EPTGretech and KeSPA Deadlocked - Page 15
| Forum Index > News |
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
| ||
|
Kashmir
New Zealand178 Posts
| ||
|
sikyon
Canada1045 Posts
Let us not forget that the US basically keeps SK from being overrun by NK. In terms of foreign policy, reducing trade with a critical strategic ally is never a good thing. Even if the courts did rule against Vindevi, I would expect prompt legislation changes as American politicians were lobbied by Vindevi and other electronic giants to put political pressure on SK. Blizzard holds all the cards and they know it. Yes, they are trying to make money. The major reason they care about e-sports is so that they can open up a new market and make money off of it. If other organizations want to make a few bucks along the way, Blizzard understands the need for middlemen. From what I've seen, I think the issue isn't money RIGHT NOW. It's precedent. If they let KESPA get away with just paying them a royalty sum, Blizzard will only ever be in a position to collect royalties. That's not a super lucrative market and leaves you vulnerable. What Blizzard wants is to be able to directly make money off tournaments, with advertising and especially make sure that Blizzard doesn't have to deal with any organizational equals when it comes to starcraft. | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
Let us not forget that the US basically keeps SK from being overrun by NK. You really... REALLY need to learn more about the international relationships between SK/NK/China/USA if you seriously think this is how it works. A statement like this might as well have been "I have no idea what the political and military situation is like between SK/USA, nor do I have any clues about the history of the SK/NK conflicts.". If other organizations want to make a few bucks along the way, Blizzard understands the need for middlemen. This is based off of the assumption that Activision Blizzard isn't asking for complete control or at least attempting to establish near-to-complete control. Not that I'm saying they are, I'm pointing out that you're one of the people I'm talking about who has opinions based on assumptions that aren't based on any facts. Yeah, it might make sense to you but its still not based on anything solid. What Blizzard wants is to be able to directly make money off tournaments, with advertising and especially make sure that Blizzard doesn't have to deal with any organizational equals when it comes to starcraft If Activision Blizzard keeps up corporate bullying and making things like Infinite Ward happen, its not the clientel that will give up on them (there's too many kids/stupid people out there with money they can access), its the developers themselves who will take a step back and think about working for someone who thinks nothing of making them jobless or futureless. Also as it stands, they aren't in any danger of being taken over in popularity in the E-Sports scene because of the success of BW and the steps that were taken to make it the #1 E-Sport game. Their move to make SC2 the new BW isn't going so well and I personally think they'll be in danger of being taken over by the FPS scene. | ||
|
dogabutila
United States1438 Posts
On June 11 2010 17:30 Diminotoor wrote: Dogabutila, not a lot of people think SC2 as a game itself is terrible. It certainly had a huge advantage of learning from its predecessor. What we think will suck and be terrible is Bnet 2.0. Even the pros agree with the majority-population on this. I could show you many whine threads. There are a few less now that beta is down. But I don't think it is fair to say 'not a lot'. What we've seen of Bnet 2.0 has never been the complete thing so far. For example, Blizz took out adding by sn. Why? Not because they only want realid email or facebook to be your adding options. But because they wanted people to use those options so they could test them and make sure they worked properly. I know the two biggest complaints about 2.0 is the lack of cross-realm play (what might that mean for D3) and the lack of chat channels. Really though, the lack of chat channels never bothered me. Other games don't have chat channels. Use vent outside of the game, or make a big party...plenty of workarounds. Having said that, I don't think SC2 will lack chat channels for it's entire lifespan. The lack of cross-realm play is the more significant problem, and the one that is less likely to be solved. | ||
|
hellbound
United Kingdom2242 Posts
On the issue at hand my guess would be that GOM signed similar conditions blizavision was offering to kespa, i.e. total control, everything belongs to us, etc. And that kespa has already decided to go to court in SK to challenge blizavision's interpretation of their IP rights. No point in negotiating anything which fits the current situation nicely. | ||
|
waffling1
599 Posts
The Korean E-SPORTS scene is the fruit of 10 years of hard-work from its players, fans and sponsors, but all this can crumble in one moment if leagues start having trouble continuing due to lack of negotiations stemming from power struggles or ego battles. boy, it's hard to take journalism seriously nowadays. putting all the blame on one party when blizzard's ultimatum and unwillingness to budge could easily be called out too. i'm not trying to take one side or the other, but that paragraph is so blatantly biased it's almost funny. the analogy is like the mafia coming to your house and demanding protection money with your daughter to a knife, and then saying "are you going to hurt your daughter for your pride?" YEAHH.... i suppose you could say it's his pride causing his daughter harm and he should just pay up... but really, what about the the mafia who is making the demands in the first place, and the powerlessness of the father? i have a question. let's hear some more terms of the deal between gretech and blizzard, instead of this blatantly one sided excuse for an article. | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
Having said that, I don't think SC2 will lack chat channels for it's entire lifespan. The lack of cross-realm play is the more significant problem, and the one that is less likely to be solved. I underestimated your investigative and reasoning skills many times over since our little post-for-post discussion, for this I apologize. I agree 100% with this, which is unfortunate (for us). If you read the webpost: http://sclegacy.com/articles/730-battlenet-20-concerns This is probably the most well-written concern-post I've read to date. This is so well-written and taken from an Activision-Blizzard perspective that its already in a form that probably could be submitted to their offices and they might actually bother to read it. In this, basically we're given hope that "yeah we can add chat channels but... really? you guys really want them?". Its the same sort of "down-talk" that got them here with us in the first place, but at least it shows that message got through. As for the cross-realm play, that's the #1 gripe I have with it. I have many friends across South Korea, China, and Japan. Based on the current system, I literally am being forced to choose between playing with them or playing with my American friends (which is where I live now). Its the very definition of "This sucks". Getting back on the track of the OP though, its still not known to us what's being asked of either side in these "negotiations". Until then I'm basically going to step out of the conversation until more concrete information is put into our hands. | ||
|
TriniMasta
United States1323 Posts
| ||
|
McDonalds
Liechtenstein2244 Posts
My first thought was "ok, so what if someone made a TV show where people got points for listening to Coldplay CDs, isn't that copyright infringement?" But then, we're not playing Starcraft when we watch the show. It's a game and we're just watching it being played. So it's like we're watching people listen to Coldplay on headphones, and we can't hear it. And the show doesn't even have "Coldplay" in the title. The announcers on the show just mention the name Coldplay sometimes, and reference the names of songs, and the album cover appears in the bottom right corner. The album cover in the bottom right corner is what Blizzard is fighting with Kespa over now. They're saying that they have ownership of the art and that Kespa is reproducing it without permission. Well, they were literally aware of the fact that the art was being used in this way for years and years. Did they do nothing? Failing to protect your copyright has big implications, whether they like it or not. | ||
|
Jugan
United States1566 Posts
On June 09 2010 06:50 ]343[ wrote: wow, I hope this won't degenerate into the worst-case scenario... zero-sum games man, they always do. | ||
|
TheAngelofDeath
United States2033 Posts
| ||
|
TDC
United States197 Posts
but blizzard did invest a good amount of money developing the game and maintaining for so long that kespa, who really makes a lot of money out of SC should pay blizzard for the copy right fee. blizzard invested ALOT more money in SC2 hoping it'll be successful not only in selling the game, but also in e-sports development. if a broadcasting company simply broadcast the game tourneys without any compensation to blizzard, blizzard might say "oh, i guess we wont make any money out of starcraft games, might as well stop investing on SC series at all and go all in with World of Warcraft." so many times do we see the article talking crap about blizzard for being so greedy, but good games like SC2 come out BECAUSE they are so greedy, and they think with good games, people will spend money on their product even when they feel cheated. I just hope that they don't go overboard, and so far, what blizzard is doing is at least kind of reasonable. | ||
|
sikyon
Canada1045 Posts
On June 12 2010 02:06 Diminotoor wrote: You really... REALLY need to learn more about the international relationships between SK/NK/China/USA if you seriously think this is how it works. A statement like this might as well have been "I have no idea what the political and military situation is like between SK/USA, nor do I have any clues about the history of the SK/NK conflicts.". Please enlighten me. I was under the impression that US-China relationships are at an all time high with massive trade accross the pacific ocean, interlocked financial institutions and rapid growth in asia - meaning that neither party will piss the other one off. I was also under the impression that North Korea had a massive military force in terms of manpower, located directly adjacent to SK's border, and consistent announcements that they want to invade SK and reclaim the peninsula. Meanwhile, SK imports the majority of its high technology weapons from the United States and other western powers, and relies on US military bases in the region and joint excersies to demonstrate strength. So yeah, I thought that because the US population has been relativly exhausted by the wars in afghanistan and Iraq and politicians would have a hell of a time getting the population to support a korean war. Yes, I know the situation is complicated by my point is that the US and SK are important partners, and that if SK flagrantly violated US intellectual rights this would be BAD for the SK, and have much farther reaching consequences than just for Blizzard. On June 12 2010 02:06 Diminotoor wrote: This is based off of the assumption that Activision Blizzard isn't asking for complete control or at least attempting to establish near-to-complete control. Not that I'm saying they are, I'm pointing out that you're one of the people I'm talking about who has opinions based on assumptions that aren't based on any facts. Yeah, it might make sense to you but its still not based on anything solid. It's based on a logical arguement with the assumption that Blizzard is a reasonable company that isn't pursuing total vertical integration and all the nightmares and headaches that will create. You know what, I'm sure they ARE asking for complete control, or at least complete executive power. I have no problem with that. On June 12 2010 02:06 Diminotoor wrote:If Activision Blizzard keeps up corporate bullying and making things like Infinite Ward happen, its not the clientel that will give up on them (there's too many kids/stupid people out there with money they can access), its the developers themselves who will take a step back and think about working for someone who thinks nothing of making them jobless or futureless. Really? The developers are going to leave their jobs developing great games because shit happened to a few of their friends? I don't know what kind of job you have but I've never worked anywhere that people would just quit their jobs because they suddenly realized they work for a corperation that cares about the bottom line. On June 12 2010 02:06 Diminotoor wrote:Also as it stands, they aren't in any danger of being taken over in popularity in the E-Sports scene because of the success of BW and the steps that were taken to make it the #1 E-Sport game. Their move to make SC2 the new BW isn't going so well and I personally think they'll be in danger of being taken over by the FPS scene. Last I checked Vindevi games owned both CoD and WoW. RTS games faded a long time ago in the most lucrative markets (united states). | ||
|
D3lta
United States93 Posts
While sc2 may be blizzard's, i think for all practical purposes (whether its legally right or not), sc1 e-sports will belong to KeSPA for many years, if not forever. | ||
|
pronoob5
United States90 Posts
| ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On June 14 2010 22:43 sikyon wrote: Please enlighten me. I was under the impression that US-China relationships are at an all time high with massive trade accross the pacific ocean, interlocked financial institutions and rapid growth in asia - meaning that neither party will piss the other one off. I was also under the impression that North Korea had a massive military force in terms of manpower, located directly adjacent to SK's border, and consistent announcements that they want to invade SK and reclaim the peninsula. Meanwhile, SK imports the majority of its high technology weapons from the United States and other western powers, and relies on US military bases in the region and joint excersies to demonstrate strength. So yeah, I thought that because the US population has been relativly exhausted by the wars in afghanistan and Iraq and politicians would have a hell of a time getting the population to support a korean war. Yes, I know the situation is complicated by my point is that the US and SK are important partners, and that if SK flagrantly violated US intellectual rights this would be BAD for the SK, and have much farther reaching consequences than just for Blizzard. They currently have SK in numbers this is true but overall its very obvious who has more in reserve they can pull from. North Korean Military Strength and South Korean Military Strength aren't that comparative because of the financial status of the two countries. I think you seriously underestimate the amount of restrictions that NK has to place on its people just to maintain control of them in the hereditary dictatorship fashion that they currently have for a government. Just to give you an idea on how far behind they are on technology, on June 11th of this year they're just now starting to implement the internet for their government. Do you understand what an informational and technological black hole you have to be to JUST NOW be getting the internet? Also its not even for its people, its just for the government. As for the US being the gigantic military supplier (aka you're talking about their imports), we're actually their third in trade. Facts on South Korea state that their number one contributor in imports is actually China, followed closely by Japan, and then less than half of the imports by China or Japan is USA. North Korea is practically in poverty technologically and economically. Their growth rate is approximately .2% annually while SK has a 3.7% growth rate. The spending ability is ridiculously different and the overall strength is unbelievably different. NK has put so much into their military that they have almost no investments, civilian consumption, or foreign trade markets. To put this in Starcraft terms, its like going for a Sparks Terran build with no ups against a Protoss who already has 3 bases running, 15 gates and full tech, but has just been probing it up for a while. The NK economy is so all-in in its military spending, did you know that only 3% of their labor force is in agriculture? That means they have like... NO FOOD. Do you know what happens when a country with no food and a horrible economy goes all-in in a war? That initial push hurts, but if the battle gets drawn out even a little bit, they crumble. Yes NK relies heavily on China backing it up economically but right now I'm pretty sure China isn't too happy with NK killing its citizens. Its not in either country's best interests to be getting into a war because it'll just be a huge exchange of fire that results in nothing but a lot of pointless loss of lives and a re-negotiation at the table. Also both nations are relying on foreign support to gain a significant advantage over the other. SK knows its current military strength is about half of NK's but they have a much bigger and stronger pool to pull from. NK knows its military strength could deal a significant amount of damage but they have no longevity. Both Koreas know that this all basically comes down to foreign support to gain an advantage so big, the other wouldn't even consider an engagement. This doesn't mean that the two Koreas rely on foreign support just to survive such a confrontation. Believe me if your homeland is under fire, you see a wave of patriotism amongst your people the likes of which we haven't seen since WW2. SK's military would multiply several times over in a matter of months. Also last note, I seriously doubt that the decision being made over the Starcraft franchise would be the least bit of a blow to US-SK relations in a manner that would bring about the Second Korean Conflict. sikyon wrote: It's based on a logical arguement with the assumption that Blizzard is a reasonable company that isn't pursuing total vertical integration and all the nightmares and headaches that will create. You know what, I'm sure they ARE asking for complete control, or at least complete executive power. I have no problem with that. Your opinions are too tainted towards 1-side for you to sit back and realize what's really going on. If you take a third-person perspective of this, such a demand would be out of the question for KeSPA. Being too absolute in the demands of either side means that both parties are too immature and unintelligent to think of the possibility of a compromise. I refuse to believe that these companies are comprised of individuals too stupid to realize this but apparently you are ok with it. sikyon wrote: Really? The developers are going to leave their jobs developing great games because shit happened to a few of their friends? I don't know what kind of job you have but I've never worked anywhere that people would just quit their jobs because they suddenly realized they work for a corperation that cares about the bottom line. Once again your viewpoint is skewed in such a fashion that it doesn't let you see the big picture. If a company repeatedly dissolves departments that create these "great games" and scenes/markets for their games, then eventually noone will want to do business with them because of their public image. If a company that has a steady 5% annual growth rate and offers you a salary of $65,000 also has a record where they dissolved 3 departments and fired all their workers immediately afterwards, how is it a smart decision to pick that over say a company with a 3% annual growth rate and a salary of $45,000 but doesn't dissolve its side-companies? Maybe I'm just getting too old or too wrapped up in the desire for stability in my life, but it seems like a very clear decision to me. There's always another company out there that may not be able to offer you as much, but will offer you a steady job and source of income for good service. Not every company is like Walmart (Look up Walmart's history of employment and the hoops they've had to jump through because of what they did as a corporation). sikyon wrote: Last I checked Vindevi games owned both CoD and WoW. RTS games faded a long time ago in the most lucrative markets (united states). WoW is slipping (and isn't an E-sport) and CoD isn't the E-sport FPS; Counter-Strike is. RTS will never die as long as intelligent people exist to play them. I'm sorry but I just don't see the scene as bleak as you do. I see us pulling through this and developing an E-Sport scene that eventually reaches the far corners of the planet. Neither side can claim they are fighting for this scene since they clearly only have their own interests in mind. I'd like to see big channels for E-Sports all over the world and being able to pursue pro-gaming as a profession world-wide in say 2-3 decades. Maybe you're right though and I'm really alone on this standpoint. | ||
|
Leo Sosnine
Russian Federation8 Posts
On June 09 2010 17:34 dogabutila wrote: What? How one plays the game does not change the game you are playing. When you start the game does it display starcraft or does it display something else? Whose code are you running? You / We, made nothing. All we did was learn how to play the game optimally. Its like saying tiger woods owns golf, or rafa nadal owns tennis. Thats absurd. As I see it, the author means, that game balance is a product of common efforts of developers and community of progamers, who were finding bugs, exploits, who reported imbalance and stuff. It's like they were testing product and writing technical task for developers about what should be changed and how. So, that's not absurd. About perfect game balance, in part, is a result of community efforts, so those claiming that about perfect game balance was created by blizzard aren't right exactly. Yes, by Blizzard, but without community game balance wouldn't reach that high degree. Besides, as a SC BW gamer and old lover, I vote for KeSPA, because in this particular case its interests are closer to regular SC BW gamer intertests, than those of Blizzard. I hope Blizzard's attempts will fail, SC2 will be screwed, and SC BW leagues will stay the same as they are today or even better. | ||
|
JustAnotherKnave
United States67 Posts
On June 15 2010 19:04 Leo Sosnine wrote: I hope Blizzard's attempts will fail, SC2 will be screwed, and SC BW leagues will stay the same as they are today or even better. That is so backwards. You don't like the direction PROGRESS is going, so instead you would rather it be destroyed. Thats the same logic used by fundamentalist terrorists. | ||
|
RamenStyle
United States1929 Posts
On June 15 2010 20:04 JustAnotherKnave wrote: That is so backwards. You don't like the direction PROGRESS is going, so instead you would rather it be destroyed. Thats the same logic used by fundamentalist terrorists. Lol, that last sentence is totally uncalled for. Besides, in some way I agree with the idea that if SC2 is not going to improve the progaming scene, well, I'd rather have it fail as PROGAMING material and have BW go on. Not saying that the game should crash, but just not be successful as a progaming option if it is not going to improve what we actually have. | ||
| ||
