|
Alright, we're going to call it a day with all the Thorin drama, guys. I figured if it was about SI, onGamers, TSM, etc, it had some relevance to League but somehow you guys managed to devolve the discussion into an issue about race of all things.
Enough is enough. Let's move along now.
-NeoIllusions |
On June 11 2014 18:39 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2014 18:28 NeoIllusions wrote:
Alright, we're going to call it a day with all the Thorin drama, guys. I figured if it was about SI, onGamers, TSM, etc, it had some relevance to League but somehow you guys managed to devolve the discussion into an issue about race of all things.
Enough is enough. Let's move along now.
@PX: For those who don't know, what's the difference between the two formats? PTI i linked a random episode in a prior post, its a more rapid fire show where two opinionated hosts discuss whether they like dislike agree or disagree with various statements or news articles, they take turns talking about it over the course of 2 minutes a topic, but they pretty frequently run over time by up to a minute when in a heated discussion. The hosts are pretty well respected within their community and the show often tries to cover the latest news in all of sports, a LoL specific could be a longer weekly or biweekly easily though. The show has three segments: Headlines, where they discuss the headlines as i mentioned, 5GM or 5 good minutes, its an interview segment with a topical guest where they bring up whatever is the biggest news of the day with the guest and give them a chance to speak their mind about it, the third section is either email/twitter based questions or discussion of future games to be played the next couple days, occasionally the headlines or interview go over and they skip the section. First Take has 2 rather controversial hosts that bring up a myriad of guests and all debate the latest sports news its usually a couple hours long and is done more in a podcast format rather than a discussion like PTI. First take tends to be more ranty and has a lot of arguing between hosts and guests and is less organized in general. im pretty bias'd in this summary as PTI is my favorite show on ESPN though
accurate enough imo.
I would say Skip and Smith are full of shit sometimes (okay, a lot of the times), and I feel like they fall into the typical sports fans fallacy of "muh feels", and "muh traditions". But I like the free form discussion that takes place between Skip and Smith.
I would say SI is more like First Take right now. The problem is, First Take there's a neutral host that introduces the topic, as opposed to Thorin is the main host introducing topic and one discussing it. Which makes people feel like SI is more platform for Thorin's rant/bashing on topics he wants. (I think this is false, since SI does a good job covering all the news in Korea/NA/EU, and not just selected topics)
|
One of the reasons I would argue PTI is better (aside from the glaringly obvious reason that the hosts are simply better from the get-go) is that there isn't room for rants. Yes, they can be awesome. But, I would feel safe wagering that more often than not, they are the opposite. Sometimes the rants are genuine, and sometimes they communicate a point well that would be impossible to get across in a 2 minute dialogue. However, most of the time, they're just filling air time because the show has to run all morning. PTI guys know they only have 20-some minutes to cover 10 to 15 topics and have to plan/choose their words and points wisely. Although this is grossly oversimplifying it, it's quality vs quantity in the long run.
I do think there is a place for the rant-style thing. Some people enjoy it, and I'm not going to try and argue your wrong in some objective sense. Hell, I probably end up on a Steven A rant that I enjoy once or twice a month after following a few links I'm actually interested in. But, I hit up the PTI podcasts on a near daily basis, and I've never even thought about sitting through a First Take one.
I'd say it's very related that I've never made it through an entire SI episode in one sitting, and I've given it multiple efforts at this point. And considering the amount of reading/coding/etc I do for large intervals of time, it's not for lack of attention span.
|
SI has no real time obligation though, they can do as long and as short as they want. The only time I felt SI was beating a dead horse was when they were trying to bait Zion into saying NintendudeX blows, and when Zion was not comfortable discussing Dig's comms.
|
On June 11 2014 18:50 wei2coolman wrote:
SI has no real time obligation though, they can do as long and as short as they want. The only time I felt SI was beating a dead horse was when they were trying to bait Zion into saying NintendudeX blows, and when Zion was not comfortable discussing Dig's comms.
yeah but wei2... my PTI clip, you can't deny the world seeing Monte in that costume.
|
When people stand on a soapbox for a living, not having a time constraint translates to "they can do as long as they want." 
I agree with you that free flow conversation is really good to listen to when it is good. To stick with the sports theme (sorry thread?), a good example for me would be the BS Report. But even there, they are clearly working with - admittedly, this is sometimes more of an editing thing in this case - a time constraint on the final product. It's not so much the beating a dead horse that is/can be the problem. It's more a case of empty verbal calories.
|
On June 11 2014 18:57 asymptotech wrote:When people stand on a soapbox for a living, not having a time constraint translates to "they can do as long as they want." I agree with you that free flow conversation is really good to listen to when it is good. To stick with the sports theme (sorry thread?), a good example for me would be the BS Report. But even there, they are clearly working with - admittedly, this is sometimes more of an editing thing in this case - a time constraint on the final product. It's not so much the beating a dead horse that is/can be the problem. It's more a case of empty verbal calories.
People can argue all they want about whether Esports and sports should try to emulate eachother or whatever, but you can't deny that ESPN's gone some quality sports coverage programs that are entertaining and easily translatable with the right hosts into any Esport.
|
United Kingdom50293 Posts
|
|
|
I don't think we should hope for riot to change pick/bans on the whims of the community, i think it'll take LCS teams asking for it as a group, but that day may never come.
|
meh. reddit cycles through the same topics every so often. Kinda like we do.
I'd argue that a large majority of people who follow the competitive scene or play ranked agrees there needs to be more bans. Only problem is a simple ban increase is a superficial change. Plus, Riot has said they don't want to.
|
On June 11 2014 18:30 NeoIllusions wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2014 18:28 739 wrote:Good, let's leave the topic. Let's discuss those changes now : On June 11 2014 17:06 739 wrote:So, I've just read somewhere that they moved servers to Amsterdam ? And it's actually working pretty faster than it did before but I had no comparizon, because it was late at night and there weren't that many people logged in. Also the new match history update seems cool - http://euw.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/features/announcing-new-match-history-betaOur goal is to deliver robust, intricate details about your previous matches in an accessible, intuitive interface that allows you to share game histories with your friends. We’re making more of your games visible, not just your last 10. We’re expanding the end-of-game information, using graphs and heat maps to display dragon kills, gold-per-minute, death locations and more. And now you can share links to your match history across all of your favorite social channels. Related to sharing, there is one aspect of the new match history we want to dive into deeper. We believe ranked play is the highest sphere of competition. Players opt in to ranked play to measure their skill in an amped-up competitive environment, and the focus is much more on winning. In order to maintain that legitimacy, we believe that ranked game stats should be open knowledge, so unlike match histories for normal queue games, ranked games will be publically available. Seems awesome ! /insert obligatory replay comment But sure, more data and details about the games you play is always welcome. No one is going to say this is a bad thing.
you clearly didnt read the thread on the lol reddit.
On June 11 2014 18:58 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2014 18:57 asymptotech wrote:When people stand on a soapbox for a living, not having a time constraint translates to "they can do as long as they want." I agree with you that free flow conversation is really good to listen to when it is good. To stick with the sports theme (sorry thread?), a good example for me would be the BS Report. But even there, they are clearly working with - admittedly, this is sometimes more of an editing thing in this case - a time constraint on the final product. It's not so much the beating a dead horse that is/can be the problem. It's more a case of empty verbal calories. People can argue all they want about whether Esports and sports should try to emulate eachother or whatever, but you can't deny that ESPN's gone some quality sports coverage programs that are entertaining and easily translatable with the right hosts into any Esport.
quality hosts is going to be a problem in the lol scene though. i honestly believe that until lol goes through a 'recession' of sorts, where the community/sponosrs have to make hard choices about who they support and who they dont the quality of lol related products and shows is going to stay forever low.
if every lol related show and streamer can pull in 10k viewers, they wont have a problem landing small time sponsorship deals, growing their brand and making a living off the scene, even though they are objectively terrible. if you comment on why they are bad on reddit other people will explode at you for negativity. if you want a truly high quality league show or host there needs to be market forces involved to force out the shit, but while lol floats on its cloud of cash this is never gonna happen.
the fact that the premier talking head in the lol scene is travis is fucking pathetic.
|
On June 11 2014 19:16 Ryuu314 wrote:meh. reddit cycles through the same topics every so often. Kinda like we do. I'd argue that a large majority of people who follow the competitive scene or play ranked agrees there needs to be more bans. Only problem is a simple ban increase is a superficial change. Plus, Riot has said they don't want to.
Pretty much the whole argument:
more bans because of bigger champ pool, allow more draft strategy -> interwoven bans for even more strategy -> riot says it makes it too draft focused of a game -> riot says more bans is bad because the competitive format needs to be the same as solo queue, and more bans means higher requirement to play solo queue and more burden of knowledge on players.
end of discussion xD
|
I don't think they will change it but it would be nice to see if their reasoning has changed at all. This season seems to be especially terrible when it comes to diversity(At least in LCS not sure about Korea/China). Last I read they said they don't view the draft phase as part of the game and while I think people could believe that before I don't see them or the players believing that reasoning so well now.
|
I could see an argument for having more bans in competitive play, but there's zero reason why we need more in solo queue.
|
On June 11 2014 19:20 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2014 19:16 Ryuu314 wrote:meh. reddit cycles through the same topics every so often. Kinda like we do. I'd argue that a large majority of people who follow the competitive scene or play ranked agrees there needs to be more bans. Only problem is a simple ban increase is a superficial change. Plus, Riot has said they don't want to. Pretty much the whole argument: more bans because of bigger champ pool, allow more draft strategy -> interwoven bans for even more strategy -> riot says it makes it too draft focused of a game -> riot says more bans is bad because the competitive format needs to be the same as solo queue, and more bans means higher requirement to play solo queue and more burden of knowledge on players. end of discussion xD
except riot is objectively wrong D;
|
On June 11 2014 19:23 Numy wrote:
I don't think they will change it but it would be nice to see if their reasoning has changed at all. This season seems to be especially terrible when it comes to diversity(At least in LCS not sure about Korea/China). Last I read they said they don't view the draft phase as part of the game and while I think people could believe that before I don't see them or the players believing that reasoning so well now.
I wonder when popular opinion will catch up enough to realize half of what riot says publicly is just nonsense or wrong or PR speak i mean i don't know what they say behind closed doors, but their public stances have always been head scratching. especially things coming from zileas.
|
On June 11 2014 19:27 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2014 19:23 Numy wrote:
I don't think they will change it but it would be nice to see if their reasoning has changed at all. This season seems to be especially terrible when it comes to diversity(At least in LCS not sure about Korea/China). Last I read they said they don't view the draft phase as part of the game and while I think people could believe that before I don't see them or the players believing that reasoning so well now. I wonder when popular opinion will catch up enough to realize half of what riot says publicly is just nonsense or wrong or PR speak i mean i don't know what they say behind closed doors, but their public stances have always been head scratching.
I initially thought the same as you but the more I looked into it the more my opinion changed slightly. I think it's more a case of Riot being more fragmented than we actually think they are. We often perceive them as having a unified body or stances and they portray themselves like this but if you take a look at some of the things the individual members say against what has been done you get a different picture. The greatest example I can think of is Morello discussing manaless sustain champs being something he never wants done again(Vlad) and then Rengar coming out not too long after that. You can either say he's lying or I think the more logical conclusion is just that Riot has lots of different individuals with different ideas.
This is made worse by them having these PR statements that act like they are all on the same page. They don't seem to have one single entity that has final say on things going into the game like an Icefrog so by continuely appearing to be unified while introducing conflicting elements it creates this very awkward dynamic.
|
On June 11 2014 19:34 Numy wrote:
I initially thought the same as you but the more I looked into it the more my opinion changed slightly. I think it's more a case of Riot being more fragmented than we actually think they are. We often perceive them as having a unified body or stances and they portray themselves like this but if you take a look at some of the things the individual members say against what has been done you get a different picture. The greatest example I can think of is Morello discussing manaless sustain champs being something he never wants done again(Vlad) and then Rengar coming out not too long after that. You can either say he's lying or I think the more logical conclusion is just that Riot has lots of different individuals with different ideas.
Im not even talking about how what they say publicly never seems to line up with their actions afterwards, but im talking about some of their stated design philosophies and reasons why they do or do not like things. Things like this http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=293417
|
Rofl did thorin really say his remarks were "off-colour" in his apology after making a monkey remark towards a black person?
Why the actual fuck is this tard in our scene?
|
Bearded Elder29904 Posts
On June 11 2014 19:50 Capped wrote:
Rofl did thorin really say his remarks were "off-colour" in his apology after making a monkey remark towards a black person?
Why the actual fuck is this tard in our scene?
Funny thing that some of the people here and I'd actually say most people are defending him, lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
