terms of market share (in esports, not just game size)
do you mean in viewer count? or in competitiveness and scope. because dota 2 is on par if not succeeding lol in the second part. and not significantly behind in the other. most dota 2 fans are happy where the game is and its constant growth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
