| Forum Index > SC2 General |
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
Law frowned upon gambling before it made so much money by doing so. As far as I know, both the legislators and judges who are responsible for gambling laws have cited moral reasons, yes. The current anti-online gambling laws are a joke tho, allowing regular casinos/betting on horses etc and banning online gambling.... Original objections might have been moral, I doubt the ones today are. | ||
|
decemvre
Romania639 Posts
| ||
|
Puosu
7003 Posts
On June 18 2010 22:38 decemvrie wrote: SC2 is not gambling. Why are you even discussing gambling laws ? This is actually very interesting to me, is MTG online with money involved considered gambling? Do they have to follow the same rules/laws as poker sites? I always thought they did and that game as far as I know isn't really "gambling" because its 100% skill. I guess SC would be the same if that's true. | ||
|
Onioncookie
Germany624 Posts
| ||
|
Kambing
United States1176 Posts
On June 18 2010 22:24 FrozenArbiter wrote: WoW is pay to play, and I don't think it's 18+ so I don't get why this would be? It's not. World of Warcraft is rated teen. The ESRB distinguishes between simulated and real gambling. Games with simulated gambling typically receive at least a teen rating whereas real gambling nets an adults-only rating, e.g., Peak Entertainment Casinos. Note that this really isn't much of an issue because the closest relative to jinro's suggestion, magic online, also nets a teen rating even with its buy-in tournament system. (And also wow retains it's teen rating even with the buy-in arena tournament system.) | ||
|
decemvre
Romania639 Posts
Gambling laws are enforced mainly to make sure that the websites implement "true random" and that the games aren't fixed. Some legislatures choose not to allow online gambling altogether. On a side note, any map-hacking in such a tournament could be subject to prosecution !!! | ||
|
skaeve
Denmark66 Posts
| ||
|
Senx
Sweden5901 Posts
| ||
|
Executioner.zealot
United States60 Posts
| ||
|
Puosu
7003 Posts
On June 18 2010 23:00 Executioner.zealot wrote: I prefer pay-to-play. I have always found that the software company listens to the masses more when they are getting a reoccurring monthly check from you. And considering Blizzard has grossly missed many reoccurring complaints or suggestions during beta, it might help motivate them to keep people paying. WoW? Yeah obviously a company is going to work more if they get paid more, however monthly pay in an RTS game is a big no-no. They wouldn't be able to compete in a market where they would be the only ones requesting such huge amounts of money. This kind of feature however would make paying optional and even if you're good it would allow you to profit from the game more easily. It wouldn't interfere with the casual players enjoyment at all. | ||
|
Smu
Serbia164 Posts
However, money pays a different role in Poker then it could in SC. Basically, poker would be extremely boring if there was no money involved. Without money, there is no weight to your decisions, and the algorithm of the game itself offers little excitement on it's own. It is easy to understand why money is an internal part of the poker game. StarCraft is all about it's gameplay. Most people are there to have fun. Once you get your 4 or 6 workers and your main building, real life, outside of the meta-game of course, does not affect the game anymore. The most exciting matches are those versus best players, where people with the best gameplay clash to see who will be better. The fact that you have to buy the game first in order to play it is really not comparable to the role money has in poker. By adding money to get in, you are preventing a lot of players who don't have money (or are too young to have their own paypal accounts) who could be potentially better from others who have money to splash. Of course that the best players and progamers would invest this without thinking, but others who might want to take a shot at it would be turned off. It would create a barrier between people who play for money tournaments and those that play for fun, which is not a good thing. It would also bring a gambling touch to the game. Seriously, I love StarCraft. But many things about the idea of being able to have a good career from playing video games are very wrong. And this is only trying to push that idea in a completely wrong way. If anything, gaming should be about openness, purity and sportsmanship. It shouldn't be like poker in this regard. Many sports (think major football leagues in Europe) got rotten and boring because they started being about money too much. They are giant marketing clogged dirty money laundries. In my opinion, there should be tournaments and Blizzard should get some prizes; from sponsors, adds on bent (if those are still in plan) etc. Everyone should be able to host tournaments and they can, of course, add an entrance fee. But if anything should set up a standard for automated tournaments it should be free tournaments. | ||
|
Brazen[six]
Canada203 Posts
The difference with this and poker though, is that typically the poker pros stick to the higher buy-ins because of the 'type' of players involved and the fact that they can afford to bankroll it. Your typical starcraft player, actually... I should say Blizzard's target audience... probably isn't going to want to shell out large sums of $$ for these tournaments. I think the biggest challenge with a system like this is ensuring that everyone who joins the tournament is on the same skill level. However, when you think about it... there's nothing stopping an experienced poker or professional player from playing in a $1 buy-in. I think if you have a seperate rating for tournament play based on win/loss or other factors and then have a system that, for example, will only allow players with a rating of 0-100 to sign up for a tournament, then it would even the playing field. All the good players will quickly win and raise their rating and then there becomes a pyramid effect after some time. | ||
|
Fefnir
United States50 Posts
| ||
|
MidKnight
Lithuania884 Posts
On June 18 2010 22:35 FrozenArbiter wrote: The current anti-online gambling laws are a joke tho, allowing regular casinos/betting on horses etc and banning online gambling.... Original objections might have been moral, I doubt the ones today are. Well, goverment realises that they make waaaay more money by allowing people to gamble on stuff which are almost 100% luck based. I mean, they ban poker, but allow people to buy lottery tickets which are INCREDIBILY -EV-wise in a lifetime, just to create the illusion that you can win and turn your life around.. It's extremely greedy for them to monetize simple stuff like tournaments, but if this is the direction current gaming is going, I think your suggestion is definitely the best one. | ||
|
Fefnir
United States50 Posts
| ||
|
Dragonsven
United States145 Posts
| ||
|
Smu
Serbia164 Posts
edit: also, lottery is usually national, horses and such as well, while online poker sites can be anywhere, creating money drains from countries where people play a lot to countries where poker rooms are. Australia is a good example. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 18 2010 23:22 MidKnight wrote: Well, goverment realises that they make waaaay more money by allowing people to gamble on stuff which are almost 100% luck based. I mean, they ban poker, but allow people to buy lottery tickets which are INCREDIBILY -EV-wise in a lifetime, just to create the illusion that you can win and turn your life around.. It's extremely greedy for them to monetize simple stuff like tournaments, but if this is the direction current gaming is going, I think your suggestion is definitely the best one. Well the thing is, the US based brick and mortar casinos obviously pay taxes to the US gov. If Americans play on a site located in europe/the carribean..... no taxes for the US government. | ||
|
Wolf
Korea (South)3290 Posts
| ||
|
Frozenzen
Sweden97 Posts
On June 18 2010 22:24 FrozenArbiter wrote: WoW is pay to play, and I don't think it's 18+ so I don't get why this would be? I believe the difference comes down to the fact that you can actually get money back from this, while from WoW you simply pay them. This is just a thought though, but that seems like it could be a distinction. I personally love this idea, even if when I first read it it felt wrong. As a plat/low diamond player on beta I probably wouldn't stand a chance to win many of these. But hell, I currently pay 15$ a month for WoW, and I absolutely loved dropping 20 SEK (about 2$ or so) per game with friends from work playing poker. Usually losing, but it made the game more fun. I play games to have fun/get excited. And when money is on the line, even if it's a tiny amount it's more fun. But the legal issues could be tricky due to the fact that you can actually earn money, and some seriously draconian anti hack measures might be needed. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games Organizations Other Games Counter-Strike Other Games StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
PiG Sty Festival
Clem vs Serral
Maru vs ShoWTimE
Sparkling Tuna Cup
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
