On August 26 2016 06:28 MuddyJam wrote: @GrandInquisitor that post is full of so much vanity and smugness its unreal.
As a side note if Riot fixed worlds for audience, It would be Korea vs China every time.
No esport is realistically going to match lol any time soon. Fighting games growing very slowily. SC is not growing and nobody is going to make a new RTS aimed at esports. Dota has been pushed into one central tournament to spike interest in that one month then keep a low profile. Other moba games have been created and all crashed. Being on weekly as the de facto epsort is very strong and pushed out competition. But as you learn more about the scene it becomes more of a scam (in some sense). People don't like how lol is at the highest level. The game is mostly about macro play and rotation. Instead we focus on jazzing up the champions/kills as its more about working as an advert for lol then about the game. Its about jayce getting buffed so people see him on screen and try him out. Maybe buy a skin, you are not going to be using that skin of the champ that is now out of the meta. With rapid patching the game becomes more about showcasing the latest game play then true matches of skill. So don't pretend its a great competition when its more of an entertainment show with stronger links to WWE than say the Olympics.
There's a lot of things here that I don't really believe.
On August 25 2016 05:02 Letmelose wrote: Everything single decision they make is so obviously catered towards the casual playerbase in order to exploit them as much as humanely possible
Riot Games has failed miserably in that regard, and it seems to me that those familiar with other e-Sports scenes has to suffer through most pathetic rationalization Riot Games puts out to veil their true colors. At least be slick about it, please.
What's with Riot Gaming being a control freak with every little thing out there when it has been proven time and time again that while they are superb at keeping that cash inflow going, they suck ass at running an awesome, legitimate e-Sports scene?
I think it's unfortunate that the parent company has the ability to dictate the landscape of its competitive scene to the level Riot Games has, given they are bound to abuse the hell out of it given their ulterior motives.
Right now, Riot Games has zero restrictions, are the gods of their own domain, and we are entirely at the mercy of their whims.
I think they are doing a completely shit job from an e-Sports perspective
I don't think it's dramatic of me to vocalize my frustrations.
Yes, you're not being dramatic.
(I feel like this is why I end up being the Official Riot Apologist, because the Riot-haters are so dramatic in their vitriol and hatred it's just staggering. You don't really see Riot dicksuckers being so dramatic.)
As an initial matter, it's hard for me to understand how "everything single decision they make is so obviously catered towards the casual playerbase in order to exploit them as much as humanely possible" [sic]. So when Riot updates Leona's passive "to display the damage text to Leona when her allies proc Sunlight", that's exploiting the casual playerbase? Or when Riot fixes Yasuo's R->Q bug, that's exploiting casuals?
OK, I hear you saying. I obviously just meant BALANCE decisions, not stuff like that. Sure. Riot nerfing Ashe R damage, buffing Diana E, or any of these other balance changes - you call that exploitation? How is that different than what any other company does?
OK, I hear you backtracking. I obviously just meant ESPORTS decisions. Sure. So when Riot determined Worlds seeding based on MSI results, that's exploiting casuals. When they shifted to a Bo2/3 system instead of Bo1. When they added mid lane streams. When they added analyst desk. All of that is exploiting casuals. Why?
The fact of the matter is, SOME of Riot's decisions really are "exploiting" casuals (see, e.g., Hextech crafting), but it's so odd to frame it that way, because it's only true if you also accept that Riot's fundamental existence, and the existence of every other corporation on the face of the earth, is to "exploit" their customers. That's what capitalism is! People make amazing things and in return we pay them for it. I mean, sure, you can call buying a burrito to be "exploitation" by Chipotle, but people are gonna look at you pretty weird for saying that.
That's the point I was trying to get at earlier. Yes, LCS "exploits casuals", but that is the point of LCS. LCS doesn't exist because Riot hates money and wants to give it to Asian nerds. LCS exists because it sells RP.
Of course, that doesn't mean that Riot can totally abandon the ideals that you want Riot to uphold. If Riot rigged Worlds so that NA teams would always be in the finals, it's not going to be good for LCS. So there's a balance to be struck. Every decision has to consider both the "competitive integrity" side (for lack of a better word to describe what you're apparently seeking) and the profits side. Some decisions will come down on one side, some will come down on the other, and the vast majority are just totally irrelevant. But you can't just take every decision that comes down on the profits side and hold it up as proof that Riot "is abusing the hell out of it for ulterior motives", because if they actually did that, LCS would be donezo pretty quickly.
At the end of the day, I think it's interesting that you assert that Riot does a "completely shit job" at esports. I think you feel the need to repeat this a lot because, rationally speaking, if you think Riot is doing a completely shit job, then just don't watch it. And if people all think that Riot is doing a completely shit job, then Riot isn't going to be making money off of LCS any more. But given how many people watch LCS, it seems like most people think they are doing a pretty good job.
I've stated my opinions, and it's pretty obnoxious of you to dismiss it all as over-dramatization. I'd rather have my points be refuted, rather than have someone try to belittle me out of some false sense of grandeur. Also don't try to paint a picture of me off your criteria when you don't even know me. I don't hate Riot Games. If anything, I'd say hate is a feeling I reserve for Blizzard. What I do hate is the shitty decisions Riot Games make. And the vitriol correlates to the amount of shitty decisions Riot Games has taken over the years. I don't have an agenda against Riot Games, I don't distinguish the world into Riot "dicksuckers" and "haters". So please, stick to your side of the argument, if you can, without name calling.
First point, there are numerous patches which done without sufficient thought, and are extremely poorly done, and I can't think of another reason why they would spend so much manpower on the sheer number of the changes, yet spend such little effort on actually making these worthwhile changes. Much of these are changes just for the sake of change, and when you realize there's a lack of replays, removing all the major glitches in the game, lack of a sandbox mode, and other issues that should be more fundamentally important points of attention, I can't help but think Riot Games is doing a shit job. There's so much that could be done, but so much focus is spent elsewhere (because it's more profitable). It's just a pile on of one bad patch after another without actually addressing any of the major issues that would enrich the competitive scene.
Second point, don't lecture me on the economic drive that explains what Riot Games does. And yes, Riot Games could be doing a worse job by actually making an arse of every little balance change and glitch fixes to sabotage their own game, and make the e-Sports scene such a joke that everything is rigged. You may be satisfied with the status quo just some of the examples you've listed didn't come into fruition, but that doesn't render my exasperation with Riot Games when it comes to their philosophy and the extent to which they are allowed to flex their right. You keep tracking back to the argument that what Riot Games does is extremely natural, and is within their rights. No shit, Einstein. I'm saying that the by-product (competitive scene) of their main purpose (profits), is shit. To my knowledge, there are other e-Sports titles out there that has fraction of the infrastructure League of Legends has at their disposal, yet has basic e-Sports concepts down better than Riot Games does. Doesn't that frustrate you? It sure frustrates me.
You've struck gold with that one point though, I shouldn't watch it if I'm not satisfied with the product. Guess what? I'm watching it a whole lot less. Considering there's currently no incentive for Riot Games to change to my liking because people such as yourself think it's completely reasonable for Riot Games to do the things they do (monopoly over the competitive scene, balance changes that seem to be driven more by profits than actual betterment of the actual game and the competitive scene that relies on it, numerous decisions that lessens practice quality for the professionals compared to some other gaming titles, and the focus on hype rather than actually creating a legitimate competitive experience with the lack of sound-proof booths), I've been weening myself out. However, I don't think you've actually touched on any of the issues I've been addressing, perhaps you don't feel the need to because they don't frustrate you like they frustrate me. You've focused on three points.
1) Riot Games does some things right. 2) Riot Games has a right to make money. 3) Enough people find the viewing experience enjoyable for them to make a profit.
This is a given. I feel like the argument should start with these points already taken for granted. The real question should be if this is sufficient, whether there needs to be changed (I obviously feel they do), and how that change (if it is necessary) should come about. I think the viewer-base expressing their frustration is one way of doing so. Address these issues enough, Riot Games may eventually cave to the pressure. It's not dramatics. It's just a call for change.
On August 25 2016 05:02 Letmelose wrote: Everything single decision they make is so obviously catered towards the casual playerbase in order to exploit them as much as humanely possible
Riot Games has failed miserably in that regard, and it seems to me that those familiar with other e-Sports scenes has to suffer through most pathetic rationalization Riot Games puts out to veil their true colors. At least be slick about it, please.
What's with Riot Gaming being a control freak with every little thing out there when it has been proven time and time again that while they are superb at keeping that cash inflow going, they suck ass at running an awesome, legitimate e-Sports scene?
I think it's unfortunate that the parent company has the ability to dictate the landscape of its competitive scene to the level Riot Games has, given they are bound to abuse the hell out of it given their ulterior motives.
Right now, Riot Games has zero restrictions, are the gods of their own domain, and we are entirely at the mercy of their whims.
I think they are doing a completely shit job from an e-Sports perspective
I don't think it's dramatic of me to vocalize my frustrations.
Yes, you're not being dramatic.
(I feel like this is why I end up being the Official Riot Apologist, because the Riot-haters are so dramatic in their vitriol and hatred it's just staggering. You don't really see Riot dicksuckers being so dramatic.)
As an initial matter, it's hard for me to understand how "everything single decision they make is so obviously catered towards the casual playerbase in order to exploit them as much as humanely possible" [sic]. So when Riot updates Leona's passive "to display the damage text to Leona when her allies proc Sunlight", that's exploiting the casual playerbase? Or when Riot fixes Yasuo's R->Q bug, that's exploiting casuals?
OK, I hear you saying. I obviously just meant BALANCE decisions, not stuff like that. Sure. Riot nerfing Ashe R damage, buffing Diana E, or any of these other balance changes - you call that exploitation? How is that different than what any other company does?
OK, I hear you backtracking. I obviously just meant ESPORTS decisions. Sure. So when Riot determined Worlds seeding based on MSI results, that's exploiting casuals. When they shifted to a Bo2/3 system instead of Bo1. When they added mid lane streams. When they added analyst desk. All of that is exploiting casuals. Why?
The fact of the matter is, SOME of Riot's decisions really are "exploiting" casuals (see, e.g., Hextech crafting), but it's so odd to frame it that way, because it's only true if you also accept that Riot's fundamental existence, and the existence of every other corporation on the face of the earth, is to "exploit" their customers. That's what capitalism is! People make amazing things and in return we pay them for it. I mean, sure, you can call buying a burrito to be "exploitation" by Chipotle, but people are gonna look at you pretty weird for saying that.
That's the point I was trying to get at earlier. Yes, LCS "exploits casuals", but that is the point of LCS. LCS doesn't exist because Riot hates money and wants to give it to Asian nerds. LCS exists because it sells RP.
Of course, that doesn't mean that Riot can totally abandon the ideals that you want Riot to uphold. If Riot rigged Worlds so that NA teams would always be in the finals, it's not going to be good for LCS. So there's a balance to be struck. Every decision has to consider both the "competitive integrity" side (for lack of a better word to describe what you're apparently seeking) and the profits side. Some decisions will come down on one side, some will come down on the other, and the vast majority are just totally irrelevant. But you can't just take every decision that comes down on the profits side and hold it up as proof that Riot "is abusing the hell out of it for ulterior motives", because if they actually did that, LCS would be donezo pretty quickly.
At the end of the day, I think it's interesting that you assert that Riot does a "completely shit job" at esports. I think you feel the need to repeat this a lot because, rationally speaking, if you think Riot is doing a completely shit job, then just don't watch it. And if people all think that Riot is doing a completely shit job, then Riot isn't going to be making money off of LCS any more. But given how many people watch LCS, it seems like most people think they are doing a pretty good job.
I've stated my opinions, and it's pretty obnoxious of you to dismiss it all as over-dramatization. I'd rather have my points be refuted, rather than have someone try to belittle me out of some false sense of grandeur. Also don't try to paint a picture of me off your criteria when you don't even know me. I don't hate Riot Games. If anything, I'd say hate is a feeling I reserve for Blizzard. What I do hate is the shitty decisions Riot Games make. And the vitriol correlates to the amount of shitty decisions Riot Games has taken over the years. I don't have an agenda against Riot Games, I don't distinguish the world into Riot "dicksuckers" and "haters". So please, stick to your side of the argument, if you can, without name calling.
First point, there are numerous patches which done without sufficient thought, and are extremely poorly done, and I can't think of another reason why they would spend so much manpower on the sheer number of the changes, yet spend such little effort on actually making these worthwhile changes. Much of these are changes just for the sake of change, and when you realize there's a lack of replays, removing all the major glitches in the game, lack of a sandbox mode, and other issues that should be more fundamentally important points of attention, I can't help but think Riot Games is doing a shit job. There's so much that could be done, but so much focus is spent elsewhere (because it's more profitable). It's just a pile on of one bad patch after another without actually addressing any of the major issues that would enrich the competitive scene.
Second point, don't lecture me on the economic drive that explains what Riot Games does. And yes, Riot Games could be doing a worse job by actually making an arse of every little balance change and glitch fixes to sabotage their own game, and make the e-Sports scene such a joke that everything is rigged. You may be satisfied with the status quo just some of the examples you've listed didn't come into fruition, but that doesn't render my exasperation with Riot Games when it comes to their philosophy and the extent to which they are allowed to flex their right. You keep tracking back to the argument that what Riot Games does is extremely natural, and is within their rights. No shit, Einstein. I'm saying that the by-product (competitive scene) of their main purpose (profits), is shit. To my knowledge, there are other e-Sports titles out there that has fraction of the infrastructure League of Legends has at their disposal, yet has basic e-Sports concepts down better than Riot Games does. Doesn't that frustrate you? It sure frustrates me.
You've struck gold with that one point though, I shouldn't watch it if I'm not satisfied with the product. Guess what? I'm watching it a whole lot less. Considering there's currently no incentive for Riot Games to change to my liking because people such as yourself think it's completely reasonable for Riot Games to do the things they do (monopoly over the competitive scene, balance changes that seem to be driven more by profits than actual betterment of the actual game and the competitive scene that relies on it, numerous decisions that lessens practice quality for the professionals compared to some other gaming titles, and the focus on hype rather than actually creating a legitimate competitive experience with the lack of sound-proof booths), I've been weening myself out. However, I don't think you've actually touched on any of the issues I've been addressing, perhaps you don't feel the need to because they don't frustrate you like they frustrate me. You've focused on three points.
1) Riot Games does some things right. 2) Riot Games has a right to make money. 3) Enough people find the viewing experience enjoyable for them to make a profit.
This is a given. I feel like the argument should start with these points already taken for granted. The real question should be if this is sufficient, whether there needs to be changed (I obviously feel they do), and how that change (if it is necessary) should come about. I think the viewer-base expressing their frustration is one way of doing so. Address these issues enough, Riot Games may eventually cave to the pressure. It's not dramatics. It's just a call for change.
Except you said they are doing complete shit job from an e-Sports perspective. I dont know your definition of shit job but last time i checked League of Legends was still top esports title, still had high viewer counts, still was enjoyable to many people, they still have numer 1 on twitch and quality content about players, hype matches itp. Just because they make mistakes or you dislike something doesnt mean they do complete shit job.
I dont like when people act like there is some devil pact or four-leaf clover where Riot does nothing right and they still have success. I agree with feedback and communication but i doubt angry mob is "calling for change". I think Regi -Tryndamere discussions were good but community outrage and thinking for 100 time that this will kill League etc is silly. Atleast some spicy conspiracy theories were born like thinking that people that worked months on Yorick waited for drama to release the rework.
On August 25 2016 05:02 Letmelose wrote: Everything single decision they make is so obviously catered towards the casual playerbase in order to exploit them as much as humanely possible
Riot Games has failed miserably in that regard, and it seems to me that those familiar with other e-Sports scenes has to suffer through most pathetic rationalization Riot Games puts out to veil their true colors. At least be slick about it, please.
What's with Riot Gaming being a control freak with every little thing out there when it has been proven time and time again that while they are superb at keeping that cash inflow going, they suck ass at running an awesome, legitimate e-Sports scene?
I think it's unfortunate that the parent company has the ability to dictate the landscape of its competitive scene to the level Riot Games has, given they are bound to abuse the hell out of it given their ulterior motives.
Right now, Riot Games has zero restrictions, are the gods of their own domain, and we are entirely at the mercy of their whims.
I think they are doing a completely shit job from an e-Sports perspective
I don't think it's dramatic of me to vocalize my frustrations.
Yes, you're not being dramatic.
(I feel like this is why I end up being the Official Riot Apologist, because the Riot-haters are so dramatic in their vitriol and hatred it's just staggering. You don't really see Riot dicksuckers being so dramatic.)
As an initial matter, it's hard for me to understand how "everything single decision they make is so obviously catered towards the casual playerbase in order to exploit them as much as humanely possible" [sic]. So when Riot updates Leona's passive "to display the damage text to Leona when her allies proc Sunlight", that's exploiting the casual playerbase? Or when Riot fixes Yasuo's R->Q bug, that's exploiting casuals?
OK, I hear you saying. I obviously just meant BALANCE decisions, not stuff like that. Sure. Riot nerfing Ashe R damage, buffing Diana E, or any of these other balance changes - you call that exploitation? How is that different than what any other company does?
OK, I hear you backtracking. I obviously just meant ESPORTS decisions. Sure. So when Riot determined Worlds seeding based on MSI results, that's exploiting casuals. When they shifted to a Bo2/3 system instead of Bo1. When they added mid lane streams. When they added analyst desk. All of that is exploiting casuals. Why?
The fact of the matter is, SOME of Riot's decisions really are "exploiting" casuals (see, e.g., Hextech crafting), but it's so odd to frame it that way, because it's only true if you also accept that Riot's fundamental existence, and the existence of every other corporation on the face of the earth, is to "exploit" their customers. That's what capitalism is! People make amazing things and in return we pay them for it. I mean, sure, you can call buying a burrito to be "exploitation" by Chipotle, but people are gonna look at you pretty weird for saying that.
That's the point I was trying to get at earlier. Yes, LCS "exploits casuals", but that is the point of LCS. LCS doesn't exist because Riot hates money and wants to give it to Asian nerds. LCS exists because it sells RP.
Of course, that doesn't mean that Riot can totally abandon the ideals that you want Riot to uphold. If Riot rigged Worlds so that NA teams would always be in the finals, it's not going to be good for LCS. So there's a balance to be struck. Every decision has to consider both the "competitive integrity" side (for lack of a better word to describe what you're apparently seeking) and the profits side. Some decisions will come down on one side, some will come down on the other, and the vast majority are just totally irrelevant. But you can't just take every decision that comes down on the profits side and hold it up as proof that Riot "is abusing the hell out of it for ulterior motives", because if they actually did that, LCS would be donezo pretty quickly.
At the end of the day, I think it's interesting that you assert that Riot does a "completely shit job" at esports. I think you feel the need to repeat this a lot because, rationally speaking, if you think Riot is doing a completely shit job, then just don't watch it. And if people all think that Riot is doing a completely shit job, then Riot isn't going to be making money off of LCS any more. But given how many people watch LCS, it seems like most people think they are doing a pretty good job.
I've stated my opinions, and it's pretty obnoxious of you to dismiss it all as over-dramatization. I'd rather have my points be refuted, rather than have someone try to belittle me out of some false sense of grandeur. Also don't try to paint a picture of me off your criteria when you don't even know me. I don't hate Riot Games. If anything, I'd say hate is a feeling I reserve for Blizzard. What I do hate is the shitty decisions Riot Games make. And the vitriol correlates to the amount of shitty decisions Riot Games has taken over the years. I don't have an agenda against Riot Games, I don't distinguish the world into Riot "dicksuckers" and "haters". So please, stick to your side of the argument, if you can, without name calling.
First point, there are numerous patches which done without sufficient thought, and are extremely poorly done, and I can't think of another reason why they would spend so much manpower on the sheer number of the changes, yet spend such little effort on actually making these worthwhile changes. Much of these are changes just for the sake of change, and when you realize there's a lack of replays, removing all the major glitches in the game, lack of a sandbox mode, and other issues that should be more fundamentally important points of attention, I can't help but think Riot Games is doing a shit job. There's so much that could be done, but so much focus is spent elsewhere (because it's more profitable). It's just a pile on of one bad patch after another without actually addressing any of the major issues that would enrich the competitive scene.
Second point, don't lecture me on the economic drive that explains what Riot Games does. And yes, Riot Games could be doing a worse job by actually making an arse of every little balance change and glitch fixes to sabotage their own game, and make the e-Sports scene such a joke that everything is rigged. You may be satisfied with the status quo just some of the examples you've listed didn't come into fruition, but that doesn't render my exasperation with Riot Games when it comes to their philosophy and the extent to which they are allowed to flex their right. You keep tracking back to the argument that what Riot Games does is extremely natural, and is within their rights. No shit, Einstein. I'm saying that the by-product (competitive scene) of their main purpose (profits), is shit. To my knowledge, there are other e-Sports titles out there that has fraction of the infrastructure League of Legends has at their disposal, yet has basic e-Sports concepts down better than Riot Games does. Doesn't that frustrate you? It sure frustrates me.
You've struck gold with that one point though, I shouldn't watch it if I'm not satisfied with the product. Guess what? I'm watching it a whole lot less. Considering there's currently no incentive for Riot Games to change to my liking because people such as yourself think it's completely reasonable for Riot Games to do the things they do (monopoly over the competitive scene, balance changes that seem to be driven more by profits than actual betterment of the actual game and the competitive scene that relies on it, numerous decisions that lessens practice quality for the professionals compared to some other gaming titles, and the focus on hype rather than actually creating a legitimate competitive experience with the lack of sound-proof booths), I've been weening myself out. However, I don't think you've actually touched on any of the issues I've been addressing, perhaps you don't feel the need to because they don't frustrate you like they frustrate me. You've focused on three points.
1) Riot Games does some things right. 2) Riot Games has a right to make money. 3) Enough people find the viewing experience enjoyable for them to make a profit.
This is a given. I feel like the argument should start with these points already taken for granted. The real question should be if this is sufficient, whether there needs to be changed (I obviously feel they do), and how that change (if it is necessary) should come about. I think the viewer-base expressing their frustration is one way of doing so. Address these issues enough, Riot Games may eventually cave to the pressure. It's not dramatics. It's just a call for change.
Except you said they are doing complete shit job from an e-Sports perspective. I dont know your definition of shit job but last time i checked League of Legends was still top esports title, still had high viewer counts, still was enjoyable to many people, they still have numer 1 on twitch and quality content about players, hype matches itp. Just because they make mistakes or you dislike something doesnt mean they do complete shit job.
I dont like when people act like there is some devil pact or four-leaf clover where Riot does nothing right and they still have success. I agree with feedback and communication but i doubt angry mob is "calling for change". I think Regi -Tryndamere discussions were good but community outrage and thinking for 100 time that this will kill League etc is silly. Atleast some spicy conspiracy theories were born like thinking that people that worked months on Yorick waited for drama to release the rework.
I think the commercial success League of Legend enjoys is exactly the reason why Riot Games's short-comings are becoming less susceptible to criticism, and why Riot Games may feel like their decisions are completely justifified. It justifies the decisions for them, and it's really odd that some people think that should be a good enough reasoning for me as well. We have entirely different concerns.
For me personally, I don't judge a product based on its commercial success. Phantom Menace was a shit film, despite the commercial success it enjoyed. I don't think of Fifty Shades of Grey as the pinnacle of literary work, despite the joy it brings to thousands of people. I want a legitimate competition with basic values that has been viable on other e-Sports titles, rather than a show that brings maximum profits for Riot Games.
If you read my first post, you'll notice how the commercial success of the competitive League of Legends scene bring me no solace when I look at what is lacking. While I do believe these are huge issues that needs to be addressed, I've never claimed that it will be the death of competitive League of Legends, so don't put words in my mouth. These are not conspiracy theories. These are real issues that I feel has made the scene shit. You may not agree, but don't tell me what to feel, or try to portray me as something else without actually addressing any of my original points. You've gotta have more than that, seriously.
For me personally, I don't judge a product based on its commercial success. Phantom Menace was a shit film, despite the commercial success it enjoyed. I don't think of Fifty Shades of Grey as the pinnacle of literary work, despite the joy it brings to thousands of people. I want a legitimate competition with basic values that has been viable on other e-Sports titles, rather than a show that brings maximum profits for Riot Games.
I hate to break it to you for the third time in a row, but: guess what the purpose of LCS is. Hint: it's to bring maximum profits for Riot Games. You can "want" a legitimate competition with basic values that has been viable on other e-Sports titles, but you know, if it didn't have those things, it wouldn't be bringing in profits for Riot Games. Most people obviously do think it has those things.
The examples you used are irrelevant because they are artistic works. Artistic works have other metrics by which they should be judged.
Sports leagues do not. They are strictly commercial enterprises. Want to know what the best hockey league in the world is? It's the NHL because the most people watch it, not the KHL. Want to know what the best football league in the world is? It's the NFL because who gives a shit about the CFL. Sure, you can argue all day that the CFL has some objectively artistically superior rule that better hews to the "basic values" of football. Good luck convincing people to watch it, or convincing people to play there.
So until you can provide an objective, measurable metric that you think LCS should be judged by, and that LCS is failing to meet, then the only metric we have is viewership and popularity. LCS is clearly miles ahead of every other esport in that regard.
I think though, that your latest posts have been really revealing. Because you on the one hand praise the infrastructure of LCS, and also decry the monopoly that Riot has over LCS.
But that's the whole point. Riot runs its scene with an iron grip and that's exactly why it has such amazing infrastructure. No other esport in the world comes remotely close. Valve is starting to do it with TI6, but no one else.
The point is that LCS is like the NFL/NBA/etc., not tennis. In tennis competitors fly around to random tournaments and live off of prize money. Some tournaments are more prestigious than others, but on the whole there is nothing "official" about it, just a bunch of unaffiliated tournaments. It is amazing for the top players (Federer, Djokovic, Nadal), but once you get to #100 or so you're just hoping to make enough at each tournament to afford to fly to the next one. It's incredibly unstable for young players, but this is what every other esports company does because it's cheap. They don't have to invest anything. Rocket League went with this model because no way can Psyonix afford to create an "LCS".
So the only reason you're impressed by all of the infrastructure that LCS has is that Riot literally paid for all of it to exist. Who do you think built the stages? Hires the casters? Hires the video producers? Pays for the electricians? Pays for the computers? Pays the janitors? In every other esport, those costs are paid for by third party tournaments. But Riot invested easily tens of millions into doing this for LCS. (And, I'd claim, it's a big reason why LCS and League are so popular now.) So the idea that you can bitch about them having a "monopoly" is Bernie Sanders-level communist, that we should just take it away because you're mad about some balance change or whatever.
LCS is unprecedented. It's the first ever esport that pays salaries instead of prizes. And the price we pay for that is absolute control, but let's be honest, absolute control has done a fuckload of amazing things for LCS. It's done some terrible things too, and you and I talk about various things that Riot should be doing instead, but when you start your discussion with
Everything single decision they make is so obviously catered towards the casual playerbase in order to exploit them as much as humanely possible, and it's impossible to expect a change with their basic philosophy and the inevitable dire consequences from that, made worse by the fact that Riot Games has full control over every possible realm involving League of Legends.
It's just hard to take you seriously as trying to offer feedback, rather than just another drama-addict looking for another platform to vent against Riot being Literally Hitler.
I think Riot had a fairly narrow vision for LCS as a marketing thing for the game and they were fairly successful. However, LCS and League have the opportunity to grow to the next level and that's where the growing pains are having now.
For me personally, I don't judge a product based on its commercial success. Phantom Menace was a shit film, despite the commercial success it enjoyed. I don't think of Fifty Shades of Grey as the pinnacle of literary work, despite the joy it brings to thousands of people. I want a legitimate competition with basic values that has been viable on other e-Sports titles, rather than a show that brings maximum profits for Riot Games.
I hate to break it to you for the third time in a row, but: guess what the purpose of LCS is. Hint: it's to bring maximum profits for Riot Games. You can "want" a legitimate competition with basic values that has been viable on other e-Sports titles, but you know, if it didn't have those things, it wouldn't be bringing in profits for Riot Games. Most people obviously do think it has those things.
The examples you used are irrelevant because they are artistic works. Artistic works have other metrics by which they should be judged.
Sports leagues do not. They are strictly commercial enterprises. Want to know what the best hockey league in the world is? It's the NHL because the most people watch it, not the KHL. Want to know what the best football league in the world is? It's the NFL because who gives a shit about the CFL. Sure, you can argue all day that the CFL has some objectively artistically superior rule that better hews to the "basic values" of football. Good luck convincing people to watch it, or convincing people to play there.
So until you can provide an objective, measurable metric that you think LCS should be judged by, and that LCS is failing to meet, then the only metric we have is viewership and popularity. LCS is clearly miles ahead of every other esport in that regard.
I think though, that your latest posts have been really revealing. Because you on the one hand praise the infrastructure of LCS, and also decry the monopoly that Riot has over LCS.
But that's the whole point. Riot runs its scene with an iron grip and that's exactly why it has such amazing infrastructure. No other esport in the world comes remotely close. Valve is starting to do it with TI6, but no one else.
The point is that LCS is like the NFL/NBA/etc., not tennis. In tennis competitors fly around to random tournaments and live off of prize money. Some tournaments are more prestigious than others, but on the whole there is nothing "official" about it, just a bunch of unaffiliated tournaments. It is amazing for the top players (Federer, Djokovic, Nadal), but once you get to #100 or so you're just hoping to make enough at each tournament to afford to fly to the next one. It's incredibly unstable for young players, but this is what every other esports company does because it's cheap. They don't have to invest anything. Rocket League went with this model because no way can Psyonix afford to create an "LCS".
So the only reason you're impressed by all of the infrastructure that LCS has is that Riot literally paid for all of it to exist. Who do you think built the stages? Hires the casters? Hires the video producers? Pays for the electricians? Pays for the computers? Pays the janitors? In every other esport, those costs are paid for by third party tournaments. But Riot invested easily tens of millions into doing this for LCS. (And, I'd claim, it's a big reason why LCS and League are so popular now.) So the idea that you can bitch about them having a "monopoly" is Bernie Sanders-level communist, that we should just take it away because you're mad about some balance change or whatever.
LCS is unprecedented. It's the first ever esport that pays salaries instead of prizes. And the price we pay for that is absolute control, but let's be honest, absolute control has done a fuckload of amazing things for LCS. It's done some terrible things too, and you and I talk about various things that Riot should be doing instead, but when you start your discussion with
Everything single decision they make is so obviously catered towards the casual playerbase in order to exploit them as much as humanely possible, and it's impossible to expect a change with their basic philosophy and the inevitable dire consequences from that, made worse by the fact that Riot Games has full control over every possible realm involving League of Legends.
It's just hard to take you seriously as trying to offer feedback, rather than just another drama-addict looking for another platform to vent against Riot being Literally Hitler.
If you truly judge sporting competitions as a pure commercial enterprises, and believe they should be run as such. Then we should just stop the discussion there. As I mentioned for the umpteenth time, it's not the commercial success of competitive League of Legends, or the right of Riot Games to use it as such, that I'm bringing into question here, despite it being a reoccuring theme in your posts. I'm talking about the degredation of competitive integrity.
The infrastructure I'm talking about is the level of man power Riot Games has at their disposal, and their refusal to use them to attain basic e- Sports concepts that has been seen on other smaller e-Sports titles. You're talking about the infrastructure that has been created with the success of League of Legends as an e-Sports. Sure we've seen a rapid growth in production value and an e-Sports career in League of Legends becoming more financially viable as a result of competitive League of Legends being so successful, and Riot Games obviously has had a huge part in that growth, but again, I don't see the reason to point out the blatantly obvious, unless you think they are somehow a result that comes in place of the things competitive League of Legends lacks. Are they mutually exclusive in your mind? Does the points I've mentioned, and you've glossed over, somehow sabotage everything that's been built up so far?
Have we been talking about these specific issues that has been making the scene shit (the term you seem to hate and extrapolate that into me accusing Riot Games of being Hitler and being a drama-addict, perhaps you should look into your own posts before you discuss the dramatics of all this)? Because I feel like any attempts to address these issues that I feel are integral to the competitive scene, and the root cause of all those issues being the level of control Riot Games has over the entire scene, has been met with you accusing me of being various things, discussing how the success of League of Legends somehow mitigates the problems in the scene. If you're just going to circumvent all the issues I've pointed out, list the credentials of Riot Games that I feel have nothing to do with these issues, then wrap your post with condescending insult as you've done for the past few posts, then simply don't bother. It wastes both our times.
Sorry but how do you judge decisions? By upvotes on reddit? Riot has Tencent over them, has multiple people whose job is judging if the decisions are good for the game and company. If the decision brings them money, brings them millions of people playing, countless stories from fans that don't show up on reddit and they see how they evolve i think its fair to say that majority of decisions are good.
If Riot actually wants to be more casual, more hardcore, more esports oriented or whatever direction they want who is to say that they should not go that way? I prefer companies that don't change their strategy because some people think they know better than them. Let me compare that to real life situation. There is a couple with a guy that has nice job that could sustain big family and there is a girl that is with him that has a nice job too. They decide to marry and have a kid, girl wants to stay in home and took care of kid and her friends think she makes bad decision not focusing on her nice job. But who is to say her friends know better than her what she wants? What if she choosed nice job and then regretted that?
Riot took one path. Dota, CS:GO took different path. Yeah maybe those other games did something better or took some better decisions but Riot is looking good too. Those other companies has problems too, and every one of them tries to fix them. Now there is a topic of priorities and whats important to you and whats important to Riot. And Riot looks at whats important to millions of their players and then looks at what is the most needed change or decision, what can wait and what cant. What consequences those decisions have, what are the alternatives. They started working on new client because they thought that having good base for all those other features would be the most important. And new client probably affects more people and is important to more people than something like replays( plus you look at the facts they are sites like op.gg that you can get replays from. There are no new clients).
Going back to esports and our main topic, there are issues to be solved and there are many things that can be better. But just like new client and replays, Riot has different priorities. They also have position they are in. Maybe Lcs owners can make Riot do what they want but other issues like Monte and casters? In Monte situation he thinks he can bite off more than he can chew. MSI showed that Riot doesn't need Monte, yeah they may want or it could be better with him but if he wants more than he is worth then Riot may think they don't need him. Monte tries to rally his fans and his friend Thoorin but i doubt they are that impactful.
Riot might be gods and they might be restrictive but what happens in mythology when gods gave their creation to humans? People say that Riot might make League die, but what if Riot is afraid that other people having more control will kill League? I think communication between Riot and other figures in the scene to clear misconception should be important and you have some good points but the problem with this community is that when they communicate their "call for change" they add " complete shit job" or other insults that don't add to discussion. Thats basically it, i don't have a problem with your criticism and i think you have good points but when i saw you exaggerate and say "complete shit job" like Riot is some shit mobile app company i had a problem. Hope you understand my point because i think this community needs some different point of view. And sorry if you thought i accuse you of thinking your points are conspiracy theories. That point about Yorick and conspiracy theories was more like a fun thing that i saw where i don't know if people troll or rly think design team did this rework to cover the drama. To be honest i didn't care about the drama and its was not topic i was super interested in but i saw your post and decided to present my point of view because i thought this site could use some discussion and is better place for that than reddit. I don't waste time on reddit discussions because its either memes or bad quality circlejerk. And then you have to search good posts and if you are late there is probably another topic.
Have a good day/night.
/edit I ate, And had some things to do and now im behind in discussion. I guess even on this site.
On August 27 2016 02:52 Radoq wrote: Sorry but how do you judge decisions? By upvotes on reddit? Riot has Tencent over them, has multiple people whose job is judging if the decisions are good for the game and company. If the decision brings them money, brings them millions of people playing, countless stories from fans that don't show up on reddit and they see how they evolve i think its fair to say that majority of decisions are good.
If Riot actually wants to be more casual, more hardcore, more esports oriented or whatever direction they want who is to say that they should not go that way? I prefer companies that don't change their strategy because some people think they know better than them. Let me compare that to real life situation. There is a couple with a guy that has nice job that could sustain big family and there is a girl that is with him that has a nice job too. They decide to marry and have a kid, girl wants to stay in home and took care of kid and her friends think she makes bad decision not focusing on her nice job. But who is to say her friends know better than her what she wants? What if she choosed nice job and then regretted that?
Riot took one path. Dota, CS:GO took different path. Yeah maybe those other games did something better or took some better decisions but Riot is looking good too. Those other companies has problems too, and every one of them tries to fix them. Now there is a topic of priorities and whats important to you and whats important to Riot. And Riot looks at whats important to millions of their players and then looks at what is the most needed change or decision, what can wait and what cant. What consequences those decisions have, what are the alternatives. They started working on new client because they thought that having good base for all those other features would be the most important. And new client probably affects more people and is important to more people than something like replays( plus you look at the facts they are sites like op.gg that you can get replays from. There are no new clients).
Going back to esports and our main topic, there are issues to be solved and there are many things that can be better. But just like new client and replays, Riot has different priorities. They also have position they are in. Maybe Lcs owners can make Riot do what they want but other issues like Monte and casters? In Monte situation he thinks he can bite off more than he can chew. MSI showed that Riot doesn't need Monte, yeah they may want or it could be better with him but if he wants more than he is worth then Riot may think they don't need him. Monte tries to rally his fans and his friend Thoorin but i doubt they are that impactful.
Riot might be gods and they might be restrictive but what happens in mythology when gods gave their creation to humans? People say that Riot might make League die, but what if Riot is afraid that other people having more control will kill League? I think communication between Riot and other figures in the scene to clear misconception should be important and you have some good points but the problem with this community is that when they communicate their "call for change" they add " complete shit job" or other insults that don't add to discussion. Thats basically it, i don't have a problem with your criticism and i think you have good points but when i saw you exaggerate and say "complete shit job" like Riot is some shit mobile app company i had a problem. Hope you understand my point because i think this community needs some different point of view. And sorry if you thought i accuse you of thinking your points are conspiracy theories. That point about Yorick and conspiracy theories was more like a fun thing that i saw where i don't know if people troll or rly think design team did this rework to cover the drama. To be honest i didn't care about the drama and its was not topic i was super interested in but i saw your post and decided to present my point of view because i thought this site could use some discussion and is better place for that than reddit. I don't waste time on reddit discussions because its either memes or bad quality circlejerk. And then you have to search good posts and if you are late there is probably another topic.
Have a good day/night.
/edit I ate, And had some things to do and now im behind in discussion. I guess even on this site.
No metrics. Just my judgements. I hope I've made it clear that I am aware all of the issues discussed above are within Riot Games' jurisdiction, and that their success in terms of a business perspective cannot be denied, just like I'm entitled to openly criticise their decisions without being subject to false accusations. I don't see why I have to have Riot Games' best interest at heart or be wary of spreading negative connotations involving Riot Games if I feel like it is justified, I do not believe that I'm out of line saying they're doing a shit job in terms of upholding competitive integrity, which has been the sole point of interest in all of my posts despite the deviation from the subject either due to my shortcomings to get my point across, or deliberate shift of the argument from the other posters.
The issues I've addressed have been present for long time. It's not a shortage of manpower. They are not new concepts that were sprung up due to unforseen circumstances. These are some basic concepts that have enriched other e-Sports titles, and have improved the level of play to heights unseen before. They are issues that have been deliberately set aside, and that needs to be addressed. I don't see why these things have to be mutually exclusive. These decisions may not be as financially lucrative as the current decisons Riot Games has been taking, but some of these things would be solved so quickly and painlessly if Riot Games just chooses to do so.
Montecristo and Thorin are mostly irrelevant to the discussion. They have their own views, and their own agendas. They may have points that are relevant to the discussion, and those are the things we should discuss. They do point out the shortcomings of Riot Games, and as long as you can differentiate between legitimate concerns, and their own personal agendas, I think they serve a purpose as one of the forces (albeit mostly negligible) keeping Riot Games in check. As far as the issue of proper payment for English casters are concerned, I personally don't have a strong opinion since I listen to the Korean commentators anyhow, it would be nice for Riot Games to match the pay rates of other major e-Sports scenes, but I'm discussing competitive integrity here, and commentating has nothing to do with that particular subject.
You may feel the tone essentially renders my points mute, since I am very harsh towards the decisions Riot Games has been taking in your mind, but that's where views differ. I believe that growing the scene, and making the scene have competitive integrity and legitimacy are very different topics, and while my views may be the general consensus they are not created to stir controversy or put Riot Games in a bad light like some suggest, they are based on my experiences viewing other e-Sports titles. So when I see a substantial shortcomings, I call it as I see it. What changes are viable? What changes can we expect to come with sufficient time? What changes do we need to push Riot Games, because they have no intentions of "fixing" it? These are the things I want to discuss.
The semantics of whether we have the right to criticise Riot Games, or how corporations function in a capitalist environment, or whether the word choice I make when I criticise Riot Games is appropriate, are discussions that may interest you, but if these are the topics of discussion for the day, I'm sure you can find other people to discuss that with.
I guess here's my analogy. I think that bacon tastes like shit. I find it disgusting, unhealthy, and it's personally nauseating that people enjoy it.
But people do enjoy it! And so I am obviously "wrong" to say that "Bacon is shit" even though I might be personally "right" that I find bacon to be disgusting.
So here, you think that LCS is "shit" and that Riot has "failed miserably". Obviously most people disagree. But are there specific reasons you think LCS is shit? I literally can only find one in all of your posts, which is soundproof booths. Everything else is a generalization (competitive integrity) or way too vague to engage on (basic esports values). Are there particular objective things you think that LCS is doing poorly that it should be doing better on?
(I incidentally hate soundproof booths too, but whatever, people get a hardon for them for some reason.)
On August 27 2016 05:34 GrandInquisitor wrote: I guess here's my analogy. I think that bacon tastes like shit. I find it disgusting, unhealthy, and it's personally nauseating that people enjoy it.
But people do enjoy it! And so I am obviously "wrong" to say that "Bacon is shit" even though I might be personally "right" that I find bacon to be disgusting.
So here, you think that LCS is "shit" and that Riot has "failed miserably". Obviously most people disagree. But are there specific reasons you think LCS is shit? I literally can only find one in all of your posts, which is soundproof booths. Everything else is a generalization (competitive integrity) or way too vague to engage on (basic esports values). Are there particular objective things you think that LCS is doing poorly that it should be doing better on?
(I incidentally hate soundproof booths too, but whatever, people get a hardon for them for some reason.)
I guess the analogy with Fifety Shades of Grey was inappropriate, while the bacon analogy was spot on. And again, I'm thoroughly enjoying this amazing discussion on whether I was "right" to say the things I do. Please do fill up your posts with more of that good shit.
Specific reasons why I think Riot Games is doing a shit job.
1) Balance changes with bugs and glitches that come before important competitions that not only make a render the previous performances useless, but reset the entire playing field. The timings of patches have in discussion beforehand, and Riot Games has only recently addressed them. The most recent comment being basically "we prioritized cool bot lane fights", as to why the patch couldn't wait after the play-offs.
This is a strategy game at its heart. Strategy games should have depth. Experience with strategy births more streamlined and methodical play that separates the casual players and the professional ones. I personally enjoy progression of a strategy under natural circumstances, and do not enjoy professional players being goofed right before a huge tournament, and basically having their level of play be substantially worse than before. I want to see an evolution of good play and understanding, that leads to a pinnacle of play capable by human minds, and wish the patches would help that progression, rather than be chaotic change that comes at the whim of the game creators that feel like doing sudden shifts of the meta-game (while I agree meta-game revolutions are fun to watch when done by the players, it feels forced when the developers dictate the meta-game so frequently) regardless of which tournaments are going on.
Excellence should be something that should be strived for, and when a season begins, there should be an overall theme of what things should be mastered, instead of doing a series unforseen random changes throughout the season at unpredictable timings, that makes the competitive scene a clown fiesta.
2) Sound-proof booths. This is a game based on playing around the fog of war. It does not take a brain surgeon to keep the level of "crowd interaction" to a bare minimum if we are to fully enjoy the mind games involving the highest level of players. Crowds cannot be trusted, and there have been reported cases of crowd interaction directly influencing the game itself. That is a facet of the scene I want to be wiped out. The effectiveness of the sound-booths varies, depending on which kind of sound-booths you employ, the stage itself, and the level of the noise created by the crowd, however, it is undeniable that the presence of sound-proof booths eleviates the problem, and while it may hurt the ticket sales because casual fans want to shout things out, but that's a hit that numerous other scenes have been willing to take. Hating sound-proof booths, not even saying they are not a efficient trade-off for less crowd interaction (which is a concept that has zero grounds on the actual integrity of the game play itself), is something I fail to understand.
3) Quality of practice, in order to reach excellence has been directly stifled by the decisions Riot Games has made. These include the lack of replays, and a sandbox mode, that enhances the importance of the ranked games. Professional players lack the options to reach excellence at their domain that professional players of other e-Sports titles were fortunate enough to have. Ranked games has had its own issues this season, when Riot Games decided to fuck up the ranked games experience for the absolute highest rankers, just so that the casual players who want to play with friends could feel more at ease. Riot Games has not gone out of its way to make the practice experience more efficient and productive for the professional players, but had no problem going out of its way to destory the previous ranked system and in its place a ranked system that was undeniably worse for the highest rankers. This kind of prioritization is not something that I find amusing, and it shouldn't have to take the ongoing months of nagging of basically every single professional player out there to revert this enforcement that catered to the casual player-base.
4) This is an ever changing game, and with that comes glitches. Glitches, and the extent to which they influence the competitive scene should be kept down to a bare minimum. League of Legends has been the most glitched game I've seen from a competitive title, although I admit that I have not followed a huge number. I believe that the number of patches that come and go, without sufficient discussion or attention to detail plays a huge part in that. They cannot keep up with the level of change, and there are actual problems with the coding itself, but with the given circumstances, keeping the game clean from glitches should be of an utmost priority, not creating new skins, or new champions, just for once, have a series of patches that remove all the imperfections from the game, instead of embracing the glitches as a part of the game and the competitive scene.
5) Monopoly over the entire competitive scene. I feel Scarra had some good insight on this topic on this interview.
Absolute power, corrupts absolutely. Even if Riot Games has done good so far (which is debatable to say the least from a pure competitive integrity point of view), what recourses are there if Riot Games do things that even you would find distasteful? How much power are you willing to relinquish just for the initial boost that comes with the parent company having total control over everything. Even if we are powerless to change anything, why should we not label that as a shitty decision (for the viewer, because obviously I'm not affiliated to Riot Games, and therefore have zero interest in what makes them richer)?
The combination of the above, with some other issues, creates a scene that has inefficient ways of attaining excellence, sustaining it, and the players play a much smaller part in creating their own destiny. It feels like Riot Games has too much power over aspects of the game untouched by the parent company in other titles (some good, but some really bad), and any recourses for an alternative approach to the competitive scene are completely suffocated out deliberately so we have no option but to complain, or stop watching entirely. Like you suggested, I have been leaning towards the latter option more and more, but I do put forth my opinions on the scene since I watched it for some time.
To be clear - you are wrong when you say Riot has "failed miserably". You can be right about what your personal opinion is, but that doesn't change the fact that your opinion is flat-out wrong, as wrong as if I said that bacon is shit, or if I said that Megan Fox is ugly. You'll say, well, it's all relative, I think YOU'RE wrong, except that if you were right, and LCS is a total travesty and shitshow, then it wouldn't be popular. But it is, so ... I guess you can't be right.
Look, that's not a problem. People can be wrong about all sorts of things. I'm wrong about bacon being shit. I'm wrong about Megan Fox being ugly. And I know I'm wrong because if I were right, then bacon and Megan Fox wouldn't be popular. But it doesn't affect my life, because I don't go on bacon forums and tell them about how bacon is shit, and I don't go to Megan Fox forums and tell them that she's ugly. I'm OK with that! Because I don't eat bacon, or jack off to Megan Fox. It's just irrelevant to my life.
Anyway. You point out 5 things that you think Riot is doing badly. Let's go through them.
On August 27 2016 07:10 Letmelose wrote: 1) Balance changes with bugs and glitches that come before important competitions that not only make a render the previous performances useless, but reset the entire playing field. The timings of patches have in discussion beforehand, and Riot Games has only recently addressed them. The most recent comment being basically "we prioritized cool bot lane fights", as to why the patch couldn't wait after the play-offs.
This is a strategy game at its heart. Strategy games should have depth. Experience with strategy births more streamlined and methodical play that separates the casual players and the professional ones. I personally enjoy progression of a strategy under natural circumstances, and do not enjoy professional players being goofed right before a huge tournament, and basically having their level of play be substantially worse than before. I want to see an evolution of good play and understanding, that leads to a pinnacle of play capable by human minds, and wish the patches would help that progression, rather than be chaotic change that comes at the whim of the game creators that feel like doing sudden shifts of the meta-game (while I agree meta-game revolutions are fun to watch when done by the players, it feels forced when the developers dictate the meta-game so frequently) regardless of which tournaments are going on.
Excellence should be something that should be strived for, and when a season begins, there should be an overall theme of what things should be mastered, instead of doing a series unforseen random changes throughout the season at unpredictable timings, that makes the competitive scene a clown fiesta.
It's important to note that this is a spectrum. I think it's important to have a sense of scale here. Juggernaut patch sucked hard. Laneswap patch sucked, but way less, because it doesn't add anything new to the game, it just cuts something out of the game. (In other words, every team in the world already knows how to play standard lanes even pre-6.15, so outside of draft the actual gameplay of a 6.15 game and a 6.14-standard-lanes-game is identical.)
But other than that, I really can't think of a major balance change that took place before worlds. Certainly not enough to make me think that the season is just "a series unforseen random changes throughout the season at unpredictable timings, that makes the competitive scene a clown fiesta". I mean, you can SAY that, but it doesn't make it true. And if it were true, no one would watch LCS.
You also raise a separate point, which basically suggests that Riot should not patch the game all season. But that just won't ever happen, and you gotta deal with it. Your ideal of a competitive integrity esport that has literally zero meta changes due to patches is never, ever going to happen unless you timewarp back to 2001 Brood War. So yeah, Riot is "failing" in this regard, but you set an impossible standard.
2) Sound-proof booths. This is a game based on playing around the fog of war. It does not take a brain surgeon to keep the level of "crowd interaction" to a bare minimum if we are to fully enjoy the mind games involving the highest level of players. Crowds cannot be trusted, and there have been reported cases of crowd interaction directly influencing the game itself. That is a facet of the scene I want to be wiped out. The effectiveness of the sound-booths varies, depending on which kind of sound-booths you employ, the stage itself, and the level of the noise created by the crowd, however, it is undeniable that the presence of sound-proof booths eleviates the problem, and while it may hurt the ticket sales because casual fans want to shout things out, but that's a hit that numerous other scenes have been willing to take. Hating sound-proof booths, not even saying they are not a efficient trade-off for less crowd interaction (which is a concept that has zero grounds on the actual integrity of the game play itself), is something I fail to understand.
I'm glad that you admit that you fail to understand something. So long as you don't understand why I, and many others, hate soundproof booths, you will never have a meaningful conversation here.
Soundproof booths solve up to three problems:
1) They block out a crowd saying stuff like "TRIBUSH IS WARDED", i.e., communicating specific information. 2) They block out a crowd making noise generally, and warning players that something is up. 3) They block out crowd noise altogether, so that players can hear each other.
1 is stupid because it has literally never happened to my knowledge in League of Legends. You're fixing a hypothetical problem that has never happened and almost certainly never will, because if you actually got a megaphone, went into the crowd, and started yelling out ward timings you'd be kicked out in ten seconds flat, much as if you got a megaphone at an NBA game and broadcast to the other team what a coach was saying to his players.
2 is a problem, but one that is not solved by soundproof booths. All booths will admit vibration. So if you actually think that it's a problem if the crowd makes noise, then you have to figure out a way to stop vibration too. Good luck.
3 is a problem, but more cheaply and easily solved by better headphones.
So soundproof booths do nothing. But soundproof booths have two big problems:
1) They are expensive 2) They are ugly
I enjoy watching live esports 10x more without soundproof booths. This is not because I want to yell things to players, but because I think they are incredibly dorky and lame.
But hey, this is the most valid argument you have. Most people seem to want soundproof booths. So I'll happily say I'm wrong on this, even though I think that most people, if they thought it through, would agree that they are a placebo.
3) Quality of practice, in order to reach excellence has been directly stifled by the decisions Riot Games has made. These include the lack of replays, and a sandbox mode, that enhances the importance of the ranked games. Professional players lack the options to reach excellence at their domain that professional players of other e-Sports titles were fortunate enough to have. Ranked games has had its own issues this season, when Riot Games decided to fuck up the ranked games experience for the absolute highest rankers, just so that the casual players who want to play with friends could feel more at ease. Riot Games has not gone out of its way to make the practice experience more efficient and productive for the professional players, but had no problem going out of its way to destory the previous ranked system and in its place a ranked system that was undeniably worse for the highest rankers. This kind of prioritization is not something that I find amusing, and it shouldn't have to take the ongoing months of nagging of basically every single professional player out there to revert this enforcement that catered to the casual player-base.
Replays already exist - every pro uses them. Custom games already exist. And I wish League had a sandbox, and I'd use it all day long, but I think this is one of those competitive integrity vs. casual playerbase compromises. The decision went for the casual playerbase. Whatever. This is absolutely a decision Riot made to appease casual players and not their hardcore players, but you know, you can have a competitive esport without sandbox.
Dynamic Queue has literally nothing to do with LCS so I don't get your point there.
4) This is an ever changing game, and with that comes glitches. Glitches, and the extent to which they influence the competitive scene should be kept down to a bare minimum. League of Legends has been the most glitched game I've seen from a competitive title, although I admit that I have not followed a huge number. I believe that the number of patches that come and go, without sufficient discussion or attention to detail plays a huge part in that. They cannot keep up with the level of change, and there are actual problems with the coding itself, but with the given circumstances, keeping the game clean from glitches should be of an utmost priority, not creating new skins, or new champions, just for once, have a series of patches that remove all the imperfections from the game, instead of embracing the glitches as a part of the game and the competitive scene.
I feel confident in saying: you have clearly never done any programming in your entire life, ever.
(Also, complaining that League is the "most glitched game I've seen from a competitive title", well, I honestly don't even know what to say about that except to ask, what other games do you even play if you think League is the "most glitched game"?)
5) Monopoly over the entire competitive scene. I feel Scarra had some good insight on this topic on this interview.
Absolute power, corrupts absolutely. Even if Riot Games has done good so far (which is debatable to say the least from a pure competitive integrity point of view), what recourses are there if Riot Games do things that even you would find distasteful? How much power are you willing to relinquish just for the initial boost that comes with the parent company having total control over everything. Even if we are powerless to change anything, why should we not label that as a shitty decision (for the viewer, because obviously I'm not affiliated to Riot Games, and therefore have zero interest in what makes them richer)?
The combination of the above, with some other issues, creates a scene that has inefficient ways of attaining excellence, sustaining it, and the players play a much smaller part in creating their own destiny. It feels like Riot Games has too much power over aspects of the game untouched by the parent company in other titles (some good, but some really bad), and any recourses for an alternative approach to the competitive scene are completely suffocated out deliberately so we have no option but to complain, or stop watching entirely. Like you suggested, I have been leaning towards the latter option more and more, but I do put forth my opinions on the scene since I watched it for some time.
Holy fucking shit if you say Riot has a monopoly over LCS one more time I'm going to cry. Who the fuck are they supposed to be sharing LCS with? LCS is theirs! TeamLiquid has a "monopoly" over LiquidLegends moderators, does that mean that "absolute power corrupts absolutely" and TeamLiquid is suffocating non-TeamLiquid views and should be sharing power?
(Also, I don't get how Riot "failing miserably" at LCS is supported by "Riot has a monopoly over LCS".)
You claim there's no recourse when they have absolute power. There is absolutely recourse. Just like on TeamLiquid, if you don't like how they exercise their absolute power, just leave. That's the incentive that keeps TeamLiquid from abusing their power. People generally don't think TL abuses their power, which is why people think so highly of it. And people obviously think very differently than you about Riot Games, because everyone keeps watching it.
So in conclusion:
1. Riot has "failed miserably" because it has suboptimal patch timings and patches the game during the season.
2. Riot has "failed miserably" because it doesn't have soundproof booths.
3. Riot has "failed miserably" because no sandbox/replays/dynamic queue.
4. Riot has "failed miserably" because League has glitches.
5. Riot has "failed miserably" because Riot has a monopoly over LCS goddamn it now I'm angry again.
OK. Let's go beyond granting you sandbox and soundproof booths. At the end of the day, you can state a case for the following proposition: Riot has made decisions that compromised competitive integrity to benefit casual players.
So?
What you haven't proved is that Riot's decisions have so compromised competitive integrity to the point of "failing miserably". Because if they had, then the game would not be popular.
And really, what you're suggesting is that any time any decision comes up where Riot has to balance competitive integrity against casual players, they should always choose competitive integrity, no matter how minimal of an effect it might have. And that's just obviously never going to happen.
Look, maybe you are just too pure for this fallen esports world. You believe in 2001 Brood War, a game that apparently never had glitches, but also a game that had no decisions ever being made for casual players, because no decisions were being made at all. You want chess, or go, a game where nothing will ever change about them again. There you can find the nirvana of competitive integrity that you hold so true.
But you can't compare Riot to that literally impossible standard, say they've "failed miserably", post that on a forum like this, and not expect to get shit for it.
At the end of the day I don't find the statement "Riot has made decisions that compromised competitive integrity to benefit casual players." problematic. Because the net effect of Riot's decisions has resulted in a pretty damn good LCS that maybe could be better but is more than enough to make me really excited for MSG Worlds semis in october.
Maybe you do. Maybe you want a game that will never, ever compromise competitive integrity to benefit casual players. Then League isn't for you. Don't watch it. Forget it. But given that you admit that you still watch it, I'm going to guess that you, like me, ultimately don't think Riot did that bad a job in compromising competitive integrity.
On August 27 2016 08:35 GrandInquisitor wrote: To be clear - you are wrong when you say Riot has "failed miserably". You can be right about what your personal opinion is, but that doesn't change the fact that your opinion is flat-out wrong, as wrong as if I said that bacon is shit, or if I said that Megan Fox is ugly. You'll say, well, it's all relative, I think YOU'RE wrong, except that if you were right, and LCS is a total travesty and shitshow, then it wouldn't be popular. But it is, so ... I guess you can't be right.
Look, that's not a problem. People can be wrong about all sorts of things. I'm wrong about bacon being shit. I'm wrong about Megan Fox being ugly. And I know I'm wrong because if I were right, then bacon and Megan Fox wouldn't be popular. But it doesn't affect my life, because I don't go on bacon forums and tell them about how bacon is shit, and I don't go to Megan Fox forums and tell them that she's ugly. I'm OK with that! Because I don't eat bacon, or jack off to Megan Fox. It's just irrelevant to my life.
Anyway. You point out 5 things that you think Riot is doing badly. Let's go through them.
On August 27 2016 07:10 Letmelose wrote: 1) Balance changes with bugs and glitches that come before important competitions that not only make a render the previous performances useless, but reset the entire playing field. The timings of patches have in discussion beforehand, and Riot Games has only recently addressed them. The most recent comment being basically "we prioritized cool bot lane fights", as to why the patch couldn't wait after the play-offs.
This is a strategy game at its heart. Strategy games should have depth. Experience with strategy births more streamlined and methodical play that separates the casual players and the professional ones. I personally enjoy progression of a strategy under natural circumstances, and do not enjoy professional players being goofed right before a huge tournament, and basically having their level of play be substantially worse than before. I want to see an evolution of good play and understanding, that leads to a pinnacle of play capable by human minds, and wish the patches would help that progression, rather than be chaotic change that comes at the whim of the game creators that feel like doing sudden shifts of the meta-game (while I agree meta-game revolutions are fun to watch when done by the players, it feels forced when the developers dictate the meta-game so frequently) regardless of which tournaments are going on.
Excellence should be something that should be strived for, and when a season begins, there should be an overall theme of what things should be mastered, instead of doing a series unforseen random changes throughout the season at unpredictable timings, that makes the competitive scene a clown fiesta.
It's important to note that this is a spectrum. I think it's important to have a sense of scale here. Juggernaut patch sucked hard. Laneswap patch sucked, but way less, because it doesn't add anything new to the game, it just cuts something out of the game. (In other words, every team in the world already knows how to play standard lanes even pre-6.15, so outside of draft the actual gameplay of a 6.15 game and a 6.14-standard-lanes-game is identical.)
But other than that, I really can't think of a major balance change that took place before worlds. Certainly not enough to make me think that the season is just "a series unforseen random changes throughout the season at unpredictable timings, that makes the competitive scene a clown fiesta". I mean, you can SAY that, but it doesn't make it true. And if it were true, no one would watch LCS.
You also raise a separate point, which basically suggests that Riot should not patch the game all season. But that just won't ever happen, and you gotta deal with it. Your ideal of a competitive integrity esport that has literally zero meta changes due to patches is never, ever going to happen unless you timewarp back to 2001 Brood War. So yeah, Riot is "failing" in this regard, but you set an impossible standard.
2) Sound-proof booths. This is a game based on playing around the fog of war. It does not take a brain surgeon to keep the level of "crowd interaction" to a bare minimum if we are to fully enjoy the mind games involving the highest level of players. Crowds cannot be trusted, and there have been reported cases of crowd interaction directly influencing the game itself. That is a facet of the scene I want to be wiped out. The effectiveness of the sound-booths varies, depending on which kind of sound-booths you employ, the stage itself, and the level of the noise created by the crowd, however, it is undeniable that the presence of sound-proof booths eleviates the problem, and while it may hurt the ticket sales because casual fans want to shout things out, but that's a hit that numerous other scenes have been willing to take. Hating sound-proof booths, not even saying they are not a efficient trade-off for less crowd interaction (which is a concept that has zero grounds on the actual integrity of the game play itself), is something I fail to understand.
I'm glad that you admit that you fail to understand something. So long as you don't understand why I, and many others, hate soundproof booths, you will never have a meaningful conversation here.
Soundproof booths solve up to three problems:
1) They block out a crowd saying stuff like "TRIBUSH IS WARDED", i.e., communicating specific information. 2) They block out a crowd making noise generally, and warning players that something is up. 3) They block out crowd noise altogether, so that players can hear each other.
1 is stupid because it has literally never happened to my knowledge in League of Legends. You're fixing a hypothetical problem that has never happened and almost certainly never will, because if you actually got a megaphone, went into the crowd, and started yelling out ward timings you'd be kicked out in ten seconds flat, much as if you got a megaphone at an NBA game and broadcast to the other team what a coach was saying to his players.
2 is a problem, but one that is not solved by soundproof booths. All booths will admit vibration. So if you actually think that it's a problem if the crowd makes noise, then you have to figure out a way to stop vibration too. Good luck.
3 is a problem, but more cheaply and easily solved by better headphones.
So soundproof booths do nothing. But soundproof booths have two big problems:
1) They are expensive 2) They are ugly
I enjoy watching live esports 10x more without soundproof booths. This is not because I want to yell things to players, but because I think they are incredibly dorky and lame.
But hey, this is the most valid argument you have. Most people seem to want soundproof booths. So I'll happily say I'm wrong on this, even though I think that most people, if they thought it through, would agree that they are a placebo.
3) Quality of practice, in order to reach excellence has been directly stifled by the decisions Riot Games has made. These include the lack of replays, and a sandbox mode, that enhances the importance of the ranked games. Professional players lack the options to reach excellence at their domain that professional players of other e-Sports titles were fortunate enough to have. Ranked games has had its own issues this season, when Riot Games decided to fuck up the ranked games experience for the absolute highest rankers, just so that the casual players who want to play with friends could feel more at ease. Riot Games has not gone out of its way to make the practice experience more efficient and productive for the professional players, but had no problem going out of its way to destory the previous ranked system and in its place a ranked system that was undeniably worse for the highest rankers. This kind of prioritization is not something that I find amusing, and it shouldn't have to take the ongoing months of nagging of basically every single professional player out there to revert this enforcement that catered to the casual player-base.
Replays already exist - every pro uses them. Custom games already exist. And I wish League had a sandbox, and I'd use it all day long, but I think this is one of those competitive integrity vs. casual playerbase compromises. The decision went for the casual playerbase. Whatever. This is absolutely a decision Riot made to appease casual players and not their hardcore players, but you know, you can have a competitive esport without sandbox.
Dynamic Queue has literally nothing to do with LCS so I don't get your point there.
4) This is an ever changing game, and with that comes glitches. Glitches, and the extent to which they influence the competitive scene should be kept down to a bare minimum. League of Legends has been the most glitched game I've seen from a competitive title, although I admit that I have not followed a huge number. I believe that the number of patches that come and go, without sufficient discussion or attention to detail plays a huge part in that. They cannot keep up with the level of change, and there are actual problems with the coding itself, but with the given circumstances, keeping the game clean from glitches should be of an utmost priority, not creating new skins, or new champions, just for once, have a series of patches that remove all the imperfections from the game, instead of embracing the glitches as a part of the game and the competitive scene.
I feel confident in saying: you have clearly never done any programming in your entire life, ever.
(Also, complaining that League is the "most glitched game I've seen from a competitive title", well, I honestly don't even know what to say about that except to ask, what other games do you even play if you think League is the "most glitched game"?)
Absolute power, corrupts absolutely. Even if Riot Games has done good so far (which is debatable to say the least from a pure competitive integrity point of view), what recourses are there if Riot Games do things that even you would find distasteful? How much power are you willing to relinquish just for the initial boost that comes with the parent company having total control over everything. Even if we are powerless to change anything, why should we not label that as a shitty decision (for the viewer, because obviously I'm not affiliated to Riot Games, and therefore have zero interest in what makes them richer)?
The combination of the above, with some other issues, creates a scene that has inefficient ways of attaining excellence, sustaining it, and the players play a much smaller part in creating their own destiny. It feels like Riot Games has too much power over aspects of the game untouched by the parent company in other titles (some good, but some really bad), and any recourses for an alternative approach to the competitive scene are completely suffocated out deliberately so we have no option but to complain, or stop watching entirely. Like you suggested, I have been leaning towards the latter option more and more, but I do put forth my opinions on the scene since I watched it for some time.
Holy fucking shit if you say Riot has a monopoly over LCS one more time I'm going to cry. Who the fuck are they supposed to be sharing LCS with? LCS is theirs! TeamLiquid has a "monopoly" over LiquidLegends moderators, does that mean that "absolute power corrupts absolutely" and TeamLiquid is suffocating non-TeamLiquid views and should be sharing power?
(Also, I don't get how Riot "failing miserably" at LCS is supported by "Riot has a monopoly over LCS".)
You claim there's no recourse when they have absolute power. There is absolutely recourse. Just like on TeamLiquid, if you don't like how they exercise their absolute power, just leave. That's the incentive that keeps TeamLiquid from abusing their power. People generally don't think TL abuses their power, which is why people think so highly of it. And people obviously think very differently than you about Riot Games, because everyone keeps watching it.
So in conclusion:
1. Riot has "failed miserably" because it has suboptimal patch timings and patches the game during the season.
2. Riot has "failed miserably" because it doesn't have soundproof booths.
3. Riot has "failed miserably" because no sandbox/replays/dynamic queue.
4. Riot has "failed miserably" because League has glitches.
5. Riot has "failed miserably" because Riot has a monopoly over LCS goddamn it now I'm angry again.
OK. Let's go beyond granting you sandbox and soundproof booths. At the end of the day, you can state a case for the following proposition: Riot has made decisions that compromised competitive integrity to benefit casual players.
So?
What you haven't proved is that Riot's decisions have so compromised competitive integrity to the point of "failing miserably". Because if they had, then the game would not be popular.
And really, what you're suggesting is that any time any decision comes up where Riot has to balance competitive integrity against casual players, they should always choose competitive integrity, no matter how minimal of an effect it might have. And that's just obviously never going to happen.
Look, maybe you are just too pure for this fallen esports world. You believe in 2001 Brood War, a game that apparently never had glitches, but also a game that had no decisions ever being made for casual players, because no decisions were being made at all. You want chess, or go, a game where nothing will ever change about them again. There you can find the nirvana of competitive integrity that you hold so true.
But you can't compare Riot to that literally impossible standard, say they've "failed miserably", post that on a forum like this, and not expect to get shit for it.
At the end of the day I don't find the statement "Riot has made decisions that compromised competitive integrity to benefit casual players." problematic. Because the net effect of Riot's decisions has resulted in a pretty damn good LCS that maybe could be better but is more than enough to make me really excited for MSG Worlds semis in october.
Maybe you do. Maybe you want a game that will never, ever compromise competitive integrity to benefit casual players. Then League isn't for you. Don't watch it. Forget it. But given that you admit that you still watch it, I'm going to guess that you, like me, ultimately don't think Riot did that bad a job in compromising competitive integrity.
Going to skip the part where you discuss the semantics of "popular = right", I'm going to drop it, and would appreciate you not wasting anymore time on that topic.
The first point you raise is the level to which the timing and the quality of the patches suck, the metric to which, you assert is viewership. You're right in saying that my ideal standard of the players dictating the metagame to an artform would be taken from the Brood War scene, but I'm willing to settle for less, but the current level of quality and timing of these patches are a joke to me. There is essentially one international tournament that matters in a caldendar year, and the last one was a clown fiesta. The most recent patch change was also hilariously timed, and it's not just the fact that the change that lessens the strategic depth, it's the fact that it was released right before the play-off season began after months of perfecting the lane swap meta-game that evolved to relatively high level of play. It's bad. And the standard shouldn't be this low, even if the standards set by the Brood War scene is an impossible goal, it doesn't mean we should be settling for shit patch timings and shit patches.
The second point, you concede, and it is necessary, and there have been reported cases where even Dyrus admitted that he heard the crowd warning him of incoming ganks.
This is something that should be absolutely avoided, and sound-proof booths are the best solution that we've had so far. Glad we agree, even though you don't.
Third point, whatever indeed, it's not as if the casual players suffer if these changes made. Riot Games didn't make a choice between their two ideals as you seem to be suggesting. They just chose not to do it. For years. Features that are available in a lot of e-Sports titles with less manpower. Dynamic queue did affect the quality of practice for LCS professionals, and a lot of players did express their frustrations at the forced change in ranked games, which I believe is one of the reasons why Riot Games conceded on this particular point.
Fourth point, I play most of the games that are popular in Korea. Some you may not be familiar with, and yes, I have not done any programming. Are you going to leave this issue on that condescending note, or do you actually want to discuss this issue? Is it a problem? Is it a problem that is worse than ones that exist in other e-Sports scenes? Is it ever going to be fixed, or is it something we have to deal with?
As for the fifth point, the monopoly Riot Games has over the competitive scene is the root cause of everything. It has changed the landscape of the tournaments, the teams, and the players (some for the better, some for the worse). Tournaments used to have the worst formats ever, and are gradually getting better, the teams are treated differently according to whether they are on good terms with Riot Games, and by default players are affected by this also. No one company should have this much influence over the scene if we truly care about the integrity of the scene, especially one that has shown tendencies to cater to the casual playerbase.
For your summary, where you grant me the right to say "Riot has made decisions that compromised competitive integrity to benefit casual players." I personally, would add "Riot who has absolute power over the scene, has made decisions that compromised competitive integrity to benefit casual players at a rate higher than was seen in other e-Sports scenes." The combination of the two is why I think this entire scene is shit. Absolute monopoly by a parent company of the game, basing their decisons off the casual playerpool who have been found again and again, willing to sacrifice the integrity of their competitive scene for higher gains. That is bullshit to me.
As for your personal advice, I already told you that's something I'm in complete agreement. As much as this comes out of my frustrations, I truly do believe that the following changes would make the competitive scene a more worthwhile experience. I used to follow this scene a lot, and used to post on this forum a lot, and had something to say about the direction Riot Games was taking the game, and you resorted to vitriol over actually responding to my thoughts, which is why I responded in kind, but now I know your overall thoughts on the matter, I don't want the aggression to continue.
On August 31 2016 10:26 Gahlo wrote: Big is the support. Hard was their jungler.
its a little unfortunate that the two are so unmemorable that i can mix them up. but yeah, he was probably the worst jungler to ever play in the lcs, and i think i'm not exaggerating when i say that
EPT
