Riot S4 LCS contract discussion - Page 14

On December 07 2013 09:25 Noocta wrote:
The whole " people are buying promotion for their games by using LoL streamers " is so full of bullshit if you want my opinion.
Valve and Blizzard don't care enough, and the other games are on the list are by very small developpers who can't afford this kind of practice.

On December 07 2013 06:12 remedium wrote:


This is why losing Lautemortis sucks so much. He has one of the best personalities in the game. Could have given OddOne a run for his money.

On December 07 2013 09:27 Kupon3ss wrote:
Like I said, Riot realizes how effective their approach of paying off streamers/youtubers of other games was and how instrumental it was to LoL's rise to popularity and is taking preemptive measures to prevent that from happening, fantastic business sense.

On December 07 2013 09:29 ChaosShadow wrote:


You mean like how the majority of top league streamer were in the very first round of Hearthstone invites? Its not directly paying the streamer, but by doing a move like that you get free promotion of your product through the use of a streamers popularity from LoL.

On December 07 2013 09:39 Noocta wrote:


'Buying"

Blizzard didn't buy them to play it, like it probably happened with Infinite Crisis or Smite I guess.
That's a whole different story than giving them money to play it on stream.

On December 07 2013 09:41 NotYango wrote:

Infinite Crisis and Smite were exactly what I was thinking this applies to.

On December 07 2013 09:45 LaNague wrote:
someone was payed to play Smite, im quite sure of it, i just cant remember who.

Honestly, there is more to it than that. Responding to community concerns was definitely a part of this, but it was discussed very spiritedly internally too. Ultimately we don't want to do things we feel aren't in line with our core philosophies. There was a whoooole lot of very intense discussion that revealed, along with how players were reacting, that this just wasn't right.

Personally, I'm very happy we changed course. We're one company, but we all have different beliefs too Our internal discussion blog had a bit under a hundred very, very long posts discussing whether this was or wasn't right. We were having discussions all over the office, during lunches, at home... this kind of thing was on my mind, and on the mind of many Rioters. We're people, and we want to do right. It sucks to feel like you might not be. Thanks for giving us your good faith on this

On December 07 2013 11:12 Ryuu314 wrote:
I would like to link Saint and Dyrus's post in the update thread on reddit:

http://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/1sa59j/update_on_the_lcs_streaming_policy/cdvgx4a

[–]Slashered
Saint is wrong. I had this conversation with Saint on Skype yesterday and literally just now but it WAS the contract that was sent from Riot to the team owners to sign. It was not a rough draft that was not yet sent out. There is time for the owners to look it over, possibly come together and talk with Riot about their concerns, but this was still the intended action. If it wasn't, then Riot wouldn't have had their internal discussion and the statements they made on Wed and today. From talking to the owners, they were rather understanding of the contract and most were not going to abstain.
In any case, I think this is obviously a great move all around for the players and esports as a whole.

On December 07 2013 12:16 nojitosunrise wrote:


Slasher promptly calling Saint out for being wrong

http://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/1sa59j/update_on_the_lcs_streaming_policy/cdvhexj




popcorn.gif

On December 07 2013 12:43 wei2coolman wrote:

depends on your point of view.
Saint considers anything not signed as still "in negotiation"
Slasher considers it finalized if Riot didn't plan on "revising"
both are right imo.

On December 07 2013 12:45 nojitosunrise wrote:

contracts aren't final until you sign them.