EPTSomeone needs to update the OP, the athletes can play any game they want but no on stream, not mention the game on twitter, and make your steam account private.
Also all the big companies have a agreement that competition products are banned.
Riot S4 LCS contract discussion - Page 11
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
illusiongamer
Mexico377 Posts
Someone needs to update the OP, the athletes can play any game they want but no on stream, not mention the game on twitter, and make your steam account private. Also all the big companies have a agreement that competition products are banned. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On December 06 2013 20:07 ZodaSoda wrote: Riot and Riot's Contract should not reach into your ability to stream and earn money on a third party streaming service, the Viewers watching on say Twitch are twitch viewers, they just happen to be watching LoL, if you switch to Hearthstone and the viewer doesn't like it, the viewer leaves, it is your channel, not Riots, becoming a LoL player does not mean handing over your Twitch account to Riot, regardless of what a contract says, The Nike/Reebok comment is an utter farce, Nike will provide their athlete with enough Nike's so that he doesn't NEED to buy some Reeboks, if Riot cant provide enough entertainment with LoL, why dont they make some more games that people could stream when waiting for LoL ques or when they're sick of LoL, they are Riot GameSSSSS afterall and they have one game... Riots contract violates almost all streaming services ToU and basic human rights... this is the reason in all the real sports they like to compare themselves too, no body owns Basketball, no body owns Baseball, when you have the Owner a game, also calling themselves a Sponsor of the players of their game, they become abusive of the people who draw attention to their product, they look for whats to trap and contain their income, Riot has NO RIGHT to what you stream on your channel the same way your boss has no right to tell you what to post on your facebook. You know I didn't want to post in this thread, but after seeing this post I think I'll take the proverbial jab as to why from a business standpoint, I'm not really against such ideas as this. You just listed one of the differences between real sports and electronic gaming. If they're paying you to play the game on their time for exposure purposes then it's their job and guess what? Considering Facebook is public realm that can blow up in your face as well. Many people lose their jobs for posting stupid shit on social media (whether it be Twitter/Facebook/etc). It happens all the time and you guys even seen instances of it in this very industry. Given that, you can post whatever you want on social media, but you could definitely lose your job or lose a promotion if you do something that they feel is out of line. It's not just your boss who you have to look out for. It's your co-workers as well. | ||
|
NotYango
United States719 Posts
On December 06 2013 23:07 Lonyo wrote: So if you are sponsored by Coke, then Coke should also let you be sponsored by Pepsi or even promote Pepsi without getting paid money? Hell no, if you do so, Coke will say "we aren't paying you money because you are promoting a competitor". I consider it laughable that Riot considers any of these games to be competitors, except maybe DotA 2. About half these games got more publicity from being on this list than they ever would have from LCS streamers playing them on stream. | ||
|
LaNague
Germany9118 Posts
On December 07 2013 02:33 NotYango wrote: I consider it laughable that Riot considers any of these games to be competitors, except maybe DotA 2. About half these games got more publicity from being on this list than they ever would have from LCS streamers playing them on stream. they are scared that a new F2P game will blow up huge, just as they did themselves, and eat them. Which i guess will eventually happen at some point. Its a very likely scenario. Obiously, they forgot to put in some non reveal rule into the contract, i doubt they wanted to make that list public :D | ||
|
NotYango
United States719 Posts
On December 07 2013 02:46 LaNague wrote: they are scared that a new F2P game will blow up huge, just as they did themselves, and eat them. Which i guess will eventually happen at some point. Its a very likely scenario. I would argue that for that purpose this contract change is totally ineffective. If that was their purpose then they should have made the contract include all other video games to begin with. Because the way it is now, they have to revise/re-negotiate the contract for a new game to be added to it. By the time such a game is on the radar enough and they can actually add it to the list, such a change would be meaningless--it would be too big to stop by then. If the game really is better than League and can "eat them", then forcing your players to choose between the two games is exactly how you'd lose players, rather than accepting that gamers can and do play multiple games. | ||
|
never_Nal
Costa Rica676 Posts
 . I really think this is a great decision and maybe Blizzard should learn something from Riot if they plan on making SC2 a real e-sport | ||
|
Don_Julio
2220 Posts
On December 07 2013 02:33 NotYango wrote: I consider it laughable that Riot considers any of these games to be competitors, except maybe DotA 2. About half these games got more publicity from being on this list than they ever would have from LCS streamers playing them on stream. Hearthstone and LoL are competing for customers. Sure, you can play both games but many players have a limited budget. Money spent on a Hearthstone microtransaction is money not spent on a Riot product. | ||
|
canikizu
4860 Posts
On December 07 2013 02:33 NotYango wrote: I consider it laughable that Riot considers any of these games to be competitors, except maybe DotA 2. About half these games got more publicity from being on this list than they ever would have from LCS streamers playing them on stream. I think it's more professionalism than fear. Imagine a player plays a 30 minute lol games then spend the next 15 minutes playing hearthstone, that is not good. I know it's because the queue time is too long, but if you watch a lot of stream, there're a lot of time players just don't even click Search, and just sit there playing Hearthstone. Moreover, a lot of time, players pay too much attention to the hearthstone games that they don't even care about what is happening on the chat, or refuse to interact with viewers out of laziness. | ||
|
Mannerheim
766 Posts
On December 07 2013 03:20 canikizu wrote: I think it's more professionalism than fear. Imagine a player plays a 30 minute lol games then spend the next 15 minutes playing hearthstone, that is not good. I know it's because the queue time is too long, but if you watch a lot of stream, there're a lot of time players just don't even click Search, and just sit there playing Hearthstone. Moreover, a lot of time, players pay too much attention to the hearthstone games that they don't even care about what is happening on the chat, or refuse to interact with viewers out of laziness. That's because Hearthstone is a better and more enjoyable game, that's hardly the streamers fault. | ||
|
canikizu
4860 Posts
On December 07 2013 03:26 Mannerheim wrote: That's because Hearthstone is a better and more enjoyable game, that's hardly the streamers fault. It's like saying you can drink Coke in the public because it's better drink although you're sponsored by Pepsi. That's why it's called professionalism. It doesn't matter if the game is better or not, if you're bounded by a contract, then follow it. | ||
|
NotYango
United States719 Posts
On December 07 2013 03:16 Don_Julio wrote: Hearthstone and LoL are competing for customers. Sure, you can play both games but many players have a limited budget. Money spent on a Hearthstone microtransaction is money not spent on a Riot product. I don't mean that they aren't competing for customers, I mean that LoL's business is so large compared to anyone else that even competing for the same customers, the impact on LoL's playerbase is going to be so small that I think it's petty for Riot to be so anal about it. People use the Coke/Pepsi analogy here while ignoring the fact that their relative market share is close enough for Coke to be concerned about Pepsi. Riot's market share in this sphere is an order of magnitude higher than the next competitor on that list, and the majority of them are utterly inconsequential. If we're using the Coke/Pepsi analogy, none of these other games are Pepsi. The closest ones like Hearthstone or DotA 2 are like RC Cola, and most of these are like the generic supermarket brands that no one further than 30 miles from you has ever heard of. On December 07 2013 03:20 canikizu wrote: I think it's more professionalism than fear. Imagine a player plays a 30 minute lol games then spend the next 15 minutes playing hearthstone, that is not good. I know it's because the queue time is too long, but if you watch a lot of stream, there're a lot of time players just don't even click Search, and just sit there playing Hearthstone. Moreover, a lot of time, players pay too much attention to the hearthstone games that they don't even care about what is happening on the chat, or refuse to interact with viewers out of laziness. The thing is, streamers do that anyway, with games not included on that list. In fact, Hearthstone is probably the only game on the list that supports that kind of "between-queue" play, as mobas and RTS games don't suit playing in such a small timeframe. | ||
|
Kergy
Peru2011 Posts
| ||
|
canikizu
4860 Posts
On December 07 2013 03:49 NotYango wrote: I don't mean that they aren't competing for customers, I mean that LoL's business is so large compared to anyone else that even competing for the same customers, the impact on LoL's playerbase is going to be so small that I think it's petty for Riot to be so anal about it. People use the Coke/Pepsi analogy here while ignoring the fact that their relative market share is close enough for Coke to be concerned about Pepsi. Riot's market share in this sphere is an order of magnitude higher than the next competitor on that list, and the majority of them are utterly inconsequential. If we're using the Coke/Pepsi analogy, none of these other games are Pepsi. The closest ones like Hearthstone or DotA 2 are like RC Cola, and most of these are like the generic supermarket brands that no one further than 30 miles from you has ever heard of. The thing is, streamers do that anyway, with games not included on that list. In fact, Hearthstone is probably the only game on the list that supports that kind of "between-queue" play, as mobas and RTS games don't suit playing in such a small timeframe. Just because they're not suitable doesn't mean they can't be. If I remember right, ROBERTXLEE has always been playing SC2 between queue, he's known for not accepting queue and just go on with SC2 games too. I've not seen pros playing WoW lately, but that was a thing in when I started playing LoL and watching LoL stream. Rekkles or Diamondpox have been playing Diablo3 when playing LoL too. Of course I'm not saying the list is right. It's clearly not a fully thought list, there're outdated games, games that make no sense,.v..v.v. I doubt they put too much thought about what's on the list, and I think they can revise it later if not already (assuming what Saint said is true) | ||
|
Shaella
United States14827 Posts
On December 07 2013 04:19 canikizu wrote: Just because they're not suitable doesn't mean they can't be. If I remember right, ROBERTXLEE has always been playing SC2 between queue, he's known for not accepting queue and just go on with SC2 games too. I've not seen pros playing WoW lately, but that was a thing in when I started playing LoL and watching LoL stream. Rekkles or Diamondpox have been playing Diablo3 when playing LoL too. Of course I'm not saying the list is right. It's clearly not a fully thought list, there're outdated games, games that make no sense,.v..v.v. I doubt they put too much thought about what's on the list, and I think they can revise it later if not already (assuming what Saint said is true) maybe riot should make their game less fucking boring then. I mean, if their pros can't even stay interested. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Kaneh
Canada737 Posts
The bottom line is that this stuff is not even remotely close to being unfair or monopolistic. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On December 07 2013 05:01 Shaella wrote: maybe riot should make their game less fucking boring then. I mean, if their pros can't even stay interested. I wouldn't say that. Let me put it this way, when you get ranked as high as these guys you can wait for a very, very long time just to get a game. That's why you see them playing other games like Hearthstone, OSU, and all sorts of indy games because that's just what a lot of them do while they're waiting. When they don't feel like laddering, they'll open up some games for their subscribers and do giveaways during downtime as well. It's not as cut and dry as you make it out to be. The downtime does suck and there isn't much you can do about it. On December 07 2013 05:24 Kaneh wrote: The more I read all the complaints about monopoly this or fairness that.... Did you know all this stuff was already hashed out by unions and factory owners ages ago? Is like the Internet suddenly discovered the mess that was labor and unions and monopolies that Better people than us paid blood to figure out in the industrial revolution. The bottom line is that this stuff is not even remotely close to being unfair or monopolistic. Yep, just wait for the day that a games big enough to have player unions and all that jazz. People will bitch about it no matter what as we see in sports when there are lock outs and bargaining agreements. We already shit on a lot of the stuff KeSPA and co. does already, but they do serve a purpose. | ||
|
ShaLLoW[baY]
Canada12499 Posts
On December 07 2013 05:28 wei2coolman wrote: You could say that about a lot of jobs, and a lot of those jobs pay 6 figures. Saying that Dyrus making 6 figures for playing LoL is insane, is absurd, that's quite reasonable pay considering his fanbase, specialized skillsets, lack of possible replacements, and workload for the job. funny how you're arguing for the professionalism of LoL, but then mock how much the players should get paid for playing a "video game". from the other thread. are we on the same page when i say 6 figures? as in, at least $100,000? i dont think that LOTS of jobs pay that much i'm arguing that if the players want to get respect for playing a "video game" and rise above that stigma, they need to accept professional responsibilities. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On December 07 2013 05:47 ShaLLoW[baY] wrote: from the other thread. are we on the same page when i say 6 figures? as in, at least $100,000? i dont think that LOTS of jobs pay that much i'm arguing that if the players want to get respect for playing a "video game" and rise above that stigma, they need to accept professional responsibilities. professional responsibilities should come with actual professional paycheck. Name jobs that have the selectivity of Dyrus's position, and I guarantee you most of those jobs are all 6 figures. On December 07 2013 05:47 JimmiC wrote: It's a pointless discussion, they have the power of choice, they can choose to not accept the contract. And then one of the 1000's of other people that would die for the opportunity will take it. And lets not forget they can still make money in other ways then riot. Some are paid by teams, streaming league, coaching, winning prize money, so on. Yes, they make money other way from Riot. that means Riot should not be interfering with them. Such as streaming. Riot is not involved with the money they make from streaming, so why should Riot be involving themselves in such a way? | ||
|
NotYango
United States719 Posts
Riot's delusional if they think the number of players who'd potentially spend less money on LoL because a streamer played a game of Infinite Crisis or Fat Princess is more than the number of people who raised eyebrows at this. | ||
|
Figgy
Canada1788 Posts
They get it waaaaaaaaaay better than anyone in the business of pro-gaming by a longshot. It's a small price to pay for League to hold onto it's stranglehold of the MOBA market. Obviously, they don't want their Employees advertising for the competition. | ||
| ||
