[IEM] Grand Finals World Championships 2014 - Page 107

On March 17 2014 01:18 fuzzylogic44 wrote:
We don't know if they agreed to split or partially split the prize before hand. sOs seems like the type to not do that. Anyway he does get 800 WCS points for second which is a lot.

On March 17 2014 01:18 fuzzylogic44 wrote:
We don't know if they agreed to split or partially split the prize before hand. sOs seems like the type to not do that. Anyway he does get 800 WCS points for second which is a lot.

On March 17 2014 01:14 Nomzter wrote:

Why?

On March 17 2014 01:15 Omnishroud wrote:


Ive watched CS:GO all weekend despite being an ex-SC2 player and current LoL gamer. CS:GO is rising and rightly so, it has the heritage and is a premier competitive game, looking forward to seeing the scene grow. Hoping for a decent LoL finals.

I will most certainly not look forward to watching some more SC2 in the last, seeing that after a ~1 year+ hiatus was extremely disappointing, my wallet was ready for Hots but it just shrivelled up inside my pocket and cried itself to sleep.

On March 17 2014 01:18 ForTehDarkseid wrote:

There wasn't something like these finals in BW yet. And it will never be.

On March 17 2014 01:14 TotalBiscuit wrote:
The winner takes all gamble was a disaster. Let's never do that again. 4 days of wins for herO pissed down the drain in 20 minutes of the worst final in history, jesus.

On March 17 2014 01:19 Dwayn wrote:
Probably the most disappointing tourny i've watched so far. The only good series was the very first between hyun and hero, the others were either 'ok' or just plain bad. First day and finals have been particulary bad.

On March 17 2014 01:18 ForTehDarkseid wrote:

There wasn't something like these finals in BW yet. And it will never be.

On March 17 2014 01:19 TotalBiscuit wrote:


Let me count the ways.

1) Players should actually get paid for their work and their achievements. Winner takes all is the complete antithesis of that. The least player friendly format you can possibly have

2) Running a winner takes all tournament during a period of noted imbalance is a sure fire way to piss off the viewers and rile people up.

3) Winner takes all tournament with single elimination format. The mind boggles.

4) This whole thing was a viewership gamble by ESL. It was contradictory to Carmacs own thoughts on sustainability and the eSports "middle class", even if it was just a one off. The gamble didn't pay off. Viewership spiked in the finals for all of the 20 minutes it took for those finals to end. There was literally more downtime than games and it left everyone with a sour taste in their mouths. The viewership during the actual event was often lower than Cologne, which doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me, but whatever the case, the purpose of the winner takes all was to drive viewership and it failed to do that. If it had succeeded, I'd get behind it, sometimes viewership is more important even for the players and the teams, that exposure, that sponsorship ROI, super important (though not that ESL did anything to help that really since they're not even using team logos in Gameheart let alone the sponsor overlays), but in this case since it didn't achieve that objective either I'd consider it a failure.

SC2 is in a fragile state and in order to make sure it can be sustained, we need tournaments that use fair, sustainable models. ESL said this was a one off, I hope it remains a one off.