EPTRiot S4 LCS contract discussion - Page 7
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
NotYango
United States719 Posts
On December 06 2013 07:09 JimmiC wrote: All the people that are talking about sports its not the NFL vs the NBA. They are not competitors, most sport fans watch multiple sports it's more like competeition within the same sport. I mean there is so fear that Lebron james is going to quit the heat and play for the Oilers. Or that Peyton manning might become the new shooting gaurd for the bulls. It's like the NBA vs the ABA or UFC vs Belator or the KHL vs NHL. How is this not the same for video games? People play multiple video games too. It's exactly like the NFL vs. the NBA because it's absurd to think that Hearthstone is going to stop people from playing LoL. Especially when the context where it's presented is "this is just time killer because my queues are too long". Like there's this absurd paranoia from Riot that exposing viewers to other games means that vieiwers playing other games is somehow going to negatively impact them playing LoL to some significant extent. And yes, that's what it is, paranoia. And everyone is somehow buying into this paranoia. It's exactly like TB said--Riot is the guy with the biggest dick in the room, they don't need to act so fucking insecure. In fact, all of those sports and sponsor comparisons are awful simply because none of those organizations exerts the level of dominance over their respective sphere that Riot currently does. LoL is the top dog in E-sports by a wide margin. Everyone knows it, there's no denying it. Really at this point trying to crowd out much smaller games that have no chance of challenging Riot's position is just bullying smaller organizations, which, while within Riot's right, goes against the much more benign image that they cultivated of themselves as a company since the beginning. If they want to go back to behaving like a normal company, fine. But if that's the case they need to drop the two-faced "by gamers for gamers" bullshit that they've been touting for years. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
NotYango
United States719 Posts
Actually the UFC is exactly what you are describing and they do exert that kind of control over competetors. Like I said the NFL NHL and NBA do not see each other as competitors. Riot clearly see's those other compaines and products as competitors. People have switched from games in the past, I'm sure riot is attempting to protect itself from that in the future. Secondly Riot is paying people which to my knoweldge is very unique. And that is exactly the attitude I am calling paranoia because realistically most of those games have even less to do with LoL than Basketball and Football have to do with Hockey. Again, if they want to behave that way that's in their right. But in that case they have no right to market themselves the way they do. | ||
|
Fries
United States124 Posts
On December 06 2013 07:03 JimmiC wrote: Usually they played multiple sports before they went pro. And were drafted by multiple sports. Very few play more then one sport at a pro level. That still doesn't change the fact that it HAS happened with no repercussions. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
NotYango
United States719 Posts
On December 06 2013 08:23 JimmiC wrote: I think people are totally over reacting because either they love the drama and want to be mad at something. Or they have not been involved in much business and don't realize how common this is. Just because it's common means I have to be OK with it happening in an industry where it's been uncommon up to this point? If E-sports becoming a real sport comes with all the business bullshit, I say fuck that, I'd rather we stay the way we are. | ||
|
kainzero
United States5211 Posts
Most competitive gaming communities need to bond with other similar games in order to survive, like Evo or most LAN tournaments. The competitive gaming world is generally not big enough to have exclusives and most competitive game communities benefit more from cooperation and not competition. (This also includes peripheral makers. I know Madcatz enjoys a good relationship with Hori and possibly Razer despite being competitors, same with Namco and Capcom.) LoL, as early as season 2, was part of these LAN tournaments. Now that they are the top dog they seem to have such an ego with their game that they want to keep down other competitive games and gaming companies and be anti-competitive instead, which really damages the entire community that often has to scrap together to put on an event. It's a scumbag move and it goes against what many competitive gaming communities have been striving for. Anybody who's invested some amount of effort into developing competitive gaming should understand how bad this is for the community as a whole. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
LaNague
Germany9118 Posts
esports is used as PR/advertisement for the game. Esport does not pay for itself, League especially is boosted by riots money. Normal sport leagues pay for themselves and are not advertisements for the sport. They even go so far to advertise for other companies in exchange for money. So analogies to sports when it comes to bans on advertisement on player streams are pretty useless. I personally have no opinion. On the one hand, Riot is hurting the competitiveness with their marketing thingy. As seen in worlds where they compromised the integrity of the tournament by seeding regions into the higher stages of the tournament, just to appease regional viewers. On the other hand, riot is paying millions every year and enable players to commit. | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On December 06 2013 08:42 JimmiC wrote: That's your right. Id rather see the players make decent incomes, benifits. More viewship options and so on. It's not like only negatives come from increased commercialization. Esspecially when the "sport" is created from a product by the company who makes the product. Compaines are only going to put more money into it if they feel they can make more. Dyrus not being able to stream hearthstone while he ques or something is not a big deal to me, and probably not to him either. How does preventing players from streaming other games allow for better incomes or benefits. if anything it increases reliance on Riot as streamers probably won't retain as many viewers leading to less revenue. All this is, is an anti competitive maneuver. and not protection of players or riots IP or anything. its solely to push other out. Its corporate Aggression. of course they can CLAIM its for protection. But no business has ever needed to push others out for its own protection, unless the other business is trying to do the same. Its all just a front so they can keep their "riot is friendly good guy company" facade, while still being anti competitive and aggressive toward any other game. | ||
FakeSteve[TPR]
Valhalla18444 Posts
The LoL world finals SOLD OUT STAPLES CENTER. Riot deserves a hell of a lot of praise for creating actual, real, tangible progress for esports. So please, if you've never seen a contract before, or never worked on contract basis, or have never dealt with sponsorships, keep your opinion to yourself. Making half-witted analogies to processes you don't actually understand doesn't help anyone. | ||
|
Don_Julio
2220 Posts
| ||
|
Aylear
Norway3988 Posts
On December 06 2013 09:01 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: no-compete clauses are 100% standard when a person or entity is paying you to work with or advertise for them. it blows my fucking mind that anyone has a problem with this. All you people waving torches a crying about "Riot's greed" need a reality check. Riot pays a salary to these players in the LCS, a no-compete clause when those players are streaming is completely sensible, and is not shady, underhanded, or greedy in any way. The LoL world finals SOLD OUT STAPLES CENTER. Riot deserves a hell of a lot of praise for creating actual, real, tangible progress for esports. So please, if you've never seen a contract before, or never worked on contract basis, or have never dealt with sponsorships, keep your opinion to yourself. Making half-witted analogies to processes you don't actually understand doesn't help anyone. This is just about the only sensible post in this thread. There is a salary involved; you have the chance to earn and win a million dollars, and you get paid even if you don't even qualify. At best you can complain that a few of the games make no sense because they aren't direct competitors, but even then the actual anger and vitriol surrounding this gives me a headache. This is like some players in the FGC railing against sponsorships and "watering down the scene" by removing the rampant racism and sexism. It's like, do you want your esport to be taken seriously or not? | ||
|
nojitosunrise
United States6188 Posts
On December 06 2013 07:09 JimmiC wrote: All the people that are talking about sports its not the NFL vs the NBA. They are not competitors, most sport fans watch multiple sports it's more like competeition within the same sport. I mean there is so fear that Lebron james is going to quit the heat and play for the Oilers. Or that Peyton manning might become the new shooting gaurd for the bulls. It's like the NBA vs the ABA or UFC vs Belator or the KHL vs NHL. The nfl, nba, MLB, NHL, and mls are all competitors when it comes to advertising and promotion. | ||
|
ItsFunToLose
United States776 Posts
| ||
|
Seiuchi
United States931 Posts
On December 06 2013 09:01 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: no-compete clauses are 100% standard when a person or entity is paying you to work with or advertise for them. it blows my fucking mind that anyone has a problem with this. All you people waving torches a crying about "Riot's greed" need a reality check. Riot pays a salary to these players in the LCS, a no-compete clause when those players are streaming is completely sensible, and is not shady, underhanded, or greedy in any way. The LoL world finals SOLD OUT STAPLES CENTER. Riot deserves a hell of a lot of praise for creating actual, real, tangible progress for esports. So please, if you've never seen a contract before, or never worked on contract basis, or have never dealt with sponsorships, keep your opinion to yourself. Making half-witted analogies to processes you don't actually understand doesn't help anyone. Why does Riot deserve praise for fucking over the people that brought them to where they are? Honestly, Hotshot and Regi and their foresight with streaming and building their brands, and then the people who took the torch from them like OddOne and Saint are what brought League to #1 game status, Riot lucked out having them around. | ||
|
Slow Motion
United States6960 Posts
On December 06 2013 09:10 Don_Julio wrote: The best analogy might be the KeSPA back in the BW days. Everyone acknowledged that they deserved huge credit to enforce eSports as legitimate entertainment and progaming as a profession. On the other hand KeSPA had been immensely criticized for having too much power and having a stranglehold over the scene. They also abused and exploited the players to a crazy level. Riot is nowhere near that yet but I still wish the players are able to have some say and negotiate these things. There is a very valid argument that this clause can cut into the entertainment value and profits of streams (boring during queue times) and if the players had a competent representative maybe they could have gotten some benefits in return. | ||
| ||
